1100D or 500D

[Snaphaan]

Hi everyone

For the past 3 years I've been shooting with a Canon Powershot S5 IS. Its been a great little superzoom but I'm really getting tired of its limitations. A few obvious issues are Chromatic Abhorations, horrible noise at ISO higher than 400, slow fps, sharpness and 10 bit RAW level. I've used chdsk to enhance some features like 35sec exposures (vs limited 15) and getting some RAW editing. Shooting with it over the past few years have really guided me into what I like best. Macros, landscapes etc. Not people, not sports and sure as hell not video.

Okay, so now I want to upgrade. But my finances never really got better since purchasing my S5 so I'm looking for some budget entry level DSLR. A month or so ago I was ready to buy the 1000D - looks stunning! Then I heard about the coming 1100D. Terrific! And then the D3100?! And, and, and...

So I started reading up a LOT about the different cameras. Finally settled on either Canon or Nikon. The Nikon D3100 looks incredible spec wise but... its got no exposure bracketing. Thats bad since I do use HDR on some occasions and doing it manually is going to be a chore. Exposure bracketing is a necessity. So, now I'm turning to the 1100D or the 500D.

From first impressions the 500D looks great. But it seems to have smaller sensor pixels, about the same sensor size and 15mp cramped in there. I'm no tech fundy but from what I've gathered reading up tons of stuff I believe this is not so good. The 1100D might have the same technology (dunno) but because they limited it to 12mp on a sensor with a larger pixel size, it seems to really perform in low light (and thats the conclusion of almost every reviewer). And I need/want good image quality.

To tell you the truth, I was BLOWN away with the 1000D's images. Compared to my fingernail size sensor S5 IS, those images were crisp, sharp and the colors beautiful. Kit lens or not. And when some photographers complain about a little chromatic abhoration and soft focus areas they have no idea what they are complaining about. I've spend hours trying to clean-up and fix those... but anyway, I'm babbling.

Further. And this might not be really a tech issue. But I love the look of the 1100D! The Nikon D3100 looks nice but plastic or not, that 1100D just grabs me. If it was build of cardboard I would buy it (not the red - its too flashy for my taste). Maybe I'm so used to bargain buys and cheap stuff I've actually developed a acquired taste for the stuff!

Back to the point. I haven't really held any of the cameras so I can't really say much. Some people have mentioned that the plastic finish of the 1100D is very misleading and when you handle the camera its quite solid. My S5 clanks and rattles and some plastic parts are really moaning (not really a valid comparison but I'm just rambling on). The 500D looks solid with a very nice rubber grip. Great stuff. But the camera just does not appeal to me. Oh well. I don't really need advice here, just mentioning it.

I'm really not worried about video. And the screen size of 2.7 inches on the 1100D is fine - even at the low res. But the 500D has a 3.7 fps burst rate and also in RAW! Wow. The 1100D has a 3fps in jpeg and 2fps in RAW up until 5 images when the buffer is loaded. Not bad, I think so. But everyone seems to complain about "this is so like 5 years ago technology", "canons losing their edge", "only 3 fps?!" etc etc. Not real quotes, just some personal summaries of peoples complaints.

Finally. The 500D is a oldish camera. Yeah, I've got a psychological issue to overcome here. But for a more practical argument, lets say I've bought a EOS that is no longer build, what are the negative aspects there? If I buy a newer camera I should have quite a bit of tech support for years to come. But older models tend to die out fast. This is just my perception of digital cameras. Have I got this all wrong? Shouldn't I have to worry about the cameras age? Maybe just the brand?

This is a lot of reading, but I've been hacking my brain left and right to figure out a final decision and I am struggling at this alone. So, I hope some tech and field savvy photographers here can help me into the dreamworld of my first (entry-level) DSLR!

Thank you for your time!

 

[KmH]

....A month or so ago I was ready to buy the 1000D - looks stunning! Then I heard about the coming 1100D. Terrific! ....


.....To tell you the truth, I was BLOWN away with the 1000D's images. Compared to my fingernail size sensor S5 IS, those images were crisp, sharp and the colors beautiful. Kit lens or not.....

...... But I love the look of the 1100D! .....

...... that 1100D just grabs me......

......the screen size of 2.7 inches on the 1100D is fine ......



Thank you for your time!

Why do you have any doubts. :scratch:

Obviously, the 1100D is the one for you.

 

[Snaphaan]

KmH

Yes, I do like the 1100D. I just don't want to make a mistake... But as someone pointed out to me, I'm on a budget so I shouldn't really break my head over this. Buy the 1100D, use the rest of the cash to save up for some good lenses and later on when I can upgrade again, I should try to aim a little higher.

The thread is probably a bit pointless now. I just needed a bit of a nidge to make up my mind. So I ordered my 1100D today,... this wait is going to be agonizing!

But...

I do have a few questions though:
The lens is a 18-55mm. Specs mention that it is the 35mm equivalent focal length range is 29-88mm. What exactly does that mean? Is the lens in fact 29mm at wide angle?

Lenses:
I like Macro and landscapes but I'm a bit lost on what to buy? A macro lens first would be nice. But nothing like $500 please if it is possible. Just something to get me started.

And for lansdscapes? Any suggestions?

Thank you!

 

[KmH]

You can't "make a mistake". They are both entry-level cameras and both are capable of making good photos.

The image sensor in the cameras is not a full size, equivelent 135 format, image sensor. It is a smaller APS-C size image sensor and provides a field-of-view (FOV) equivelent to a longer focal length on a full size image sensor.

In the case of Canon APS-C size image sensors, that is a 1.6 times FOV factor (Nikon APS-C sensors are slightly larger and have a 1.5 times factor). The focal length does not change, just the apparent FOV.

Check out this, and all the tutorials, on this web site: Digital Camera Sensor Sizes: How it Influences Your Photography

 

[jaomul]

Hi Snaphaan,

no sooner will you buy one when a supposedly better one will arrive, be it from the make you buy or a competitor. I recently saw a photo win a competition, taken with a 1000D. I have the supposedly superior 50D and will count myself lucky if I get a shot as good as this 1000D shot.What image you get out is down to the user it seems. I think if you liked the shots you saw with the 1000D you will be very happy with the1100D, it seems to be getting the thumbs up with better metering and noise control than the 1000D by the experts.

Your kit lens will be equivalent to about 29mm on a 35mm camera at its wide end. This isn't a bad size for landscapes. You could invest in software that would stitch 2 photos together but you would also need a tripod to benefit from this.
I bought a sigma 105mm macro which I would recommend, but the canon 60mm macro is cheaper, has favourable reviews and supposedly doubles as a great portrait lens on an aps-c such as the 1100D. Enjoy your new camera