Canon 30D or Nikon D200

[zeckdude]

Hello all Photography Enthusiasts,

I recently discovered the art of photography and I have been sucked in! I came up on $3000 over the Christmas Break and I would like to buy my first Digital SLR. I am fairly inexperienced, but I love to learn and experiment. I am especially interested in Landscape, Architectural, Macro, Night, and Panoramic Photograpy.

I read in Scott Kelby's "Digital Photography Book" that most people use Nikon's or Canon's. I am still somewhat undecided over whether I should buy the Canon 30D or the Nikon D200. I am leaning toward the Canon 30D, since it seems a bit more newbie-friendly, but I may be completely wrong in that assumption.

So my question to you all is: Should I buy a Canon 30D or a Nikon 200D?

Also, should I buy the camera with the lens kit or should I buy the body only and buy a separate lens, and if so, which do you recommend as a good starting zoom lens?

I would like to use this camera as a hobby and for my profession as a web designer in the future, and would therefore also like to invest in a quality tripod and various other filters, which I need to budget in.

I can't wait to begin creating amazing shots! I hope you all can help me! Thanks!

 

[uberben]

My first recommendation is to go and hold both of them. If you like one over the other thats a good direction to go down. Also look at the lenses you want to get eventually. The lenses are whats important and you'll have them forever if they are quality. I joined the Canon Camp since I feel they have an edge on Full Frame sensors and they have been the leader in technology of the DSLRs. I also really like there lenses. Don't just think of what you are getting now, think of it long term. If you are on a budget, don't pass up on a used 20d if its in good shape. Its very similar to the 30d and you could get a nice tripod or another lens with the difference. I bought one last summer for 900 shipped and paypal'd that included the extra battery grip, 2gb card, 4 batteries, Remote shutter release and a extra charger. Pretty awsome deal and it is a great camera.

as far as lenses go....
I started out with a 300d and a kit lens...the kit lens isn't that bad if you know how to use your camera. I didn't upgrade till I knew that it was the lens and body holding me back. I then bought a 28-105 3.5-4.5 USM, 50 f/1.8 and a tokina 12-24 f/4. The lenses I use now 90% of the time are my 24-70 2.8L and my tokina 12-24f/4. I would take a look at the 50mm 1.8 since is sooo cheap and quite sharp.

If you are looking to do some stock type photos...get a decent tripod. Expect to spend at least 130 or more on legs and a Ball head. Bogen/manfrotto make good stuff. Check out www.bhphoto.com

 

[table1349]

I will advise you as I have others with this question. If you are asking us, then you are not ready to buy a DSLR. First thing you need to do is evaluate your skill & knowledge level. Then look at the cameras that you feel fit your need and you can grow into. Compare the features of the ones you are interested in to narrow down your choices. This is a good site to do so.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sidebyside.asp

After you have narrowed down your choice go to a real photography store, not a big box place. Handle each of the cameras you are interested in. Look at the lenses, accessories etc that you are interested in. See which one feels the best in your hands with the controls easily useable. Most good camera stores will let you take a few pictures or even take it out for a little bit to try out. Then you are ready to make a decision. When you buy a DSLR you are not buying a camera. You are buying a system. Bodies come and go but good lenses when taken care of will last forever. Good Luck

 

[nakedyak]

if you are a complete beginner, i'd get either a D40 or D50 or Rebel XT or something similar and cheap, and spend some money on maybe a 35mm or 50mm prime, learn the basics of composition, lighting and metering, and everything else, and save the rest of your money. Once you gain experience, you can decide if you need the 30d or d200. That's my advice

 

[Pyrex]

The D200 is definately not a newbie camera. I wouldn't suggest one unless you can operate a D50-D80 on manual mode in absolutely every condition... then you could really see the benefits of having a D200. I think (as does much of the pro theater does) that Nikon's strength lies in their glass. On average I find that Nikon glass is normally higher quality for less than Canon's similar competition. The new Nikon 18-200mm VR lense is probably one of the best lenses ever made period, and for its versatility and quality it's price is unrivaled.

 

[nakedyak]

Also, I'd probably get the D200 over the 30D, but I'd also probably get the Canon 5d over the D200 if I had the money...

 

[Graelwyn]

Agree with Naked, having read the reviews for both cameras. I also would love to be able to get the Canon 5d, but I am settling for the 200D...even though I have not handled a dslr before. I have the rudimentary knowledge of aperture, shutter etc from doing photography a level, and will simply have to put some work into reading the manual and experimenting.

 

[JIP]

The D200 is definately not a newbie camera. I wouldn't suggest one unless you can operate a D50-D80 on manual mode in absolutely every condition... then you could really see the benefits of having a D200. I think (as does much of the pro theater does) that Nikon's strength lies in their glass. On average I find that Nikon glass is normally higher quality for less than Canon's similar competition. The new Nikon 18-200mm VR lense is probably one of the best lenses ever made period, and for its versatility and quality it's price is unrivaled.

I'm not sure where to start on this one but I think the proper response has been given go somwhere and handle both of the cameras, find out more about the pros and cons of each and decide for yourself. And as far as "qualifying" on a D-50 or a D-80 before you buy a D-200 that is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard, if everyone waited to meet your standards before they bought a higher end camera I really do not think that Nikon or Canon would sell very many or really any upper-end cameras for that matter. If you can afford to buy a D2X for your first DSLR and can justify spending that kind of money in your mind do it. Oh yeah as has been discussed in this forum ad-nauseum the 18-200 not a good lens by any strech of the imagination.

 

[Pyrex]

I'm not sure where to start on this one but I think the proper response has been given go somwhere and handle both of the cameras, find out more about the pros and cons of each and decide for yourself. And as far as "qualifying" on a D-50 or a D-80 before you buy a D-200 that is about the dumbest thing I have ever heard, if everyone waited to meet your standards before they bought a higher end camera I really do not think that Nikon or Canon would sell very many or really any upper-end cameras for that matter. If you can afford to buy a D2X for your first DSLR and can justify spending that kind of money in your mind do it. Oh yeah as has been discussed in this forum ad-nauseum the 18-200 not a good lens by any strech of the imagination.

You completely missed the point. The point is, to really get the benefits of the pro level cameras, having experience in how to properly expose and configure the camera is a key part of enjoying all the advances in the D200 over the lesser consumer level cameras.

 

[JIP]

No I understood what you were trying to say and it still doesn't make any sense to say it there is no reason why someone can't learn photography as a total beginner with a D200 or a D2X for that matter. And there really no disadvantage in learning on a camera like that either if you can afford it why not. Oh yeah and the 18-200 is still a bad lens.

 

[Jeremy Z]

If I were you, I'd buy a Nikon D80 and spend the change on very good lenses and a flash. It will be all you'll ever need. It'd be a shame to spend all that dough on a top-of-the-line body, and be too broke to put good glass on it. The glass is what does the majority of the work.

 

[thebeginning]

i'm a little biased...

...i'm a huge fan of starting off with something cheap and simple, or something that forces you to learn what you might like in the future. if you start with something like the d200 (or even the 30d most likely) you're less likely to focus on your images and more likely to rely on the camera to get you good pictures.

for instance...say you start with a nikon d50 or a canon 350d. you bought one or two lenses, like a 17-50mm zoom and a 50mm prime. by using that setup for a good while, you could hone in on the type of photography you know you'd like to do and build your equipment base from there.

I started with a little kodak point and shoot camera, shooting flowers and some landscapes, just random nature stuff. I then progressed to some architecture and eventually to a little bit of street photography and photojournalism. now since I started with kind of a crappy camera, i was forced to really try to get the pictures i wanted. I bought a nikon f3 manual film slr which helped me learn ALOT about exposure, composition, and depth of field. I slowly built up a list of what i was missing or needing in a digital camera. after a bunch of research (and saving up money) I decided on the canon 20d, and a 17-35mm lens. I still shot pretty much the same stuff, but was leaning towards people photography. so I bought an 85mm prime and began shooting portraits. I completely fell in love with it, and have been built my equipment set around that for the past year or so.

this is just my opinion of course, but if you start with something really nice you're not going to value its capabilities as much. if you start with something that might be considered slightly lacking (not that the d50 or the 350d are bad, of course! they're terrific as first dSLRs), it will help you realize what equipment would suit you best in the future. also, if you bought the setup i mentioned before, plus a flash, you'd still have quite a bit of money left to save for your next big purchase.

meh...just an idea.

 

[zeckdude]

Thanks for all the reply's. I decided to get the Canon 30D now, especially with the double rebates that Canon is offerring now. In fact the body is going for only $1060! From what I've read in the forums, It's the glass that really matters anyways, so thanks for all the input!

 

[Jeremy Z]

Thanks for all the reply's. I decided to get the Canon 30D now,

What lens(es)? You're not going far without at least one lens, hehehe. If Canon is like Pentax, they not only have rebates on the body, but on a lot of the lenses too...

thebeginning makes a good point. It is kind of the same answer I got a long time ago when I asked some folks what tools I should invest in to start working on my motorcycle. "Here are the most basic things that you will need. From then on, buy only what you need, and you will end up with a tool kit that is exactly matched to the kind of work you do."

I don't agree 100% with the "start with a crappy camera" philosophy. But I agree with the spirit. I don't believe it is in your best interest to start with the "best" camera. You should start with one that has the capability to make good photos, but forces you to do the work of setting exposure, etc.

Read the manual on that 30D, and buy a good book on photography in general; one that explains shutter speeds, apertures, ISOs, & composition. It will go a long way towards furthering your skills. National Geographic has some really good ones out.

 

[burtharrris]

To follow Jeremy's lead, jJust as important as technical books, buy some books that teach you the more artistic and abstract aspects of photography. I recommend Stephen Shore's, The Nature of Photographs.