Canon EOS Rebel T1i vs. Nikon D5000

"It's also not designed for someone who wants to "go pro" one day."

I dont understand how its not for someone wanting to "go pro". I'm wanting that and its what i bought for my backup. I bought it first so I would understand dslr's better and know my cameras. As for the comment about the d90 lasting much longer down the road???? I dont get that statement at all either! Do you know what your talking about or just yacking your lips? please explain....
 
"It's also not designed for someone who wants to "go pro" one day."

I dont understand how its not for someone wanting to "go pro". I'm wanting that and its what i bought for my backup. I bought it first so I would understand dslr's better and know my cameras. As for the comment about the d90 lasting much longer down the road???? I dont get that statement at all either! Do you know what your talking about or just yacking your lips? please explain....


i think he ment that overwall, the d90 has more feature that will keep you learning for a longer period of time.

i upgraded my d60 to a d90 because i think i mastered the d60 overwall and learned alot with it.

i wanted to go further and bought a d90 because there was some stuff i was not able to experience with my d60.


commander mode.
PRE custom white balance.
lack of top screen.
build in lens motor. (i had a tamron AF IF lens)

and much more.

learning curve with a D90 will last longuer.
 
The d5000 is great for teaching you the ropes. That's what it is designed for and nikon has installed software for that purpose.
On the flip side of that, it is NOT an auto focus body. Which means you have to buy AF lenses always and forever and all that jazz. They are more $. It's also not designed for someone who wants to "go pro" one day. It's designed for the hobby shooter/family shooter/avid amateur.
The T1i is in canon's consumer line too. It is an auto focus body-all canon's are and it's designed more towards a bit heavier use, but not much overall. Kind of the same class in general.
Both have video on them which to me is silly, but to a family shooter is probably an awesome feature.
If you are deciding on Nikon, I'd prefer the D90. It's not designed for a teaching camera, but it will last you much longer down the road. It also has video
Canon just introduced the T2i as well which looks like the shiz-nit for consumer grade and low light handling!

You do know that there all kinds of people buying Canons for the HD video feature. A lot of them are film makers.
 
If you type in T1i vs D5000 in the search feature located at the top right hand side of the forum window, a list of 66 threads will pop up. There's bound to be a thread or two that has a good bit of information you'll find helpful among those 66 threads. THere have been three rather large threads on this subject that I recall, within the last three months or so. All "the goodies" will be found in those earlier threads.

But i just searched it and didn't find any threads :p I TYPED IN "T1i vs D5000" and it said sorry no matches.
That's what happens when you give up after only trying 1 search term. Then again, Darrell got 66 hits to your none...Hummmmmm?????????

As it turns out the cpapbilities of all the cameras you have asked about XSi, T1i, and D5000 really don't have any significant differences.

Flipping a coin would be just as efffective, and a lot less time consuming. :thumbup:
 
It's all in the features. The biggest one being the lens options. The fact that you have to purchase lenses with the motor in them is more expensive down the line. Build quality has also been a question with them. Here's a comparison of the cameras in question. Or do a google search and see what is out there on them. You'll find that it's all pretty close to my opinion. Nikon manufactures different camera for different uses. It is what it is.

As for the video, I can't balance the two. If I want to shoot video, I want to shoot video. If I want to shoot still... I can't stop in the middle of a video with my DSLR to capture a shot. It's not something I can justify needing on my DSLR. For some it is. I think it's a huge benefit for family stuff overall and that's the biggest selling point of the video.
 
It's all in the features. The biggest one being the lens options. The fact that you have to purchase lenses with the motor in them is more expensive down the line. Build quality has also been a question with them. Here's a comparison of the cameras in question. Or do a google search and see what is out there on them. You'll find that it's all pretty close to my opinion. Nikon manufactures different camera for different uses. It is what it is.

As for the video, I can't balance the two. If I want to shoot video, I want to shoot video. If I want to shoot still... I can't stop in the middle of a video with my DSLR to capture a shot. It's not something I can justify needing on my DSLR. For some it is. I think it's a huge benefit for family stuff overall and that's the biggest selling point of the video.

The fact that if you want to purchase quality glass, most of Nikon's having the motor in them, is expensive anyways. Truthfully, what would you prefer? A 70-200 f/2.8 of a 70-300 f/3.5-5.6?

The biggest selling point of the video is that amatuer film makers can get a camera that does 1080p, has incredible high ISO ability, incredible DOF, and incredible optics options for much less than that of a professional level dedicated HD video cam. There's music videos, commercials, movies, etc... being shot with these cameras. What mom or dad do you think wants an HD video camera that shoots in HD where the format almost certainly has to be converted and will only shoot for 15-30 minutes at a time? I guarantee most people shooting videos with these cameras aren't worried about stopping in the middle of shooting video to take a still shot.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top