digital SLR in the future

thebeginning · Apr 20, 2005

im saving up to buy a dSLR...i'd like a 20d (heck i'd like a 1ds Mark II) but i'd have to wait longer to get the money saved up. which one of these is the best for the money? i'd like versatile on camera controls (contrast, sharpness, saturation, etc. i'm pretty sure most have this), alot of lens capabilities (i need to choose nikon or canon for this one...), good autofocus (fast, several focus points 7 is good, 9 is best) and good white balance.

i'm going to put up a poll for the major ones i've looked at. if you have any suggestions please....suggest them.

Digital Matt · Apr 21, 2005

Which one is the best for you? What are you going to be photographing? Which company has a lens line up that appeals to you. How many fps do you need? Do you really need a more durable magnesium alloy body?

catweh00 · Apr 21, 2005

From what I've seen on all of these posts at dpreview, the canon XT and nikon d70s match up very well. Several people have mentioned that they cannot fully exploit their camera's full potential, since they are only amateurs anyway (me too). What they're saying is that these cameras are so good, it doesn't matter which one you choose and you'll probably start out only using 10% of the options/power available to you.

The big difference lies in feel and body construction. If you have big hands, go to a store, try both the canon and d70, and on a hunch, I'd say you would pick the d70. I was faced with the same dilemna, went to the store, picked up the XT, and disliked the feel. I ordered my d70 and have been extraordinarily pleased with construction, performance, and image quality.

It just has to feel right in your hands.
Craig

thebeginning · Apr 21, 2005

Digital Matt said:
Which one is the best for you? What are you going to be photographing? Which company has a lens line up that appeals to you. How many fps do you need? Do you really need a more durable magnesium alloy body?

that second question is pretty tough...i'm going to be photographing a very wide range of things...nature photography, some portraits maybe, perhaps some street shots and/or architecture...maybe some sports photography too.

would that change anything with high level cameras?

i dont mind about fps. 3 or above is fine for me.

and yes, a stronger body would be better.

i'm looking at the new d50 too...i'd rather have 8 megapixels...but if i cant get that, i guess that is ok

Big Mike · Apr 21, 2005

Last month's edition of Popular Photography had a comparison of DSLR's under $2500. They didn't have the Rebel XT or the new Nikon's but the 20D was their winner. I think it just beat out the D70.

You really have to figure out what small differences there are between the cameras and decide if those differences matter to you. They are all good cameras. You might as well ask if you should drink a Coke or a Pepsi.

danalec99 · Apr 21, 2005

thebeginning said:
...but i'd have to wait longer

How long is longer? Soon you will comparing 30D with Nikon's next model!

thebeginning · Apr 21, 2005

haha. let's just say im paying for this with a typical teen's summer job (with some graphic design and photography interspersed in there).

i really like the 20d. i would get the d70 no questions asked, it's just that i'd like 8 mp.

Digital Matt · Apr 21, 2005

You'd rather have a stronger body, but have you used one of the models with the cheaper body? Are you going to be using the camera on jobs everyday, banging it around?

The Rebel XT with a kit lens is almost $500 cheaper than a 20D at most places, and the only major differences are the build and the fps. That $500 can be put towards a nice lens, like a 17-40 f/4 L or 70-200 f/4 L. You'll be much happier with a Rebel XT and an L lens, than a 20D and a cheapo EF-S lens.

Go to a store that has all of these models, and pick them up. Take some shots. Get a feel for the camera, and then decide how important the build is to you. In the end, any of those cameras will be durable and give you great picture quality. The more important factor is what glass you put in front, and saving a few bucks on build puts more in your lens budget. The difference between 6.3 and 8 mp is not enough to make any difference.

If build is a major concern, consider a used 10D. Same build as a 20D, but much cheaper. If you plan to do more with sports photograpy, then the 20D's speed is what you want.

Chase · Apr 21, 2005

The new Nikon D50 may be a good option now as well...

thebeginning · Apr 25, 2005

i've come to the d70s as the most likely choice for me. but i do have some questions for all you d70 users out there.

the d70's lowest ISO is 200. does that affect image quality ever? do you ever wish you had lower? also, the d70 has a 5 point autofocus, while many other dSLR's have at least 7. does this make a significant difference? thanks for the help, guys!

hobbes28 · Apr 25, 2005

Here's my $.02.

I was afraid to buy the d70 because of the ISO 200 minimum. I like to take long exposure night shots and didn't want it to be ruined because of the higher low ISO rating. And I didn't want them to be grainy. A good friend of mine, that happens to run this site, sent me some pictures that he took at night with his and I was floored. No more fear of that 200ISO. They are silky smooth no matter what I take pics of.

As for the five point auto focus, I've never had any sort of problem with it because I had gotten used to fully manual cameras and focusing from the middle then moving to the right composition anyway. I seldomly use the other focus groups but when I do, it's still no problem.

I shoot with both the Canon and the Nikon and don't favor one completely over the other so I'm giving you an unbiased opinion. Even though you're leaning towards the d70s, I just have to ask when you consider them over the D70: Why do you feel you would need an 8MP over the 6MP? I used to shoot with a 4MP and I could print an 8x10 that came out very sharp and clear. It's nice to have those two extra megapixels but not really necessary.

Okay, off my soapbox now.

thebeginning · Apr 25, 2005

i appreciate the two cents hobbes!

that is encouraging about the ISO 200 bit. and the 5 point auto focus. i suppose it is better to have a reliable yet not too amazing autofocus since it would take away from the skill of focusing and you would never manual focus. all i have is an f3 and a point and shoot, so all of my SLR focusing is manual, and i often use manual focus when using my friend's 10d.

i've read several articles about megapixel ranges and i was so surprised at how the difference (at least with dSLRs) really is minimal until you get at least passed 11x14 or so prints. if i ever do huge prints it will probably be from 35mm negatives anyway.

so i think i've settled on the d70S.

catweh00 · Apr 26, 2005

Good choice. You won't look back at your decision. However, you will look back...into great manual focus, gun-metal black lenses! Thats what I love about my d70--I can slap on lenses that are years older than I am! I have recently purchased a 300mm f/4.5 from 1979, as well as a 180mm f/2.8 Both lenses were in mint condition and both (total) cost $300.00 even. It's hard to beat that. I really like manual focus lense now, and I will most probably continue using them far ahead intot the future.

Good luck with your decision. I haven't noticed any loss of quality with the 6mp sensor vs. the 8m sensor. My brother has the XT, so we compare almost daily. I prefer nikon, he loves canon. It's like a civil war over here.

Craig

spike000 · May 19, 2005

Just before you buy it!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Test the Nikon AF against the Canon in low light - it will change your mind!

If you take a few test shots and look at each you will find that the Nikon Matrix Metering is somewhat dodgy to say the least........ but at the end of the day up to you.

I'd pick the 20d out of the ones you've mentioned - but if you can save up for a IDMKII - they are great cameras...

Spike