First DSLR - Need config options

[ZachOly]

I'm about to buy my first DSLR. I don't really have one type of setting I'm looking to capture, but I'd like a setup that would allow me to take the typical portraits, landscape, houses, wildlife, etc.

My choices right now are a Canon T1i and a Nikon 3100

Right now I have a Canon 50mm f1.8 mkI

Config options include:

Go with Canon, keep the 50mm, buy a T1i + 18-55 kit lens and a 55-250mm lens all for around $900 taxes in

Go with Canon, keep the 50mm, buy the Ti1 + 18-55 kit lens for around $675 after taxes & shipping

Go with Nikon, sell the 50mm (~$100), buy the D3100 + 18-55 kit lens for ~$750 after taxes & shipping, net total is $650. For another $250 I could get a 55-200mm lens making the total $900

 

[bigtwinky]

First off...Canon or Nikon means that you should go to a store and hand hold the cameras and see which is more comfortable. Its your first dSLR, so honestly, you won't know much about the settings and values you can chose, so its all about ergonomics. Even taking test pictures in a store won't do much for ya as you should never rely on the LCD.

The 50 1.8 is a great lens. Thankfully, its also a cheap lens. If yuo had a 50 1.2 or an expensive lens, then I would factor that in to your decision. But the 50 1.8 is cheap, so shouldnt be a factor. Hopefully a Nikon shooter can chime in, but I know that the 50 1.8 won't autofocus on D40, D70, D80 bodies...not sure where the D3100 stands in there.

You wants to shoot are all over the place. Landscapes are typically done in the wide mm range (15mm-30mm) and wildlife is at the long telephoto range (300mm + ) while portraits are in the middle of that around the 50mm-100mm range. Lenses are WAY more important than bodies. Both the 18-55 and the 55-250 are kit lenses, the cheapest you can get today. They are great to learn with though, and could be a good entry point until you find out what you really want to do.

So all that to say, seeing as your final prices on a body, 50, 18-55 and 50-200 style lenses both Nikon and Canon are $900, it all comes down to which brand you feel more comfortable shooting with.

Another factor is if you know anyone who shoots with either brand. I have a friend with nice glass who shoots Canon, which somewhat swayed my decision towards going with Canon

 

[sobolik]

Go with building a Nikon system. Although Canon is almost an equal. The sales figures may differ with what I just said a tad. Together they both are 80% plus of the market.

Nikon has famous glass. In fact some people use Nikon glass on their Canon.

People ooh and aah over my camera simply because they saw the Nikon name. I even had a Canon DSLR owner proclaim that I had a really good camera. IT WAS A D50 no less! Why? The Nikon name.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+3]Nikon vs. Canon[/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Nikon and Canon are as good as each other. Each are multi-billion dollar optical companies who have been making some of the world's best optics for numerous consumer, military and industrial applications for decades and decades. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Each makes lenses as parts of multi-million-dollar steppers used in making electronic chips with more precision anything needed for photography, and each make other optics that sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars in other applications. They each make our cameras and lenses out of the same stuff from which they create these other products.
[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Did you know that Nikon is one of the world's leading makes of professional laboratory microscopes, often beating out Zeiss and Leitz? Nikon also makes the million-dollar lenses and mechanical steppers used in semiconductor manufacture. They have a 37% market share. These lenses and mechanics resolve at 45 nanometers, or less than one-tenth of a wavelength of visible light? That's over 10,000 lines per millimeter! See Nikon Precision.
[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Making $20,000, $2,000 or $200 lenses for either Canon or Nikon is child's play. Their big stuff sells in the $200,000 to $2,000,000 range. We photographers get to benefit from all of it.
[/FONT]

​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+3]SYSTEM COMPATIBILITY[/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Nikon[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Most Nikon camera and lenses made since 1959 are compatible with each other.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Nikon system is so renowned for its multi-decade interoperability that I have a Nikon System Compatibility page discussing it. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Canon[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Canon cameras can use Nikon lenses, but Nikon cameras can't use Canon lenses. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]On the other hand, Canon flushed compatibility down the toilet in 1985 when it created a new and completely incompatible system of AF cameras and lenses called EOS. Nothing works together before or after the great divide of 1985.[/FONT]

​

Nikon vs. Canon

 

[bigtwinky]

lol.. that is such a hilarious response

People ooh and aah over my camera simply because they saw the Nikon name. I even had a Canon DSLR owner proclaim that I had a really good camera. IT WAS A D50 no less! Why? The Nikon name.

I pee'd myself a little reading this. So if I want to ooh and aah, I need a Nikon. I'd take you more seriously if you actually said you had a model Canon makes.


To the OP, don't be biased by these blatant fanboy posts. Both manufacturers make amazing bodies and lenses and have been for years. They both have their pros, they both have their cons. Pros use Canon and Nikon alike.

One year Canon will be more popular than Nikon because of XYZ technology release and the next year, Nikon will be more popular because they released something newer. Its a game that we as consumers are the biggest winners.

 

[gsgary]

Go with building a Nikon system. Although Canon is almost an equal. The sales figures may differ with what I just said a tad. Together they both are 80% plus of the market.

Nikon has famous glass. In fact some people use Nikon glass on their Canon.

People ooh and aah over my camera simply because they saw the Nikon name. I even had a Canon DSLR owner proclaim that I had a really good camera. IT WAS A D50 no less! Why? The Nikon name.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+3]Nikon vs. Canon[/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Nikon and Canon are as good as each other. Each are multi-billion dollar optical companies who have been making some of the world's best optics for numerous consumer, military and industrial applications for decades and decades. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Each makes lenses as parts of multi-million-dollar steppers used in making electronic chips with more precision anything needed for photography, and each make other optics that sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars in other applications. They each make our cameras and lenses out of the same stuff from which they create these other products.
[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Did you know that Nikon is one of the world's leading makes of professional laboratory microscopes, often beating out Zeiss and Leitz? Nikon also makes the million-dollar lenses and mechanical steppers used in semiconductor manufacture. They have a 37% market share. These lenses and mechanics resolve at 45 nanometers, or less than one-tenth of a wavelength of visible light? That's over 10,000 lines per millimeter! See Nikon Precision.
[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Making $20,000, $2,000 or $200 lenses for either Canon or Nikon is child's play. Their big stuff sells in the $200,000 to $2,000,000 range. We photographers get to benefit from all of it.
[/FONT]

​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+3]SYSTEM COMPATIBILITY[/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Nikon[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Most Nikon camera and lenses made since 1959 are compatible with each other.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Nikon system is so renowned for its multi-decade interoperability that I have a Nikon System Compatibility page discussing it. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Canon[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Canon cameras can use Nikon lenses, but Nikon cameras can't use Canon lenses. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]On the other hand, Canon flushed compatibility down the toilet in 1985 when it created a new and completely incompatible system of AF cameras and lenses called EOS. Nothing works together before or after the great divide of 1985.[/FONT]

​

Nikon vs. Canon

Do you always talk ********

 

[ZachOly]

bigtwinky, I've been to my local camera store and shot with both. I even brought my own SD card and saved the photos to it.

I didn't really see a difference between the two cameras, although I'll be honest...I don't really know what to be looking for. Both cameras took very nice pictures and felt fine in my hand.

 

[BuS_RiDeR]

Canon and Nikon are both great camera systems. You will be satisfied with either one.

Mr bigtwinky has the right idea...

 

[gifarkas]

bigtwinky, I've been to my local camera store and shot with both. I even brought my own SD card and saved the photos to it.

I didn't really see a difference between the two cameras, although I'll be honest...I don't really know what to be looking for. Both cameras took very nice pictures and felt fine in my hand.

There won't be a noticeable difference in image quality, just stick with the one that fits you better ergonomics wise.

 

[KmH]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+3]Nikon vs. Canon[/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Nikon and Canon are as good as each other. Each are multi-billion dollar optical companies who have been making some of the world's best optics for numerous consumer, military and industrial applications for decades and decades. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Each makes lenses as parts of multi-million-dollar steppers used in making electronic chips with more precision anything needed for photography, and each make other optics that sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars in other applications. They each make our cameras and lenses out of the same stuff from which they create these other products. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Did you know that Nikon is one of the world's leading makes of professional laboratory microscopes, often beating out Zeiss and Leitz? Nikon also makes the million-dollar lenses and mechanical steppers used in semiconductor manufacture. They have a 37% market share. These lenses and mechanics resolve at 45 nanometers, or less than one-tenth of a wavelength of visible light? That's over 10,000 lines per millimeter! See Nikon Precision. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Making $20,000, $2,000 or $200 lenses for either Canon or Nikon is child's play. Their big stuff sells in the $200,000 to $2,000,000 range. We photographers get to benefit from all of it. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+3]SYSTEM COMPATIBILITY[/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Nikon[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Most Nikon camera and lenses made since 1959 are compatible with each other.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Nikon system is so renowned for its multi-decade interoperability that I have a Nikon System Compatibility page discussing it. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Canon[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Canon cameras can use Nikon lenses, but Nikon cameras can't use Canon lenses. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]On the other hand, Canon flushed compatibility down the toilet in 1985 when it created a new and completely incompatible system of AF cameras and lenses called EOS. Nothing works together before or after the great divide of 1985.[/FONT]​

Nikon vs. Canon

Does Ken Rockwell know you "borrowed" his copyrighted work? :er:

 

[KmH]

Both cameras took very nice pictures and felt fine in my hand.

Which is why suggesting it makes much of a difference is ludicrous.

 

[John Mc]

Lmao at that Nikon Fanboy post! I certainly dont see a Nikon badge and think,ooo,nice camera.I might say that you have a nice camera ,but it doesent mean im going to switch Systems!as a mater of fact,it wouldnt cross my mind.reason being ive spent money in one company,nom im commited,and they havent failed me,my sensor failed 2 weeks after purchase and the store i bought it from would have nothing to do with me,refused to replace it ect,called Canon at 9 to get it fixed under warentee,they sent me a New camera,boxed,and a postage stamp for the Broken one.

I Use the Canon T1i,its a lovely camera,very easy to use.build quality is good,its been droped a few times,which im not happy about but it takes a decent ammount of punishment,both options you gave would i suppose take abuse. I picked the Canon over a Nikon D5000,i think last year was its newest camera in the same price range with canon.
I would suggest if your willing to spend $900 on a camera,Get Option 1. Make use out of that 50mm lens you have there. if your buying it from a store,i'd make one suggestion,Dont go on the advise of the sales person,he'll most likely be biased towards one perticular company.

 

[inov8ter]

I like cats

 

[Tulsa]

WHO CARES WHAT THE CAMERA LOOKS LIKE?

Get the camera that feels the best, I shoot canon, because I felt it fit me the best, with fit and layout.
You will see no difference at all in quality.

 

[bigtwinky]

bigtwinky, I've been to my local camera store and shot with both. I even brought my own SD card and saved the photos to it.

I didn't really see a difference between the two cameras, although I'll be honest...I don't really know what to be looking for. Both cameras took very nice pictures and felt fine in my hand.

As said, you won't see much of a different in image quality as you dont know what to look for.

Taken from the nikon usa faq

Nikon offers two types of autofocus digital camera bodies: those with a built-in focus drive motor and those which require a lens to have a motor. Camera’s such as the D5000, D3100, D3000, D60, and D40 do not have a focus motor in them and can be smaller and lighter but they require the lens to have the focusing motor – an “AF-S” lens. While these bodies can use a lens with no focus motor (an “AF” lens) you would have to manually turn the focus ring to bring the subject in to sharp focus.

So the D3100 does not have an autofocus motor. While not a huge deal, you need to keep that in mind when buying lenses (specially the 50 1.8) to get a lens that has the motor built in, or be ready for manual focus. Not sure about lenses without autofocus motors other than the 50 1.8, so again, some research on your end is needed.

So lets see... both feel the same and you would be happy with the handling of both cameras. Both manufacturers make great pro lesnes and bodies that will allow you to grow as a photographer.

The one question I can think about, and its not a hugely essential thing but might sway your choice, do you have friends with either brand? Would just make lens sharing easier. But again, my main photo walk friend shoots Nikon and I shoot Canon, we get along fine.

You have a Canon 50 1.8, so logic says go with Canon. But again, its a cheap lens, easily replacable.

Seeing as everything else is equal, the last thing is the price. Do some online shopping and see if you can get either one at a cheaper price and then go with that.

Or if you can get a cheaper D90 (now that the D7000 is out, I would think the D90 would be less popular) and go with just 1 lens until you can save up for another.

The choice is yours, really. No one here is going to give you an answer saying "buy THIS one" (other than Nikon fanidiot posted up top).

 

[orb9220]

Yep spend more than a two minute feel & foreplay with both.
Also consider the button layout and menu's.

As I found the feel,button layout and menu's on the Nikon a better fit for me.
As they are both great systems.
.