New camera

[mikeatpriestlake]

Hi everyone, I am looking to purchase a new Dslr camera. I am not new to photography, but I am new to dslrs. I am currently looking at a Nikon D5500 and a Canon EOS rebel t5i. Any thoughts on these or other ideas for a novice who wants his camera to be able to serve me as I get more skill? Thanks in advance! Mike

 

[rudimaes]

I would take the D5500. It is smaller and lighter, has a higher pixel count and wifi (easy for saving your pictures on a smartphone or tablet and using this devices as a remote). But I only know Nikon DSLRs, so I'm biassed
Rudi

 

[Bryston3bsst]

He's the Nikon guy, I'm the Canon guy. I'd suggest the Canon......gee, what a surprise, right?

Nikon has a greater pixel count. At this point, it makes zero difference. Both of these cameras placed in the hands of a good photographer are going to produce stellar pictures, you could not possibly tell them apart by looking at their resulting images. The Nikon has WI-FI. My camera has it too. I've never used it, don't care about it. But that's just me. Both cameras have 9 cross type AF points, which is great and quite important. What I did find just looking now was that the Canon was $200 cheaper. So, is the WI-FI worth 2 bucks to you?

You aren't going to lose regardless of what you do here. Close your eyes and point to one and you're going to get a great piece of hardware. But that's only assuming they are both priced the same.

 

[nerwin]

Go to the store and see which camera feels better in your hand. Its important. Also, you are not buying just a camera..you buying a system..something you could potentially stay with for years. Just do your research.

 

[DandL]

Hi everyone, I am looking to purchase a new Dslr camera. I am not new to photography, but I am new to dslrs. I am currently looking at a Nikon D5500 and a Canon EOS rebel t5i. Any thoughts on these or other ideas for a novice who wants his camera to be able to serve me as I get more skill? Thanks in advance! Mike

Here are a few links that may help with your decision:

Canon T5i vs Nikon D5500 - Our Analysis
Nikon D5500 versus Canon EOS 700D - Side by side camera comparison - DxOMark
Nikon D5500 vs Canon 700D Detailed Comparison
Nikon D5500 vs Canon 700D Camera Comparison Review

To me, it looks like an easy choice, but then I'm a Nikon guy...

Best of luck with your decision.

 

[mikeatpriestlake]

Wow, !folks get dedicated to a brand!! Lol, I really appreciate everyones input! Years ago and I mean years ago when I was in college I had a botany class. We were required to collect an herbarium of plants and if you were in Lab photography class you could take pictures of them instead of collecting and drying plants. No brainer! The deal then was that the Lab cameras were Nikon and my field camera was Canon. All 35mm film of course. Loved them both I think I will approach this as suggested and do more research into both. Touch and feel, check out the systems, also cost of the accessories etc. thank you all so much for your input. Looking forward to jumping into the new technology. Been gone too long.. Mike.

 

[Raj_55555]

TBH IMO t5i doesn't stand a chance against the D5500, but as Bryston said a good photographer can make good photographs from both. But if I was buying one for me, no way I'd get a t5i over a d5500 (being impartial to nikon or canon).

It has better DR, better colour depth, better AF system, better everything.

 

[soufiej]

Hi everyone, I am looking to purchase a new Dslr camera. I am not new to photography, but I am new to dslrs. I am currently looking at a Nikon D5500 and a Canon EOS rebel t5i. Any thoughts on these or other ideas for a novice who wants his camera to be able to serve me as I get more skill? Thanks in advance! Mike

IMO there's little need for most new students of photography to have an "upscale" model from either Nikon or Cannon. The useful features can be found down the line and often the small differences between that point and what is more costly will be useful in only a very small percentage of situations. That small percentage can most often be worked around by the inventive photographer to minimize any actual disparities in performance. Features are features and they seldom go to the real world performance of the camera. IMO too many OEM features can actually get in the way of taking a good photograph.

Mass market manufacturers pack a lot of punch into their entry level products and, after that, many features of the upscale models are simply window dressing for the less informed buyer with cash in their account. Many buyers feel tossing more money at a purchase will give them leeway to make more mistakes. Or they feel they will be more assured of a higher quality product and, hence, higher quality results. After selling high end electronics for decades, I'd say both rationales simply ignore that basic fact they will get back what they put in in knowledge and effort. Money alone has little to do with actual results and your enjoyment beyond the water cooler crowd.

Many buyers, experienced and new, make the mistake of comparing specs. They have little to go on when sitting at their kitchen table and pondering a purchase, so they look at static numbers. Here are the static numbers, side by side, for the two cameras; Side by Side Comparison Digital Photography Review

Not much difference. The resolution capacity of either camera is above the requirements for the experienced shooter and well above the limits for most student photographers. Rather like comparing two audio amplifiers, one at 100 watt and the other at 110. Or two televisions, one being 56" and the other 57". Not enough to discuss by anyone sensible enough to avoid such comparisons. It will be you who makes the difference with either camera.

You would not go wrong with either manufacturer's product IMO. Both represent a legacy brand with sufficient history and breadth to satisfy any serious photographer not simply tied up in their camera as their identity. As you can see, brand loyalty is fierce among Canon and Nikon owners. Today's DSLR's are very capable of providing exceptional quality in every respect.

However, you might be able to save yourself some money that could go to other accessories or a nice trip if you were to down scale your choices.

Looking at the D3300 and the SL1 in each respective line, I really doubt you would ever see any difference in image quality when compared to the higher priced cameras. Handling would be very much the same with feature counts and usability being about the same. Each company has a somewhat recognizable "House Image Quality" look to their results. Those differences amount, IMO, to the differences between your mother's cooking and your aunt's cooking (assuming both are good at the task, my aunt couldn't make a pot roast to save her life). Beyond that, it is really just you handling and learning the camera that will count. Head to a local camera shop and make your comparisons and your purchase there.

It's certainly your money to spend but you may be overspending and not really seeing the benefits IMO by buying mid-line.

DPReview Gear of the Year Canon Rebel SL1 EOS 100D Digital Photography Review

Recommended Cameras

The kit lens that comes on either camera is quite good and will take you a long way in your studies of photography and the development of your skills as a photographer. Both companies sell rather inexpensive fixed focal length lenses which offer even better performance and a serious education for a new photographer. And, IMO, either will provide most any young photographer with a base from which they can grow for many years and many photographs.

Good luck with your new adventure.

 

[mikeatpriestlake]

Hi everyone, I am looking to purchase a new Dslr camera. I am not new to photography, but I am new to dslrs. I am currently looking at a Nikon D5500 and a Canon EOS rebel t5i. Any thoughts on these or other ideas for a novice who wants his camera to be able to serve me as I get more skill? Thanks in advance! Mike

IMO there's little need for most new students of photography to have an "upscale" model from either Nikon or Cannon. The useful features can be found down the line and often the small differences between that point and what is more costly will be useful in only a very small percentage of situations. That small percentage can most often be worked around by the inventive photographer to minimize any actual disparities in performance. Features are features and they seldom go to the real world performance of the camera. IMO too many OEM features can actually get in the way of taking a good photograph.

Mass market manufacturers pack a lot of punch into their entry level products and, after that, many features of the upscale models are simply window dressing for the less informed buyer with cash in their account. Many buyers feel tossing more money at a purchase will give them leeway to make more mistakes. Or they feel they will be more assured of a higher quality product and, hence, higher quality results. After selling high end electronics for decades, I'd say both rationales simply ignore that basic fact they will get back what they put in in knowledge and effort. Money alone has little to do with actual results and your enjoyment beyond the water cooler crowd.

Many buyers, experienced and new, make the mistake of comparing specs. They have little to go on when sitting at their kitchen table and pondering a purchase, so they look at static numbers. Here are the static numbers, side by side, for the two cameras; Side by Side Comparison Digital Photography Review

Not much difference. The resolution capacity of either camera is above the requirements for the experienced shooter and well above the limits for most student photographers. Rather like comparing two audio amplifiers, one at 100 watt and the other at 110. Or two televisions, one being 56" and the other 57". Not enough to discuss by anyone sensible enough to avoid such comparisons. It will be you who makes the difference with either camera.

You would not go wrong with either manufacturer's product IMO. Both represent a legacy brand with sufficient history and breadth to satisfy any serious photographer not simply tied up in their camera as their identity. As you can see, brand loyalty is fierce among Canon and Nikon owners. Today's DSLR's are very capable of providing exceptional quality in every respect.

However, you might be able to save yourself some money that could go to other accessories or a nice trip if you were to down scale your choices.

Looking at the D3300 and the SL1 in each respective line, I really doubt you would ever see any difference in image quality when compared to the higher priced cameras. Handling would be very much the same with feature counts and usability being about the same. Each company has a somewhat recognizable "House Image Quality" look to their results. Those differences amount, IMO, to the differences between your mother's cooking and your aunt's cooking (assuming both are good at the task, my aunt couldn't make a pot roast to save her life). Beyond that, it is really just you handling and learning the camera that will count. Head to a local camera shop and make your comparisons and your purchase there.

It's certainly your money to spend but you may be overspending and not really seeing the benefits IMO by buying mid-line.

DPReview Gear of the Year Canon Rebel SL1 EOS 100D Digital Photography Review

Recommended Cameras

The kit lens that comes on either camera is quite good and will take you a long way in your studies of photography and the development of your skills as a photographer. Both companies sell rather inexpensive fixed focal length lenses which offer even better performance and a serious education for a new photographer. And, IMO, either will provide most any young photographer with a base from which they can grow for many years and many photographs.

Good luck with your new adventure.

 

[mikeatpriestlake]

Thanks for the great advice! I have not looked closely at the d3300, it may be all I ever need, I am hoping to grow into my camera a bit and want to really learn to use manual settings for more control of my shooting. What I don't want is a camera that is too heavy with auto settings. I am hoping to have good easy to access manual type settings and thought that if I went to the 5500 it might be a better choice. I have not handled each one of these yet, but will certainly give the 3300 a look see. thank you all again

 

[Yzerwing]

I find the idea of Wifi on my camera to be pointless because I prefer to edit my pictures on my computer at home before uploading them to the internet or any other device. Both companies make quality equipment and as everyone here has stated you are splitting hairs between the two.

 

[TCampbell]

Though I shoot Canon ... I'd be willing to recommend either brand. It's not so much the "brand" as the "model" that might be important. The question is: What do you plan to shoot? (or what do you like to shoot?) This can influence features that are important to you, accessories, or lenses that you might want. Ultimately there's also the question of budget.