Nikon vs Canon

Artoo · Nov 19, 2006

All good advice. The D80 felt waaay better in my hand than the EOS 400D, so I got into Nikon. Not the only reason, but quite significant, still.

DocFrankenstein · Nov 19, 2006

I would seriously look at pentax - they are very good option for an amateur.

Tiberius · Nov 19, 2006

Moranton said:
Canon are making cheaper and better digital ie rebel 400 which made my 20D a cheap peice of plastic. Also not sure how much you want to spend but the 5D is $1,500 cheaper than nikons 12mp.

also nikon dont take pictures in focus j/k

There is a LOT more to a camera than Megapixels. Not to mention that10MP and 12MP are nearly identical.

Also, the Dec. 2005 issue of Popular Photography rated the D2X and D50 as having better ISO 1600 performance than the 5D.

table1349 · Nov 19, 2006

Tiberius said:
There is a LOT more to a camera than Megapixels. Not to mention that10MP and 12MP are nearly identical.

Also, the Dec. 2005 issue of Popular Photography rated the D2X and D50 as having better ISO 1600 performance than the 5D.

The 5D was never designed as a low light/fast action camera. It is a great portrait/studio camera that has outstanding image quality. It is full frame where Nikon does not have a full frame offering. The 30D out performs the D50 and D2X at ISO 1600 with far less noise as it is designed to be a top line cropped sensor all around camera. I find it interesing that Popular Photograpy chose to compare the D2X and the 5D rather that the more comperable 1D MarkII.

When it comes right down to it, you need to choose the system for your style of photography whether it be Nikon or Canon.

shahzadmasih · Nov 20, 2006

Hi, This post is very informative, however I would like some specific information. If someone can help me then please send me a private message. Best Regards,

benhasajeep · Nov 20, 2006

I could not decide. So I have both.

Mad_Gnome · Nov 20, 2006

shahzadmasih said:
Hi, This post is very informative, however I would like some specific information. If someone can help me then please send me a private message. Best Regards,

Ask the questions on the forum, and we'll be more than happy to help you. You'll get a much more complete range of answers than just getting your info from one person.

Don Simon · Nov 20, 2006

gryphonslair99 said:
There are always options, however I do believe that JenR has selected the two best companies to look at. Canon and Nikon have the vast share of the pro digital market for good reason. They design for the pro's because it has to work, and work right everytime. With digital, it is far easier (translates to cheaper) for the average person to shoot like a pro. Pictures are taken by cameras. Photographs are created by people. It however is very hard to create with out good tools. You are on the right track JenR, now you just have to decide for yourself.

Yep, they have the vast share of the pro market, they design for pros... and where in his post did JenR express a desire to become a professional photographer? The vast majority of consumers, yes even those who buy digital SLRs, will never feel the need to use much of Canon and Nikon's range of lenses or accessories and would not find the systems offered by other companies too limiting. Unless someone tells me they want to be a professional photographer I don't see the need to recommend only gear made by companies who cater to professionals. If JenR has already looked at the options and come to the conclusion that Canon or Nikon are the best choice, then fine, but these days there seems to be a presumption that only two companies make digital cameras that work - you say it's very hard to create without good tools; are you seriously suggesting that the cameras and lenses offered by other companies are totally inadequate for the purposes of the average consumer?

Ripnowell45 · Nov 20, 2006

I would say hold them and flip through menus and see which one you like better... I personally did this and liked the Nikon better... I now have the Nikon D50 and absolutley love it.

Mad_Gnome · Nov 20, 2006

I love my 5D. Good noise control, great color reproduction, incredibly ergonomic (I knew how to use most of the features within 2 hours of picking the thing up) and the built-in image stabilization was the ultimate trump card for me. Doing a lot of handheld low-light photography without the use of flash made it a no-brainer in my book. Not to mention the availability of some of the best glass ever made.

brighteyesphotos · Nov 20, 2006

I went with sony for many reasons. I loved how it felt in my hands, whereas Canon and Nikon just didn't feel all that great. If I had to choose, Nikon. Canon has a bad habit of changing their lens mounts nearly every time they come up with a new model so many of your lens for your Rebel XT may not fit on their next new model. Not exactly cost-wise for someone who may not have much of a budget. Look for a camera that will keep up with you as your skill and style changes.

table1349 · Nov 20, 2006

ZaphodB said:
Yep, they have the vast share of the pro market, they design for pros... and where in his post did JenR express a desire to become a professional photographer? The vast majority of consumers, yes even those who buy digital SLRs, will never feel the need to use much of Canon and Nikon's range of lenses or accessories and would not find the systems offered by other companies too limiting. Unless someone tells me they want to be a professional photographer I don't see the need to recommend only gear made by companies who cater to professionals. If JenR has already looked at the options and come to the conclusion that Canon or Nikon are the best choice, then fine, but these days there seems to be a presumption that only two companies make digital cameras that work - you say it's very hard to create without good tools; are you seriously suggesting that the cameras and lenses offered by other companies are totally inadequate for the purposes of the average consumer?

JenR's question was:
"I know some people are passionate about Nikon cameras. There are probably just as many people passionate about their Canon cameras. Can someone please summarize the basic differences between the two?

I haven't purchased and SLR, so I don't have an allegiance to any manufacturer yet. So what is so awesome about Nikons? What is cool about the Canons? Come on, persuade me to join your "team""

I don't see that JenR asked for options. She wanted to know about Nikon and Canon.

A Yugo is adequate to get you from point A to point B. But I really don't believe that you are going to try to convince me that it has the same quality of engineering as a Mercedes. I can't afford to drive a Mercedes; I choose not to drive a Yugo. My vehicle of choice however has benefited from Mercedes engineering.

CMan · Nov 20, 2006

I think a lot to do with Canon vs. Nikon is what you started with...

I grew up with Canon cameras, so as a result I find them easier to use from the moment I pick one up.

fightheheathens · Nov 21, 2006

several points.

As i sell cameras (for now) i feel there are three brands to look at. Pentax Canon and Nikon.
Pentax does not yet have a pro level digital camera but the digital cameras they make are compatibale with all of the glass they make/made. (with some limitations on functionality) Pentax makes very good glass. Befor Canon was a house hold name, Pentax was considered second only to Nikon and some consider some of the glass they made equal. The 50mm 1.2 pentax lens make in the 70's-80's still goes for around 500 bucks. its a damn good lens.

on to canon and nikon.
Nikon makes better glass.
Canon makes a better image sensor.
that being said, the top nikon glass is at most 1-3% "better" then the top canon glass and the top canon image sensor is at most 1-3% better then the nikon image sensor.

From what i have read, the canon cameras have a wider range of glass to choose from. everything i have seen says that the canon Cameras are back compatible to every canon lens made after 1985.
As far as i know, that is not true for nikon. Some of their lenses only work with the digital nikons and some only work with some older film bodies. That being said, both do have a range of glass to choose from.

Lastly, i would not go with sony or panisonic simply for the reason that they have not been in the camera market for long. There is no way to know if one day in 5 years they will just pull out from the camera market leaving you with a useless system.

Don Simon · Nov 21, 2006

gryphonslair99 said:
I don't see that JenR asked for options. She wanted to know about Nikon and Canon.

A Yugo is adequate to get you from point A to point B. But I really don't believe that you are going to try to convince me that it has the same quality of engineering as a Mercedes. I can't afford to drive a Mercedes; I choose not to drive a Yugo. My vehicle of choice however has benefited from Mercedes engineering.

First of all, I'm aware that JenR asked about Canon and Nikon. My point is that IMO the reason so many people come here asking which is better is because they've already heard all the plugs from those brand's followers in camera shops, seen the websites of their internet preachers, read all the posts on forums advising people to buy Canon or buy Nikon... and taken all that on blind faith. The ridiculous idea that only Canon and Nikon make useable digital cameras is repeated so often that frankly I'm not sure beginners even know there are viable alternatives, so why does it hurt to let them know that they have more choice?

As for the last point, it pretty much sums up my whole idea that some of the people who preach the Canon and Nikon gospels must live in an alternate universe. To point out that Sony may not be in the market long enough to keep their Konica-Minolta based system going is a very sensible warning. To point out that Olympus doesn't handle noise well at higher ISOs is helpful. To warn consumers that Pentax's range of lenses and accessories could be too limiting if they decide to become a certain type of professional photographer is very good advice. But to say that those brand's cameras and lenses are all of a significantly poorer quality than the Canons and Nikons in the same product and price range is silly. To think that a D50 and Rebel XT are like a Mercedes and a BMW while a Pentax *ist or a Minolta 5D can be compared to a Yugo is fantastically silly. Of course I'm not going to try and convince you that one's as good as the other... if you have such irrational contempt for them then there would be no point even trying. But that doesn't mean I shouldn't try to convince others who haven't bought into such an ideology yet.