Ready to buy my DSLR... insight on options needed

[Jimbo Slice]

Ok so I've been doing lots of reading around this forum, other forums and magazine reviews over the past few months all building up to now to try and decide what DSLR I would like to invest in.
I have thus narrowed my options down to the following: -
Canon Rebel XSi
Canon 40D
Nikon D80
Nikon D90

Now I've seen endless threads on this forum that end up being a Canon vs Nikon fanboy flame war and that is what I am trying to avoid here. A lot of you guys have great knowledge and experience with the above cameras so I'd like your insight.

From what I've read, the D90 has superb image quality, sharpness and low light performance, my only issue with it is the price and the possibility that Nikon in other countries won't honor my warranty if I migrate (a friend who lived in NY, bought his D80 there and moved to Canada said Nikon Canada wouldn't service his D80 when he had issues with the sensor) which I may do within a year or two.

The XSi has great quality too but when shooting in JPG the images are noticeably softened and this bugs me as I really like my images to be sharp but the pricepoint is a lot nicer than the D90 plus Canon's support seems to be internationally consistent.

The D80 is like a D90 with less features and older technology but still excellent and at a decent price point and the 40D seems to be an excellent camera as well that doesn't suffer from the issues that the XSi does but its in the D90 price vicinity.

Would you guys say that good glass is priced in the same range regardless of Canon or Nikon or is good Canon glass cheaper than good Nikon glass?

Any help or wisdom offered is more than welcome, thanks so much for reading this long post, I truly appreciate it.

[LittleCanonKid]

It's nice to see that you've done a good chunk of research, and you're not blindly buying. It's quite refreshing. ;)

All four cameras listed are fantastic and will all probably serve you wonderfully. However, all of them have to be attached to good glass to maximize IQ potential. First of all, what're you planning to shoot? If you shot, for example, outdoor sports, I would recommend a 40D, along with a 70-200 f/4 (a lens that I'm not quite sure Nikon has a direct competitor for, as far as I know they only have f/2.8s. Please correct me if I'm wrong.). The bulk of the higher-up models like the 40D and D80/90 may be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on what size you're aiming for.

If I had the choice between the four, I would go with the XSi or D80, but I don't shoot sports so a 4.5 or 6 FPS shooting rate isn't that important to me. Getting the less expensive body allows more money to spend on great lenses, which will be a lasting investment and not be cycled out even as close to as often as a body.

On the subject of XSi jpegs being soft, you can always turn up the sharpening in-camera, or shoot RAW and prevent everyone here from pouncing on you. :p

I'm not totally familiar with Nikon's brand of lenses, so I can't quite comment with a ton of authority on those but Canon's brand of glass fits me fairly well for what I want to do/have been doing. Once again though, I don't know what you shoot so I can't comment on your situation between the brands. Most people will agree with me when I say that photography is an expensive hobby, though, no matter what brand you choose! The lowest possible admission price to joining the club of L-lens owners is around $600, for the 70-200 f/4L. :eek: Chances are, you'll always have something on your photography shopping list. A good lens or two, a flash, a tripod... it goes on and on!

I hope I've helped at least a little bit. Good luck!

[Kiwi Mac]

The whole warranty thing is appalling; I am a professional photographer and my Nikon D3's will only be repaired under warranty in the country I bought them in, which I think is pants.

After warranty expires, you should not have any issues as they will charge you wherever you are. So - only a problem if you are one of the lucky few who get 5 year warranties, rather than the 12 months we get in New Zealand!

I also would hesitate to use the word 'invest' in relation to DSLRS. Essentially, they are camera-shaped computers and like computers, 5 years down the track they will be paperweights.

What you are investing in is the glass. For example, almost every Nikon lens made since 1977 will work on their pro and prosumer bodies. I regularly use a 15 year old 18mm on a D3.

IMHO, Nikon lenses are the best in the world from a major player and you can buy them secure in the knowledge that, unlike Canon, they probably will retain the backwards compatibility. Canon changed their mount in the mid 80's and lenses made before that do not work properly (or at all perhaps) with bodies made after that date.

I think that the D90 is a great camera. You will find helpful reviews on Ken Rockwell's site, although his style sometimes grates!

When I tell you that my Nikkor lenses would cost about $35,000 to replace, you will see that having lenses that you can continue to use with the newest bodies as they appear is quite important after a while!

[ChrisA]

From what I've read, the D90 has superb image quality, sharpness and low light performance,

You are wrong about that. The N90 can't do anything.

You are going to need a lens. Which lens you get will determine if you can shoot in low light and if the images will be sharp or not. All the camera body can do is record the image that the lens produces.

Pick the kit of lenses you like then buy the body that fits them. Choose a price point for the body such that you are not having to skimp or "make do" with a lesser kit of lenses. In other words spend as much on the body as you can but not so much that you have to reduce what you spend on the rest of the system. Which body you choose matters the least, every other part of the system matters more. Lighting matters more, lenses matter more.

But the body does have to fit the lens. So if you like the Nikon 80-200 f/2.8 AFd you are going to need the D90 or D80 because the N40 lacks a focus motor.

When you show some one a photo they will not know if you used a D40, D90 or a Canon but they will be able to guess the lens you used by looking at the image.

[butterfly0fdoom]

What's an N90? What's an N40?

[ab2650]

What's an N90? What's an N40?

I think he meant the D90/D40. His point was that non AF-S lenses will not focus on cameras that don't have a lens motor (D40, D40x, D50).

Has the OP considered a D200? You can get one for a steal at Best Buy ($599 for the body). linky-poo (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7633313&st=D200&type=product&id=1130987191339). (To see $599, you have to add it to your cart).

I've upgraded Nikon bodies several times and the D200 has been one of my favorites. Of course it's a few generations back so high-ISO performance isn't phenomenal like with the D3/3X/300/700 and there is no live-view shooting, and no video. If you're looking for excellent build quality this is a great price.

[TheReef]

Consider the Pentax K20D, it's better value for money and offers unique features not included with those you have listed.

Shake Reduction with any lens, weather sealing, superior construction and large bright viewfinder are some.

You can pick up a Pentax f1.4 50mm for 2/5 the price of the equivalent Nikon for example, built in shake reduction also reduces the price on all Pentax lenses in regards to that.

I know you ask Canon or Nikon, just offering an alternative that seams to fit that space quite well…

[Kiwi Mac]

Nikon AF-S lenses have ultrasonic motors in the lens itself and will focus on any modern Nikon DSLR.

They will focus faster and more accurately, and in lower light, the more expensive the body.

The AF lenses require the motor in the camera to drive the lens focus ring and again, the more expensive bodies have more powerful motors. AF lenses are slowly being phased out and replaced with AF-S G lenses.

The D200 is good value as one poster said - although the D300 is a much better camera if you can spring for the bigger price.

Other than that, go D90.

[Kiwi Mac]

"When you show some one a photo they will not know if you used a D40, D90 or a Canon but they will be able to guess the lens you used by looking at the image."

This is nonsense. No one can tell what lens (other than it was "wide" or "Telephoto") was used just by looking at an image!!

For example, it may be a cropped section of a larger image or shot on a smaller sensor camera using a full frame lens.

[Apple Ink]

Here we go again.... lol

Well I can at least tell you one thing... Canon has a real fuss free Warranty system and Canon's presence is considerably larger in the World so it beats Nikon in at least and probably the only front!

I'm a Canon guy and so my advice will obviously be the Canons.. get the XSi if photography is your hobby and you aim to perfect it with time! Get the 40D if you dont have any credit crunch.... beyond this I would recommend you to splurge more on glass if possible... the first thing you should consider adding to your kit should be a prime... the Canon 50mm 1.8 for $80 is the best lens on a bargain out there and the 1.4 is the perfect bokeh machine if you're in that area.. The 24mm and 85mm might interest you after this...
As for zoom... imho Canon really doesnt have something real good and vfm out there for the fovcf cameras out there... so you might want to keep your 18-55 IS and get a 24-135 IS USM or get a Tamron 17-50 2.8..

[vga4life]

The D90 is the best body of the ones you listed, but they'll all take great photos with the right lenses and more importantly, the right photographer.

My first lens purchase if I were a new DSLR owner buying a D90 would be the new Nikkor AF-S DX 35mm f/1.8G.

[Jimbo Slice]

Thanks for all the responses, I think this is a great photography community!

First of all, what're you planning to shoot? If you shot, for example, outdoor sports, I would recommend a 40D, along with a 70-200 f/4 (a lens that I'm not quite sure Nikon has a direct competitor for, as far as I know they only have f/2.8s. Please correct me if I'm wrong.). The bulk of the higher-up models like the 40D and D80/90 may be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on what size you're aiming for.


Your post was great help, thanks a lot man.
I forgot to mention what I'll be shooting. Not sure if it'll be much help because of my hobbies it will be a variety of different things. I would like to do some sport shooting as I'm really into soccer and enjoy live matches a lot but I also do a lot of landscape (city/nature) shooting; I also love to do macro work on strange insects or creatures. Thanks for your insight on the fast telephoto zoom lens, thats why I came here, because I really don't know the range of glass available for either brand.


On the subject of XSi jpegs being soft, you can always turn up the sharpening in-camera, or shoot RAW and prevent everyone here from pouncing on you. :p

LOL I know, shooting in jpg is pretty lame but to be honest if I shoot exclusively in RAW then I'll run out of HDD space so fast. Sometimes shooting in jpg is good for small events like a family dinner or something where I don't expect to have to do much processing after and I just want the shots. I'm doing this is a hobby, not as a profession right so I won't spend all my time processing images.

Kiwi Mac, I use the term invest because I'll be dishing out a substantial amount of money for something that I plan to keep for at least 5 years as you aptly put it, something that will bring me much happiness and enjoyment so to me, it is an investment with the ROI just being measured in enjoyment and quality images being captured.

You are wrong about that. The N90 can't do anything.

You are going to need a lens. Which lens you get will determine if you can shoot in low light and if the images will be sharp or not. All the camera body can do is record the image that the lens produces.
I see what you're saying, sorry let me clarify. I'd be buying the DSLR with the kit lens which I will have to use for a few months until I save enough to get a good piece of glass. The D90 using the kit lens has amazing photo quality, IMO better than what I've seen on the XSi. What really impressed me with the D90 with the Nikon F4.5-5.6, 70 - 300 mm VR lens is this night shot taken from www.dcresource.com http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/d90-review/nightshot6400.jpg
Even at 6400 ISO, you can even still read the us bank sign on the building, after reading many other reviews I haven't seen comparable performance in that area.

I'm not too sure what glass I'll be investing just yet but I've realized now that I've been doing this all wrong, I guess I should have done my research on glass first and then researched what body to buy based on what glass I wanted lol. Damn, its just that there is so much glass out there, if it took me months to research bodies, it'll take me years to research glass lol and I miss shooting with a good camera so I want to get back into the hobby as soon as possible.

ab2650, I was considering the D200 some time back but the pricepoint was substantially more than the D80, I guess I'll have to take a look and see if that has changed over the past few months but in any case I most likely won't buy my Nikon in the US as I won't get warranty coverage from Nikon Canada, which is where I currently live. Load of bollocks, that warranty business.

TheReef, I remember reading the review on the K20D when it came out but a few of the comments turned me off, I like how feature filled it is for the low price but the reviewer noted that it had noisy low light performance, consistently underexposes, outdated UI and relatively slow burst rate. I will definitely go to a photo store and give it a whirl though, thanks for your suggestion. (BTW what good glass is available for Pentax?)

Apple Ink, I don't have a credit crunch but I am a student who is currently without a part-time job so price is an issue. However I'll be using this for some time to come so I'd rather spend a few extra hundred and get something I'll be happy with for the next few year, rather than save a few hundred and get something with small niggling problems that will just bug me. Thanks for your input on lenses though.

Ideally, I'd like to get a telephoto zoom lens, a wide angle and a macro lens for my insect work.

[jaseone]

Personally I have the D90 with the 18-105VR and 70-300VR lenses, I love the combo and does pretty much everything I need except for low light, for low light situations I plan on investing in some primes firstly the new 35/1.8 once it is available. I may also look at something like the 70-200VR (the beast) if I end up doing a lot of indoor sports like basketball.

Unless you really find a rare someone that has used all of the cameras you mentioned for an extended period all you are going to get as advice is from people that have read the same reviews you have mixed in with people chiming in about the one camera they own.

It sounds like you have done your research though so I would say go with what your own choice is based upon your research, however I will recommend that you at least step in to a camera store and handle each camera before making a purchase as that could sway you one way or the other. I'm actually starting to form an opinion that body selection shouldn't be based on the glass but rather the ergonomics of the body itself, after all having the best glass is hardly going to matter if you hate using your camera due to the ergonomics of the body!

[Jimbo Slice]

jaseone, I have been to a few Best Buy's, Future Shops and Henry's to mess around with the cameras but its hard to gain an idea of what its ike to use it in the real world by just messing around with it in the store, the ergonomics of all of my options are pretty good, the only camera's ergonomics I didn't like all that much was the Olympus E-420 because it just feels like its going to slip out of my hand lol.
I was hoping that people who own the cameras that I'm looking at would give me good insight as they're actually living with it and would have information I might not read in a review.

[Apple Ink]

Apple Ink, I don't have a credit crunch but I am a student who is currently without a part-time job so price is an issue. However I'll be using this for some time to come so I'd rather spend a few extra hundred and get something I'll be happy with for the next few year, rather than save a few hundred and get something with small niggling problems that will just bug me. Thanks for your input on lenses though.

Ideally, I'd like to get a telephoto zoom lens, a wide angle and a macro lens for my insect work.

I'd strongly suggest the 40D with the excellent spot metering system an a Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro... the Macro lens is well renowned and used by most professionals. It has simply superb optics, lightning fast AF for a Macro lens and cutting sharpness... for telephoto I recommend the 70-300 IS USM or the 70-200 2.8L... the L is Canon's luxury range and pretty expensive but you usually dont walk into a zoom doing constant f/2.8 everyday do you!

[MacJenn]

The 40D is a decent body and while I'm not the biggest fan of the D90 (I own one), it is better than the 40D.

One thing people quickly learn from this site is the Canon fanboys (post above is perfect example) are extreme and the Nikon lovers are quick to suggest someone get a Canon if that fits their style better.

[mikekelley]

What about a Rebel XS instead of the XSi - the extra features you get in the XSi are not really worth what you are paying. Spot metering and an extra 2 mp. Not worth 200 dollars in my opinion. And if you are a beginner, you probably don't need the extra 1.5 FPS in RAW.

[vga4life]

One thing people quickly learn from this site is the Canon fanboys (post above is perfect example) are extreme and the Nikon lovers are quick to suggest someone get a Canon if that fits their style better.

Golly, those Canon fanboys sound a lot like Apple fanboys. ;)

(Canon shooter here, who recommended the D90 above.)

[Apple Ink]

The 40D is a decent body and while I'm not the biggest fan of the D90 (I own one), it is better than the 40D.

One thing people quickly learn from this site is the Canon fanboys (post above is perfect example) are extreme and the Nikon lovers are quick to suggest someone get a Canon if that fits their style better.

Aah... I was just wondering the other day when we might meet again.. must be my bad day!

Anyway let me ask you if you'd suggest a Dell over an Apple?!?

Besides you yourself once suggested people should only suggest something that they 'own'!!

LOL.. Alas I suggested the 40D OP.. You see Nikon can't use the 100mm or the 70-200 L lens.. If it were I'd have suggested the D90 LOL.

[MacJenn]

Aah... I was just wondering the other day when we might meet again.. must be my bad day!

Anyway let me ask you if you'd suggest a Dell over an Apple?!?

Besides you yourself once suggested people should only suggest something that they 'own'!!

LOL.. Alas I suggested the 40D OP.. You see Nikon can't use the 100mm or the 70-200 L lens.. If it were I'd have suggested the D90 LOL.

Wow you remember my comments from a long time ago. I'm either freaked out or impressed. I said people shouldn't say a product is bad if they have never genuinely used it (most people I think on the internet say they have used xxx product to make them look more credible).

Using your analogy the Canon would be the Dell (cheap, plastic and can be bought at Walmart) and the Nikon is the Apple of the camera world. See we can play these tit for tat games all day, Canonboy. I, however, am quick to bash Nikon when they deserve it.

The Nikon 70-200 VR is world class and Nikon's 105mm is awesome. We can debate all day which company makes better lenses, but it is all just opinion at the end of the day.

I do find it funny when I visit the Canon sites and find many of their little fanbois have those fancy little signatures with the L in red and with italics. I guess whatever makes them feel special. Maybe insecurity does that to some people.

[Kiwi Mac]

The whole thing revolves around how much glass you will buy.

I now have a large collection of Nikkor lenses which effectively tie me to Nikon bodies. If you intend to buy a big collection of lenses, this will be an issue. If just a few, not so much.

Canon bodies are regarded - currently at least - as having worse ergonomics and poorer menus etc etc. At the top end, the low light performance of a Nikon D3 knocks anything Canon currently make into a cocked hat. I can produce useable images at over ISO25,000! An EOS 1D does not even go to half that.

They tend to leapfrog though, so for example in the mid range the new EOS 5 Mk2 is probably better than the Nikon offerings at that price, at least in terms of image resolution etc. However, the next Nikon will probably beat it for a while etc etc.

I always view Nikon as the equivalent of what Apple used to be - they make specialist equipment for choosy users. Canon make photocopiers, printers and all manner of other things which dilute their R&D budgets. Nikon make cameras, lenses, glass, microscopes and binoculars etc - a sort of Japanese Leica, if you like.

Best advice I can give you after 20 years as a professional shooter? Go and play with all the ones you shortlisted in a GOOD dealer (not a stack em high dealer) and see how they feel in your hand and how you like the interaction with controls, weight, menus and what the images look like.

Buy the one you like the best, screw the reviews and get out there and shoot images!

There is an old saying in photojournalism - "How do you take great pictures? f8 and be there!"

[Jimbo Slice]

I guess it was only a matter of time until brands started getting bashed lol.
Today I went to Henry's used centre and saw a D200 for $599. Thats starting to look really nice to me, thanks for all the input everyone, I'm not a particularly indecisive person but this decision is taking me lots of time to make :o

[jaseone]

BestBuy has the D200 body only brand new for $599 at the moment:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7633313&st=d200&lp=2&type=product&cp=1&id=1130987191339

[Jimbo Slice]

BestBuy has the D200 body only brand new for $599 at the moment:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=7633313&st=d200&lp=2&type=product&cp=1&id=1130987191339

I'm located in Canada unfortunately

[Wingnut330]

I have an XSi and love it. I will be upgrading to a 50D soon. If I had it to do over again I likely would have just started with a 40D (or now a 50D). It's an expensive jump so if money is an issue I would get and XSi and start shooting. It's a great camera, easy to use and would allow you to save for nicer lenses.

[Apple Ink]

Wow you remember my comments from a long time ago. I'm either freaked out or impressed. I said people shouldn't say a product is bad if they have never genuinely used it (most people I think on the internet say they have used xxx product to make them look more credible).

Using your analogy the Canon would be the Dell (cheap, plastic and can be bought at Walmart) and the Nikon is the Apple of the camera world. See we can play these tit for tat games all day, Canonboy. I, however, am quick to bash Nikon when they deserve it.

The Nikon 70-200 VR is world class and Nikon's 105mm is awesome. We can debate all day which company makes better lenses, but it is all just opinion at the end of the day.

I do find it funny when I visit the Canon sites and find many of their little fanbois have those fancy little signatures with the L in red and with italics. I guess whatever makes them feel special. Maybe insecurity does that to some people.

Now that's a good retort... rather than bashing people for suggesting a brand by making stupid off topic comments(though you haven't completely foregone this but it's a start) you have given a solid rebuttal this time that you hate canon's build... and I have no problems with this comment since the OP can actually make some use of it...

As for brands... LOL. I dont give a heck for the body.. it's the lens and the performance I want and both will give a beginner more than enough of that!! It's the lenses you should be researching because you've told us you have an interest!!

[MacJenn]

Now that's a good retort... rather than bashing people for suggesting a brand by making stupid off topic comments(though you haven't completely foregone this but it's a start) you have given a solid rebuttal this time that you hate canon's build... and I have no problems with this comment since the OP can actually make some use of it...

As for brands... LOL. I dont give a heck for the body.. it's the lens and the performance I want and both will give a beginner more than enough of that!! It's the lenses you should be researching because you've told us you have an interest!!


Don't play the victim and act like I bashed you before in another thread. You dished it out pretty well yourself. You are better than that aren't you? Now I will give you this. Your retort this time was a little better, but you still had to put a bash in there by implying my answers in another thread weren't productive which they were. You just disagreed with them.

I actually agree with you mostly about lenses. They are the most important aspect for the most part. I disagree with many who discount what a quality body can do over a cheap one. I think the body is very important also. Now I think Nikon lenses are better than their Canon rivals which is why I own a Nikon. You own a Canon most likely because you think the Canon makes better lenses overall. That is where neither of us are wrong because that is how we (I) honestly think. Both make great lenses though and at the end of the day it is just a persons personal opinion and everyone has one.

[luminosity]

As a Nikon guy, I'd like to cast a vote for giving Pentax a try. Their stuff seems to have outstanding value for the money.

[ProwlingTiger]

One tries to be objective when choosing a brand. Each have pros and cons. But you must remember that once you gather enough equipment with a brand, it becomes hard to switch.

Personally, I've been shooting Canon for years. However, this past month I bought a Sony Alpha to use as a second body. I like the feel, quality, etc, and determined it would be better fit for a smaller companion that I could take mostly everywhere.

I still shoot most my stuff Canon and would highly recommend their cameras. I will admit I have not shot much with Nikon. I didn't like the UI and the feel so I cannot offer any advice there.

I have extensively used the 40D and can say it's an awesome camera. The only reason I would never get a Rebel XSi is due to the fact that it uses SD cards. While I have plenty of them around, I shoot with Compact Flash as it's interchangeable with my other cameras. Something minor, I guess, but worth noting for me.

[Mr. G4]

Olympus E-420 because it just feels like its going to slip out of my hand lol.

The E-420 is the smallest DSLR in the world and doesn't have a grip to rest your finger to hold the camera. Olympus just corrected that with the announcement of the E-620 which is the smallest DSLR to have in body image stabilizer.

In order, to choose a brand to buy in you need to look further than the body. You need to look at the quality/price of lens.

Like many Apple users and buy into "Think Different" I went with Olympus because like Apple, Olympus is an innovative company. They were the first to come out with the self cleaning sensor, and until today no one was able to duplicate what they did. They were the first to introduce "Live View" that everyone said to be gimmick...now every one have one. With the E-30 they introduced the first electronic level so your picture won't look crooked and it is very useful with wide angle so your picture won't look distorted. Now with the E-620, they put illuminated button so you can see which button is which in the dark à la Macbook Pro keyboard...you might say that is not going to help in picture quality...granted but it's liitle innovation like that that make us like what Apple does, isn't it?

As far as glass is concerned, Zuiko, that how Olympus calls their optic department, they made the best lens for the money...just look at their kit lens...it's the best of any kit lens from any manufacturer.

Which ever body from which ever company you choose will let take great picture, but if you are serious about photography you should look into lens first and decide for the body later, because you always keep the lens and not the body...Think Different :D

[Max Archer]

I played around with an E-420 the other day, actually, saw 'em for really cheap at the Circuit City bankruptcy sale and considered getting one to play with. I didn't actually mind the shape, it reminded me quite a bit of the way old camera bodies felt in the hand, which I always liked.

However, I don't think it's really the best choice. My opinion is that the D90 and the 40D are the real options in the price range. I'm a Nikon guy myself, but I've shot relatively extensively with the 40D and liked it quite a bit, for a Canon. The D90's also a great little camera, and I'd choose it simply for the high-ISO performance.

In regards to an earlier post, Nikon's closest competitor to the 70-200 f/4L is the 80-200 f/2.8D. You pay slightly more (depending on where you buy it), but get a more "solid" lens, and real "fast" glass. It's one of the biggest examples of the difference in philosophy between the companies - Canon goes for a smaller, lighter lens that relies on technology (IS), while Nikon goes for the big, solid, traditional solution.

I'm going for the (hopefully coming soon) D400 as soon as it comes out, myself. I'm using a D2X right now, but have too much invested in DX glass to move to the full-frame D3, and I want the crop factor because I tend to shoot a lot of telephoto sports work, and I'd rather carry the relatively mobile (and versatile) AF-S 70-200 f/2.8VR that I own, than the huge and "slow" 300 f/4.

[Astroguy12s]

Thanks for all the responses, I think this is a great photography community!

TheReef, I remember reading the review on the K20D when it came out but a few of the comments turned me off, I like how feature filled it is for the low price but the reviewer noted that it had noisy low light performance, consistently underexposes, outdated UI and relatively slow burst rate. I will definitely go to a photo store and give it a whirl though, thanks for your suggestion. (BTW what good glass is available for Pentax?)

Ideally, I'd like to get a telephoto zoom lens, a wide angle and a macro lens for my insect work.

Let me guess, the reviewer is dpreview? Take it with a grain of salt, read people's reviews in the forums to get a general feel. Having just bought a dslr (went with the Pentax K200d), Pentax appealed to me because there is a vast assortment of lens available, built in image stabilization, and I very much liked the quality feel to it compared to the competition. ANY lens ever made for a Pentax camera will work with your new Pentax dslr....and many can get picked up quite cheap (and all will have image stabilization since Pentax builds it into their bodies). In fact, my buddy who bought a XSi before me was a bit jealous of the difference in build quality of the body and lens in comparison his. Check our pentaxforums.com for lens review and see if something may meet your requirement. Good luck!

[LittleCanonKid]

Let me guess, the reviewer is dpreview? Take it with a grain of salt, read people's reviews in the forums to get a general feel. Having just bought a dslr (went with the Pentax K200d), Pentax appealed to me because there is a vast assortment of lens available, built in image stabilization, and I very much liked the quality feel to it compared to the competition. ANY lens ever made for a Pentax camera will work with your new Pentax dslr....and many can get picked up quite cheap (and all will have image stabilization since Pentax builds it into their bodies). In fact, my buddy who bought a XSi before me was a bit jealous of the difference in build quality of the body and lens in comparison his. Check our pentaxforums.com for lens review and see if something may meet your requirement. Good luck!Pentax is a great brand that most people discount fairly quickly without much merit. If I were the OP I'd do some research in Pentax.

My personal love for continuous shooting, though, would probably stop me from getting a K200D. The buffer is 4 shots at 2.8fps, right? I'm a fairly trigger-happy guy, maybe I should look into stopping that. :p

[TheReef]

Let me guess, the reviewer is dpreview? Take it with a grain of salt, read people's reviews in the forums to get a general feel. Having just bought a dslr (went with the Pentax K200d), Pentax appealed to me because there is a vast assortment of lens available, built in image stabilization, and I very much liked the quality feel to it compared to the competition. ANY lens ever made for a Pentax camera will work with your new Pentax dslr....and many can get picked up quite cheap (and all will have image stabilization since Pentax builds it into their bodies). In fact, my buddy who bought a XSi before me was a bit jealous of the difference in build quality of the body and lens in comparison his. Check our pentaxforums.com for lens review and see if something may meet your requirement. Good luck!


There tends to be a mindset against Pentax in this industry, perhaps people feel better as part of the main crowd. (Kind of reminds me of Apple vs Microsoft 10 years ago).

Not having any previous slr or lens collection (So I'm hopefully unbiased :)), in search for a dSLR, I found the Pentax K10D the best in features and price at the time, yet the saleman responds "Is there any reason you are buying a Pentax?, let me show you a nice Nikon D200 over here".

So even the shops salesmen sometimes steer you away from Pentax, their margins are less simply because of bulk distribution from Canon and Nikon. I'd say the reviewer is one of those people.


It's a shame because they are excellent cameras. (Jimbo Slice, be sure to check out reviews of people who own the camera, on Cnet it rates almost 10)



TheReef, I remember reading the review on the K20D when it came out but a few of the comments turned me off, I like how feature filled it is for the low price but the reviewer noted that it had noisy low light performance, consistently underexposes, outdated UI and relatively slow burst rate. I will definitely go to a photo store and give it a whirl though, thanks for your suggestion. (BTW what good glass is available for Pentax?)


Ideally, I'd like to get a telephoto zoom lens, a wide angle and a macro lens for my insect work.

I'm not sure where you read about noisy low light performance, it is meant to be very good, google K20D low light performance.

I can't speak for under exposure but I've never noticed anything like it on my K10D? I doubt there would be a major problem in that area.

The UI is perhaps a little bland, it is perfectly clear and functional though. The K20D has a plenty of on-body controls (which means you don't spend a lot of time in the menus anyway) and the interface offers heaps of customization for these, I have ISO assigned to the second thumb dial, and moved AF from halfway press to a dedicated spare AF button for example.

The burst rate is 3 FPS, not the best but not terrible. Keep in mind the buffer is unlimited, you can shoot continuously until the card is full which is nice.



Pentax have been expanding their lens offerings, all of which are here:
http://www.pentaximaging.com/camera-lenses/


Pentax is renowned for making very high quality glass, but if you want 3rd party for savings try these:

Sigma 70-300mm, Tamron 28-75mm (very very sharp, more so than Canon's equivalent) and various Sigma and Tonika wide angles.

For budget Macro, possibly look into coupling an extension tube with a used 50mm Manual F1.7 Focus for cheap off eBay. (K20D will be backwards compatible with any K mount lens).

Whatever your choice have fun! :)

[ProwlingTiger]

Not having any previous slr or lens collection (So I'm hopefully unbiased :)), in search for a dSLR, I found the Pentax K10D the best in features and price at the time, yet the saleman responds "Is there any reason you are buying a Pentax?, let me show you a nice Nikon D200 over here".

It's a shame because they are excellent cameras. (Jimbo Slice, be sure to check out reviews of people who own the camera, on Cnet it rates almost 10)


3.5 out of 5 stars? Well, that's the editor's rating. However users are rating it very highly...4.5 stars.

[Kiwi Mac]

I played around with an E-420 the other day, actually, saw 'em for really cheap at the Circuit City bankruptcy sale and considered getting one to play with. I didn't actually mind the shape, it reminded me quite a bit of the way old camera bodies felt in the hand, which I always liked.

However, I don't think it's really the best choice. My opinion is that the D90 and the 40D are the real options in the price range. I'm a Nikon guy myself, but I've shot relatively extensively with the 40D and liked it quite a bit, for a Canon. The D90's also a great little camera, and I'd choose it simply for the high-ISO performance.

In regards to an earlier post, Nikon's closest competitor to the 70-200 f/4L is the 80-200 f/2.8D. You pay slightly more (depending on where you buy it), but get a more "solid" lens, and real "fast" glass. It's one of the biggest examples of the difference in philosophy between the companies - Canon goes for a smaller, lighter lens that relies on technology (IS), while Nikon goes for the big, solid, traditional solution.

I'm going for the (hopefully coming soon) D400 as soon as it comes out, myself. I'm using a D2X right now, but have too much invested in DX glass to move to the full-frame D3, and I want the crop factor because I tend to shoot a lot of telephoto sports work, and I'd rather carry the relatively mobile (and versatile) AF-S 70-200 f/2.8VR that I own, than the huge and "slow" 300 f/4.

You could carry the huge and "fast" 300 2.8 VR instead! I'm seriously looking for one of those at the moment.

It is worth noting too that the DX format does not give you more actual magnification - only narrower fov, which appears to be more magnification when compared to FX. Nothing changes about the lens; it's simply the amount of the image we use from the back of the lens.

[luminosity]

I've seen outstanding images from Pentax cameras online, and that includes their somewhat older DSLRs like he K200D. If I were starting over again, I might really think about going with Pentax, particularly from a cost standpoint.

[Jimbo Slice]

:( Wow I feel like I have so much more reading to do, no problem though as I love to learn about things that I enjoy. Thanks for the excellent feedback everyone, I'm definitely going to dedicate some time to do some pentax reading

[Wingnut330]

:( Wow I feel like I have so much more reading to do, no problem though as I love to learn about things that I enjoy. Thanks for the excellent feedback everyone, I'm definitely going to dedicate some time to do some pentax reading

I got overwhelmed too which is why my advice a few posts ago was to make a decision and begin shooting. A few reasons I feel that way. 1. All of the cameras discussed here are good choices and the 4 you started out with are fine choices. 2. Camera equipment (that is well cared for) generally holds it's value pretty well, so if you buy something shoot with it and change your mind, you can usually sell it and get something else. (I'm not advocating wasting money, I'm simply saying that once you've held it, tested it in a store you will likely enjoy it in the field BUT if not, you won't get killed trying to sell it) 3. The hobby is about taking pictures and enjoying it, all this time researching is less time shooting! : )

I would decide which lens brand and features you like and buy the corresponding dSLR. I liked Canon lenses because they work with most all (if not all) Canon bodies. They focus in the lens not the camera. Others like Nikons because they focus in the camera and not the lens. This is good for some but has limitations related to lenses - would you ever run in to that limitation? Maybe, maybe not. Will you notice the difference between Nikon glass and Canon glass? Maybe, maybe not - heck will you ever even compare them once you make your decision?

The folks on this forum are very knowledgeable and very technical. That's good and bad. Everyone is trying to be as helpful as possible, but sometimes you can get bogged down in analysis paralysis.

I say get a good camera, better lenses and start shooting! It's tons of fun!

[epicwelshman]

However, this past month I bought a Sony Alpha to use as a second body. I like the feel, quality, etc, and determined it would be better fit for a smaller companion that I could take mostly everywhere.

Can I ask why you went with an Alpha to complement your Canon? I'm not attacking, I'm just curious, because in my mind it would make sense to stick to one brand so you can share lenses between the cameras. What's the point in having to buy lenses for two systems, simply because you like the 'feel' of the Alpha? Again, just curious...

[jbg232]

Obviously you've done your reading and have invested many hours into this choice but I was in a similar situation to yours a few months ago and here's how I chose to get the XSi (over the 40D and the XS/XT/XTi).

First off I chose to go with canon because the lens I wanted for bird photography (the canon 100-400mm L IS or 400mm L prime which are considered the standards in the bird photography world) are made by canon, thus necessitating a canon body. I don't really have anything against nikon, I just have never used them and I owned 2 canon point and shoots before I bought the XSi and really like the quality of them. From my limited research into nikon vs. canon I would say that to me it seemed like you got more bang for your buck at the XSi price range and that the image quality was slightly better from comparison shots but I am quickly leaving my realm of knowledge so I'll leave it at that.

I chose the XSi over the 40D (good comparison chart here (http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/canon_eos_xsi_vs_xti_vs_40D.html) because the image quality was for the most part identical and the real differences were the body which was more heavy on the 40D and more rugged, the increased fps/shutter/ISO speed, and on camera LCD display. Personally I wasn't shooting sports photography so I didn't need the increased fps, I didn't see myself shooting at 1/8000 shutters or 3200 ISO so those weren't of concern either. While I liked the LCD display in practice for a day that I borrowed both and compared them I really didn't use it much and actually found the XSi to be an easier to use camera for myself. Lastly, while I think I would have liked to have the more rugged body, the price wasn't worth it to me for that feature so I went with the XSi over the 40D and am very happy with my decision.

I chose the XSi over the XTi/XS for different reasons. From testing I could tell the the image quality (the most important feature probably) was different. I also like that my wife could use the live view mode to shoot pictures if she desired which was the deciding factor in my choice and worth the extra money.

Obviously from my experiences it is really a personal decision. What are you shooting? What lenses do you need? What features are most important to you? What is your budget? One thing that I should mention that I have learned now is that good lenses are very expensive (I'm now saving up for that $1500 lens) but are the ENTIRE reason you are buying a camera. In my opinion I would save money on the body (like an xsi vs. a 40d) to get a better lens because the truth is that in 5-10 years you will most likely get a new body anyways, but you will not likely get a new lens (or even if you do, they retain a tremendous amount of their resale value for when you decide to upgrade, unlike the bodies). Enjoy!

[foulmouthedleon]

Get the D40, it does everything you need it to. If money is no object, get the D90.

[ProwlingTiger]

Can I ask why you went with an Alpha to complement your Canon? I'm not attacking, I'm just curious, because in my mind it would make sense to stick to one brand so you can share lenses between the cameras. What's the point in having to buy lenses for two systems, simply because you like the 'feel' of the Alpha? Again, just curious...

Well, you're right in the sense that it doesn't make sense to buy lenses for 2 systems. I know of several people and companies personally that do though; they often carry Nikon and Canon. But with my Alpha I mainly use only 2 lenses. For me, it's used as a general purpose camera, just if I'm walking somewhere or have some quick things to photograph. It weights considerably less than my Canon so I can more comfortably.

I wanted to buy a lower range DSLR for my second body. I had used a few Rebels in the past, never owned one though. I like the XSi but it uses SD cards and I'm biased a bit towards Compact Flash. I was going to look online for a good deal on the XTi until I caught an Alpha at CC's liquidation sale for a good price. That sort of sealed the deal for me.

[MacJenn]

I got overwhelmed too which is why my advice a few posts ago was to make a decision and begin shooting. A few reasons I feel that way. 1. All of the cameras discussed here are good choices and the 4 you started out with are fine choices. 2. Camera equipment (that is well cared for) generally holds it's value pretty well, so if you buy something shoot with it and change your mind, you can usually sell it and get something else. (I'm not advocating wasting money, I'm simply saying that once you've held it, tested it in a store you will likely enjoy it in the field BUT if not, you won't get killed trying to sell it) 3. The hobby is about taking pictures and enjoying it, all this time researching is less time shooting! : )

I would decide which lens brand and features you like and buy the corresponding dSLR. I liked Canon lenses because they work with most all (if not all) Canon bodies. They focus in the lens not the camera. Others like Nikons because they focus in the camera and not the lens. This is good for some but has limitations related to lenses - would you ever run in to that limitation? Maybe, maybe not. Will you notice the difference between Nikon glass and Canon glass? Maybe, maybe not - heck will you ever even compare them once you make your decision?

The folks on this forum are very knowledgeable and very technical. That's good and bad. Everyone is trying to be as helpful as possible, but sometimes you can get bogged down in analysis paralysis.

I say get a good camera, better lenses and start shooting! It's tons of fun!


A ton of Nikon lenses have AF (auto focus) on their lenses like the Canons. Once again a Canon owner acting like they know a lot about Nikons when they have no clue. Of course their older ones don't have AF, but nor does Canons.

[gkarris]

jaseone, I have been to a few Best Buy's, Future Shops and Henry's to mess around with the cameras but its hard to gain an idea of what its ike to use it in the real world by just messing around with it in the store, the ergonomics of all of my options are pretty good, the only camera's ergonomics I didn't like all that much was the Olympus E-420 because it just feels like its going to slip out of my hand lol.
I was hoping that people who own the cameras that I'm looking at would give me good insight as they're actually living with it and would have information I might not read in a review.

What about those of us that have small hands? :eek:

I ordered one online as a second body and it has IS to compliment my E-500 and 2 lenses. The E-420 is replacing a like-dSLR I just sold.

I played around with an E-420 the other day, actually, saw 'em for really cheap at the Circuit City bankruptcy sale and considered getting one to play with. I didn't actually mind the shape, it reminded me quite a bit of the way old camera bodies felt in the hand, which I always liked.

However, I don't think it's really the best choice.

How much are they going for? The Circuit City's around me have already been picked clean for weeks.

I found a body only online for $320 (free shipping/no tax).

Great choice if you already have lenses.

OP - I understand, if you are just starting out with dSLR's - Nikon and Canon are the way to go.

[Mr. G4]

A ton of Nikon lenses have AF (auto focus) on their lenses like the Canons. Once again a Canon owner acting like they know a lot about Nikons when they have no clue. Of course their older ones don't have AF, but nor does Canons.

Isn't that true if you put a lens that doesn't have a motor on a D40 and D60 it won't autofocus, because the D40 and D60 don't have the motor in the body while other Nikon bodies do?

What about those of us that have small hands? :eek:
I ordered one online as a second body and it has IS to compliment my E-500 and 2 lenses. The E-420 is replacing a like-dSLR I just sold.


I think you mis-spoke ...the E-420 does not have in body stabilization. The new E-620, which has almost the same form factor, do have the IS.

[MacJenn]

Isn't that true if you put a lens that doesn't have a motor on a D40 and D60 it won't autofocus, because the D40 and D60 don't have the motor in the body while other Nikon bodies do?



I think you mis-spoke ...the E-420 does not have in body stabilization. The new E-620, which has almost the same form factor, do have the IS.

That is true. There are also some disadvantages of having the AF in the lens rather than the body. The poster I quoted made it sound like it was a negative that many Nikon bodies have AF built in which is a great advantage of the Nikon in my opinion.

[Wingnut330]

That is true. There are also some disadvantages of having the AF in the lens rather than the body. The poster I quoted made it sound like it was a negative that many Nikon bodies have AF built in which is a great advantage of the Nikon in my opinion.

Well you're right on one thing, I don't know as much about Nikon cameras or lenses as you. But you admit there is a difference in the lenses between Canon and Nikon.

I think that 1. you read to much into my comment and 2 (and more importantly) you took it personally. You appear to be very proud of your decision to go with a Nikon and that's great for you, but that doesn't mean that they are for everyone.

I was simply pointing out to the OP that there are differences in the brands but at the end of the day he might not even notice. I'm simply encouraging him to get shooting rather than spending months trying to decide.

Chillax a bit.

[MacJenn]

Well you're right on one thing, I don't know as much about Nikon cameras or lenses as you. But you admit there is a difference in the lenses between Canon and Nikon.

I think that 1. you read to much into my comment and 2 (and more importantly) you took it personally. You appear to be very proud of your decision to go with a Nikon and that's great for you, but that doesn't mean that they are for everyone.

I was simply pointing out to the OP that there are differences in the brands but at the end of the day he might not even notice. I'm simply encouraging him to get shooting rather than spending months trying to decide.

Chillax a bit.


I didn't take anything personal. I don't even know you. Also please don't tell me to chillax out. I think you said that because you were called out for posting BS (to divert the attention away from your lie/BS). If you post BS on a message board someone will call you on it. I will post whatever I want within the guidelines of this board.

Your above post was wrong factually about Nikons and it made it seem like Canon lenses were better than Nikons. IMO they both are great and it depends on the user. However I do think Nikon makes a better lens for me. I used Canon for a few years and decided to make the switch. I prefer Nikon much better, but I won't lie about another brand to make Nikon look better.

[LittleCanonKid]

I didn't take anything personal. I don't even know you. Also please don't tell me to chillax out. I think you said that because you were called out for posting BS (to divert the attention away from your lie/BS). If you post BS on a message board someone will call you on it. I will post whatever I want within the guidelines of this board.

Your above post was wrong factually about Nikons and it made it seem like Canon lenses were better than Nikons. IMO they both are great and it depends on the user. However I do think Nikon makes a better lens for me. I used Canon for a few years and decided to make the switch. I prefer Nikon much better, but I won't lie about another brand to make Nikon look better.MacJenn, I don't know you very well either, but it often seems like it's your goal to find anything remotely close to "wrong" about Nikon and attack anyone who says anything about it, even if it's just pointing out a feature/non-feature of a body. Yes, it's a fact that the D40/40x/60 don't have an in-body focus motor. Wingnut even brought up that it's very possible that it wouldn't make a difference: "Others like Nikons because they focus in the camera and not the lens. This is good for some but has limitations related to lenses - would you ever run in to that limitation? Maybe, maybe not." Wingnut brought that up and even said that it's possible that it wouldn't make a difference, but there is a possibility that it could and so it's worth noting. He didn't say "auuuugh no AF motor in body means YOU CAN'T USE ANY LENSES NOOO". He never denied what you said:
"A ton of Nikon lenses have AF (auto focus) on their lenses like the Canons." I don't recall him saying that a ton DON'T. Nikon's pushing out a good number of AF-S lenses, like the new 35mm f/1.8 which is great for an entry-level Nikon user, and even owners of the D90!

I guess what I'm trying to say is don't assume that every person who shoots Canon knows nothing about Nikon and is only out to ruin their name. Please don't overgeneralize by brand name usage...

[MacJenn]

nm

[gkarris]

I think you mis-spoke ...the E-420 does not have in body stabilization. The new E-620, which has almost the same form factor, do have the IS.

ummmm, are you sure???

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1372

DIGITAL IMAGE STABILIZATION.
The E-420's Digital Image Stabilization, activated as a Scene Select Mode, allows high ISO sensitivity and faster shutter speeds so you can freeze the action to capture sharp, blur-free images even if you or your subject is moving.

All I said was IS, not body vs. digital... Please research first...

[Wingnut330]

I didn't take anything personal. I don't even know you. Also please don't tell me to chillax out. I think you said that because you were called out for posting BS (to divert the attention away from your lie/BS). If you post BS on a message board someone will call you on it. I will post whatever I want within the guidelines of this board.

Your above post was wrong factually about Nikons and it made it seem like Canon lenses were better than Nikons. IMO they both are great and it depends on the user. However I do think Nikon makes a better lens for me. I used Canon for a few years and decided to make the switch. I prefer Nikon much better, but I won't lie about another brand to make Nikon look better.

Wow - I'm not even sure where to begin. As for me spreading BS - that couldn't be further from the truth. You and I are doing the same thing and that is discussing perspective. Yours from a Nikon owner and mine from a Canon owner. You even admitted that there are in fact differences. I'm not running or hiding from anything either, so that's just a silly comment. And btw, no one accused you of breaking any forum rules, so I'm not sure where that's coming from.

I wasn't lying about Nikon, nor was I even bashing them. I was specifically thinking of the availability of VR lenses vs IS lenses. For me, image stabilization was important and 12 months ago it appeared that Canon had more options for IS than did Nikon. Again, will the OP notice or care - I'm not sure. It depends on what he intends to shoot etc.

Anyway, back to the OP...when doing some research here are a couple of sites to check out:

www.kenrockwell.com - a Nikon guy that gives very fair reviews of both product lines.

www.dpreview.com - good site with independent analysis on all kinds of cameras and brands.

If you decide to go with a Canon you will enjoy this site:

www.photography-on-the.net - a Canon specific forum site.

(There is probably a Nikon version of a site like this too, but I don't know what it is. I'm guessing someone else on this thread will know if there is one and can share it)

You'll find it to be a very personal decision. It's funny I actually went into my local camera shop to buy a Nikon but ended up buying a Canon. I have friends that shoot both and they are very committed to their brands - which I think you are seeing in this thread. I don't think you can go wrong either way.

Keep us posted with your decision!

[Mr. G4]

ummmm, are you sure???

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1372



All I said was IS, not body vs. digital... Please research first...

That's just marketing gimmick...all it does is just push up your ISO.

"The E-420's Digital Image Stabilization, activated as a Scene Select Mode, allows high ISO sensitivity and faster shutter speeds so you can freeze the action to capture sharp, blur-free images even if you or your subject is moving."

Yes, please research first in regard of IS and what it means. You will be very disapointed because you could have done the same way with your E-500, I know I used to have one.

[gkarris]

That's just marketing gimmick...all it does is just push up your ISO.

"The E-420's Digital Image Stabilization, activated as a Scene Select Mode, allows high ISO sensitivity and faster shutter speeds so you can freeze the action to capture sharp, blur-free images even if you or your subject is moving."

Yes, please research first in regard of IS and what it means.

If it's like the digital IS in all the point-and-shoots - works for me...

Are you unhappy with it when you used the E-420?

OP -

Wow, just wow.... the people on these boards...

Just get a camera YOU like and suites your needs.

I've met people that have these super Nikon D90 super duper IS live view blah blah blah, and looking at they're pics, they really stink...

It's all about talent. I've seen people take better pics with a Kodak 110 or a Polaroid One-Step... :eek:

[Wingnut330]

Just get a camera YOU like and suites your needs.

I've met people that have these super Nikon D90 super duper IS live view blah blah blah, and looking at they're pics, they really stink...

It's all about talent.

I agree 100% - I've seen jaw dropping shots taken with simple point and shoot cameras. Talent is key, as is practice (at least in my case).

[Mr. G4]

If it's like the digital IS in all the point-and-shoots - works for me...

Are you unhappy with it when you used the E-420?


I won't be able to say because I never owned one.
What can I say if it works for you, like people that say it work for them with the 200x digital zoom and I leave it to that.

[AlaskaMoose]

Wow you remember my comments from a long time ago. I'm either freaked out or impressed. I said people shouldn't say a product is bad if they have never genuinely used it (most people I think on the internet say they have used xxx product to make them look more credible).

Using your analogy the Canon would be the Dell (cheap, plastic and can be bought at Walmart) and the Nikon is the Apple of the camera world. See we can play these tit for tat games all day, Canonboy. I, however, am quick to bash Nikon when they deserve it.

The Nikon 70-200 VR is world class and Nikon's 105mm is awesome. We can debate all day which company makes better lenses, but it is all just opinion at the end of the day.

I do find it funny when I visit the Canon sites and find many of their little fanbois have those fancy little signatures with the L in red and with italics. I guess whatever makes them feel special. Maybe insecurity does that to some people.
Visit a Nikon fanboy forum, and you will see the same you see in a Canon fanboy forum.

There are Canon fanboys, Nikon fanboys, and Apple fanboys in this forum. The problem is that it makes no difference what questions are asked by possible buyers, since soon enough the answers to the OP degenerate into arguments between the Nikon and Canon fanboys :)

Both Canon and Nikon make "world class" glass and bad glass. Look at sporting events :)

-----
My answer to the OP is to buy any of the cameras he has listed above, and buy some good glass whenever he can afford it. Use the camera for three or four years, and then upgrade it and use the same old glass. Bodies (cameras) are cheap, but good glass isn't.

[MacJenn]

Thanks for stating the obvious. You must feel really smart for doing so.

[AlaskaMoose]

Thanks for stating the obvious. You must feel really smart for doing so.

Not really. I don't get too exited about brands, except for Mac's of course. Arguing about such things causes hypertension, and doesn't provide meaningful answers to posters.

[Jimbo Slice]

I agree with the statement that I should just make a decision and start shooting and forget about cognitive dissonance! As a result I think I will be making a decision within the next week or two, as I get my tax refund from the gov!

At every opportunity I've been going to camera and electronics stores to try out the feel of the cameras I'm interested in. I think I've almost made up my mind on the D90, I really like the UI, its so intuitive that I could figure out how to adjust a lot of the settings within a minute of picking it up. I also really like its high speed continuous shooting mode, its amazing and since I'll be doing some sport shooting, I figure that could come in handy. I also like that it has independent clickwheels to adjust shutter speed and aperture just by the shutter release button. The only thing that has me considering a XSi instead is the price. If I get the XSi I could pick up a decent telephoto zoom lens right away but if I get the D90, I'll be with the kit lens indefinitely.
Ahhh decisions decisions, I guess you guys can't really help me with this one, but thank you all. I got exactly the info that I needed from you all and very quickly too. Wish me luck

[Wingnut330]

I agree with the statement that I should just make a decision and start shooting and forget about cognitive dissonance! As a result I think I will be making a decision within the next week or two, as I get my tax refund from the gov!

Woo hoo! That sounds like a plan. You better cash that check quickly - it might bounce! ; )


At every opportunity I've been going to camera and electronics stores to try out the feel of the cameras I'm interested in. I think I've almost made up my mind on the D90, I really like the UI, its so intuitive that I could figure out how to adjust a lot of the settings within a minute of picking it up. I also really like its high speed continuous shooting mode, its amazing and since I'll be doing some sport shooting, I figure that could come in handy. I also like that it has independent clickwheels to adjust shutter speed and aperture just by the shutter release button. The only thing that has me considering a XSi instead is the price. If I get the XSi I could pick up a decent telephoto zoom lens right away but if I get the D90, I'll be with the kit lens indefinitely.
Ahhh decisions decisions, I guess you guys can't really help me with this one, but thank you all. I got exactly the info that I needed from you all and very quickly too. Wish me luck

D90 is a great camera - I don't know much about the kit lens it comes with. I'm sure a Nikon person could tell you if it's good or not.

My advice would be to get a camera that allows you to afford a lens or two for a variety of reasons. Having more lenses is fun and adds a little depth to your shooting ability. Nicer lenses will likely last you longer than the camera body and you can upgrade the body later but keep your lenses.

So, if you took that approach that would put the XSi or D40x as options that would allow you to buy a nice lens. Both good cameras and having that lens would be nice.

After I bought my XSi I bought a 50mm for fun then a zoom (70-200mm USM IS L) and so on. You might be disappointed if you only had one lens to choose from, especially if you plan to shoot sports. If you went with the XSi you could get the kit plus a 70-300mm USM IS for sports and zoom.


** Disclaimer - Before I offend another Nikon fan, I'm sure you could do the same with a Nikon setup I just don't know the lens names etc.


After my rather lenghty reply, my vote is for a cheaper body and better lenses. Let us know what you decide!

[Jimbo Slice]

^^^ Funny you mention this because I was planning to post another interesting decision I have come up with.

Either a D40 ($450) with the Nikon 18-200mm VR ($700 used from Henrys)
Or the D90 body ($900 open box) and the Nikon 18-55mm VR ($150 used from henrys) for now...

Sorry Canon guys, I think I really just prefer the Nikon UI and picking up the D90 everything was like second nature, with the 40D and the XSi I feel like I have to do more things to get it to do what I want.

[LittleCanonKid]

^^^ Funny you mention this because I was planning to post another interesting decision I have come up with.

Either a D40 ($450) with the Nikon 18-200mm VR ($700 used from Henrys)
Or the D90 body ($900 open box) and the Nikon 18-55mm VR ($150 used from henrys) for now...

Sorry Canon guys, I think I really just prefer the Nikon UI and picking up the D90 everything was like second nature, with the 40D and the XSi I feel like I have to do more things to get it to do what I want.My recommendation would be to take a good, long hard look at Nikon's lens library. If you can see yourself buying some non AF-S lenses down the road, avoid the D40. If you think you'll stick to AF-S lenses, then go ahead and spring for the D40. Otherwise, unless there's some compelling reason for you to get the D90, I think the D40 would be a good decision.

[Wingnut330]

^^^ Funny you mention this because I was planning to post another interesting decision I have come up with.

Either a D40 ($450) with the Nikon 18-200mm VR ($700 used from Henrys)
Or the D90 body ($900 open box) and the Nikon 18-55mm VR ($150 used from henrys) for now...

Sorry Canon guys, I think I really just prefer the Nikon UI and picking up the D90 everything was like second nature, with the 40D and the XSi I feel like I have to do more things to get it to do what I want.

No apologies needed. Get the one that works best for you. The key is to get one that you like so you will use it. If you get frustrated by it, it will just end up on the shelf and that's no good.

I haven't fiddled much with the menu system on either brand. I tend to use the dials and buttons more than the screen stuff - but I'm a beginner.

Does the D40 come with a basic kit lens? If so, I'd go with that and the zoom.

[jaseone]

My recommendation would be to take a good, long hard look at Nikon's lens library. If you can see yourself buying some non AF-S lenses down the road, avoid the D40. If you think you'll stick to AF-S lenses, then go ahead and spring for the D40. Otherwise, unless there's some compelling reason for you to get the D90, I think the D40 would be a good decision.

It really isn't that much of an issue, the only lens I would be worried about is the 50/1.8 as it is so cheap but on a crop body 50mm isn't a real useful focal length anyway and the forthcoming 35/1.8 fills that hole even though it is a little more expensive than the 50/1.8.

It is more of an issue if you have access to an abundance of older Nikon lenses from a film body, then the decision would be harder.

[hogfaninga]

Jimbo I owned the D90 and it is a very nice body as everyone will tell you. It is much nicer than the XSi, but as you know cost a few hundred more. That isn't a shot at Canon, but we are debating 2 bodies in different leagues. I see the 40D as a competitor of the D90, but I'm sure some Canon fan will take me on. That is my opinion.

I sold my D90 because I decided I needed more fps for shooting sports which is what I primarily do. The D90 does this really good also, but at 4.5 fps, which is great for the price of the D90, I just felt I needed the 8fps among a few other things the D300 had. That said, the D90 is the best in its class in my opinion. I know they sell the D90 as a kit also with the 18-105VR. VR as you probably know is a good thing to have on zoom. The 18-105 is a pretty good kit lens and covers a lot. It is pretty sharp. I sold mine when I had the D90, but I liked it. In the U.S. You can buy this kit for about $1050 the last time I looked. I don't know what that is in Canadian dollars, but it is a good price for what you get. You can add a Nikon 50 1.8 for low light situations for about $100USD. I love this lens. For the price it is hard to beat. Fast and takes nice pictures.

You can also go to the Nikonians website and visit their forsale section which is the best in my opinion for used Nikons. I see a lot of D90's and a lot of used lenses for sale there. No taxes of course. Also visit fm.com. Their for sale forum is good also, but most of it is Canon's, but they have a number of Nikons as well.

Good luck.

[sapper]

:cool:
Whichever camera you buy, when you upload the pics, be prepared to invest in an external hard drive, both as back up and to download your photos to.
I found that whenever I clicked the 'enhance' button in iPhoto, the file size (from a 6.1 mp Nikon D100) increased from a 9.6 mb file to around 46mb as a finished item, so this will take up an awful lot of space on your hard drive.
I bought a LaCie 500gb which takes little time to fill if you take lots of pics.

Best wishes from a newbie.

[ProwlingTiger]

:cool:

I bought a LaCie 500gb which takes little time to fill if you take lots of pics.

Best wishes from a newbie.
I just ordered the 500GB FW edition Neil Poulton one. First time with Lacie brand, not my first external though.

An external is almost a must these days. If not for just the peace of mind that backups provide. My new Lacie (should arrive Wed) is going to act as my Macbook Time Capsule.

Anyone have experience with the D40x? Could someone with Nikon experience enlighten me on what happened to it? I don't see it on Nikon's site but I see it on some reseller sites. Sorry for my ignorance here, never have followed Nikon too much in regards to the low-range models.

[luminosity]

I wouldn't buy anything until next week.

I'd also stay away from the D40/x/60, but that's just me.

[Jimbo Slice]

I wouldn't buy anything until next week.

I'd also stay away from the D40/x/60, but that's just me.

Please elaborate? Is it because of the lack of an autofocusing motor in the body?

[jaseone]

I wouldn't buy anything until next week.

Well Nikon's Press Release about PMA (http://press.nikonusa.com/2009/03/nikon_showcases_latest_offerin.php) was a complete letdown so if anyone was awaiting news of a new body before making a purchase you can now go ahead and make said purchase!

[VegasPhoto]

There's no drive in the D40/D40X to support many af systems that require the camera to drive them.

D90 has sounded like a nice camera since its announcement but it's too expensive for me to consider investing in another crop sensor camera. The XSi has better detail retention than the 40D. I have a 40D and a 5D.

Each camera is a trade off; in the D90 you trade off more money than the others and accept the fact that many of the newer high end nikon lenses are a bit more expensive than the canon version.

[PCMacUser]

I own the Canon 40D and it's a decent camera. The first time I used it, I thought the UI was a disaster, but now it's fine. Just a bit of extra time needed to learn it, like finding the dashboard controls on a new car.

However, I don't think I'll ever buy another crop sensor body. Full frame is where I want to be now. It's just a shame it's so expensive to go there.

[cube]

Look at the D80 that is cheaper now.

If that's still too much, look at a used D50 with all the accessories for about $250.

[oscarmacca]

Canon 450D EOS End of debate

[Phrasikleia]

Canon 450D EOS End of debate

I really think that at this level, the 450D is the best of the bodies. A notch higher, and Nikon gets the nod for its D90.

[rogersmj]

I really think that at this level, the 450D is the best of the bodies. A notch higher, and Nikon gets the nod for its D90.

I agree. Nikon's lowest-end offerings (D40/D60) are pretty stale compared to Canon's XSi, but if you're stilling to spend a bit more than the XSi the D90 really knocks it out of the park for $900 or so. Canon has more lens selection but I personally haven't run into anything I wanted and couldn't get on the Nikon system. Plus the Nikon UI is way, way more intuitive to me.

[cube]

Canon has more lens selection

Nikon has 2 DC lenses that offer more control than Canon's Soft Lens.