Nikon VS Cannon Noob questions

[4thgen]

So im in the middle east right now and looking into getting into a little photography when i get home. I am looking at either the Nikon D5000 of the Cannon EOS Rebel T1i. Also looked at going the cheaper route with the Nikon D60. Out of the 2 middle class SLR cameras which one do you guys suggest. As i say im brand new. Only used your usual digi camera.

Thanks in advance

[Pendulum]

Buy whatever you can afford and learn photography. Don't buy in to any crap about you need the D90 or anything.

Composition, and understanding ISO, shutter, aperture etc are more important than a nice camera.

On that note, I would suggest going with the D40 or D60 (I prefer to D40 personally) and spending the extra cash on photo classes and books, as well as lenses.

Also, don't listen to that crap about the lenses and the focusing. The AF-S lenses will focus on the nicer cameras, soit's not like you can't use them later.

[Koopa Troopa]

Buy the cheapest DSLR possible. Don't even focus on a brand name, just some cheap POS. Hell, buy an old 10D or a 20D and some lenses.

Never buy your first DSLR with the intentions on keeping it. Use it until you feel you're limited by your camera body and upgrade. You might find out you're not that serious about photography as you thought you were.

[4thgen]

Well i can get a Nikon D40 with two lense kit (18-55mm and 55-200mm) for 600.00 tax free. From what you guys have both said it seems this would be the better deal to invest in instead of a camera thats 800-900 with only one lense. And thanks to pendulum and koopa for the honest suggestions.

[die in a dick fire noob]

koopa how is one limited by their camera body? i want some elaboration on this.

the d40 has terribly slow autofocus do to it being in the lens not the body itself just buy a canon since they never tried to do this horrible idea that nikon has had.

[JDM Jon]

koopa how is one limited by their camera body? i want some elaboration on this.

the d40 has terribly slow autofocus do to it being in the lens not the body itself just buy a canon since they never tried to do this horrible idea that nikon has had.

how is the autofocus terribly slow? It takes less than a second...

[taggart_lumpy]

thats a long time

[JDM Jon]

i guess...?

[riceboy88]

manual focus right here with 70-210mm

http://i719.photobucket.com/albums/ww200/riceboy88honda/DSC_0065copy-2.jpg

autofocus FTL

[jägermeister]

autofocus FTL

automode in general ftl

[Koopa Troopa]

koopa how is one limited by their camera body? i want some elaboration on this.

the d40 has terribly slow autofocus do to it being in the lens not the body itself just buy a canon since they never tried to do this horrible idea that nikon has had.

It sounds more like you're just trying to pick a fight. I find it hard to believe that you don't understand my post. Lower level cameras have bad sensors, horrible ISO selections, no or little custom functions, etc.

[die in a dick fire noob]

automode in general ftl

true

manual focus right here with 70-210mm

autofocus FTL

if you're at a specific point in the track shooting at a higher aperture of course you'd just manual focus and wait for subjects, if you panned that shot while manual focusing that's just impressive.

Jon;1625538']how is the autofocus terribly slow? It takes less than a second...

use a canon with a usm lens

thats a long time

so long, it's like when i shot my minolta xtsi and thought it was quick then picked up an elan 2 and i crapped myself.



It sounds more like you're just trying to pick a fight. I find it hard to believe that you don't understand my post. Lower level cameras have bad sensors, horrible ISO selections, no or little custom functions, etc.

i'm not trying to pick a fight, why are you being so defensive? i asked for your input on a statement you made because i wanted to understand what you meant. i used a d70 for years and never really felt like i needed to upgrade. the things you said aren't exactly true, when nikon was making their d50, d70, d70s, d100 etc the d50 (the low end) had the best and newest sensor out of all of them, and they were all the same size 6.1mp. i know this is an older example. now custom functions i understand but i don't even use those. i understand wanting to upgrade from a megapixel standpoint but this really again is only going to matter when printing, the majority of people don't print large images because of the cost. i regularly print 20x30's with my 20d and don't have a problem at all.

i want to hear some input, i thought that's what this section was for, serious photography discussion?

[die in a dick fire noob]

Buy whatever you can afford and learn photography. Don't buy in to any crap about you need the D90 or anything.

Composition, and understanding ISO, shutter, aperture etc are more important than a nice camera.

On that note, I would suggest going with the D40 or D60 (I prefer to D40 personally) and spending the extra cash on photo classes and books, as well as lenses.

Also, don't listen to that crap about the lenses and the focusing. The AF-S lenses will focus on the nicer cameras, soit's not like you can't use them later.

missed this earlier.

agree 100% on learning photography first.

i don't agree with the d40 because i'm still really turned off by the af motor not being in the body.

the last statement is true but the af-s lenses work on the d40 because af-s lenses have the motor in the lens. it's the non af-s lenses that don't work. like you say though, lenses are an investment for future use, they hold their value usually 100% and are always going to be useful, i focus more on them than i do the camera body for sure!

[Fundillo]

Go D80 for about 500-600 bucks and get a decent walk around lens (even the cheap 18-55 is good) and learn from there.

[Mafioso]

i have a Canon 40d and love it. i say u go and hold both camera bodies in your hand and check the controls, then make your decision. both manufacturers are so close to each other these days specs-wise..

[die in a dick fire noob]

i have a Canon 40d and love it. i say u go and hold both camera bodies in your hand and check the controls, then make your decision. both manufacturers are so close to each other these days specs-wise..

used to tell people this when i sold cameras... i personally think a nikon feels better in my hand, i however like the color rendition stock off the sensor of my canon vs my nikon. i've grown acustom to the 20/30/40d body style and absolutely love it.

[atrsikeg]

nikon d5000 is sick as fuck i love how the screen comes down and shit like that

[die in a dick fire noob]

that's old hat, sony's been doing it forever, casio too, i don't see how that's a selling point on a nikon. i guess i don't buy into "cool" factors too often.

[e2blade]

you guys are missing one imporant aspect, what kind of shooting will you be doing. i do alot of high ISO shoots so i went Nikon, if you like landscapes go canon. if you wanna do sports both are gonna suck dick unless you have a upper model that has lightning last focus.

its what you need that will help you in your epic quest to pic a camera

[die in a dick fire noob]

yeah koopa covered this in another thread, it's definitely going to be an issue based on subject. i don't do low light high iso shooting, if i do anything at night it's with a tripod still shooting at 100iso.

listen to e2, he definitely knows the truth.

[4thgen]

Well I opted out of getting the 800.00 D90 and took AZHT's advice and went with the D40 with the 2 lens kit. 18-55 and 55-200 VR lense's are what came in the kit. I should have it by Monday and ill be at the U.S Embassy in Kuwait sometime next week so if the pics come out ok ill post my NOOB pics. Thanks for the help guys

[GunnRulF]

i have a Canon 40d and love it. i say u go and hold both camera bodies in your hand and check the controls, then make your decision. both manufacturers are so close to each other these days specs-wise..

^^this. hold them both and get what feels good and with what you feel comfortable with.. dont go out and buy the most expensive camera there is.. a lot of good photography is done by the shooter not just the camera.

[die in a dick fire noob]

Well I opted out of getting the 800.00 D90 and took AZHT's advice and went with the D40 with the 2 lens kit. 18-55 and 55-200 VR lense's are what came in the kit. I should have it by Monday and ill be at the U.S Embassy in Kuwait sometime next week so if the pics come out ok ill post my NOOB pics. Thanks for the help guys

sigh. i'm glad you listened to azht's advice.

[e2blade]

you wanted to get a d90. YOU SHOULD HAVE, that camera is AMAZING for the price.
i have recommend it to many people and they love it

[die in a dick fire noob]

troof.

[e2blade]

KIT LENSES SUCK DICK also, they are a 3.5 to 5.6 max, in english, thats a big sucky fatty cock. they cant capture light for shit even after dusk. and you got a d40 which has no ISO capability.

ive sadly owned all the nikon D series or used them, and the d40 seems to their big mistake in MY eyes. the D5000 reigns supreme, and they should have just made the D60 to begin with.

sigh. oh well. have fun and post some pics when you get it.

[94EXCIVIC]

i hate d40s and d60s with a passion they suck so bad

[4thgen]

Im sure it does suck compared to the more high dollar cameras that you guys have. I just figured id get somthing to learn with and once i really feel like i actually kno what the hell im doing ill upgrade. I have a few friends with the D40 and they all seem to be pretty happy. Im not looking into making it a career just somthing to have around with all my military travels. and plus that extra 400 that i woulda spent went toward a CNC ported head.

[4thgen]

sigh. i'm glad you listened to azht's advice.

No need to be a douche!!! This was about the only place i have for photography opinions. I cant walk into a camera shop and ask questions at my present location 8,000 miles away from the states. I also talked to friends and did some reading on the internet. If it dont make me happy, i'll upgrade.

[Koopa Troopa]

Im not looking into making it a career just somthing to have around with all my military travels.
I'd have gotten something with a magnesium body like an old 4.2 MP 1D. My 1Dmk2 has fallen off the top of HMMWV's, fell off my strap on patrols, etc. Nothing ever broke on it and it worked flawlessly till the day I ditched it for a D90.

[die in a dick fire noob]

No need to be a douche!!! This was about the only place i have for photography opinions. I cant walk into a camera shop and ask questions at my present location 8,000 miles away from the states. I also talked to friends and did some reading on the internet. If it dont make me happy, i'll upgrade.

there are a million resources for information like this.

dpreview.com
fmreviews.com
kenrockwell.com (not sure if this is the site but this is his name)

etc...

azht is by no means an authority on photography. On top of that you didn't even really listen to any of our advice. hence my statement.

sorry to be a douche but i am one on a lot of occasions. :-\

[4thgen]

i do appreciate the knowledge. I actually checked on kenrockwell/ nikonians/ and dp reviews for reviews and good beginner sets. multiple sources said to go with a lower end camera, get a few lenses and once i learn what im dealing with than upgrade in a year or so. thanks to everyone for the help

[die in a dick fire noob]

k well as long as your happy that's all that matters... good luck, post some of your images once you begin to make them...

[braddd]

i have a nikon d90 and i'm very very happy with the camera and it's features. however i wish i waiting for the d5000, because the movable screen helps with video pan shots.

[die in a dick fire noob]

another great innovation by camera manufactures, video... sigh... sales are more important than anything now aren't they?

[e2blade]

wait, why are you bitching that there is video capability, i would love to have video capability on my D700. why not have 2 things for the price of one.

[Koopa Troopa]

wait, why are you bitching that there is video capability, i would love to have video capability on my D700. why not have 2 things for the price of one.

Because that means you sacrifice performance to do something else.

[e2blade]

WUT, the D300s does EXACTLY what a D300 if not better
stop trying to find a reason to hate on technology

[die in a dick fire noob]

Whether you think it sacrifices something or not it does. It can be any number of things. I personally find it ridiculous, that and live lcd preview on an SLR. It removes the whole purpose of the camera, to carefully compose a shot with your eyes. I'm more of an elitist when it comes to photography, i don't like the fact that everyone and their brother has an SLR now. THe only thing that i find good in all of it is that it's driving the prices down for us who are serious about it but at the same time it's driving lens prices up because they have to make their money back somewhere. I think it's ridiculous to use a PHOTO lens to try to shoot VIDEO. Video lenses have huge apertures to capture a lot of light and i find it hard to believe that the 3.5-5.6 is going to do anything but mediocre at best. I don't hate on technology i hate on technology combination in photography. It's the same thing like cell phone cameras. sure it's convenient as hell but in most cases quality is severely sacrificed by the form factor. If you want a camera buy a camera. If you want a video camera buy a video camera. If you want an SLR buy an SLR, etc. etc. etc.

[e2blade]

So you hate me for having teh BEST that nikon offers.
i dont shoot no panzy bull shit 3.5 lens.
why are you being such a god damn purest, who the hell cares? there are SO many people in the world and the can own what ever they please.

and lens prices arnt going up, they have been the same for over 3 years, if not cheaper!

and whats the big deal about Live view, i fucking love live view. i can look at the landscape on the tripod. that is HELPING ME MAKE THE PICTURE BETTER!.

why the fuck would i go pay 2000 for a canon VSLR then turn around and buy a Nikon D700 for another 2600 when i can have both in one body.

you are SERIOUS hater on things trying to advance and people like you are the reason why some shit just wont change.

lets compare your argument to something else. i hate paddle shifters, WHY the FUCK would you have a shifter that doesnt have a clutch, thats the stupidest shit ive ever heard of. but it makes for extremely faster shifts. but im not gonna dog on it because i KNOW its better than a regular standard. there is also NO downfall on having a paddle shifter, its just not my preference.

you are saying straight out that having a video on a DSLR is stupid and thats that.

[die in a dick fire noob]

comparing a paddle shifter (a part necessary for racing) is completely the opposite argument. that would be if i were saying no cars should have them. i don't think the honda fit sport should have faux paddle shifters... do you?

my point is that video cameras are good for video.

digital slrs are good for photographs.

i don't hate you for anything, in fact i don't hate you at all. i hate the concept of video and live preview as i deem them completely unnecessary and a feature that drives prices higher.

if lenses haven't changed price in the last 3 years that's news to me. i've seen consistant rises in prices on B&H ever since 2004.

also, even your 2.8 lenses aren't near the same as a video lens.

[e2blade]

man theres just no convincing you lol. go use a D300s or D90, you will then understand
just givin you a hard time :D

[die in a dick fire noob]

i stopped using nikon when they discontinued the d50 and started making cameras like the d80 and d40... :-\

just won't go back after that travesty... lol.

love my canon :)

[Koopa Troopa]

So you hate me for having teh BEST that nikon offers.

and whats the big deal about Live view, i fucking love live view. i can look at the landscape on the tripod. that is HELPING ME MAKE THE PICTURE BETTER!.

why the fuck would i go pay 2000 for a canon VSLR then turn around and buy a Nikon D700 for another 2600 when i can have both in one body.

you are SERIOUS hater on things trying to advance and people like you are the reason why some shit just wont change.

lets compare your argument to something else. i hate paddle shifters, WHY the FUCK would you have a shifter that doesnt have a clutch, thats the stupidest shit ive ever heard of. but it makes for extremely faster shifts. but im not gonna dog on it because i KNOW its better than a regular standard. there is also NO downfall on having a paddle shifter, its just not my preference.

you are saying straight out that having a video on a DSLR is stupid and thats that.

I don't hate you because of your camera. Fuck, I'd rather shoot film then have your camera. I have a D90, the microphone on it is so terrible it makes using it for video almost pointless. Only thing I can use it for is for in car video and even then it's terrible.

I highly regret not using my D90 money to buy a D300 or even have saved for a month or 2 and bought a D700.

As far as paddle shifters? Yes there is a downfall to them. You can't slip the clutch on a launch, you can't heel-toe downshift. You can't do a lot of things. However because lazy ass people want a manual but are too pathetic to learn to drive a H pattern manual car, manumatic transmissions are becoming standard equipment.

It's getting pretty ridiculous. The way technology is being forced on to us, we're going to need engineering degrees to be able to fix or operate almost anything within the next 10 years.