# Nikon / Canon DSLR ... other makes ?



## James79 (May 24, 2006)

Hello, sorry if this has been asked a million times before. I get the feeling this is probably a standard thing to ask (no wish to stoke an old debate either), but I couldn't find what I needed with searching.

Anyway ... the world of the DSLR beckons, mostly for travel photography but also landscape shots, maybe some portraits when I get home. What I would like out of a camera is :

Image quality - obviously I want the best results for my dough !
Good colour reproduction - the point and shoot I'm using just looks washed out
Reliability - I can't afford to buy another within a couple of years.
Versatility - something I'll be able to learn with as I get more experienced
Phew ! So, I've used Nikon film SLRs a bit in the past ... the temptation is to go with this, or maybe a Canon. Within my budget, the Nikon D70s / Canon EOS 350D looks just what I want (I won't say 'need' just yet  Is the 6MP resolution of the Nikon likely to be any sort of barrier in the future ? I'm not thinking of printing any larger than standard photo sizes, but wondered if the 8MP of the Canon is worth it for similar money. I've heard that the Canon has bolder colour reproduction, but really I haven't seen any direct comparisons. Any comments on this ?

But ... am I being blinkered in terms of thinking of just two major brands ?? Are there others that are suitable that I'm missing ? Ease of buying new lenses out and about is a consideration for me ...

Many Thanks,

James


----------



## Big Mike (May 24, 2006)

Welcome to the forum.

Any of the models from Nikon or Canon are great.  You didn't mention the Nikon D50, which is an entry level model and cheaper than the D70s.  Quite a few people here have one, and they seem to love it.

Don't be fooled by Mega Pixels...the image quality from a 6MP DSLR is outstanding...and very capable of making prints 8X10 or even larger.

As for color, most DSLRs are pretty good but to really get the most out of your camera, you need to know a bit about image software (Photoshop for example).  As long as you can get a good clean image from the camera...it's easy to make the color pop.  While the entry level DSLRs may not have all the options...they are very capable...so you shouldn't have to replace them any time soon.

There are plenty of other brands.  Pentax, Sony (formerly Minolta), Sigma (I think).  I believe that Canon and Nikon are clearly the leaders though.  When you buy an SLR, you are buying into a system...so look at that.  Canon and Nikon clearly have the widest selection of lenses and accessories.

Go to www.dpreview.com and compare the D50 and Rebel XT (350D).  If you can, go into a store and hold them...pick the one that feels best to you.

I think Canon currently has a rebate in place.  $100 off the Rebel XT.


----------



## summers_enemy (May 24, 2006)

Pentax has a line of DSLRs, there are still Minoltas available as well I hear.  Panasonic has one coming out that looks very promising, and Olympus has at least 1 out as well (though I wasn't very impressed with it).  Most of these DSLRs are a fair bit cheaper in price than a 350D or D70.  But have you checked into Nikon's D50? Excellent camera (yes, I own it ).

To me, and I'm also not trying to cause any kind of debate, it was the wisest choice on the market. Takes SD cards which I already had from my compact digital, can be had very cheaply, smaller in size than a D70, and on auto modes in my tests it far out performed Canon's 350D in terms of color rendition and contrast.  

Whatever you get though, remember that your lenses are every bit as important, if not more so, than the camera body you choose.

Happy shopping!


----------



## jophassa (May 24, 2006)

What do people think of the Samsung Pro815? Is the lack of OIS a really bad thing?


----------



## thebeginning (May 24, 2006)

James79 said:
			
		

> Image quality - obviously I want the best results for my dough !
> Good colour reproduction - the point and shoot I'm using just looks washed out
> Reliability - I can't afford to buy another within a couple of years.
> Versatility - something I'll be able to learn with as I get more experienced



i'll just give you some info that might help in these four areas.  big mike pretty much nailed all of it, but all add in what i can.


Image quality - like he said, both are very good.  IMO the nikon's images have a tad more punch straight out of the camera, but that's not necessarily a good thing in some cases.  the overall image quality (resolution, noise, etc.) tips slightly in the canon's favor though in my opinion. 

good colour reproduction - both are good, but don't expect to get everything perfect out of the camera.  Like mike said, you'll want to get used to some editing software, like photoshop. 

reliable - both cameras are equally reliable in my opinion 

versatility - each camera is different as far as controls and menus go. both can do essentially the same things, but each one has 'special features' that  the other does not.  I recommend going to a store and checking them out yourself, as they are very different in body style and size...


----------



## DocFrankenstein (May 24, 2006)

You can print ok 8*12 from either one of them. With XT you get a little bit less sharpness because of the smaller photosites...


----------



## thebeginning (May 24, 2006)

DocFrankenstein said:
			
		

> You can print ok 8*12 from either one of them. With XT you get a little bit less sharpness because of the smaller photosites...



depends on what you mean by 'ok', and what you're used to.

and what are 'photosites'?


----------



## Big Mike (May 25, 2006)

If I'm not mistaken, Photosites are the tiny light receptors that are on the image chip.  The more Photosites the chip has, the more mega pixels the images will be.  When they try to cram more photosites onto a chip, it can make for noisy images.  That's why the small sensors in non-DSLR cameras get noisy images, especially at higher ISO.



> With XT you get a little bit less sharpness because of the smaller photosites



I'm not sure I believe that...sounds like something a Nikon owner would say 

There are plenty of other factors, like the type of sensor (CCD in the Nikon and CMOS in the Canon) and the in camera processing of the sensor data.


----------



## DocFrankenstein (May 25, 2006)

Big Mike said:
			
		

> I'm not sure I believe that...sounds like something a Nikon owner would say


Yeah, I know. 

But I shoot canon and you do see that the XT is a bit less "informational" than the 300D... at least at ISO 100.

PURE IMO.

I'd shoot nikon with their MF lenses if I weren't hoping to get a full frame digital someday.


----------



## Richard Daley (May 25, 2006)

One advantage of staying with Nikon is that if you have any lenses, virtually all will work (the very wide angles for film won't work on the Nikon digitals) great and, depending on what Nikon you've been shooting with, you will find the controls very similar whereas they are different on the Canon or other brands.

Why do pros nearly all stick to Canon and Nikon, well, various reasons but including durability (nod in my opinion to Nikon), engineering (nod in my opinion to Canon) and the huge range of accessories that fit as your wants and needs change (other brands like Pentax also good at this, but Nikon and Canon are the leaders). 

You won't be sorry with the D50, D70, or Rebel - I've shot most of these myself and have students that use them all and love them.

Richard Daley


----------



## thebeginning (May 25, 2006)

Big Mike said:
			
		

> If I'm not mistaken, Photosites are the tiny light receptors that are on the image chip.  The more Photosites the chip has, the more mega pixels the images will be.  When they try to cram more photosites onto a chip, it can make for noisy images.  That's why the small sensors in non-DSLR cameras get noisy images, especially at higher ISO.



i always referred to those as pixels...(?)


----------



## DocFrankenstein (May 25, 2006)

Richard Daley said:
			
		

> One advantage of staying with Nikon is that if you have any lenses, virtually all will work (the very wide angles for film won't work on the Nikon digitals)


They will also work on canons just as well, even better.


----------



## thebeginning (May 25, 2006)

DocFrankenstein said:
			
		

> They will also work on canons just as well, even better.



that's a little misleading, you'd have to get a different mount and you wouldn't have metering (pretty obvious)


----------



## DocFrankenstein (May 25, 2006)

thebeginning said:
			
		

> that's a little misleading, you'd have to get a different mount and you wouldn't have metering (pretty obvious)


well... the funny part is that you wouldn't have metering on most of nikon bodies but would on canon. And it's just an adapter...


----------



## thebeginning (May 25, 2006)

DocFrankenstein said:
			
		

> well... the funny part is that you wouldn't have metering on most of nikon bodies but would on canon. And it's just an adapter...


wait, you mean that canons can meter with nikon MF lenses attached?  whoa.  if that's true, i'm going to grab some old nikkors, definitely.  those have got to be killer with a FF viewfinder (like you, i plan on getting a 5d/1ds next).  PM me with info, i'm interested.


sorry for hijacking your thread, james


----------



## DocFrankenstein (May 25, 2006)

thebeginning said:
			
		

> wait, you mean that canons can meter with nikon MF lenses attached?  whoa.  if that's true, i'm going to grab some old nikkors, definitely.  those have got to be killer with a FF viewfinder (like you, i plan on getting a 5d/1ds next).  PM me with info, i'm interested.
> 
> 
> sorry for hijacking your thread, james


ROFL

The canon bodies don't disable any metering, whether they have a lens or not. So you can use spot/weigted/matrix freely and they aren't changed. The adapters allow focus to infinity too.

Canon wide angle glass sucks, so my dream setup would be something like 1Ds and the nikon lenses.


----------



## Rob (May 26, 2006)

thebeginning said:
			
		

> wait, you mean that canons can meter with nikon MF lenses attached?  whoa.  if that's true, i'm going to grab some old nikkors, definitely.  those have got to be killer with a FF viewfinder (like you, i plan on getting a 5d/1ds next).  PM me with info, i'm interested.
> 
> 
> sorry for hijacking your thread, james


I shoot with a Canon 20D with Nikon MF lenses on (AI I think they're designated?). You switch the camera into Aperture mode or Manual (I use Av) and dial the lens to f-widest. This is because there is no shutter/aperture combination - you need to focus wide open then stop down for the shot. That's the only inconvenience. The metering works absolutely fine. I understand that the MF Nikon lenses do not work on any Nikon digital cameras, but I have no proof of this - anyone???

Oh, and FWIW, get one adaptor for every lens - they slice your fingers cos they're badly tooled chinese aluminium. 

Rob


----------



## Big Mike (May 26, 2006)

On a side note:  The movie, The Corpse Bride, was shot entirely with a Canon body (1Ds mk II, I think) with Nikon lenses.


----------



## Jeff Canes (May 26, 2006)

thebeginning said:
			
		

> wait, you mean that canons can meter with nikon MF lenses attached? whoa. if that's true, i'm going to grab some old nikkors, definitely. those have got to be killer with a FF viewfinder (like you, i plan on getting a 5d/1ds next). PM me with info, i'm interested.
> 
> 
> sorry for hijacking your thread, james


 
Camerquest is one of the few place in the US that sales lens adapters, never bought any thing from them myself so I can not comment on there quality or service. The other place to look for them is Ebay, thats where I got FD to EOS adapter.


----------



## DocFrankenstein (May 26, 2006)

Rob said:
			
		

> I understand that the MF Nikon lenses do not work on *any* Nikon digital cameras, but I have no proof of this - anyone???


I beleive on "most" The professional cameras D2X? (forgot the letters, sorry) do work. And I think D200 too?

D70 and D50 don't support them AFAIK. So it actually makes more sense to get a canon body.

But I may be wrong. I'm a canon guy. I tried to mount a lens on nikon F once and couldn't figure it out.


----------



## thebeginning (May 26, 2006)

Big Mike said:
			
		

> On a side note:  The movie, The Corpse Bride, was shot entirely with a Canon body (1Ds mk II, I think) with Nikon lenses.




yep.  i think it was actually the 1d Mk II though.  surprising.  i read an article about it and they said they manually focused and exposed every single frame :shock:


----------



## DonSchap (Jun 23, 2006)

This camera is a Nikon-lensed powerhouse... if you want to try something a bit radical.

See the link and give it a think:

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital/lineup/s3pro/index.html


----------



## JodieO (Jun 24, 2006)

You can't go wrong by going with Canon or Nikon - both will give you great quality and you won't have any problem finding good parts (i.e., lenses, accessories, etc.).  The most significant difference I personally have seen between Canon and Nikon is it seems that with Nikon you can produce a better color image EASIER straight out of camera (although with just a bit of tweaking, you should get Canon to do the same), and Canon tends to have less noise at higher ISOs... at least, that has been MY personal experience.

That said, I went with Nikon because I had already started investing in good lenses.  I have had the Nikon D100, D70, and now the D2X.  As far as 6 MP being a barrier.  No, I don't think so.  While I love my D2X being 12 MP, I have blown up 6 MP images and had super clear wonderful results as well (here's a quick image of two that are around 20 x 28, they are tack sharp and beautiful)  






Now, personally I can see a difference between my D70 images and my D2X images (D2X gets more "film like" and contrasty but D70 tends to be flatter), but to the average person who doesn't stare at images all day lolol! , there is no huge difference.


----------



## Tiberius (Jun 24, 2006)

DonSchap said:
			
		

> This camera is a Nikon-lensed powerhouse... if you want to try something a bit radical.
> 
> See the link and give it a think:
> 
> http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital/lineup/s3pro/index.html


The Image Quality is great, but the S3 is dead slow compared to even the Nikon D50.  It's not a _bad_ camera, but if you're going to be doing anything at all that you need speed for, even wildlife or anything, I'd look elsewhere.

As to DSLR brands - Whatever camera you get, make sure it accepts either Nikon or Canon lenses.  There's no sense in getting a camera that doesn't accept either.  Looking for used lenses, or looking to rent a lens for a weekend event, those are the companies that will be available.  Smaller brands usually will not.  You've also got more guaranteed future compatibility, since neither Canon nor Nikon will be going anywhere for a while.


----------



## JodieO (Jun 24, 2006)

Tiberius said:
			
		

> The Image Quality is great, but the S3 is dead slow compared to even the Nikon D50. It's not a _bad_ camera, but if you're going to be doing anything at all that you need speed for, even wildlife or anything, I'd look elsewhere.


 
ITA.  While the S3 is supposed to have great dyanamic range, I need my shutter to be able to go "pop pop pop pop" and be able to review the images immediately on the LCD... that is NOT going to happen with the S3... it is SUPER slow.  Also, they have decreased the price way down... maybe that means an S4 is coming?  If so, if they have fixed the slow problem, it would be worth looking into, but until they get that issue resolved, it isn't worth taking a second look at IMO for most photographers.


----------



## DonSchap (Jun 24, 2006)

They're talking inroduction of the new Fujifilm Finepix S4 at Fotokina, next September. IMO, I'd save your sheckles and get ready to blow a good wad to get this one. You know you want want one... I can see it in your eyes.


----------



## Don Simon (Jun 26, 2006)

Tiberius said:
			
		

> Whatever camera you get, make sure it accepts either Nikon or Canon lenses. There's no sense in getting a camera that doesn't accept either.



No sense? I dunno, I consider getting great quality old Pentax lenses cheap (because everyone else is after the Canons and Nikons) pretty good sense.



			
				Tiberius said:
			
		

> You've also got more guaranteed future compatibility, since neither Canon nor Nikon will be going anywhere for a while.



True, but who's to say they won't be changing their lens mounts? Plus they might have _future_ compatibility, but Nikon certainly doesn't have much _past_ compatibility, not when it comes to manual focus lenses anyway. Canon is a different story since their DSLRs let you use a whole variety of old lenses (including manual focus Nikons!) with TTL metering.


----------



## Tiberius (Jun 26, 2006)

Zaphod, Nikon's used the F Mount since 1959.  All of their AI and newer lenses (35 years' worth or so) will mount and shoot properly on all their DSLRs.  Admitedly, the pre-1984 Lenses without CPUs will not meter light properly and will require the use of manual settings (but with a histogram this is not a terrible problem) on the D50 and D70s, but they WILL still shoot fine and will even meter on the D200 and D2 series.


----------



## Don Simon (Jun 26, 2006)

Yeah but I consider TTL metering to be, well, reasonably useful  and I still don't see why it makes no sense to go for something that isn't either Canon or Nikon. If you're not a pro (which the original poster didn't say he was) you're unlikely to need the guarantee of being able to find that one specific lens in any shop anywhere in the world at any time... lenses for other brands are available, it's not like only one store on every continent sells them. Now if the people using Pentax cameras and lenses were finding it impossible to get a good shot, or the people using Konica-Minoltas were cursing the day they bought them and using them as paperweights now the company's dropped out of the business, then I'd understand your point. But they're not. Canon and Nikon make very good cameras and very good lenses - but so do other companies, and most people will be happy with the results from a good lens on a good dSLR, whatever the name on the front.


----------

