Nikon/Canon?

[drummerman]

I've been looking to re-enter my hobby after a few years in the cold.

I was for ages comparing specs/accessories of Canon and Nikon cameras, namely the Nikon D90, Canon EOS450D but also a couple of higher spec'd DSLR's ... the D300 and EOS40 and 50.

Long story short, I love the compactness of both the 450D and D90. I find the D300 and EOS50 to heavy and bulky but love the robustness and part weather sealing which is not too important but could be useful when travelling. They also offer some useful improvements such as higher fps and, in some cases, higher iso's than the 450D in particular.

Having looked into lenses I found Nikon's to be significantly more expensive though I guess I could go 3rd party manufacturer such as Sigma/Tamron.

At the moment I am leaning towards the cheaper D90/EOS450D and put some cash towards good lenses and processing software/printer but if anybody can convince me that it is worth spending extra on the D300/EOS50 I'd consider that too.

Just to make it more difficult Canon has a new model (EOS500D) coming out imminently which seems to incorporate most of the 50D's spec (incl. the 15mp cmos) in the 450D's smaller body plus some HD camcorder facilities ala Nikon D90. I can't quite figure out though why they price it at £900 (pre-order price, so it probably comes down significantly over the months though I'm not sure I want to wait that long).

I would like to print large (A3+) so a few more megapixels would be welcommed though I know from previous experience that a good lens for example is more important.

I would like to hear from anybody that uses any of the above SLR's with some feedback and your thoughts. Many thanx

[Yandros]

I think you've got a pretty good handle on the situation

I think the launch price of the 500D is faintly absurd, but if it settles down below the D90, it'll make more sense - after all the sensor is no better than the D90/D300 and it has a lower frame rate.

I toyed with the Canon 30D, D80, and D200, and opted for the D200 in a moment of 'oh what the hell it'll stop me lusting over one later for ever more'. Having said that, spend on other kit since then is way over £2K, so the body cost proportionally is fairly low.

The difference in the sensors between the 500D, D90, 50D, and D30 is trivial, even at A3, so it comes down to handling, speed, build etc.

My own random thoughts after a few years of D200 ownership...

Used the weather sealing rarely - out in the snowstorm recently I appreciated it, but still had to watch it as the lens wasn't sealed. Copes with near 100% humidity of our local butterfly house with no issues.

The dials and buttons are cool - more like a tool than a toy, and you find yourself flicking settings pretty instinctively after a while.

I do give the AF module and 5fps frame rate/huge RAW buffer a workout on occasions, and it's very welcome. The D300/50D would be even better - the 4.5 fps D90 pretty close. If I shot more action it would be a total no brainer, but as it is I regard it as a cool luxury that gets me some shots I'd miss otherwise now and again.

Weight and size is a factor. You can't really forget you're carrying something like a D200.

[drummerman]

Thank you. Size is an issue but I guess I could just about cope with the D300. The 50D seems even more enormous. I had them all in my hand earlier (except the 500D) and the shop owner (lady) uses the 50D and does'nt mind the weight/size. I am, by the way 6.3 and 15st but it does'nt mean I want to constantly lug something the weight of a water melon with me. I think, it could be reason enough sometimes to not take the thing with me as happened on a recent visit to switzerland and my brothers professional Nikon DSLR, which ended up staying in the car/at home more than anticipated!

Picture quality is paramount and hence I will budget for some quality lenses. I probably can live with the D90 but I also don't want to buy into something that I'll out-grow within a year or is obsolete and old hat in the same period of time.

What about re-sell values of say a D90 compared with a 450D and are there any features the higher range D200 gives you that you find you'd miss by say downgrading to a 450D just to use an example?

[Yandros]

Originally Posted by drummerman

What about re-sell values of say a D90 compared with a 450D and are there any features the higher range D200 gives you that you find you'd miss by say downgrading to a 450D just to use an example?

Resale values are pretty good actually, particularly as the DSLR market has matured a bit in the last few years - the megapixel race has slowed down, so your kit isn't stone age in 2 years!

Any features I'd miss?

Going down to a 450D, I'd miss the huge top LCD. I'd go nuts having to use the rear screen/viewfinder to see my settings (D90 has this, but not as big). I'd miss the drive mode dial. I use aperture priority most of the time, so not having a mode dial is preferable for me. The lack of mirror lockup mode would be a bit of a shame. I like my meter mode dial. I like the clicky manual/autofocus switch (still on the D90 of course). As mentioned above, I like the frame rate and RAW buffer.

In conclusion, I'm sure I could take 95%+ of my shots with a 450D/D90, and the ones I couldn't would all be due to the frame rate. The other issues are mostly ergomonics. I might miss the occasion shot due to fiddling more in menus I guess, but not a serious issue I suspect.

Incidentally, I wouldn't swap from Nikon to Canon, as I love my 105VR macro too much - Canon don't do an image stabilised macro lens yet. I might console myself with the Canon 17-55mm IS f2.8, which rather trumps the Nikon 16-85mm VR f3.5-f5.6, but I'd also lose my Nikon closeup speedlights too, and I don't think I could cope

[drummerman]

That's a nice lens. Yes, I find the top display nice too but whether I find it more useful than say a direct ISO selector I don't really know. Anyhow, I prefer the build of the D90 but having just looked at the price of your lens I am swaying back towards canon, they do a roughly equivelant 90mm macro for about £250 less. I don't know how the quality compares though. It also seems to have 14bit processing and I wonder if that works out as better colour gradation on large prints.

I'll get there slowly. Many thanks

[Yandros]

Originally Posted by drummerman

That's a nice lens. Yes, I find the top display nice too but whether I find it more useful than say a direct ISO selector I don't really know. Anyhow, I prefer the build of the D90 but having just looked at the price of your lens I am swaying back towards canon, they do a roughly equivelant 90mm macro for about £250 less. I don't know how the quality compares though. It also seems to have 14bit processing and I wonder if that works out as better colour gradation on large prints.

I'll get there slowly. Many thanks

Macro lenses aren't a good example actually - forget I said it. The main reason I like mine is I do a lot of handheld stuff in places where tripods aren't allowed (or I don't want to lug one), and VR helps. For most people the Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro - available in Canon or Nikon mount would be best choice.

[drummerman]

Originally Posted by Yandros

Macro lenses aren't a good example actually - forget I said it. The main reason I like mine is I do a lot of handheld stuff in places where tripods aren't allowed (or I don't want to lug one), and VR helps. For most people the Tamron 90mm f2.8 macro - available in Canon or Nikon mount would be best choice.

I looked at the Tamron too and that would be a viable option for either system I guess but I do see the point of VR too even though at a premium.
Do you know a good source/place for second hand glass?

[Chumpalot]

I know this sounds funny, but eBay seems quite a good place to get lenses. I have been watching quite a few listings (about to purchase a D90 myself) and the sellers all seem quite genuine. The savings that can be had are very worthwhile too... I'm certainly going to look towards eBay when looking for a wide-angle lens in the future.

[drsuave]

A canon man myself

Originally Posted by Chumpalot

I know this sounds funny, but eBay seems quite a good place to get lenses.

used ebay a few times for glass but remember you will be stung on import tax

guy in scotland something like kerso is good on ebay

Also the tamron 17-55 is very good only sold it cos got my L glass

[gpa]

Originally Posted by drummerman

I've been looking to re-enter my hobby after a few years in the cold.

I was for ages comparing specs/accessories of Canon and Nikon cameras, namely the Nikon D90, Canon EOS450D but also a couple of higher spec'd DSLR's ... the D300 and EOS40 and 50.

Long story short, I love the compactness of both the 450D and D90. I find the D300 and EOS50 to heavy and bulky but love the robustness and part weather sealing which is not too important but could be useful when travelling. They also offer some useful improvements such as higher fps and, in some cases, higher iso's than the 450D in particular.

Having looked into lenses I found Nikon's to be significantly more expensive though I guess I could go 3rd party manufacturer such as Sigma/Tamron.

At the moment I am leaning towards the cheaper D90/EOS450D and put some cash towards good lenses and processing software/printer but if anybody can convince me that it is worth spending extra on the D300/EOS50 I'd consider that too.

Just to make it more difficult Canon has a new model (EOS500D) coming out imminently which seems to incorporate most of the 50D's spec (incl. the 15mp cmos) in the 450D's smaller body plus some HD camcorder facilities ala Nikon D90. I can't quite figure out though why they price it at £900 (pre-order price, so it probably comes down significantly over the months though I'm not sure I want to wait that long).

I would like to print large (A3+) so a few more megapixels would be welcommed though I know from previous experience that a good lens for example is more important.

I would like to hear from anybody that uses any of the above SLR's with some feedback and your thoughts. Many thanx

I think in your case a D300 and standard lens is your best bet. You will after all strive to improve your lens quality once you get sucked ina quality Nikon lens would suit you well and would be your next upgrqade The D300 can shoot at 8 fps, has great auto focus and 51 point selection, Auto white balance. Also built like a tank and I should know because I dropped my D300 several times!!!!!!!!!!

[drummerman]

Originally Posted by gpa

I think in your case a D300 and standard lens is your best bet. You will after all strive to improve your lens quality once you get sucked ina quality Nikon lens would suit you well and would be your next upgrqade The D300 can shoot at 8 fps, has great auto focus and 51 point selection, Auto white balance. Also built like a tank and I should know because I dropped my D300 several times!!!!!!!!!!

Nice photos you too there, enough to almost convince me to buy the 300 .

£400 difference could get me a nice lens or a good printer/software ...