[PowerPc = Pwnage]

Why?

[ort888]

My very non-expert opinion is in favor of Canons. I've owned both, but they have been point and shoot models.

[davesimondotcom]

I have a D50 -> Great camera at a great price for hobbyists.

[Calimus]

I'll second the D50. Awesome camera. The digital Rebel, canons model in the same price range felt small in my hand and not as sturdy as the D50 body. Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ has amazing reviews to give you any information you could possibly want.

[paul w]

Depends depends depends.

If I could buy a new dslr I can't quite afford it'd be the Canon 5D.

If I had to buy a new dslr today I'd be really torn between the Nikon D200 and the Canon 30D. It's basically a toss up, all things considered (sensor, build quality, ergonomics, lens quality and cost, etc.)

As for point and shoot I think it's moot since there's sooo much competition.

Don't listen to me though, since I have a KM 7D

[dbranham]

That's vague. What exactly is the question?

[fhoubi]

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom 

I have a D50 -> Great camera at a great price for hobbyists.

Second^2. I own a D50 as well as the original Rebel, the Rebel was a POS. Inconsistent metering, in fact 33% of all flash fotos were waaay off. If you won't fall for the megapixel hype, the D50 has 99% anyone can dream of. Auto Iso, ergonomics? Only on a Nikon. Newer expensive models (D80/200) have a bigger viewfinder and gridlines if you need that though.

[mdc]

Here's another vote for the D50. I love my camera. . . except for the fact that the St. Pete Times Forum won't let me inside with it because it has a removable lens.

[sknapp351]

I take photos that are printed rather large, so the D50 is out for me. I have used the D70, but for the same reason as the D50 it starts to lose focus on my images. I am in the process of deciding between the D80 and the 30D. I have a source for Nikon lenses that makes me consider that, but I also have large hands and the 30D just feels better to me. I work as an assistant with a few professional photographers from the NYC area and the general opinion with the ones I have spoken to is that both are fine cameras, but that Canon tends to have the better equipment in the DSLR area ( with the exception of the Rebel series, no one seems to like them ), but that Nikon has the edge at the moment with the 200D.
SAm

EDIT: I am actually starting to use the 4" x 5" film cameras for my shots. I'm so exited.

[mitchell_pgh]

Low Medium Range = Canon
Higher End = Canon/Nikon (they seem to leapfrog one another)

I really like Nikon at the medium high end, but wouldn't even think of buying a Nikon digital point and shoot.

Regarding Digital vs. Analog... digital has been whittling away at the list of things Digital can't do to the point where it really doesn't matter much for most photographers.

[PowerPc = Pwnage]

I just want to know why you like what you have.

Also, yes, yes, the D50 does rule, I have one, all-around great camera, with options for the amateur and professional.

[Peter]

D50

[itai195]

I have a preference toward Nikon for a DSLR. For plain old digicams and film cameras I'd definitely pick Canon.

[PowerPc = Pwnage]

Amen, brother.

[mac128k-1984]

I have the D70s, awesome camera. The construction and weight distribution make for a nice handling camera. Lens quality that Nikon offers is outstanding.

I don't think you could go wrong with either camera and while I'm predisposed towards Nikons Canon is also a good camera.

[PowerPc = Pwnage]

I agree, Canon makes an excellent camera.

[powerbook867]

Canon. Couple of reasons:

1) Nikon sensors have high ISO noise. Yes, it does look more like film grain rather than digital noise that is still there on the Canon's, but try shooting sports at night @ ISO 1600 or 3200...yuck

2) Lenses. I have 2 pieces of L glass and the only word that can describe them is WOW. Not that Nikon glass is bad. I have just been extremely happy w/ the Canon quality

Now even though I shoot Canon, there are some features that almost brought me over to the Nikon side...

1) D200 with weather sealing. If I'm shooting a football game and it starts raining, it's time for a plastic sleeve...starts sprinkling? Time for the sleeve. For weather sealing on the Canon side you go up to a 4k boby. Ouch.

2) 10 mp sensor. A nice feature and larger than the 30d sensor I have, but not enough to swing me over when you factor in the noise..

Just my opinion, they are just tools to get a job done. Pick the tool that works best for you. Both are quality you can rely on.

[voodoo]

None of the above.

Leica digital/SLR/film

Leica rangefinder:

http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/m_system/m8 (digital)

http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/m_system/m7 (film)

Leica SLR

http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/r_system/r9 (film)

http://www.leica-camera.us/photograp...igital-modul-r (digital back on the R9)

Leica compact

http://www.leica-camera.us/photograp...meras/d-lux_3/ (digital)

Simply the best cameras and lenses combined with incredible look, design, features and reliability.

Pricy? Oh yes. Although the D-LUX3 is rather affordable actually.

V

[powerbook867]

voodoo, while I know and respect the name, aren't the digital versions partially rebadged Panasonics? The innards Panasonic, the glass and body Leica?

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by powerbook867 

voodoo, while I know and respect the name, aren't the digital versions partially rebadged Panasonics? The innards Panasonic, the glass and body Leica?

Well the M8 has a 10.3 Megapixel Kodak sensor designed especially for it, has a Leica body and lense..

The DMR Digital Module-R fits over an R8 or R9 which are both 100% Leicas and that was designed and made specifically for those models..

However the D-Lux 3 is based on a Panasonic model (I think.. since the D-Lux 2 was - they are very similar looking).

Hence the price difference

R9+DMR ca €6000 (body only)
M8 ca €4000 (body only)
D-Lux 3 ca €600 (lens included)

The D-Lux 3 is a fine camera non-the less.

V

[powerbook867]

Hence my confusion. Thanks for setting me straight. I have been intrigued by them and stopped by the Leica website a couple of times.

I have been looking seriously at some of the used Mamiya medium format gear on ebay. Talk about cheap compared to a couple of years ago!! I might pick up a 645 AF-D sometime in the next 6 months to play with when I shoot landscapes.

[Buckaroo]

Lecia, your only paying for the name.

Get a Canon Rebel Xti (400)

[tooki]

Originally Posted by powerbook867 

Canon. Couple of reasons:

1) Nikon sensors have high ISO noise. Yes, it does look more like film grain rather than digital noise that is still there on the Canon's, but try shooting sports at night @ ISO 1600 or 3200...yuck

2) Lenses. I have 2 pieces of L glass and the only word that can describe them is WOW. Not that Nikon glass is bad. I have just been extremely happy w/ the Canon quality

Now even though I shoot Canon, there are some features that almost brought me over to the Nikon side...

1) D200 with weather sealing. If I'm shooting a football game and it starts raining, it's time for a plastic sleeve...starts sprinkling? Time for the sleeve. For weather sealing on the Canon side you go up to a 4k boby. Ouch.

2) 10 mp sensor. A nice feature and larger than the 30d sensor I have, but not enough to swing me over when you factor in the noise..

Just my opinion, they are just tools to get a job done. Pick the tool that works best for you. Both are quality you can rely on.

Nikon sensors do not have higher noise, at least not visibly. In test after test, you can see what's going on: Canon applies more noise reduction, reducing measurable noise, but also blowing out fine detail sooner than Nikon. Also, as you said, Nikon tends to make noise appear as luminance noise (which looks more like film grain), while Canon allows it to linger as chrominance noise. The sensors, as far as I can tell, are essentially identical in noise characteristics, but Nikon and Canon use different approaches for noise reduction. Take a look at DSLR Resolution and Noise Comparison for info on this.

Of course, if you really care about noise for a specific image, you shoot it in RAW and then process it in Capture One Pro, which produces images with film-like grain, much better than any in-camera processing to date.

Canon makes superb lenses that I, as a Nikon owner, envy (for example, the 10-22mm ultrawide zoom, which is both wider and cheaper than Nikon's). Conversely, Nikon makes some lenses that Canon owners lust over. (Case in point: Nikon's amazing 18-200mm VR image-stabilized zoom. It's sharp, versatile and compact. No wonder Nikon has a 2-year backlog of orders for it!!) Canon and Nikon both make top-notch optics.

The fact is, most users could go either way when choosing an SLR system and be completely satisfied.

I went with Nikon for a couple of reasons: in my budget range, the Nikon gear feels better. Though I have no complaints with the Digital Rebel XT and XTi's performance or capabilities, I think they feel cheap. Their housings have a flimsy plasticky feel. Also, they are too small for me to hold comfortably. The Nikon D70s feels outstanding in the hand. (Women, who tend to have smaller hands, prefer the Rebels, while men with bigger hands prefer the Nikons or higher-end Canons.) Another reason is that, in my research, I found that many reviews preferred the way Nikon put basic controls right on the camera rather than in menus. Finally, the Nikon D70 and higher all have built-in wireless flash commanders, which is incredibly useful. For a Canon, you must buy a transmitter to do this (as is also necessary with the D50).

Now, as a Nikon owner, I have discovered one big disadvantage of Nikon SLR gear: it's never in stock!! Nikon designs this magnificent equipment, but can't ship it till many months after it's supposed to have hit the streets. The D70/D70s were out of stock in stores half the time during their entire lifetime. The aforementioned 18-200mm lens has never been in stock at any store since it was introduced a year ago. (The few units that trickle in to camera shops go to people who pre-ordered.) Similarly, all sorts of Nikon items, from expensive lenses to $20 accessory bits, are frequently out of stock. Now, I'm very glad to see Nikon's popularity growing, but this problem is a big frustration to Nikon dealers and users alike.

Canon right now sells something like 4 digital SLRs for each one Nikon sells. I doubt the difference would be so big if Nikon could keep retailers stocked!

Even third-party lenses for Nikon cameras are sold out when the Canon versions aren't! (Not that I recommend going third-party, generally speaking.)


Now, for point-and-shoot digitals, I prefer Canon's designs. I think they focus a fair bit faster, especially in low light, and just seem more responsive. That said, neither Canon nor Nikon hold the crown in P&S digital responsiveness, which oddly enough goes to Casio, nor do they have the lowest noise (NOT including digital noise reduction) P&S digital. That prize goes to Fuji. (Canon just came out with a new pocket digital, the SD800 IS, which has an image-stabilized 28-105mm lens, and apparently a new processor that makes it REALLY responsive, from the reviews I've seen.)

tooki

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by powerbook867 

1) Nikon sensors have high ISO noise. Yes, it does look more like film grain rather than digital noise that is still there on the Canon's, but try shooting sports at night @ ISO 1600 or 3200...yuck

This is more of a myth these days. The D80 has better noise characteristics than the 400D/Rebel XTi, especially at high ISO. The reason is simple: at ISO800, an additional noise filter kicks in which reduces sharpness a bit whereas Canon did not decide to do so. As some people have pointed out, if you want optimal results, you shoot RAW and process each pic yourself.

Basically, both are on par these days.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

This is more of a myth these days. The D80 has better noise characteristics than the 400D/Rebel XTi, especially at high ISO.

That's not what I've read. Contrary to what Tooki says, the reviews I've read agree with you and say that Nikon has brought the noise down by using more aggressive noise reduction thereby sacrificing sharpness. As a result, the D80 is on a par (not better) with the 400D in terms of noise, but is not as sharp. If you shoot RAW and forego the noise filter on the Nikon, then the Nikon is still more noisy for the same level of detail (sharpness). So, it loses on RAW shots and draws level on jpegs.

DPreview says of the D80:

"To be fair the D80 does not perform as well as the EOS 400D (Digital Rebel XTi) at ISO 800 or 1600 but the differences are much less than they ever used to be, Nikon is closing the gap." And they say under Cons: "High sensitivity (ISO) noise levels higher than Canon EOS 400D ... and Noise reduction can be intrusive". Nikon D80 Review: 29. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review

DCResource review says:

"The first thing to notice in the above comparison is just how much sharper the Canon and Sony cameras are straight out of the box (which is what people moving up from point-and-shoots expect). In terms of noise, the D80 holds its own compared to the Rebel XTi -- and, as you can see, the DSLR-A100 lags behind at ISO 1600." DCRP Review: Nikon D80

Still, I think that there is very little to choose between these two cameras. High ISO noise is not the be all and end all. Each of these cameras has advantages over the other - sensoring cleaning in the 400D, bigger grip on the D80. Lighter weight of the 400D, brighter viewfinder on the D80. Simpler interface on the D80, $200-$300 cheaper for the 400D.

As far as high end digital cameras go though, Canon has to be the clear winner for the simple reason that Nikon doesn't make a full frame camera ... for now! Things change so fast in this market! I would say that unless you're in the market for a full frame camera, anything from Canon or Nikon will do you fine right now.

[starman]

I own a Canon EOS 20D and love it. I found that Canon and Nikon are 50/50 in terms of what they offer.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Troll 

That's not what I've read. Contrary to what Tooki says, the reviews I've read agree with you and say that Nikon has brought the noise down by using more aggressive noise reduction thereby sacrificing sharpness.

Take a look here and here: it's obvious that the D80 hasn't just closed the gap, but surpassed (also at ISO 400 without any loss of detail since the additional noise filter kicks in at ISO 800+ only) its direct competitor (also at lower ISO values).

I didn't mean to say that there is a tremendous difference in noise, but rather that the argument, Canons have lower noise, is a thing of the past, a myth.

Originally Posted by Troll 

Still, I think that there is very little to choose between these two cameras. High ISO noise is not the be all and end all. Each of these cameras has advantages over the other - sensoring cleaning in the 400D, bigger grip on the D80. Lighter weight of the 400D, brighter viewfinder on the D80. Simpler interface on the D80, $200-$300 cheaper for the 400D.

The viewfinder is not just brighter, but considerably larger -- which alone is worth a lot for someone wearing glasses.

Originally Posted by Troll 

As far as high end digital cameras go though, Canon has to be the clear winner for the simple reason that Nikon doesn't make a full frame camera ... for now! Things change so fast in this market! I would say that unless you're in the market for a full frame camera, anything from Canon or Nikon will do you fine right now.

Nikon won't make a full frame camera any time soon. A full frame sensor doesn't imply more detail. Full frame sensors demand a lot more from the lenses to the degree that in some tests (even with high-end fixed focal length lenses), the effective resolution of Canon's cameras was actually lower (compared to the D2X(s)) unless the aperture was closed one or two stops.

[Turias]

I love my Canon Digital Rebel XT. I spent a long time debating between it, a D70, and a D50, and finally chose the Canon.

[screamingFit]

Either the Pentax 100D or the new, improved 10D.

Best value and better features than either Canon or Nikon prosumer DLSRs.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by screamingFit 

Either the Pentax 100D or the new, improved 10D.

Best value and better features than either Canon or Nikon prosumer DLSRs.

I had forgotten about Pentax! Very good cameras. Better than Nikon for the price. Damn fine.

V

[memento]

I love my digital rebel, but have no particular allegiance to canon. At the time it was the only DSLR that I could afford. When the time comes for a new camera I'll look at price/performance of all available cameras and make a new decision then. Canon/Nikon//Leica/whatever.

[Turias]

Originally Posted by memento 

I love my digital rebel, but have no particular allegiance to canon. At the time it was the only DSLR that I could afford. When the time comes for a new camera I'll look at price/performance of all available cameras and make a new decision then. Canon/Nikon//Leica/whatever.

I guess you haven't purchased any lenses for your camera?

[PowerPc = Pwnage]

The reason I didn't mention Leica was most certainly not because I don't think its worthy, everyone knows Leica makes an excellent camera, with unrivaled lense quality and build. But the reason I only put Nikon and Canon is because i believe the two seem to be in a bit of competition when it comes to SLRs for pros and Amateurs.

[PowerPc = Pwnage]

Tooki,
It says you posted at 4:30 AM! Wow.

[powerbook867]

Turias brings up an excellent point. You're not just buying an SLR, but an entire system.

When I started w/ Canon, the noise issue with Nikon was...an issue. Now it sounds like not so much and that the noise suppression going on in camera does a pretty good job. Sometimes I do shoot RAW, but not for high school sports. I am unwilling to spend the time post processing RAW sport shots for what I get paid. I don't work for Sports Illustrated...

For me, the Canon was the best choice at the time and I bought into the system and made the investment in glass. Have to drink the Cool-aid now...

and on that note, it has not let me down, so I have little reason to make a change.

[glideslope]

Everyone eventually comes to the Dark Side. Prepare yourself young Jedi.

[- - e r i k - -]

My wife has a Canon 5D. I am however very happy with my Olympus E-300. The sensor-cleaning has saved me more than once

[Troll]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

Take a look here and here: it's obvious that the D80 hasn't just closed the gap, but surpassed (also at ISO 400 without any loss of detail since the additional noise filter kicks in at ISO 800+ only) its direct competitor (also at lower ISO values).

Obvious to you maybe!

Dpreview and dpresource did much more detailed tests. The cameralabs test you refer to doesn't say what they are comparing or explain how they did the tests. Those are probably jpeg shots of colour swatches which of course makes the Nikon look better. That's because you can't see the lack of sharpness on a shot of a colour swatch and we know that Nikon is doing some extreme noise reduction in camera at high ISOs.

Dpreview really is an excellent site when it comes to tests and dcresource is quite good too. Both of these still maintain that the 400D has an advantage in terms of noise. What they both say is that the Nikon is noisier when you compare RAW data but when the noise filter is implemented on the Nikon, it is on a par with the Canon in terms of noise although less sharp. I can do noise reduction in Aperture or Photoshop, so for me, it's far more important that I have a sharp photo out of the camera. Besides, I don't want the camera messing with the photo so if I had the Nikon, I'd switch the noise filter off.

But that's just me! All of the sites say that the Canon is no longer the obvious choice and I think that's the message. If you're looking at the 400D or the D80, there really is little to choose between them. You need to look at other considerations like your upgrade path in terms of lenses, which one feels better etc.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I didn't mean to say that there is a tremendous difference in noise, but rather that the argument, Canons have lower noise, is a thing of the past, a myth.

Hold on, the D80 might compare with the 400D in terms of noise, but Nikon still has nothing to compare with the full frame Canons in terms of noise. I don't think it is now accepted that Nikons in general are now on a par with Canons in terms of noise.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

A full frame sensor doesn't imply more detail.

Depending on how you define more detail. If you have a 10MP APS-C sensor and a 10MP full frame sensor, the pixels are necessarily going to be bigger on the full frame sensor which is good. Full frame has distinct advantages when it comes to noise and accuracy because the pixels are more dedicated to their tasks. Of course, the other difference is that APS-C sensors are going to max out at some point sooner than full frames. Because as many pixels as you can pack onto an APS-C sensor, you will be able to pack more onto a full frame. But that's more theoretical.

In practice, the majority of pros use full frame cameras. A lot of the pro photography sites I've seen insist on full frame cameras. I was at a photography vernissage last night and spoke to some industry people (mostly in haute couture) and they said that full frame is the standard. Hasselblad, Contax and Canon is all that they use - although they still use a lot of film. Chanel for example, will not use digital at all. Even touch ups must be done with the old paintbrush.

Anyway, I think we agree that there is little to choose between the 400D and the D80. Both are great cameras. One is an evolution of the biggest selling DSLR of all time and the other represents a new breed of Nikons that look very promising.

[memento]

Originally Posted by Turias 

I guess you haven't purchased any lenses for your camera?

I have 2, but I can also sell them if there is a big difference between a Canon and a Nikon. It will be a factor for sure. But I honestly think that we're splitting hairs here. Both make great DSLR cameras.