Camera Geeks: Nikon vs Canon

[Viney]

So then there i was looking at DSLR's at the weekend and looking at the Nikon D90 or the Canon 500D. Both similar in spec and RRP price range, however, you can get silly discounts on the canon but not on the Nikon, like £300 vs £60 respectivly.

So why is this? Is the Nikon that much better than the canon, or just a company offering a better range to discount?

The canon was slightly better in spec to, 15.1MP vs 12mp of the nikon. Camera box are offering a sensible twin lens kit (17-85is and 55-200is) for around the same price as a D90 with 18-105mm lens.

Advice please

[Alpinestarhero]

I think canon are just trying to shift a few. Nikon did discounts on the D60 when it came out, £60 cashback, making it a more atractive prospect than the corresponding canon

Carefull with MP count...it might have more pixels, but if its on the same size sensor as the nikon then noise *could* be an issue, particularly at higher ISO

That lense offering sounds quite good; I have a 55-200 for taking pictures at racetracks, its a good lense for that sort of work.

Have you physically held the nikon and canon? one reason why I chose my nikon was because it felt more durable and better quality than the canon alternative

[wyrdness]

You can't really go wrong with either. If you can get the best deal on a Canon, then go for that.

[anna]

OHh Can of worms you have just opened there Viney. I am sure resident experts will be along, until then here is my 2p.
They both work a little differently but basically do the same thing. I know this is an over simplification, but from what I can gather this is the case.

If you have friends who have NIKON buy NIKON as you can borrow and swap lenses between you. If it is the other way around then buy Cannon, and as Cannon have a deal on right now.. bingo.

This black and white info was brought to you by the letter A....

[Quedos]

no contest - Canon every time - but evey camera i've owned has been a canon and as Anna says so does my partners and most of my mates and that is one of the resona why we chose canon - you can get access to great kit with having to fork out all of the money (esp when you doen'y use all the lenses all the time)

its down to personal preference - go into the shop and play about with them see how they fell etc. you have to be comfortable with them

[SVStorm]

I had a similar indecision to you and I landed up going for canon due to the price.
I held both of them compared features etc and the Nikon did have better build quality. But at the end of the day price won as the spec was not that much different.
Good luck

[fizzwheel]

I went for Nikon

1. Because my friends all have Nikons.. see Anna's point above
2. I got a deal on my Nikon when I bought it from Jessops
3. I prefered the look at feel of the Nikon Camera body
4. When I compared like for like shots on dpreview I thought the colour depth on the Nikon was better than the Cannon.

I dont honestly think theres that much in it. You wont be disappointed with either.

The thing I've noticed is that places that hire out lenses seem to have more choice of cannon fitment over Nikon. I.e. if you wanted to hire a tele lens because you were going to the F1 or something and wanted to take better pics you'll have more choice of lens if you go down the Cannon route.

[kwak zzr]

i'm still shopping for one of these too :smt119 is camera box a good place to buy from?

[jambo]

Both Nikon & Canon make quality kit.

When I bought my 400d a couple of years ago the choice came down to reading reviews, thinking through my choices, and ultimately having 2 good friends who owned a large collection of Canon accessories such as flashes and lenses. This meant I could try stuff out before parting with money.

Had they owned a collection of Nikon kit I might well have decided the other way. When we bought my Dad a camera last Christmas we got him to try a D60 and 1000D as they were the same price. He picked the Canon simply because he'd used a Canon film SLR for the last few years and it felt natural.

In short, try both out, one will almost certainly feel more natural than the other. I can't comment on the Nikon lenses but the Canon 17-85 IS is the key lens that spends most of the time on my camera and is very good. The 55-250 IS lens I've used and is a good bit of glass, the 55-200 I haven't used.

Shout if you want to borrow my 400d with the 17-85 for a walkabout.

Jambo

Edit: The 55-200 seems to be a non-IS lens. At that focal length the IS becomes quite handy, but I use a fairly basic 80-200 non IS lens and it's capable of returning good pictures if you can keep the shutter speed up :)

[mkz9876]

the nikon cannon argument is great most people who owns either will swear that one is better than the other in reality its whichever you find easier to use and that suits you best, go to a shop and have a play with them both and see which you prefer.

[jambo]

Sorry, I've just read my reply above and it seems terribly balanced, if Anna and Filipe read it they'll use it against me.

Nikon have an overly complex lens system based on never properly overhauling their standards meaning you need to have an interest in tables and train spotting to understand what features will work on what lens wth what body. Oh and everyone who shoots with Nikon smells of wee.

Even people like Joe McNally and David Hobby who are two of my favourite photogs. Thankfully I follow them online and in books so I can't smell the wee.

:p

Jambo

[Filipe M.]

Sorry, I've just read my reply above and it seems terribly balanced, if Anna and Filipe read it they'll use it against me.

Thanks for the ammo, Jambo! :smt023

Nikon have an overly complex lens system based on never properly overhauling their standards meaning you need to have an interest in tables and train spotting to understand what features will work on what lens wth what body.

It's actually simpler than that. While not being Leica M-like in which every lens works with every body, you basically get AI and AF lenses. If you look at the thing from the body you own perspective, then it gets brilliantly simple. Let's take the D90 (I have one):

AI - no auto-focus, no metering (don't even try pre-AI lenses, they'll break your camera).
AF breaks down into:
AF-D: they need internal camera motor for auto-focus (the D90 has one, D5000 and below don't), and they'll meter on the D90 and above.
AF-S: auto-focus in every digital body, as well as 3D Matrix Metering.

... okay Jambo, I'll give you that one, but it all breaks down to this: Take the D90 and every lens manufactured after 1977 will work on it. Can you say the same about Canon? ;)

Oh and everyone who shoots with Nikon smells of wee.

Even people like Joe McNally and David Hobby who are two of my favourite photogs. Thankfully I follow them online and in books so I can't smell the wee.

:p

Jambo

Can't really comment on that one, because I'm used to the smell by now, but Canon shooters usually have rashes on the index finger due to some idiot placing the (single?) control dial vertically behind the shutter button, instead of horizontally behind and in front of the camera, where you can actually use them!

Oh, and if in doubt, take a walk into Grays of Westminster... (I know Jambo, that one was below the belt! :lol: )

[Filipe M.]

Carefull with MP count...it might have more pixels, but if its on the same size sensor as the nikon then noise *could* be an issue, particularly at higher ISO


There are at least two reasons why Nikon are still holding back on the megapixel race, one of them being exactly this. The D90 is known for having one of the cleanest APS (cropped) sensors, if not the best.

The other one is the fact that the higher the sensor's resolution, the more the lens defects / imperfect photo technique will show up. ;)

[Littlepeahead]

How about a look at this:

http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/equipment/advice/315919/canon-eos-5d-mk-ii-vs-nikon-d700-vs-sony-a900.html

I'm a Canon user myself. Gone from an old A1 to an EOS 350 to an EOS 350D and now on an EOS 30D with L series lenses. I work with a lot of pro sports photographers and they are pretty evenly split between Canon and Nikon.

[Filipe M.]

...now on a very expensive lens cap with L series lenses...

mmmmmmmmm L glass.......... *drools*


:lol:

[Specialone]

My mate has the d90 and i think it superb, havent tried the canon so cant really compare.
Im actually saving for the d90 myself at present, cos i want one.

[Bluepete]

Why not try one of the slightly older cameras? I have a Nikon D60 which is quite superb! Maybe you could save a few quid by not having the latest gizmo that'll be out of date in the new year?

Pete ;)

[falc]

I think both are very good makes and the reason I chose the Nikon was because my Dad had a Nikon and I can steal his lenses. Also my co-workers have various makes of Nikons and quite a selection of lenses.

Either way you won't be disappointed, you've had a go with mine so have a rough idea of that.

[TC3]

I went with the Nikon D90 as i have not had good experiences with some Canon dslrs i bought several years ago and among other things i also wanted the brilliant CLS flash lighting system Nikon do which Canon just can not match. Look at the feature set of both and decide what you will use/benefit from and also what feels good in your hands.

[keith_d]

I've been a Nikon user for longer than I care to admit in public.

However, these days a mid-range dSLR from either of the big manufacturers will do everything you're likely to want. The cameras will have very similar functionality and both manufacturers offer a comprehensive selection of lenses. There really is nothing to choose between them.

So, my recommendation would be to try borrow a camera or two and see what feels right for you. Obviously, if one of your mates has a huge selection of lenses and will lend them to you that might also influence your choice.

Just my thoughts,

Keith.

[Filipe M.]

...among other things i also wanted the brilliant CLS flash lighting system Nikon do which Canon just can not match.

Ditto, but with the SB-900 at £325 a pop, might as well get some cheap taiwan stuff and learn how to use it in full manual... :smt087

I'd love to get my grubby hands on a couple of those (heck, even the SB-800 would do!), but they're just too damn expensive :smt087

On the other hand, that LumoPro 120 is getting more and more interesting each day... 8-[

Oops, sorry about the derail there Viney. There's some brilliant advice here, just go to a decent camera shop, pick up a couple of models, see how they feel in your hand (this thing changes from model to model even within the same manufacturer, if you've got big hands then forget about the Nikon D5000 as it'll feel cramped, whereas the D90 will probably suit you just nicely... and stay away from the D300s, because you won't be able to put it down again) and rest assured that every camera in the class you're looking at will be more than decent. Canon and Nikon will give you a wide selection of accessories (read: lenses) to chose from when you feel the need to upgrade, Sony will probably give you bang for your buck, but probably limit your choice in the future (and it's got the Sony brand stamped all over), Pentax will be middle of the bunch while having more than satisfactory image quality.

We have to admit, there's something for everybody out there right now, and we're spoiled for choice.

BTW, don't know if anyone pointed you this way, but may be worth a read or three: www.dpreview.com .

[Filipe M.]

(...) Oh and everyone who shoots with Nikon smells of wee.(...)


I think both are very good makes and the reason I chose the Nikon was because my Dad had a Nikon and I can steal his lenses. Also my co-workers have various makes of Nikons and quite a selection of lenses.


Nope, they smell of nappies! :p

[Richie]

I bought a camera that took a good picture... ( notice I said Picture not photo..)
so as like my Father before me I bought a canon...

All I need to do now is to learn how to use it to it's full potential.



as they said in a crappy game show... "The Choice is yours..."