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

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

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....

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

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.

i'm still shopping for one of these too 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

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.