Canon or Nikon?

[Fong$tarr]

Originally Posted by verynecessary

nah, there's so much generalization that happens when you boil it down to one brand versus another.

really, if your priority is still photography, if you can't get decent photos out of a mid range dslr, it's not the camera's or lens's fault.
there really are very few "lemons" as far as dslrs go. each brand has it's own benefits and drawbacks.

True. True. I am sure any good photographer can take any high end DSLR and come out with some great photos. Still, Canon and Nikon offer the most versatilityin lenses and accessories compared to its predecessors. If I had the money, I would love to try all cameras and see which one is the best fit for me. ThePanasonic Lumix series seems very intriguing to me.

 

[rocafella kidd]

They're TOOL'S its how you use them..... personally im nikon.. i was canon die-hard till i did my research on both canon/nikon... and i was very sadwhen i had to get my nikon but it was a better overall camera for what i was looking for... but i did my research on specific cameras in my range and went withnikon.. been happy ever since.... and im staying Nikon as far as digital goes.. i currently use canon for film... either way switching cameras is very awkwardand i like the nikon feel... i would honestly suggest going and playing with the cameras and see which one YOU like. Both are great cameras... one photographerfriend constantly says canon is industry standard.. but a lot of pros shoot Nikon.. hell the photographer he assists and interns for uses Nikon ... buy whatyou like.. its a tool make it work

 

[ruleofthirds]

My sig says it all

 

[ddrombo]

Hey guys, I am really pretty green at photography. Going on a big trip to the West Coast in July and was looking into getting a DSLR. I've just startedlooking at the real low end ones, specifically the Nikon D3000. Coming strictly from point and shoot and always using the LCD for the viewfinder I just have afew questions. Is the live view that much of a hindrance? I've handled it and the viewfinder seems pretty functional to use. I've been seeing the D3000on sale w/the lens for about $450 some places and really wasn't looking to spend over $500. As much as I might get clowned on, I'm not to familiar withall camera shooting modes and the Guide mode that the D3000 offers actually is a selling point for me. Just interested to see what your opinions are and if Ishould be looking for anything else? or if you guys had any suggestions?

 

[ricekrispies420]

Go with nikon

 

[i3]

Originally Posted by Mr Fongstarr

Originally Posted by I3

Im keen to start on this, in my spare time.

Nikon D90 sounds good to me. But with all technology, everything keeps upgrading. Would this camera last me in the long run?

I am becoming a true believe that you will always upgrade and eventually get to buying a full frame camera. If this is a big hobby for you, I would say max that you'll have the camera for like 2 years until you get something better or get a D90 replacement when Nikon makes a better mid-range camera....which I have a feeling they will do soon. I can already see a D100 in the near future with a better ISO and video frame rate.

I dont think i'll be too into it, more of a spare time thing. So i'd rather pay for a camera that can last a good few years for now and after that seehow things go.

Besides, is there any good books or articles/websites that you can learn about the basics? Everyone must've started from somewhere right

 

[illuzionz23]

^^^
I would recommend a Nikon D5000 or a Canon T1i as a good entry SLR camera, plus both have HD recording capability.
I got my Nikon D40x in '07 (three years ago) and though its a bit old, I still love it and has never failed me.
If you end up going with Nikon, you can learn a lot from Nikonians.org

 

[Fong$tarr]

Originally Posted by I3

Originally Posted by Mr Fongstarr

I3 wrote:

---

Im keen to start on this, in my spare time.




Nikon D90 sounds good to me. But with all technology, everything keeps upgrading. Would this camera last me in the long run?

I am becoming a true believe that you will always upgrade and eventually get to buying a full frame camera. If this is a big hobby for you, I would say max
that you'll have the camera for like 2 years until you get something better or get a D90 replacement when Nikon makes a better mid-range camera....which I
have a feeling they will do soon. I can already see a D100 in the near future with a better ISO and video frame rate.

I dont think i'll be too into it, more of a spare time thing. So i'd rather pay for a camera that can last a good few years for now and after that see how things go.

Besides, is there any good books or articles/websites that you can learn about the basics? Everyone must've started from somewhere right


Rapsizzle put up some links on the official photography post.

I might be the only person to say this but photography to me kind of reminds me of the DJ thing. People would always tell me to start off with basic DJequipment and upgrade later but if I could do it all over again, I would just get some legit equipment cause in the long run, it just cost me more money. Ithink a lot of us on here have started with basic entry level DSLRs but upgraded to another one in about 1-2 years. I would have just skipped getting the entrylevel and would have got something more solid. I am sure people will tell you that is just wasting money too but the resale value on the higher end camerashold a little better then the entry level stuff. I had a Canon XTi and bought it for $700 and sold it for a little over half of what I paid for cause of allthe new stuff that came out. If I had a 40D, I am sure I would have still had that camera to this day since the 50D upgrade wasn't that much better.

Anyways....if you are going the Nikon route, I would suggest getting the D90 over the D5000. Since it seems like it will be getting replaced soon, I am sureyou can get a good deal on it. BHphotovidoe has a D90 body for $789 with free shipping. Get that body and the 35mm 1.8G and you should be straight.