Which one you like more ?
After reading their spec... and seeing the sample photos....
http://dcuser.net/nikon/nikon-d90-announcement.html
http://dcuser.net/canon/canon-eos-50d-announcement.html
I think D90 is better....
Pogue takes it for a spin at http://video.on.nytimes.com/?fr_story=74fb53b38202407685818a51932e2baa36bff397
Pretty amazing about the lenses.
about the D90. The video was VERY soft and lacking in resolution. It has about the same number of pixels as my ancient Canon X1s, and that fully explains the deficiencies in the video image it produces. I'm puzzled as to why Nikon chose to produce such poor resoltion when the camera has so much more resolution available from its sensor. By contrast, my newest Canon HD camera has almost 10 times the resolution of the D90.
I think the 50D is competing a higher level than the D90.
I too think the 50D is competing at a higher level.
They are both nice cameras, but most people I know that do a lot of photograpy can't understand why you would want a video mode in a DSLR.
From what I have read, you can only get about 30 sec of video before the camera gets too hot and the video shuts down.
I have a 40D for stills plus a old JVC GR-D30U Digital video camera and they both work excellent for what they were intended to do, so I leave it at that.
My personal opinion if I were buying a new camera and had to start from scratch I would be the Canon 50D without question.
D90 still has reached Nikon's limit, that's the techonology. 12MP is becoming outdated toward the end of 2008, considering a FOV DSLR camera. In addition to that, Nikon D90 still gets stuck with the 12-color-bit depth why not moving to 14-bit instead ? Perhaps, the noise issue? For the video camera, why don't you buy a video camera instead of a DSLR ?
Canon 50D has acheived beyond what D300, D90's big brother, performed. Consider 15MP, on the full frame scale is approximately around 30MP something; I'd say that even the mighty Canon 1Ds mark III, released 8 months ago, has been beated by that. With the pricing of 50D around $1,299, even the new upcoming Nikon D400 will have a hard time for that range. The price of new Canon 50D will be even below what Nikon D300 is selling now. With the new digic 4, some pros who previously tested the camera in July mentioned that the focusing speed is as fast as 1D mark III.
Nikon D90 and Canon 50D aren't in the same comparing category at all.
Hopefully soon actual unbiased reviews will tell the truth. I'm tired of all the speculation, but keep reading it and speculating myself.
I have to agree with those that say these cameras are going after different market segments and are not really comparable. They both have pros and cons when compared, but it really is about what you are looking for in a camera.
The D90 looks to be attempting to be the "next logical step" for those people that have cut their teeth on compact digital cameras and are "shocked" to find that when they go to move to a dSLR that their "expensive" camera doesn't have some of the functionality of their little compact camera. It attracts the same market space of people that bought Nikon because "that is what Ashton shoots."
The 50D is targets more to the mid-market. Those people that would probably prefer to shoot a 5D Mark II or a 1-D series camera, but can't justify (or afford) to go to that live... a true mid-market.
I know the war has seemingly heated up recently between Nikon and Canon, especially since the release of the D3, D300 and the like, but not everything is a straight up comparison.
As a user of both the D90 and D50 I would say the D90 wins hands down. Though it don't have the metal body it seems to out beat the canon in every way.
| Forum legend: | |
| Locked thread | |
| Moderator | |
![]() |
CNET staff |
![]() |
Samsung staff |
| Norton Authorized Support team | |
| AVG staff | |
| Windows Outreach team | |
![]() |
Dell staff |
| Intel staff | |