Gibson Guitar Pack @ Best Buy $99.99
Digital cameras: Nikon D40 vs D90 vs Canon XSi vs?
D40
by Sharynf - 2/15/09 11:12 AM In reply to: Buy new by kalel33I will mostly take pictures of my family and friends but then also landscapes and buildings while traveling. What do you think of the 18-135? Will that cover most of my needs, or do I need to 18-200 to cover all of that? Also, the store nearby has the D60 the same price as the D40 and they seem to weigh the same. Isn't the D60 an upgrade? Sorry to ask so many questions
The D60 is just the upgraded version
by kalel33 - 2/15/09 11:32 AM In reply to: Buy new by kalel33You might be fine with 18-200mm lens, I don't what you're expectations are. I know that it either lens you named won't work well indoors without using the harsh flash of the camera. I would go to the store, take your own card, try out the lens on the camera, and then go home and see if you're happy with them. If I were doing it, I would try them out on a variety of focal ranges and aperture settings to see where the weak points are.
D60 is just an upgraded D40
by Sharynf - 2/15/09 12:24 PM In reply to: Nikon D90 or D40 by SharynfI would take your suggestion and go to the store and compare them all if only we had a store that had that selection. There is no one store here that has everything, one store has the lens, another has the body, none have the D80 (I was thinking that would be a good compromise for a while...) That is why I am trying to figure it out this way. The sales people naturally suggest what is in their store, although one told me the D80 was the best choice if I could find it, with the 18-200 lens, which is why I started out with that thought. If the 18-135 and the 18-200 both won't take good photos in low light without a flash, which combo will?
Look at the apertures
by kalel33 - 2/15/09 12:34 PM In reply to: D60 is just an upgraded D40 by SharynfYou can get these for zooms:
Tamron 17-50 F2.8
Sigma 18-50 F2.8
Nikon 17-55 F2.8
You could get the 18-200VR and then buy a prime lens for indoors that has a large aperture.
All good cameras, here is how to figure it out:
by jalywol1 - 12/5/08 6:30 PM In reply to: Nikon D40 vs D90 vs Canon XSi vs? by amygdala6You have already done some of the research, and that was to pick up the cameras and see how they feel and how comfortable you are with them.
I did the same a couple of years ago, and ended up with a Nikon, simply because it balanced better in my hands and the viewfinder worked better for me than the Canon. Both companies make good cameras; make your choice based on how they feel to work with for you.
Both companies have a wide variety of lenses available in all different price ranges. Don't make a decision to buy a camera because the store sells a kit with one with a specific lens. Find a place where you can buy the lens you want with the body you want, and don't get sidetracked by the "one size fits all" kit packages.
I personally would highly recommend the Nikon D90 with the basic Nikon 18-55VR (Vibration Reduction) lens. I have the non-VR version of that lens, and, while a lightweight and moderately plastic-y feeling lens, it takes great photos. Color balance and sharpness are very good, and I am quite pleased with it. Nikon also has a legendary 50mm lens for very little money (the 50mm 1.8) which is extremely sharp, and really worthwhile to get. They also make an inexpensive 55-200mm VR lens, that would give you long telephoto capability on a budget. I haven't used that one, but it gets surprisingly decent reviews also. Of course, the drawback to these lenses is that, while optically pretty good, they are not super fast lenses, and they do not feel like finely machined devices. However, they do a really nice job optically at a very resonable price.
In terms of media...I use the SanDisk Ultra media in mine...look for sales and you can get 2gb cards for quite a resonable price (no need to buy at the camera store; just look for sales at Staples or Best Buy or the like). Also, definitely get a card reader. It's just the easy and fast way to go.
One thing nobody has mentioned yet either: When working with photo files that are this large (Especially RAW format files), do not be surprised if you make your computer breathe heavily. I highly recommend having a computer with at least a dual-core processor to make your photos easy to work with. Also, unless you are already using a photo editing program like Photoshop, you will need to install one that gives you some ability to work with your photos and make adjustments to bring out the best in them. Both Nikon and Canon make photo editing programs that do much of what you need, but keep in mind that this is also an area that you may wish to explore more as you get used to working with the medium.
I hope this does not discourage you. All of this is actually a lot of fun to experiment with, and it is a hell of a lot more fun being able to see your photo experiments immediately than have to wait for film. You may be surprised at how much you enjoy all of the things you can do creatively with your photos that you never could before.
Hope this helps!
They are all good
by ozarktroutfisher - 12/5/08 7:25 PM In reply to: Nikon D40 vs D90 vs Canon XSi vs? by amygdala6A little time spent on the many camera related internet forums will quickly show that the Nikon vs Canon debate is no different than the Ford vs Chevy debate among truck owners. Both produce very good equipment and the "best" really depends upon your requirements.
I personally shoot Nikon and made that decision based on several variables that may not be important to you. I would usually recommend that a person stay within a line that they are already using but you can choose freely as you're essentially starting over.
Of the three cameras you mention, I would opt for the D90 with the 18-105 VR kit lens but I would look at some of the more advanced amateur Canon models to compare against it. The D40 and XSi are entry level cameras and of course the D90 is "better". I own pro level Nikon gear but just recommended the D90 to a close friend. He just got it in Monday night and we spent some time playing with it and I must say that it's an impressive camera for the price. Again not to say the equivalent Canon isn't.
To answer a few of your other questions, the D40 does not ship from Nikon in a kit with the 18-55 VR lens. Only the newer models do. VR / IS is not magic but helps tremendously in low light hand held shots of static objects. I would definitely get that feature.
One thing that you may or may not know. Unless you opt for the big boys from Canon or Nikon you'll get a sensor that is much smaller than a 35mm frame that you are used to. The effective focal length of a lens is derived by multiplying the actual focal length by the "crop factor". Nikon's crop factor is 1.5X and Canon's is usually 1.6X. So for Nikon the 18-105 VR effectively becomes a 27-157.5 mm lens. That's great for telephoto uses and not so great for wide angle work.
The bottom line is that you are on the right track to go and hold them and take pictures with each. I would recommend going to a real camera shop that you can hold an untethered product to get the real feel for the camera.
Choices, choices, choices...
by forkboy - 12/5/08 7:56 PM In reply to: Nikon D40 vs D90 vs Canon XSi vs? by amygdala6I myself went through the long and laborious process of researching dSLRs last year before my purchase of the Canon 40D in December 2007. I'm not recommending it, or Canon for that matter, as either Canon or Nikon will provide you with years of fine picture taking equipment. The 40D was the right decision for me, but may not be such for you.
It would seem that you need to better define your needs and budget. The entry level consumer dSLRs (Canon Rebel series, Nikon D40 & D60) offer a host of compromises when compared to the entry level prosumer options (think Canon 40D and 50D and the Nikon D80 and D90). However, the entry level consumer dSLRs are less expensive, smaller in size and weight (which may be good for you if you are average sized - I'm 6'4" and find them too small for my hands). Clearly the issue of budget should have a major impact upon which general line you should be looking through: either the consumer or prosumer lines.
I have to disagree with some of the other postings in regards to which camera company does this better or that better. It is true that Nikon and Canon images may look a bit different straight off the sensor. But the truth is that each brand sets up their cameras a bit differently and that anyone could take one from each manufacturer and tweak the various settings until their respective output matched. Nikon...Canon...the differences are so small or inconsequential as to be a non-starter issue wise as far as my opinion goes.
Yes, almost all or all of these cameras will come with diopters, but do they offer enough adjustment for your eyesight?
Regarding VR and IS: yes, it does make a difference, but only at the telephoto end, where it is most effective. Some of my Canon lenses include IS (I have the kit 17-85mm, the 70-200mm f/4 and 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6) and I make good use of it in the field, especially when shooting birds, insects and the like. It can be the difference between getting the shot and getting a bunch of blur. It's worth the investment IF you are going to be shooting moving subjects, otherwise it's not necessary and you can save yourself some money on lenses.
For what it is worth, the 10 months I spent researching my choices led me to the following conclusion: either company will make you happy as long as you buy the right camera for your needs (meaning consumer, prosumer, professional). Both firms offer plenty of great (and not so great) lenses, flashes and other accessories.
You ask about other makes/models and there I'm not certain I can help you so much. I didn't bother to look with any real intent at other companies only because I was looking at the big picture: a camera system. You know....camera body, lenses, flashes, software, etc. I think venturing out into the wilds of Sony, Olympus, Samsung, Pentax, etc. is warranted as far as research is concerned, but I ultimately felt more comfortable with names that have been around forever and will be around forever.
Finally, why not plug my 40D....My previous camera was a film-based 35mm Nikon N65. I wanted a Nikon dSLR. I was hot and bothered by the D80 and desired to own it. When I began the process of setting aside money for its eventual purchase I also began looking at other options, but always came back to the D80. Then, in November 2007 the D300 came out and I was in love. Smitten. Completely and utterly. Suddenly the D80, an excellent camera even by today's standards, seemed small and old-fashioned. Problem was the D300 was $1800 without a lens and thus pushed outside of what I felt was prudent for this particular purchase. But now the D80 didn't seem all that 'cool' any longer and by chance I asked what would be the best alternative for me through Canon. While the 40D certainly isn't in the same league as the D300 it was, out the door with the kit lens, only $1,600. And, truth be told, it felt better in my hand than either the D80 (too small) or the lovely D300. For me the Canon 40D felt right. Everything fell to the appropriate finger even more so than the D300. So, after 10 or so months of thinking I was going to buy a Nikon D80, and then briefly entertaining the idea of the D300, I walked out with a Canon 40D.
And for you....seeing how you are already a Canon owner, why jump ship now?
Best of luck making a decision and whatever you do.....enjoy taking lots of pictures with your new camera!
shopping
by amygdala6 - 12/6/08 7:01 AM In reply to: Choices, choices, choices... by forkboyThanks for the replies; hearing from others who have gone through this process is very helpful. A few clarifications: having sold my old reliable AE-1 and lenses, I am starting over in terms of equipment. I 5'8", not a big guy with big hands, but "feel" and having controls in ergonomically appropriate positions matters a lot to me.
After going to Best Buy where all the cameras were connected to various cables and brackets, I made a somewhat pointless visit to a camera store. The store had a Nikon D40 in stock but not a D90 or anything similar. No Canon 40D either, but there was a broken 30D body. When I put that in my hand it felt really comfy because of the sculpted corner where the shutter button is. There was also the "Rear Command dial" and "Multi-controller joystick" on the back of the body. I have no idea how user friendly these gizmos are; if possible I like to look at my subject through the viewfinder while making adjustments. Any opinions on these controls are welcome. The D40 and Canon XSi felt about the same in terms of size -- kind of small.
It looks possible to get a refurbished Nikon D40x body and 18-200mm VR lens for $1000-1200. A new Nikon D90 and 18-105mm VR lens kit is $1100-1200.
I like the idea of carrying as few lenses as possible. That seems more likely with the Nikon 18-105mm or 18-200mm lens than the Canon 17-85mm lens.
The Canon 40D feels more comfortable to handle, but
by Kiddpeat - 12/6/08 7:59 AM In reply to: shopping by amygdala6you are still leaning to a Nikon? The 40D is an excellent camera, and the controls are quite intuitive. I don't look in Best Buy for cameras very much. I would look at Amazon.com or B&H Photo and Video. These are both online stores.
It seems that you really want a Nikon, so go with a Nikon.
another visit
by amygdala6 - 12/6/08 2:32 PM In reply to: The Canon 40D feels more comfortable to handle, but by KiddpeatI went to another camera store -- in a mall (ack) -- today. No Canon 40D cameras, but I played a bit with the Nikon D40 and D90. The D90's bigger size definitely felt more comfortable in my hand than the D40. Changing ISO, shutter speed, and aperture manually all seemed easy to do. Didn't quite figure out how to manually override the AF when in AF mode (maybe this isn't possible or even ever needed).
I need to find a store with Canons.
Yes, I do price comparisons on Amazon.
30D, etc.
by forkboy - 12/6/08 1:00 PM In reply to: shopping by amygdala6The 30D should feel very similar to the 40D in that I do not recall there being any material changes in design.
Sorry the other shop didn't have the cameras on hand - sounds odd, but maybe with the holidays upon us their stock is flying off the shelves?
The joystick and command dial are simply means by which to move through the various menus. They work just fine, but I'm confident the Nikon system (as exhibited on the D80, D90 and D300) are fine too. Again, it's maybe a matter of personal preference which feels more right, but either will do everything you need.
Canon recently announced it's own 18-200mm all purpose lens and is priced similarly to that offered by Nikon. So if you really want to par down the lenses to one all purpose one, you can now look at Canon as well as Nikon. I have no personal experience with either because I find both to offer a few too many compromises in image quality for my own personal taste. But that's just me.
If it helps you in your research the web site http://www.dpreview.com is a very nice site from England that has reviews on all of these cameras, including the more recent Nikon D90. I won't say it's the only site out there, but it is one I have come to use in my own research for equipment and I haven't felt that I've been steered wrong yet. There is also another web site that I enjoy for lens reviews at http://www.photozone.de (it is in English). I feel as positive about it as I do the dpreview site.
still undecided
by amygdala6 - 12/7/08 6:59 PM In reply to: 30D, etc. by forkboyAnyone know what accessories, if any, come with:
- the Nikon D90 body and 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 G AF-S DX VR lens kit supplied by Amazon for $1140?
- the Canon D40 body listed by Amazon ($840) and the EF 17-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens supplied by DBRoth ($430) [total of ~ $1280 with shipping]
I don't want to think I'm saving the price of a flash unit and find out that I still need to buy a card reader, extra battery, memory card, USB cable, or whatnot.
Also, does anyone have any opinions on durability and weather-proofing differences on these cameras? My former camera, the AE-1, went with me to Vietnam, Cambodia, Burma, etc. and I never had a problem with it, despite the humidity, heat, and accidentally banging it on things.
Of course, I could still buy a Nikon D40 kit that includes the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX and 55-200 mm F/4-5.6G ED AF-S DX VR lenses for ~ $600, or a refurbished D40x body and the 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED IF AF-S DX VR lens for about $1100.
This is so confusing. These camera companies sure are good at competing against each other.
talk to jump1127
by kalel33 - 12/7/08 10:39 PM In reply to: still undecided by amygdala6He lives in humid areas and could tell you, but I would say neither of those are weather sealed and you are dealing with electronics. Durability wise, both are made very well, but they do have limitations and are not built like the pro models.
You will find that there is not much to what comes with the cameras. You can transfer photos with the camera, but you will have to buy a card and I would suggest a card reader. Don't forget you will need to buy some photo processing software, and if you shoot landscapes then a nice tripod would be very helpful.
Am I crazy?
by amygdala6 - 12/8/08 6:52 AM In reply to: talk to jump1127 by kalel33This morning I came up with what I think might be a great idea: buy the Nikon D40 body + lens kit, the Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G VR lens, and the SB 400 flash for $1150. I then sell the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens for $100 on Ebay. I'll end up with a great lens with a monster range that I can use with another body should I outgrow the D40 in the future.
Is this crazy?
Not crazy at all...
by forkboy - 12/8/08 7:36 AM In reply to: Am I crazy? by amygdala6Not crazy at all. However, I wouldn't get excited about selling the kit lens online. I'm not certain there is much of a market for an inexpensive kit lens that comes on so many of these cameras.
Regarding your earlier question about weather sealing, the idea of weather sealing is really to keep out snow and light rain. These cameras are not sealed against the likes of dust and humidity. And unlike your older film-based 35mm camera, modern digitals, due to their being electronic, are much more susceptible to issues of humidity. That said, I haven't yet read of anyone having any real problems with this sort of thing. The best advice I've been given regarding such matters is that when you intend to move your camera from one "zone" to another (for example: an air conditioned house to the outside on a warm/hot summer day or a heated home to a wintry day of cold temperatures) you should plan ahead. Plan to place your equipment into a garbage back that you tie off and then place into the area you will be taking pictures and leave the camera equipment there for at least an hour. This allows the equipment to come up or down to temperature and will let any condensation that forms dissipate before you use the equipment.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
