Digital cameras forum: CANON OR NIKON DSLR PLEASE HELP

Hey kiddpeat the person is looking for advice give the cameras thier
pros & cons not just thier good cameras.........
Do you have any of these cameras?

You should go ahead and get the Canon 30D or Nikon D80.
Since that is really what you wanted originally.

Regarding sample photos you find on the internet.

There are some very good examples of photography to be found.
I enjoy looking at good photography, just to learn.
I download the best photos and made a DVD slide show from them, just for my own enjoyment and education.

If your first photos do not match the ones you have seen, don't get discouraged. Such photos are 30 percent equipment and 70 percent photographer. The more you learn about photography, the better your photos will be. And remember, people only publish their best shots.
For every outstanding photo, there are at least 20 that are just OK.

Here is a link to a photo that I found on the internet:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v159/randol9p9/DogTub.jpg

It shows that an outstanding photo is sometimes just the subject matter.
And any photo that tells a story will be a keeper.

Enjoy your new camera.

Now....don't ask which is better....the Nikon or the Canon.
That will just start a fight.
Canon owners against Nikon owners.
Pick the one you like.

...
..
.

I thought you made an excellent point regarding the fact that when you select a Nikon or Canon camera you're actually buying into their lens systems as well. I recently purchased a Canon EOS 30D and can attest to the fact that even though I purchased a kit with two lenses, I've already begun to look at upgrading my lenses and most of the ones I am condidering cost nearly as much as my original kit. In this regard I read an interesting article which took the position that until camera bodies become more "upgradeable", i.e., come with an ability to increase resolution, shutter speeds, automatic programming etc., it would be wise to emphasize building up your lense inventory while buying the LEAST EXPENSIVE camera body that met your needs. (With the expectation that, ultimately, manufacturers will start producing more upgradable camera bodies.)

One additional comment regarding the original poster's question. Given the fact that she has no experience, perhaps a less expensive DSLR would be more appropriate. There are many other DSLRs that cost far less, which can provide excellent results.

Your Rebel XTi is a very nice camera. I've seen many great shots , performed by that camera . Please visit www.photo.net . Get to know the camera more. I'm sure that soon you'll be quite happy with the camera. Enjoy shooting.

Not knowing much about photography, or dSLR's, I purchased a camera for my wife for Christmas. I read lots of reviews, and decided on the Canon Rebel XT (not XTi). The reason for this, was that the reviews were spectacular on the XT, but not so great on the XTi.

I considered the Nikons as well, which are great cameras -- but decided on the Canon because of its feature-set and ease of use in Auto mode.

We change very few settings on the XT, and it takes great pictures for us all the time (maybe not technically great, but we like them).

The burst rate on the XT is fast enough to burn up a 1GB card in no time at all, so don't get too concerned with that unless you really,really need to shoot stuff at high speed.

Check the reviews on the XT, because according to the ones I read -- reviewers site problems with the XTi even though its the "next generation".

Good luck!

I won't bother to interject with my preference as it's quite irrelevant. I would have thought a person moving from the Canon A620 to any of the entry-level dSLRs would have been quite happy with the results. However, if you aren't I would suggest looking at more reviews of your current camera, the D80 and the Canon and Nikon models above these. I have found that www.dpreview.com offers extensive reviews, but I do not know what, if any, connection they may have to the camera manufacturers.

An alternative would also be to check out Consumer Reports online. If a membership is required to read the relevant reviews for entry-level dSLRs (I'm already a member so I don't know if the information is available to the general public or just members) I would seriously consider spending the money to join. I think it's $20 and that seems like a pittance compared to the cost of the products you are looking at.

Both the Canon and Nikon cameras you are considering are cameras made with the professional photographer in mind. By your own account you are a long way from that status. For you to buy one of those would be much like a brand new driver buying a Lamborghini; way too much for you. Why not take a look at the new Nikon D40, designed with folks like you in mind?

I agree with other posters in that the Rebel XTi is more than enough to give you fantastic quality images with a little trial and error on your part. You should remember several things:

1. The most important part of using a camera is figuring out how to make it work. In the new digital cameras, the software or menu system is responsible for that. Just like a Nokia cell phone has different software than a Motorola (and to many people, it's superior), each camera comany programs their menus differently. You ought to spend half an hour in a camera store and look at the menus on the display, and see which are easier to understand.

2. What it feels like in your hands affects how well you control it. I'm sure with the competitive pressures of the camera market, Canon and Nikon are very close to each other in feel. The new pro-sumer cameras are amazingly light and comfortable compared to their analog cousins. But some controls are on the front, some are on the top, and some can only be accessed with the menus. Decide what you want the camera to do beyond point-and-shoot, and see how easy it is to set that task.

3. You cannot decide the quality of a camera by online pictures. This should be real obvious, but let's go into a little detail. First, each image you see on a web site was cherry-picked for whatever reason the poster decided was important. Second, the viewer (you) has no idea what compression was used to publish the image, but it was certainly degraded in it's journey from lens to internet. Third, all computer monitors look different, from soft to sharp, and from true colors to anything but; and the web creator has no control over your display. For example, at the most basic level, pictures shot by Macintosh users and published unaltered from their editing look way too dark to PC users because PC monitors display 20% darker than Apple monitors do by default. Finally, your camera captures up to 500% more image detail than a web page might display (if it's a 10-megapixel), but web publishers must "downsample" the images so they aren't 48" wide on a web page. This means you can throw away up to 90% of your picture detail and still have a nice image for the web. Look in a magazine to see how photos actually reproduce, not a web site.

4. Don't compress the image. There are settings both for image size (in pixels) and compression. Set your camera for both maximum image size and least compression, either TIFF or RAW. Once you make your images smaller and start to compress them, detail gets lost as the camera, not you, throws away good data. Wait until you get the photos into your computer before you edit the size of your pics.

I think you'll find that the only reason your pictures aren't award-winning with the Digital Rebel is because you aren't taking award-winning pictures yet! Brilliant photos are due to the time and care of the photographer, not the gear on his shoulder. You can break a plate with a hammer...or build a beautiful house with it. The difference isn't the tool, but the user. Save your money and get to know your tool.

Fact is, I took some amazing photos on trips in the last few years with a camera I ultimately decided was pretty junky...an 8-year-old Nikon Coolpix 950. It didn't have changeable lenses, had only 3X optical zoom, no aperture control and images were only 2 megapixels...basically a really heavy pro-level point-and-shoot. Nonetheless I shot some pictures that I'd be proud to publish in a magazine.

By the way, I now have a Nikon D50, a great camera that costs less than $600 these days. It replaces my $2000 F3, and I have no regrets. I haven't learned how to maximize it's performance yet either, but the more I learn the better I'll get.

As stated before I use the Nikon D-80 and love it. One thing you need to consider is the feel of the camera in your hand. If it feels good you will use it and shoot for longer periods. I have long finger and the Canon felt short and light to me. The Nikon also felt better balanced in my hand. Add a lense and I didn't have the control with the Canon that I did with the Nikon which will help with blur.

If your trial pics weren't pleasing to your eye ( colors not composition) then you might want to give Nikon a try, keeping in mind that you are also buying into a lense system as well as a camera. The Nikon offers a kit with the 18x135 lense which I found to be a good all round lense to start with. It gives you a wide angle with a fair amount of zoom.

As far as Learning the camera,try this it might help. As you read the instruction book follow with practice on the camera then pratice shooting with the settings or auto mode you have set. Give yourself time you will learn something each and every day you shoot or pratice.

Both Cameras take good pictures, There is the new Nikon D-40 which is more of a point and shoot with DSLR results if you find the others more than you want for now.

As a previous Nikon user I like the viewfinder placements and the menus access, plus they all work similar but since you are new to it all these may not matter.

As far as features go www.dpreview had great in depth review with pictures to view in the sample gallery. This is a good place to compare features as well as learn the pros and cons of each camera

Good luck with your search...