Dan Clark Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 At the moment I'm using a Fuji S5500 P&S, and having discovered that photography is mighty fun, I wanted to upgrade to a DSLR.The two ones I'm looking at are the Canon 400d (Rebel XTi) and the Nikon D70s, as their both in my price range of £500 thereabouts.I'm going into town tomorrow to try them out and see how they feel, but I want to know whats the difference between the two. I shoot mostly action photos (BMX, mountain bike, skateboard etc) and night time photos, because I love the way you can manipulate light.This is what I sorta understand/think at the momentCanonBetter high ISO performanceCheaper lenses/more options for extra lensesMore megapixelsDust removal systemNikonBetter build quality (metal over plastic?)Better kit lensLarger in sizeFaster start up timeI'm probably wrong with a few of those, and I'm sure that theres a million more points. Anyone want to offer any advice?Preferably with reasons, not just "Get Canon cos Nikon are shit" or "Get Nikon cos Canon users are fags" etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-Stop Junkie Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Bottom line - you can't go wrong with either. Which ever one you prefer to use will be good. Nikon seems to have a better flash system, but the Canon Anti-dust system could be an absolute god send in the future. Tamron and Sigma both make Nikon and Canon fit lenses. The Canon kit lens is often unfairly criticised, but it is a cheap lens.Keep in mind that most of the time, a couple of those points won't make much difference most of the time. The Canon may have better high ISO performance, but it's not amazingly better. Certainly most of the time you won't see a huge difference, same with the start up time. I've been trying a 30D, and the startup time on that is so small I wouldn't notice if it was any better.Go and try both, see what you prefer, then buy the Canon, you know it makes sense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Campbell Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 One thing I notice about the two which could be quite an influence is the Flash sync, the nikon is 1/500 and the canon is 1/200. This means when using fill flash for action shots you're more likely too get a nice crisp blur-less photo with the nikon.I wouldn't say faster start up time should be a problem, with my canon the start up - shoot time is so quick i can't see why i'd need it to be much faster!Better high ISO performance could be useful as you like night photos but i guess you'll be using a tripod a lot of the time so you may find you never really use the high ISO.I have a 350D and I love it but i've not properly tried a Nikon so i can't really give a great comparison. I'll just say that i love the 350 and the 400 has some extra features to add to the spec sheet.This of course all could be trampled on by one of the far more experianced guys but it's my 2 cents!Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-Stop Junkie Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 One thing I notice about the two which could be quite an influence is the Flash sync, the nikon is 1/500 and the canon is 1/200. This means when using fill flash for action shots you're more likely too get a nice crisp blur-less photo with the nikon.Doesn't stop me syncing upto 1/4000th on my Canon ) All you need is a decent flashgun with high sync mode. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haz Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 I have a very similar choice as both are nice bodies, but I'm interested in Lenses.My dad has a set of Image Stabilised lenses, both Canon, on his 20D, I think they are 28-135mm and 70-300mm.They are both nice as it means you can quite often get away without the tripod, but I was just wondering if it was just a Canon thing, or whether or not I might find one for a the Nikon, with similar focal lengths? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Campbell Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 Doesn't stop me syncing upto 1/4000th on my Canon ) All you need is a decent flashgun with high sync mode. until such time as I/he can afford/justify buying a flash gun!Which flash do you run Chris? I was looking into them as I do get a little tired of the 1/200 sync and it would be nice if it was a little more versatile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-Stop Junkie Posted November 16, 2006 Report Share Posted November 16, 2006 I have a very similar choice as both are nice bodies, but I'm interested in Lenses.My dad has a set of Image Stabilised lenses, both Canon, on his 20D, I think they are 28-135mm and 70-300mm.They are both nice as it means you can quite often get away without the tripod, but I was just wondering if it was just a Canon thing, or whether or not I might find one for a the Nikon, with similar focal lengths?I don't like the 28-135, it's a pretty slow lens, and not great for a crop body. I also think that IS on a lens of that length is only of limited use, given the increase in cost, weight and the extra glass elements in the lens which affect image quality. Nikon's VR - their version of IS - is only used on the longer lenses, and they have a 70-300 with VR coming soon.Thing is that IS will give you two stops advantage reliabley, but if you're at the max aperture then all you can do is slow the shutter speed which isn't always a good thing. 1/120th of a second may freeze action enough, but 1/30th certainly won't.Don't get me wrong, there are times with IS is useful, but most of the time I'd rather push the ISO two stops and keep the shutter speeds up!Which flash do you run Chris? I was looking into them as I do get a little tired of the 1/200 sync and it would be nice if it was a little more versatile.I use a pair of 550EXs, though I think it's been discontinued for the 580EX. The Sigma EF 500 DG-Super has a high speed too though I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Clark Posted November 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 After trying them out in Jessops today the Nikon feels a lot nicer. It jut seems when you hold it your fingers are already in the right places, whereas it wasn't really with the Canon.Also the Canon's tiny, I knew they were smaller but I swear its even smaller than my Fuji. Nikon fitted in your hand so much nicer.So far Nikons ahead, but its hard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomm Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 I think the start-up time is pretty irrelevant. It's something to do with the dust-removal system isn't it? I.e. the Canon takes half a second every time you turn it on to get rid of the dust? But actually you can set it to only shake the dust off when you want, making the start-up time really quick. Something like that anyway. But anyway, as F-stop said, both are good. If you like the feel of the Nikon I'd probably go for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tipus Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 Get a batterygrip I've got it on my 350d, feels well nice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Papasnap Maher Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 I got a nikon d100 going cheap..if u wanna get it fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Clark Posted November 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 Explain Joseph, although it's unlikely I'm interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_P Posted November 17, 2006 Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 (edited) It's certinatley a constant debate over Canon and Nikon. Not many people mention the others like Olympus, Pentax, Samsung, Sony.....quite simply because there not as good IMO (and many others). I'm gonna contradict myself here by saying that I actually love the Olympus system. The new tiny E400 is based around something like a OM2 with a long slim body with hardly any grip, feels like poop but my god the photos and lenses are really good!! Had the Olympus rep in at work tuther day so he bought a load of kit with him, including a 7-14mm, the end glass was actually like a ball, crazy wideangle!! Just the general system works really well, even the lenses screw on REALLY smooth, so much nicer than any others but thats kinda not important Also the dust system is really good, mate uses an older E1 at banger racing etc and gets it totally covered in shat, not had a dust problem in the 2/3 years hes had it which is pretty impressive. Also if it gets covered in sand and mud can just wash it under the tap because it's fully weather sealed Also the sensor shakes when you turn it on as aposed to the Sony jobbie that shakes the sensor when you turn it off, so you gotta turn it on, then off, then on again, bit odd. Anyway, sorry gone a bit off topic. If your looking for a D70s you'll be pretty lucky to find one as it's been replaced with the D80, unless a few shops have em kicking about still. As you said the Nikon definatley definatley handles better, the grip on the D80 is so deep it just fits perfectly! The Canon is a bit plastic like and smaller, but then again it is cheaper. You really have to weigh up the pros and cons but as has been said, your not gonna go wrong with either! Both big brand names and you'll be pleased with either choice. Just gotta think if it's worth spending the extra on the Nikon, because what are you gonna spend the extra money on? Drink, cheap schlaggs and the like? Gonna be kicking yourself 6 months down the line and saying wish I bought the Nikon or whatever!? Start up time is something like 0.2 and 0.3 seconds so don't worry about that at all. Canons self cleaning sensor may be handy and haven't heard too much about it but apperntly you've got to use some software as part of the cleaning? Anyway let us know how you get on PS. get the nikon Edited November 17, 2006 by Rob_P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Clark Posted November 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2006 Sony's high ISO performance is hilarious though. I know people slate Nikon for it, but its not really that far off Canon, from what I've seen of the new Sony under high ISO conditions it's in a whole different league.I've heard fairly good stories about the Pentax too actually, maybe someone will manage to rival the big two? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.