canon vs nikon for basic digital camera?

xhugsnotdr

my last 2 digital camera's have been nikons, and i know everyone raves about them..but honestly..for me they haven't been that great. i've had my current one for almost 2 years now, and the picture quality comes out horrible now. i'm thinking about buying a new camera, and i was thinking about getting either this one: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8800577&type=product&id=1205538350143
or
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8740348&type=product&id=1202429848939

i know i put another nikon in there, but i've heard good things about that one from several people. i just want it for basic use and good quality pictures. help!

Answer
There is really no difference between similar levels of P&S cameras, so whether you use a Nikon, Canon, Casio, Pentax, Panasonic or Fujifilm, what is important is your technique .... not the camera

My guess is that there could be some issues ... 1) you are hand holding your camera at shutter speeds that are so slow that camera movement does not cause blurry images 2) assure that your cameras ISO is not set to "auto" ... as you know, shooting at high ISO's show a lot of noise, especially in the dark areas

Canon 7D vs. Nikon D300?

Alex

which one do you prefer the most and why ?
is 17MP really matter vs. 12 MP.

Answer
Canon EOS 7D 18 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3-inch LCD and 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Standard Zoom Lens.
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EOS-7D-28-135mm-Standard/dp/B002NEGTU6/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1260071382&sr=1-2&tag=commentglitte-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325

By any measure, the new Canon EOS 7D is a worthy successor to the EOS line of APS-C sensor DSLRs. I believe it finally levels the playing field for many Canon shooters envious of Nikon DXXX shooters.

I am an advanced amateur photographer who has owned the 20D for the last 5 years and will use it as a backup body now. With each Canon announcement of a successor to the XXD line of DSLRs, I was tempted to upgrade but resisted each time up until now. This was partly due to budgetary constraints, but I felt mostly that each new model was only an evolutionary modification rather than a revolutionary one. If there's one thing to keep in mind in this fast-moving world of DSLR photography, then it is that DSLR bodies come and go (and depreciate quickly in value, like most electronic goods) but excellent glass will nearly always be sound investments (high-quality lenses maintained in good condition may appreciate in value).

The 7D appears to be a game-changer for many Canon photo enthusiasts like myself who prefer or can only afford to shoot with an APS-C sensor body. Nikon shooters have had an excellent choice of a crop sensor body in the D100/D200/D300 (now D300s), but for Canon shooters, the top-of-the-line equivalent was trailing in the feature set department. Now most of the features that were absent in the Canon XXD body as compared with their main rival are present in the 7D.

Notable features:
- 18 MP APS-C CMOS sensor
- Dual DIGIC 4 processors (a first for a prosumer Canon DSLR)
- Maximum 8 fps frame rate
- Maximum ISO 12,800
- VF with 100% coverage and 1.0x magnification (a first for a Canon DSLR)
- 19-pt AF (all cross-type with f/5.6 or faster lenses)
- 63-zone metering system (measures focus, color, and luminance)
- On-demand grid lines in VF (a first for any Canon DSLR)
- Built-in electronic leveler in 2 planes (a first for any Canon DSLR)
- Built-in wireless flash trigger (a first for any Canon DSLR)
- HD video in 1080p (30/25/24 fps) and 720p (60/50 fps)

I have had the camera for over a week now. My initial impressions are mostly positive thus far. Additional thoughts in the form of updates will be forthcoming once I get an opportunity to capture more images under various conditions (indoors/low light, outdoors, action, etc.) and get my act together to type it up. So far, I believe that the IQ, VF, LCD monitor, and handling are all vast improvements over the 20D. Taking photos at high ISOs and achieving low noise captures is all the rage these days. I feel that random photos I've taken at ISO settings up to 1600 are completely usuable. In the past, I felt comfortable shooting with my 20D mostly south of ISO 400/800. I shall pixel peep some more and shoot at even higher ISOs to see where the happy medium for me shooting with the 7D lies. Tolerance for noise, I feel, is very subjective.


Limitations:
There is a steep learning curve with this camera. The 7D is packed with new features that I have yet to maximize to my advantage. Coming from a 20D rather than a more recent line of XXD body makes things even more challenging. A careful read of the user's manual is critical.

If ultimately low noise captures at high ISOs is most important to you, then a FF sensor body is the way to go rather than an APS-C sensor body. A larger pixel pitch that captures more light (at the expense of lower resolution) will help maintain low noise levels at very high ISOs. This is a key reason why the small-body FFs, such as the Nikon D700, Canon 5D/5DMkII, and Sony A900/A850, are so revered. Any of those cameras will likely outperform the 7D at high ISOs in terms of low noise captures. Moreover, they provide less DoF than APS-Cs at equivalent fields of view. However, the obvious downsides are their cost and need for big, heavy, and expensive glass.

The 7D should not be viewed as an HD camcorder replacement. Although useful to have and with slightly more shooting options as compared with the version currently offered in the 5DMkII, video capture in the 7D still suffers from lack of continuous AF. Unfortunately, the jello phenomenon (from rolling shutter) and monoaural sound (external stereo mic input is available, though) make for a less than harmonious package.

*** Please be aware that some information about potential problems with the initial batch of 7D bodies has surfaced on photography forums and elsewhere (including here on Amazon). They include difficulties with the new AF system (particularly in AI servo mode, though some users have had trouble in any AF mode) resulting in OOF photos, as well as ghosting (residual preceding images captured in subsequent images) under certain sho

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

canon vs nikon for basic digital camera?

xhugsnotdr

my last 2 digital camera's have been nikons, and i know everyone raves about them..but honestly..for me they haven't been that great. i've had my current one for almost 2 years now, and the picture quality comes out horrible now. i'm thinking about buying a new camera, and i was thinking about getting either this one: http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8800577&type=product&id=1205538350143
or
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8740348&type=product&id=1202429848939

i know i put another nikon in there, but i've heard good things about that one from several people. i just want it for basic use and good quality pictures. help!

Answer
There is really no difference between similar levels of P&S cameras, so whether you use a Nikon, Canon, Casio, Pentax, Panasonic or Fujifilm, what is important is your technique .... not the camera

My guess is that there could be some issues ... 1) you are hand holding your camera at shutter speeds that are so slow that camera movement does not cause blurry images 2) assure that your cameras ISO is not set to "auto" ... as you know, shooting at high ISO's show a lot of noise, especially in the dark areas

Canon 7D vs. Nikon D300?

Alex

which one do you prefer the most and why ?
is 17MP really matter vs. 12 MP.

Answer
Canon EOS 7D 18 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3-inch LCD and 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Standard Zoom Lens.
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EOS-7D-28-135mm-Standard/dp/B002NEGTU6/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1260071382&sr=1-2&tag=commentglitte-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325

By any measure, the new Canon EOS 7D is a worthy successor to the EOS line of APS-C sensor DSLRs. I believe it finally levels the playing field for many Canon shooters envious of Nikon DXXX shooters.

I am an advanced amateur photographer who has owned the 20D for the last 5 years and will use it as a backup body now. With each Canon announcement of a successor to the XXD line of DSLRs, I was tempted to upgrade but resisted each time up until now. This was partly due to budgetary constraints, but I felt mostly that each new model was only an evolutionary modification rather than a revolutionary one. If there's one thing to keep in mind in this fast-moving world of DSLR photography, then it is that DSLR bodies come and go (and depreciate quickly in value, like most electronic goods) but excellent glass will nearly always be sound investments (high-quality lenses maintained in good condition may appreciate in value).

The 7D appears to be a game-changer for many Canon photo enthusiasts like myself who prefer or can only afford to shoot with an APS-C sensor body. Nikon shooters have had an excellent choice of a crop sensor body in the D100/D200/D300 (now D300s), but for Canon shooters, the top-of-the-line equivalent was trailing in the feature set department. Now most of the features that were absent in the Canon XXD body as compared with their main rival are present in the 7D.

Notable features:
- 18 MP APS-C CMOS sensor
- Dual DIGIC 4 processors (a first for a prosumer Canon DSLR)
- Maximum 8 fps frame rate
- Maximum ISO 12,800
- VF with 100% coverage and 1.0x magnification (a first for a Canon DSLR)
- 19-pt AF (all cross-type with f/5.6 or faster lenses)
- 63-zone metering system (measures focus, color, and luminance)
- On-demand grid lines in VF (a first for any Canon DSLR)
- Built-in electronic leveler in 2 planes (a first for any Canon DSLR)
- Built-in wireless flash trigger (a first for any Canon DSLR)
- HD video in 1080p (30/25/24 fps) and 720p (60/50 fps)

I have had the camera for over a week now. My initial impressions are mostly positive thus far. Additional thoughts in the form of updates will be forthcoming once I get an opportunity to capture more images under various conditions (indoors/low light, outdoors, action, etc.) and get my act together to type it up. So far, I believe that the IQ, VF, LCD monitor, and handling are all vast improvements over the 20D. Taking photos at high ISOs and achieving low noise captures is all the rage these days. I feel that random photos I've taken at ISO settings up to 1600 are completely usuable. In the past, I felt comfortable shooting with my 20D mostly south of ISO 400/800. I shall pixel peep some more and shoot at even higher ISOs to see where the happy medium for me shooting with the 7D lies. Tolerance for noise, I feel, is very subjective.


Limitations:
There is a steep learning curve with this camera. The 7D is packed with new features that I have yet to maximize to my advantage. Coming from a 20D rather than a more recent line of XXD body makes things even more challenging. A careful read of the user's manual is critical.

If ultimately low noise captures at high ISOs is most important to you, then a FF sensor body is the way to go rather than an APS-C sensor body. A larger pixel pitch that captures more light (at the expense of lower resolution) will help maintain low noise levels at very high ISOs. This is a key reason why the small-body FFs, such as the Nikon D700, Canon 5D/5DMkII, and Sony A900/A850, are so revered. Any of those cameras will likely outperform the 7D at high ISOs in terms of low noise captures. Moreover, they provide less DoF than APS-Cs at equivalent fields of view. However, the obvious downsides are their cost and need for big, heavy, and expensive glass.

The 7D should not be viewed as an HD camcorder replacement. Although useful to have and with slightly more shooting options as compared with the version currently offered in the 5DMkII, video capture in the 7D still suffers from lack of continuous AF. Unfortunately, the jello phenomenon (from rolling shutter) and monoaural sound (external stereo mic input is available, though) make for a less than harmonious package.

*** Please be aware that some information about potential problems with the initial batch of 7D bodies has surfaced on photography forums and elsewhere (including here on Amazon). They include difficulties with the new AF system (particularly in AI servo mode, though some users have had trouble in any AF mode) resulting in OOF photos, as well as ghosting (residual preceding images captured in subsequent images) under certain sho

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

What type of camera would you suggest for me?

canon digital camera vs nikon image

x_moopy_x

Right now, I'm looking at Nikon and Canon SLR Digital camera's [like the Canon Rebel xti, for example]. I just want some outside opinions on the type of camera I should purchase.
I previously had a Minolta Maxxum5, but I want to "upgrade" to a digital.
I love to take photographs of landscape and scenery [my family travels to the Smokey Mountains in Tennessee very often], including old farm buildings, mountains, waterfalls, etc. I also take many pictures at live music shows, where the lighting can be very poor and there's a lot of action. Basically, i'm looking for an all around great camera.
Now, I'm not the richest person in the world either. I'm looking for a camera [body only] costing $600 or less.

If you could also guide me in the right direction as far as camera lenses, that would be great.

thanks a bunch.

Answer
If you have a couple of Minolta A-type mount lenses, you should look at the Sony Alpha-100 (A100) digital SLR, as this is the type of lens that the camera takes. The body alone is available at B&H Photo for $599. I'm not a HUGE fan of this camera, but it is one of the top 10 digital SLR's in the consumer market right now.

If you want to get away from your Minolta lenses or want to avoid Sony in the first place, the Nikon D40 and Canon Rebel XT are in your price range. They are the number 2 and 3 selling consumer SLR's right now. http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4341/top-selling-digital-slrs-for-may.html I have abias towards the Nikon way of doing things and I usualyl recommend the D40, but you mentioned the Rebel XTi, so I will mention the XT as it is in your price range.

Since you have some experience, you ought to go to a camera shop and play with both the D40 and the XT and see what you think. The way they feel in your hands will be the deciding factor. I have a stock comparison that I will include here, though.......

~~~~~~~~~~

Nikon D40 vs. Canon EOS 350D (Rebel XT)

This isn't exactly what you asked for, but perhaps you will find it helpful in making your decision. I have never used a Canon EOS 350D, so I can't actually compare the cameras, but I favor the D40 because it has a spotmeter and the 350D doesn't. Although the D40 seems small, it is practically the exact same size as the 350D.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos350d%2Cnikon_d40&show=all

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page17.asp
tells us that the Canon 350D meter calibration is off by about 1/3 of a stop. This would not really present any problems, except that it suggests "something" to me about the quality, since the Nikon and Pentax are dead on.

Scroll on down the page for image comparisons. The D40 is clearly sharper and shows less noise at all ISO settings.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page18.asp shows us that both handle shadows equally, but the D40 clips the highlights by about 1/3 of a stop.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page21.asp shows a side-by-side of studio images. The 8 MP of the Canon 350D at least put the camera on equal footing with the Nikon D40 for image quality, but you have to take note that the Rebel XT is shot at ISO 100 and the Nikon is shot at it lowest setting of ISO 200. I think the Canon images may look a little better, but we know from the prior page that under equal lighting levels, the Canon will start to break up before the Nikon.

The reviewer says, "While it is possible to pick areas of the image which lend some credence to the EOS 350D's 34% pixel count advantage it's clear that the average observer would not notice these differences and that you would need a very large output size for any of them to become visible."

Check this out...

http://dpreview-img.fotki.com/gallery/canoneos350d_samples1/originals/img_4068-raw-dpp.jpg is taken by the Canon 350D with a 17 mm focal length at f/6.3, 1/80th of a second, ISO 400 using RAW.

http://dpreview-img.fotki.com/gallery/nikond40_samples/originals/dsc_1206.jpg is taken with the Nikon D40 with an 18 mm focal length at f/4.5, 1/80th of a second, ISO 400 using jpeg.

The point of focus for the Canon photo is a bit deeper than it is for the Nikon, but even having 8MP and using RAW and a smaller aperture, I think the Canon image breaks up a lot more than the Nikon. You can barely make out the features on the face of the gentleman in the background. Is this the camera or the superiority of the Nikon 17-55 lens, which so many of us here praise???

Okay, I've made my stance clear. I like the Nikon D40 better than the Canon EOS 350D, so here's my general review of the D40.

The Nikon D40 is a great little camera, very easy to use and quite reasonably priced. It has a few "consumer friendly" totally automatic modes that make it very easy to use, but still offers total photographic control when you are ready to take charge. It will get you in the Nikon family which is a great place to be. If you buy accessories and lenses, you will be able to use everything on any Nikon that you might upgrade to later on.

Check out Nikon's "Picturetown" promotion, where they handed out 200 D40's in Georgetown, SC. http://www.stunningnikon.com/picturetown/

Here are a few reviews, in case you have not read them yet. Be sure to note that they are several pages long and some of the reviews also have some sample images that you can look at.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_reviews/nikon_d40.html
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/3756/camera-test-nikon-d40.html
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40/d40-recommendations.htm

I hate to see people slam the camera because it can't autofocus with older Nikon lenses. It is true that there is a "slight problem" with older Nikon lenses not autofocusing on the D40, but if you do not own a bag full of older lenses, it is not going to be a problem. It is barely a problem anyhow. If you check www.nikonusa.com for "AF-S" lenses, which are ALL 100% compatible with the D40, you will find 23 lenses, including 7 "VR" (vibration Reduction) lenses and one true macro lens with "VR". There are another 25-plus lenses in the current catalog that provide all functions except autofocus as well as many (possibly dozens) "out of print" lenses that will work just as well. In addition, although these lens will not autofocus, most of them will still give focus confirmation. From the D40 manual: "If the lens has a maximum aperture of f/5.6 of faster, the viewfinder focus indicator can be used to confirm whether the portion of the subject in the selected focus area is in focus. After positioning the subject in the active focus area, press the shutter release button halfway and rotate the lens focusing ring until the in-focus indicator is displayed." (See http://www.members.aol.com/swf08302/nikonafs.txt for a list of AF-S lenses.)

The D40 only has 3 autofocus zones arranged horizontally at the center, 9 o'clock and 3 o'clock positions. This might be considered a limitation, but realistically, most people will find this perfectly adequate, especially if you are moving up from a point and shoot with only a center zone.

You can get the D40 with the 18-55 kit lens at B&H Photo available through Yahoo! Shopping or at 1-800-622-4987) for $525 (June 2007). Add a Lexar Platinum (60X speed) card for $25 or 2 GB for $35. Or - get the D40 with 18-135 lens and 1 GB Lexar card for $750. They also have used D40's from $475.

And yet... clearly these are both very good cameras. What it all comes down to is which one YOU feel better about. Go to a camera shop and pick them up and see.

~~~~~~~~~~

What digital camera would you recommend?

aetherboxx

I'm looking for a decent digital camera to use primarily for shooting flower arrangements against white backgrounds. Quality and focus are the major concerns here as most of the work will be closeup/macro. A good zoom lens and SLR are a plus for general purpose shooting. What camera(s) would you recommend in the under $600 price range?

Answer
I recommend to anyone seriously contemplating the purchase of a new digital SLR camera to consider these two primary questions:
1. How much money do you have to spend???? $500.? $800.? $1,500.?
2. What level of photography do you aspire to "progress to" in the coming years ? (i.e. basic beginner, intermediate, or professional/business use).
For most beginners to intermediates I usually suggest one of these two manufacturers: Canon vs Nikon

1. Canon EOS Rebel model XSi. (Also known as the Canon 450D in Britain) The "kit" package comes with an 18-55mm zoom lens. The camera has pop-up flash, 12.2 Megapixels, and shutter speeds up to 1/4000th, 100-1,600 ISO sensitivity, 7 auto exposure Scene modes, PLUS Shutter Priority, Aperture Priority and Programmed Exposure Modes and Manual. It also has a 3 inch LCD screen, 3.5 frames continuous per second max., 9 point AF system, Live View Functioning and the ability to record photos in 3, 6 or 12 Megapixels PLUS numerous other great features found only on more expensive cameras. Wal-Mart is also selling them now for about $799. Sam's Club also has them for $729. I also think that Amazon dot com has them for around $650.

I bought one of these 6 months ago and use it as my "back up" camera. I absolutely love it. I have gotten some fantastic photos with it and cannot praise it enough. I routinely enlarge my photos to make 8x10's and 11x14 size enlargements with no noticeable distortion or loss of detail in the pictures.

2. Nikon D-90: If you prefer to use Nikon equipment I strongly recommend the Nikon D-90 which has 12.3 Megapixels, 3 inch monitor with Live View, 200-3,200 ISO sensitivity, 11 point AF system with Face Priority, 4.5 frames per second in continuous mode, 5 advanced Scene modes for auto exposure plus Shutter Priority, Aperture Priority, Programmed Auto plus Manual. The D-90 sells for around $900-950. (Body ONLY. The 18-55mm lens cost an additional $150.-175.) Typically, Nikon equipment is slightly more expensive than Canon equipment, but (having owned both Nikon and Canon cameras), I have seldom noticed BETTER quality results using Nikon equipment.

You might also consider the Nikon D-40 ($499) kit that comes with the 18-55mm lens. Another great choice is the Nikon D-60 kit ($649) which also comes with the 18-55mm lens. All of these Nikon's can be found at Best Buy or Amazon dot com for a very low price.

These selections are probably the best choices for any beginner to intermediate skill level, offering the most lenses and other accessories, dealers and places to purchase. Both manufacturers have a good selection of macro lenses, which is just what you need for taking close up photos of flowers.

I strongly recommend that ALL beginners buy a good book on digital photography AND take a class or two from a Vocational school or Community Education Center in your area.
You can learn more about the technical specifications of each of these two cameras at these websites:

http://www.usa.canon.com
http://www.nikonusa.com

Good Luck

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

I am shopping to replace my broken Digital camera. What FEATURES should be my focus?

canon digital camera vs nikon image

chasvanblo

The Fuji-Digital camera I bought from a travelling-merchant, years ago has finally given out. - It no longer powers-up. :-( I used it to take a few Final pic's of my nephew's newly-arrived son a few days ago, so I do have some .jpeg's in it that I really want to take out.
I am shopping to replace this digital camera with one with even more and better features - for a reasonable price.
Beginning my browsing at Wally World, I find a few models of cameras to consider.
How VERSATILE is the standard Aim-and-shoot-type of Digital camera vs. the model that comes with interchangeable lenses (like it's earlier version of the 35mm film camera)?

The Models and prices range from a CANON @$79.00
to a FUJIFILM @$119.00
to a SONY @$119.00
to a NIKON@$149.00

I am not a PROFESSIONAL Photographer by any means. - I want an easy-to-operate unit that will allow me to edit my .jpegs on-the-spot, easily upload to my desktop terminal to post to my FB Wall and attach to misc. E-mails and will allow me to take an occasional live video with sound-recording.

What can be my shopping-options?
I live on a VERY-TIGHT BUDGET, so price is very important.
Placing a PRICE-LIMIT on my shopping, I will go as high as $150 for a GOOD QUALITY Digital camera with more features (I hope to be able to Edit my images inside this camera as well as setting the other options %Aperature, F-stop, Automatic-Focus, Repeating shots, etc.)
I am REALLY GOING AFTER THIS NEW CAMERA, planning to buy it soon.

Comparing the TYPES of Digital cameras (Fixed-focus vs. Interchangeable-lenses) which type of digital camera offers a better deal, is more versatile and is more durable (I hope to travel with this camera)?

Answer
The Canon A810 is an easy to use budget compact camera. Works amazing, easy to use. It takes high quality HD videos, focuses well, not painfully slow. If don't expect manual features or anything professional get it

What type of camera would you suggest for me?

x_moopy_x

Right now, I'm looking at Nikon and Canon SLR Digital camera's [like the Canon Rebel xti, for example]. I just want some outside opinions on the type of camera I should purchase.
I previously had a Minolta Maxxum5, but I want to "upgrade" to a digital.
I love to take photographs of landscape and scenery [my family travels to the Smokey Mountains in Tennessee very often], including old farm buildings, mountains, waterfalls, etc. I also take many pictures at live music shows, where the lighting can be very poor and there's a lot of action. Basically, i'm looking for an all around great camera.
Now, I'm not the richest person in the world either. I'm looking for a camera [body only] costing $600 or less.

If you could also guide me in the right direction as far as camera lenses, that would be great.

thanks a bunch.

Answer
If you have a couple of Minolta A-type mount lenses, you should look at the Sony Alpha-100 (A100) digital SLR, as this is the type of lens that the camera takes. The body alone is available at B&H Photo for $599. I'm not a HUGE fan of this camera, but it is one of the top 10 digital SLR's in the consumer market right now.

If you want to get away from your Minolta lenses or want to avoid Sony in the first place, the Nikon D40 and Canon Rebel XT are in your price range. They are the number 2 and 3 selling consumer SLR's right now. http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/4341/top-selling-digital-slrs-for-may.html I have abias towards the Nikon way of doing things and I usualyl recommend the D40, but you mentioned the Rebel XTi, so I will mention the XT as it is in your price range.

Since you have some experience, you ought to go to a camera shop and play with both the D40 and the XT and see what you think. The way they feel in your hands will be the deciding factor. I have a stock comparison that I will include here, though.......

~~~~~~~~~~

Nikon D40 vs. Canon EOS 350D (Rebel XT)

This isn't exactly what you asked for, but perhaps you will find it helpful in making your decision. I have never used a Canon EOS 350D, so I can't actually compare the cameras, but I favor the D40 because it has a spotmeter and the 350D doesn't. Although the D40 seems small, it is practically the exact same size as the 350D.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos350d%2Cnikon_d40&show=all

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page17.asp
tells us that the Canon 350D meter calibration is off by about 1/3 of a stop. This would not really present any problems, except that it suggests "something" to me about the quality, since the Nikon and Pentax are dead on.

Scroll on down the page for image comparisons. The D40 is clearly sharper and shows less noise at all ISO settings.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page18.asp shows us that both handle shadows equally, but the D40 clips the highlights by about 1/3 of a stop.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/page21.asp shows a side-by-side of studio images. The 8 MP of the Canon 350D at least put the camera on equal footing with the Nikon D40 for image quality, but you have to take note that the Rebel XT is shot at ISO 100 and the Nikon is shot at it lowest setting of ISO 200. I think the Canon images may look a little better, but we know from the prior page that under equal lighting levels, the Canon will start to break up before the Nikon.

The reviewer says, "While it is possible to pick areas of the image which lend some credence to the EOS 350D's 34% pixel count advantage it's clear that the average observer would not notice these differences and that you would need a very large output size for any of them to become visible."

Check this out...

http://dpreview-img.fotki.com/gallery/canoneos350d_samples1/originals/img_4068-raw-dpp.jpg is taken by the Canon 350D with a 17 mm focal length at f/6.3, 1/80th of a second, ISO 400 using RAW.

http://dpreview-img.fotki.com/gallery/nikond40_samples/originals/dsc_1206.jpg is taken with the Nikon D40 with an 18 mm focal length at f/4.5, 1/80th of a second, ISO 400 using jpeg.

The point of focus for the Canon photo is a bit deeper than it is for the Nikon, but even having 8MP and using RAW and a smaller aperture, I think the Canon image breaks up a lot more than the Nikon. You can barely make out the features on the face of the gentleman in the background. Is this the camera or the superiority of the Nikon 17-55 lens, which so many of us here praise???

Okay, I've made my stance clear. I like the Nikon D40 better than the Canon EOS 350D, so here's my general review of the D40.

The Nikon D40 is a great little camera, very easy to use and quite reasonably priced. It has a few "consumer friendly" totally automatic modes that make it very easy to use, but still offers total photographic control when you are ready to take charge. It will get you in the Nikon family which is a great place to be. If you buy accessories and lenses, you will be able to use everything on any Nikon that you might upgrade to later on.

Check out Nikon's "Picturetown" promotion, where they handed out 200 D40's in Georgetown, SC. http://www.stunningnikon.com/picturetown/

Here are a few reviews, in case you have not read them yet. Be sure to note that they are several pages long and some of the reviews also have some sample images that you can look at.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40/
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_reviews/nikon_d40.html
http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/3756/camera-test-nikon-d40.html
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40/d40-recommendations.htm

I hate to see people slam the camera because it can't autofocus with older Nikon lenses. It is true that there is a "slight problem" with older Nikon lenses not autofocusing on the D40, but if you do not own a bag full of older lenses, it is not going to be a problem. It is barely a problem anyhow. If you check www.nikonusa.com for "AF-S" lenses, which are ALL 100% compatible with the D40, you will find 23 lenses, including 7 "VR" (vibration Reduction) lenses and one true macro lens with "VR". There are another 25-plus lenses in the current catalog that provide all functions except autofocus as well as many (possibly dozens) "out of print" lenses that will work just as well. In addition, although these lens will not autofocus, most of them will still give focus confirmation. From the D40 manual: "If the lens has a maximum aperture of f/5.6 of faster, the viewfinder focus indicator can be used to confirm whether the portion of the subject in the selected focus area is in focus. After positioning the subject in the active focus area, press the shutter release button halfway and rotate the lens focusing ring until the in-focus indicator is displayed." (See http://www.members.aol.com/swf08302/nikonafs.txt for a list of AF-S lenses.)

The D40 only has 3 autofocus zones arranged horizontally at the center, 9 o'clock and 3 o'clock positions. This might be considered a limitation, but realistically, most people will find this perfectly adequate, especially if you are moving up from a point and shoot with only a center zone.

You can get the D40 with the 18-55 kit lens at B&H Photo available through Yahoo! Shopping or at 1-800-622-4987) for $525 (June 2007). Add a Lexar Platinum (60X speed) card for $25 or 2 GB for $35. Or - get the D40 with 18-135 lens and 1 GB Lexar card for $750. They also have used D40's from $475.

And yet... clearly these are both very good cameras. What it all comes down to is which one YOU feel better about. Go to a camera shop and pick them up and see.

~~~~~~~~~~

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Should I get a Nikon or a Cannon digital camera?

canon digital camera vs nikon image

carolinexo

I recently acquired some money and I have slightly less than $600 left and wanted to spend all or some of it on a high quality digital camera.

I have taken only one photography class and I'm 17 so I'm obviously not a professional. But I am interested in photography and I wanted to get a camera that would be a good fit for a beginner but that is of high quality.

After doing a little research I found that Canon and Nikon are basically the same in terms of quality but I'm also looking for one under $600. So my question is, which brand should I look more into if I'm looking for a relatively cheap digital camera for beginners, that can produce high quality photos with good color rendition regardless of the lighting? Or in other words, which of cameras' flash will provide the most accurate exposure? I will mostly be photographing animals(so that includes action and close-ups), scenery, and people.

Thanks in advance :)

Answer
That budget will get you an entry level (or possibly just up) DSLR from either Nikon or Canon. Which one you choose depends on your personal preference (it's like Coke vs Pepsi).

Go into a camera store & ask to try both out - get the 'feel' of both, menu choices, button positions etc & buy whichever one is right for you - you can't go wrong with either, they are both good cameras.

A DSLR is really the only way to go if you are serious about photography & are willing to put the time & effort into learning about the basics of photography (ISO, aperture & shutter speed). Although the entry level models have Scene & Auto modes, you won't get the best out of the camera if you just stick to these.

Start off with the kit lens (usually 18-55mm) & only buy other lenses as & when you need them. As for flash, all the models (except pro cameras) have an inbuilt flash with TTL (auto) flash metering which in most cases is ok. However, on camera flash is harsh & frontal - if you eventually branch into more professional work, you will almost certainly need an external speedlight flash.

What is a good compact point an shoot digital camera, for casual photography?

polecat094

I know that digital cameras have come down in price over the years, an have many more features on them . I am still using a Nikon cool pix 4300, I would like it to have a digital zoom on it of at least 18 or 20 with nice features that would not cost me as much as a digital SLR. Am I asking something impossible during this holiday season in the 200 to 250 price range. An to update my aging Nikon which was a good camera in it's time, but I am sure there is something with more bells an whistles on the market in 2012.

Answer
The popular ones are canon powershot, sony cybershot and the nikon coolpix.

You should be looking at optical zoom rather than digital zoom.

http://www.camerapoll.com/canon-powershot-vs-sony-cybershot-vs-nikon-coolpix.html

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Is the Fujifilm XF1 12 megapixel a good camera?

canon digital camera vs nikon image

Sam

I am looking to buy a really good digital camera and my budget is about $400 max! I have been looking at Nikon and Canon cameras and I like them, but I spotted this fujifilm camera and I think it is raely cool! If anyone can tell me if it is a good camera to own, that would be great. Also, if you have any advice on camera buying I would like that too. I am new to photography and have no idea what to look for in a good camera. Thank you!

Answer
The Fujifilm has many advantages over my favorite high end compact, the Nikon P7100. Look over the advantages.
http://snapsort.com/compare/Fujifilm-XF1-vs-Nikon-P7100

Can you help me pick a digital camera?

art

i'm deciding to get a digital camera and i don't know what do get so if you can help me out in telling me which ones are good or something like that. website would help.

Answer
Art, you have three excellent answers above me. I agree with them all, but in a minute I will post my standard answer just because it has a couple of links in it and because I want to reinforce what the others have already said.

Koko, that is a GREAT list that is comprehensive and I hope you have saved it for future use. I'd take a look at the 700IS vs. the 800 IS, though. Personally, I think you get a lot more bang for the buck with the 700IS. Ask Petra about this or just look at the charts side-by-side on dpreview.com. (haha) And double haha - I wonder why there are no Nikon SLR's on your list??? :-)

Mir, you have given all the details for why the 540 is a good choice for a new user. I've recommended this to my mother-in-law, my brother, and an employee and they are all tickled pink with the camera.

Big Jim, your thought process is right on the mark. You are showing that this is not such a simple question and the buyer has a lot to consider before just going out to a store and saying that they want a digital camera.

Tee, you'll see below that I also agree with you. The A630 or A640 will not soon be outgrown by anyone.

My stock answer:

Start with the budget. This may seem backwards, but it's not. You can find a decent camera to match any amount of money you want to spend.

Next, find a friend who will help you learn how to use the camera. This "friend" could even be the clerk in your local photo shop. By "photo shop," I mean an actual camera shop or at least a camera department where the sales staff only deals with cameras and not dishwashers, too. Buy the camera that your friend recommends so that they will be able to teach you how to use it.

After you know what you are doing and are ready for your next camera - and this will come sooner than you think - you will be in a position to make your own choice.

If you have some vague ideas about price and desired features, go to http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare.asp and see what they select for you.

Choose the best one by deciding what you want to do, how much you want to learn, how far you want to progress and how much you want to spend.

http://www.dcresource.com/buyersguide/
http://www.dcresource.com/buyersguide/shopping_tips.shtml
http://www.steves-digicams.com/best_cameras.html
http://www.popphoto.com/buyingguide/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sidebyside.asp

http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/3148/top-5-digital-cameras-for-august.html

Consumer Reports for November 2006 has ranked the Canon Powershot A620 as the best compact digital camera. It is becoming almost a legend for longevity at the top of various consumer lists. This model has been replaced by the A630, which I would expect to be just as popular. The A640 is virtually the same, but it is 10 MP instead of 8 MP (A630) or 7 MP (A620).

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_a620%2Ccanon_a630%2Ccanon_a640&show=all

If you want to trim the budget a little, the Canon Powershot A540 is a great choice. I have recommended it in my own family several times. You will still need a decent memory card as discussed above, though.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Canon/canon_a540.asp
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2006_reviews/a540.html

Powered by Yahoo! Answers