Newbie, help between Nikon D5100 and Canon 600D. I know my needs.

[Ezra Goh]

Ok I've never had anything other than a point-and-shoot. I'm going to NAFA to study dance so I'll be spending many days in the dance studios and around stage performances with ample photo-worthy moments. That's why I'm thinking of getting a DSLR.

In other words:
-Shooting indoors (Dance studio & Stage)
-Working with moving subjects
-Relatively close range (3-10m)
-Relatively low light/stage lights
-Taking videos occasionally

I've narrowed my choice down to the Nikon D5100 and the Canon 600D but I'm getting too many differing opinions on the two. Sooo I thought I'd throw it out here and get more opinions from seasoned users.

Reasons for Nikon D5100:
-Higher ISO (which I understand helps me capture moving people better)
-Less noise on high ISO (according to snapsort)
-More dynamic range (which means colours are nicer yes?)
-Faster FPS

Reasons for Canon 600D
-Images are softer and thus nicer for people shots
-In-built AF motor (hence cost savings on lenses in the long-run?)
-Better video function
-More user friendly for newbies to learn and start out with
-According to friends, based on experience it performs better in low light even though specs seem to favour the Nikon. ("Higher ISO does not necessarily means the pictures come out nicer")

Difference in size and weight are not really a consideration. And price isn't a large factor either. I don't mind shelling out a bit more for the Canon if it suits me better. According to snapsort there are tons more advantages the Nikon has but a friend (Nikon user) said that the rest are negligible and narrowed it down to these few. My other sources include snapsort, dpreview (sry can't post links. haven't been on for more than 30 days), the guys at John 3:16 and an assortment of friends who are Canon, Nikon and Sony Alpha users.

So any comments? Would love to hear any thoughts you guys have! =)

 

[Rashkae]

Reasons for Nikon D5100:
-Higher ISO (which I understand helps me capture moving people better) - same as basically all entry-level DSLRS
-Less noise on high ISO (according to snapsort) - barely noticeable
-More dynamic range (which means colours are nicer yes?) - no.
-Faster FPS - this can help

Reasons for Canon 600D
-Images are softer and thus nicer for people shots - not really once you resize anyway.
-In-built AF motor (hence cost savings on lenses in the long-run?) - maybe.
-Better video function - Nope... 600D video is quite basic.
-More user friendly for newbies to learn and start out with - all entry-level cameras are. In fact I find the Canon the least friendly.
-According to friends, based on experience it performs better in low light even though specs seem to favour the Nikon. ("Higher ISO does not necessarily means the pictures come out nicer") - not true.


Do you need AF in video? Consider that.

Have you actually tried holding these cameras for the ergonomics?

Do you need even higher FPS? If yes, skip these 2.

 

[rhino123]

Have you also consider other brands too? Pentax, Sony, Panasonic (m4/3), Olympus? All these also gave you very beautiful picture.

Actually for D5100 and 600D, I would think that their IQ is on par... with D5100 being slightly better in lowlight situation.

Actually you don't need very high ISO for catching people in motion, unless your environment is dark...

Go to the shop, try out these cameras and see which one suits you better... then get that one since cost is not much of an issue to you here.

 

[Ezra Goh]

Do you need AF in video? Consider that.

Have you actually tried holding these cameras for the ergonomics?

Do you need even higher FPS? If yes, skip these 2.

I thought bout the AF in video but people have said that the AF isn't important cos playing with the focus is more fun and gives more flexibility.

I've held both. The Canon sits a bit more nicely, though the Nikon felt more solid and I liked that the lens was tapered.

I've no idea how high an FPS I need really. This is just what I've gathered. I don't actually know how it applies in practice.

 

[daredevil123]

You get differing opinions mainly because it comes down to personal preferences between these 2 cameras. Strongly recommend you go try these cameras hands on.

 

[Ezra Goh]

Have you also consider other brands too? Pentax, Sony, Panasonic (m4/3), Olympus? All these also gave you very beautiful picture.

Actually for D5100 and 600D, I would think that their IQ is on par... with D5100 being slightly better in lowlight situation.

Actually you don't need very high ISO for catching people in motion, unless your environment is dark...

Go to the shop, try out these cameras and see which one suits you better... then get that one since cost is not much of an issue to you here.

Didn't really consider the other brands since almost everyone uses Nikon and Canon so I'd be able to get better help and I'll be able to borrow lenses and stuff?

I really can't tell much about the environment. What would you consider dark? Dance studio with spotlights? And for stage the theatre will be dark but the stage is lighted, though a friend wasn't too sure if the illumination works the same for eye and camera. Do you have any experience with stage photography?

I was at John 3:16 yesterday. I really couldn't tell the difference between the two very much. As in there was a slight difference in grip but I could get used to either I think.

 

[Rashkae]

I thought bout the AF in video but people have said that the AF isn't important cos playing with the focus is more fun and gives more flexibility.

That's the usual line from people who never had fast AF in video...

 

[rhino123]

I thought bout the AF in video but people have said that the AF isn't important cos playing with the focus is more fun and gives more flexibility.

I've held both. The Canon sits a bit more nicely, though the Nikon felt more solid and I liked that the lens was tapered.

I've no idea how high an FPS I need really. This is just what I've gathered. I don't actually know how it applies in practice.

Basically, depend on what is the subject of your shots. If it was more on fast moving actions like birding and sports, you might need higher FPS. And for really fast FPS, only the semi-pro to pro body (50D, 60D, 7D for Canon) and (D7000 and D300, D700) could give you that FPS. Other than that I don't see how well the rest of the entry level actually matters.

The main thing is, you must find yourself comfortable with which ever camera, the arrangement of their buttons, etc and the user interface. I find Canon pretty easy and straight forward (although Rashkae said that Canon is the least friendly).

 

[Rashkae]

And for really fast FPS, only the semi-pro to pro body (50D, 60D, 7D for Canon) and (D7000 and D300, D700) could give you that FPS.

Entry-level bodies from other brands have 7fps/10fps...

 

[dun.ask]

Which one is cheaper? from what i see, if you're really torn between the 2, just go by cost. Although for me, the in built AF motor for the 600D will make more sense if you're serious about photography and plan to upgrade and play with different lenses.

 

[Rashkae]

(although Rashkae said that Canon is the least friendly).

To me it was... This is just personal opinion mind you. I was especially annoyed with the location of the scroll wheel.

 

[Ezra Goh]

So basically, between the 2 there's nothing really significant that a new user like me would notice and I'd be happy with whichever I end up getting.

So get to the shop, see which one calls out to me more, and that's that. yes?

 

[Rashkae]

Didn't really consider the other brands since almost everyone uses Nikon and Canon so I'd be able to get better help and I'll be able to borrow lenses and stuff?

"Borrowing lenses" is the worst reason.... Not many will happily lend you their precious lenses...

 

[Ezra Goh]

Basically, depend on what is the subject of your shots. If it was more on fast moving actions like birding and sports, you might need higher FPS.

I got dancers running around, doing jumps, spins, rolls, flips and whatnot. So probably like sports. Is the 3.7 & 4fps for canon & nikon respectively enough?

 

[Cowseye]

Entry-level bodies from other brands have 7fps/10fps...

Only when shooting jpeg or also as fast when shooting raw?

 

[Ezra Goh]

"Borrowing lenses" is the worst reason.... Not many will happily lend you their precious lenses...

hahas yea saw that on the newbie help thread. Well.. my friends were the ones who gave that reason so I'm holding them to it. =P

 

[Rashkae]

Only when shooting jpeg or also as fast when shooting raw?

RAW too.

 

[kei1309]

High FPS? :bsmilie:

Credits to francisdcx

wanna know which camera? click this link:
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/threads/753826-Up-close-and-personal-with-Sony-Alpha-55-%28A55%29?highlight=francisdcx

 

[wmayeo]

Regardless of brands, both camera are quite matched at the entry DSLR level. So the next question when you purchased your cam, what lens do you need? The "dance studios and around stage performances" have varied lighting conditions, and I suppose mostly low light conditions and you need better lens than the kit lens to equip such situations.

Have you tried both camera bodies? How does it feel in your hands? Reviews are kinda subjective so best is to get down and play around in camera shops or Canon Showroom and Nikon Showroom.

 

[wmayeo]

Didn't really consider the other brands since almost everyone uses Nikon and Canon so I'd be able to get better help and I'll be able to borrow lenses and stuff?

I really can't tell much about the environment. What would you consider dark? Dance studio with spotlights? And for stage the theatre will be dark but the stage is lighted, though a friend wasn't too sure if the illumination works the same for eye and camera. Do you have any experience with stage photography?

Good that you can borrow lenses from friends, do you know which brand has more users among your friends? I had that point in mind when purchasing my camera too.