if you have a budget of around 1.6-1.7k which one would you go for?
450D + tamron 17-50
or
d90
????????????????????????????
450D + tamron 17-50
or
d90
????????????????????????????
450d or d90?
- Thread starter kdirectorate
- Start date
- Status
Canon guy: 450D
Nikon guy: D90
Sony guy: A350
Olympus guy: E520
Pentax guy: K200D
And so on..
Are you deciding which to buy? Or are you just asking what others would buy given that amount?
If you have no idea which to buy, I would suggest you read up the reviews and try out the camera at the shops. And find out which would suit your shooting needs. All the cameras above are more than capable in their own right.
But at the end of the day, if you are just asking for opinions of others, it will simply remain as that. Opinion of others. You'll need to come up with your own in deciding which camera you want.
Good luck!
Nikon guy: D90
Sony guy: A350
Olympus guy: E520
Pentax guy: K200D
And so on..
Are you deciding which to buy? Or are you just asking what others would buy given that amount?
If you have no idea which to buy, I would suggest you read up the reviews and try out the camera at the shops. And find out which would suit your shooting needs. All the cameras above are more than capable in their own right.
But at the end of the day, if you are just asking for opinions of others, it will simply remain as that. Opinion of others. You'll need to come up with your own in deciding which camera you want.
Good luck!
Are you choosing between a Nikon system and Canon system ? Lens apart, which system you prefer ? It doesn't need to be D90, though seriously I won't compare 450D and D90.
Be comfortable with which system gives you the feature on the body. Lens comes later.
My 2 cents worth, I'm a Nikon D300 user and now a D3 user. Give me a D3/D300 + video capability, I choose the body without video. That's my opinion of course, some may beg to differ. I personally feels video and still should be separated. I haven't use a D90, but I did own a Sony DSC-H2 P&S with video capability. WHen you switch it on and look at the motion scene, you will ask yourself, "Do I want the motion which gives the audience a flow of events, or a still that depicts emotions in freeze time form. Really....it feels weird to me. But I guess Nikon is just keeping up with the consumer demand for video in camera. Much like camera in handphone. For me, I'm not a PRO photographer, but I am stubborn enough to feel camera should be a camera and video camcorder is a video camcorder. Let 2 different devices exhibit their own distinctive functionalities.
So back to your question, compare between 450D and D80 and decide you choice. I don't own both of them hence i cannot give much advice.
Lens wise, my another 2 cents worth. Get a decent lens if you are tight on budget and on hobby, if you are a PRO, get the best that makes u work les on post processing and make your client's money worth. If you are a rich fellow and willing to spend, you can spend like a PRO and use it for hobby.
I do own one of the good Nikon lens 70-200, but somehow my daily lens is an average 24-85 AF-D. Versatile, not that versatile compared to 18-200 for DX body. IQ definitely trash by 24-70 f/2.8. Distortion, plentiful. But who cares, at the end of the day, it's your composition that is going to make you outstanding among the others.
Some might ask, why I get a D3 if I care about composition instead of quality ? That's because I enjoy tripod-less, high ISO, low-light portrait. I reckon if I don't wanna get plentiful of noise, I better have a FX system which at the moment can offer me the near noiseless image.
Be comfortable with which system gives you the feature on the body. Lens comes later.
My 2 cents worth, I'm a Nikon D300 user and now a D3 user. Give me a D3/D300 + video capability, I choose the body without video. That's my opinion of course, some may beg to differ. I personally feels video and still should be separated. I haven't use a D90, but I did own a Sony DSC-H2 P&S with video capability. WHen you switch it on and look at the motion scene, you will ask yourself, "Do I want the motion which gives the audience a flow of events, or a still that depicts emotions in freeze time form. Really....it feels weird to me. But I guess Nikon is just keeping up with the consumer demand for video in camera. Much like camera in handphone. For me, I'm not a PRO photographer, but I am stubborn enough to feel camera should be a camera and video camcorder is a video camcorder. Let 2 different devices exhibit their own distinctive functionalities.
So back to your question, compare between 450D and D80 and decide you choice. I don't own both of them hence i cannot give much advice.
Lens wise, my another 2 cents worth. Get a decent lens if you are tight on budget and on hobby, if you are a PRO, get the best that makes u work les on post processing and make your client's money worth. If you are a rich fellow and willing to spend, you can spend like a PRO and use it for hobby.
I do own one of the good Nikon lens 70-200, but somehow my daily lens is an average 24-85 AF-D. Versatile, not that versatile compared to 18-200 for DX body. IQ definitely trash by 24-70 f/2.8. Distortion, plentiful. But who cares, at the end of the day, it's your composition that is going to make you outstanding among the others.
Some might ask, why I get a D3 if I care about composition instead of quality ? That's because I enjoy tripod-less, high ISO, low-light portrait. I reckon if I don't wanna get plentiful of noise, I better have a FX system which at the moment can offer me the near noiseless image.
If the video-recording features a major pull-factor for you, then by all means get the Nikon.
Otherwise, I think both the models are highly competent for a beginner :thumbsup:
well.. if only got a choice between canon and nikon body... and the budget of 1.7K.. which combo will you guys go for?
I think a more important question is what do you want to use the camera for?
There are lots of professional photographer out there using Nikon, Canon, Sony etc. They still take great pictures.
Beside camera, lots of other stuff you might need: specialised lens, flash, accessories etc.
Cheers
There are lots of professional photographer out there using Nikon, Canon, Sony etc. They still take great pictures.
Beside camera, lots of other stuff you might need: specialised lens, flash, accessories etc.
Cheers
Last edited:
haha i would go for the nikon, BECAUSE i started off on a nikon and am more familiar with it. you can't ask this question and get a good answer.
D90. No question about it. Given the fact the the original D70 was meant to compete with the 300D, the D90 today is drawing lots of comparisons to the Canon 50D, instead of the 450D. That I think is big compliement to the abilities of the D90. Plus the 18-105mmVR should be useful for beginners to start with.
Agree. Borrowing TS's thread , lazy to open more redundant thread.
Been saving and now came the new pets..
I would rather compare D90 to 40D at the moment as 50D looks too ex, above 2k for a newbie like me.
D90's movie mode is additional feature to me as bonus, rather than 50D i feels 40D is sufficient if I choose Canon group. Moreover, perhaps might just wait if 40D would reduce further..
At e moment, the things i like to find out from CSer are:
1) Nikon lens are ex than Canon's ?
2) Nikon lens mount are confusing to me..
3) Nikon's image processor and compare to Canon's, which better?
, lazy to open more redundant thread.Been saving and now came the new pets..
I would rather compare D90 to 40D at the moment as 50D looks too ex, above 2k for a newbie like me.
D90's movie mode is additional feature to me
as bonus, rather than 50D i feels 40D is sufficient if I choose Canon group. Moreover, perhaps might just wait if 40D would reduce further..At e moment, the things i like to find out from CSer are:
1) Nikon lens are ex than Canon's ?
2) Nikon lens mount are confusing to me..
3) Nikon's image processor and compare to Canon's, which better?
1. Depends on the lens. Check the pricelists in the Canon and Nikon forums.
2. What's confusing? They haven't changed it.
3. Both have strengths and weaknesses. Read reviews to compare. Most important processor is *you*.
obviously, like vonlichenstein, i'd say Nikon cos i'm very familiar with the Nikon system.
But if I were to start again? I'm still go for Nikon since the HD video recording feature's a real strong pull factor
Hmm I wonder if we have to do this kind of comparisons everytime a new cam is introduced? :bsmilie:
The D90 is a very able camera. I also want to get it, but no money. D90 is not a cheap camera, but it's capabilities and build will serve you very well. You should compare D90 with 40D. 450D to me is slightly too small, too p&s and too plasticky. Then again, D90 has a HD video recording function, it may not be that fair to compare it with 40D.
My suggestion, as always, is to go down to a shop and feel the cameras. See which one feels better in your hands.
1) This depends on which lens you're talking about. Most lenses from nikon and canon have different specs. You can't compare apple and pear right? Besides, there aren't many lenses which you can do direct comparison.
2) The mount hasn't change over the years. It has always been F-mount. Are you talking about the types and naming of the lenses that make it sound confusing to you?
3) Check out dpreview.com. They do unbiased review on cameras and the images taken. Cameras have their own strengths and weaknesses. But i think they are quite on par. Up to you to decide.
I started off with canon back then in the film age. Now all my digital cams are nikons.Agree. Borrowing TS's thread
Been saving and now came the new pets..
I would rather compare D90 to 40D at the moment as 50D looks too ex, above 2k for a newbie like me.
D90's movie mode is additional feature to me
At e moment, the things i like to find out from CSer are:
1) Nikon lens are ex than Canon's ?
2) Nikon lens mount are confusing to me..
3) Nikon's image processor and compare to Canon's, which better?
The D90 is a very able camera. I also want to get it, but no money. D90 is not a cheap camera, but it's capabilities and build will serve you very well. You should compare D90 with 40D. 450D to me is slightly too small, too p&s and too plasticky. Then again, D90 has a HD video recording function, it may not be that fair to compare it with 40D.
My suggestion, as always, is to go down to a shop and feel the cameras. See which one feels better in your hands.
1) This depends on which lens you're talking about. Most lenses from nikon and canon have different specs. You can't compare apple and pear right? Besides, there aren't many lenses which you can do direct comparison.
2) The mount hasn't change over the years. It has always been F-mount. Are you talking about the types and naming of the lenses that make it sound confusing to you?
3) Check out dpreview.com. They do unbiased review on cameras and the images taken. Cameras have their own strengths and weaknesses. But i think they are quite on par. Up to you to decide.
Last edited:
i kinda curious about IQ on both system... i know lens play a big part in the IQ... so does the body system?
so i was think if tamron with 450d will give better pic quality than d90 wif kit lens??
so i was think if tamron with 450d will give better pic quality than d90 wif kit lens??
The D90 kit lens is pretty good.... You can't compare like that.
Each body has different IQ characteristics. That's why reading reviews is a good idea.
I agree that u can't compare them that way. No doubt that the 450D with Tamron 17-50 sounds pretty good to me, but the 18-105mmVR on the D90 is arguably more useful if you are starting out, with a longer focal length to cover your photographic needs. You can always buy a Tamron 17-50 for Nikon too anytime in the future. If not... can wait a while longer for the Body only option for the D90...pair it up with a Tamron, then compare it with the Canon when u try them out at the shop.
Ok, yes same case, 450D way too small for me.
comparing 40D to D90 maybe slight unfair due to the video mode.
But in term of price range, both under $2k and within budget for me. Pardon me for not eyeing other brands.
opps my reply will be long, bear with me. Extracted from a review site:
Sorry but for the mths back, I'd been looking into Canon, thus I'm blurred over Nikon's lens and types. All I heard and a deep impression that people say Nikon cams had a compatibility issues with lens, old lens?
Anyway need to try out D90, Nikon showroom @ 80 Anson Road, Fuji Xerox Towers, #10-01/02? Any other locations like Canon had its convenient showroom in Vivo.
Does anyone knows which camera has a better Noise level at ISO at 1600 under low light. Have tried comparing couple of shorts of both these cameras in http://www.imaging-resource.com but still not sure which is better.
errr, your deep impression is a wrong impression. Nikon cameras can use ANY lenses it has produced in the past ____ (fill in the blank) years. their old AI lenses can be used on a D3,2,1,700,300,200,100,90,80,70,50,60,40 or any of their film SLRs. new lenses can ALSO be used on older cameras. its just the issue of AF and AF-S lenses, which i will leave someone else to explain because i'm working :bsmilie:
- Status
Similar threads
