CanonVs.Nikon


Status
Not open for further replies.

John E

New Member
Oct 5, 2008
92
0
0
#1
Hi, this is a classic question but I like to hear it out.

I am considering macro and bird photography and looking into DSLR, possibly Nikon D90 or Canon 450D or 50D etc. I am considering the brand first as the latter buy would have to stick to the same brand direction

I have not own any lense of the above but doing research before embark into any direction. Of course there are pro and cons for each but I like to hear it out from the forum before committed to the long "marriage" to any brand.

Thanks a lot.

Cheers,
John E :dunno::bigeyes::confused::)
 

Headshotzx

Senior Member
Dec 14, 2007
5,841
0
36
25
Punggol
#2
Canon vs Nikon

If you're interested in bird photography, 50D (or 40D / 30D) + 400mm f/5.6L is the cheapest and longest reaching option. Nikon has no cheap alternative for long lenses (not that I know of).

For macro, Nikon has a 105mm VR (vibration reduction) lens that allows to better handholding in less-than-ideal light for macro. However, Canon has a 100mm lens without IS (image stabilisation) that's cheaper. Macro should be done with tripod when and if possible, so a Benro / Yong Nuo tripod would be alright for you (as a beginner, unless you have deep pockets).

For everything else you're going to shoot (family, events etc), both cameras (D90 / 50D) are good and both have good lenses. The 50D might be better on the ISO side, but its subjective.

Canon has been dominating the high-iso low-noise sensor department for a while now (till the Nikon D3 / D300 came out). Their long lenses (perfect for birding and sports) have been the choice of many professionals for quite some time (Pre-2008 olympics, most of the lenses were white, which means they're Canon). Being the #1 brand for professionals for a while (1D2 and 1Ds2 was unbeatable for a while), Canon definitely seems to support their professional buyers more than the average hobbyist, with the Canon Professional Services (CPS) schemes and their awesome top-grade bodies, though their lower-end "perfect-for-hobbyists" models like the 450D and 50D do seem to be a good entry-point for newbies.

Nikon, on the other hand, took the spotlight with their D3 and D300 models when Canon made a big blunder on their top-grade 1D mark3 autofocus. However, for the entry-level cameras, they really toned down the features. Nikon D40/D40x/D60 don't have AF modules in their cameras, for example. Other than the D3 / D700, the high-ISO pictures on every Nikon camera can't really match Canon's 40D / 50D, though the D300 and D90 sure are catching up very quickly now.

For full-frame cameras, D3 has 12mp and 11fps full-frame shooting, while Canon's 1Ds mk3 has 21mp and 5fps shooting. To me (im probably wrong) Canon's full-frame seems to stress more on image quality than speed.

Cheers,
Zexun
 

Last edited:

obewan

New Member
Feb 11, 2005
1,877
0
0
obe.homedns.org
#3
Since you already know about the pro and con of each brand, ok let's not make this into a battle between the brands. Make it a fun one.
1 vote for Nikon since I'm using. ;p
All CS bros and sis let's vote and give this man a direction. :bsmilie:
 

a.c.e

New Member
Jul 27, 2007
239
0
0
#4
i vote for SONY ALPHA.
by the way, 50D on the other side, nikon will be D300 sony will be A700
so pls don't compare 50D to D90.
 

eosdigital

New Member
Feb 11, 2008
608
0
0
#5
Another countless Canikon thread! :bsmilie:
 

Headshotzx

Senior Member
Dec 14, 2007
5,841
0
36
25
Punggol
#7
i vote for SONY ALPHA.
by the way, 50D on the other side, nikon will be D300 sony will be A700
so pls don't compare 50D to D90.
Why is this? The D300 is a notch above the 50D with upgrade-able fps and when it came out, it used to cost 1k more than the 40D.

1 vote to close thread.
I don't see why a perfectly reasonable question would make you want the thread to be closed. The threadstarter clearly wants it to be an unbiased debate, and clearly there won't be a winner. It just needs to not start a flame war.
 

Last edited:

eosdigital

New Member
Feb 11, 2008
608
0
0
#8
I don't see why a perfectly reasonable question would make you want the thread to be closed. The threadstarter clearly wants it to be an unbiased debate, and clearly there won't be a winner. It just needs to not start a flame war.
I sense sour grapes :bsmilie:
 

Maxton

New Member
Jul 28, 2008
8
0
0
#9
i vote for SONY ALPHA.
by the way, 50D on the other side, nikon will be D300 sony will be A700
so pls don't compare 50D to D90.
The D90's IQ, function and features, low noise at High-ISO are all comparable to the 50D. D300 is way better than 50D - you shouldn't be comparing the 50D with the D300.
 

John E

New Member
Oct 5, 2008
92
0
0
#10
Didn't know that this is a sensitive old issue.

I scratched my head over weeks as newbie pondering over this question.

Hope don't close the tread and hope to see some good advice.

Thanks and cheers,

John E
 

longfish

New Member
Mar 15, 2004
507
0
0
Lentor
#11
There are countless of review articles on various models of C and N. Read them and evaluate the pros and cons yourself. Try them at shops or rent the cameras together with the lenses which meet your need to verify what you have read.

I support closing the thread.
 

Headshotzx

Senior Member
Dec 14, 2007
5,841
0
36
25
Punggol
#12
I sense sour grapes :bsmilie:
You do? *shrugs* I'm no Ferrari president ;)

On topic, I feel that Nikon camera bodies well, FEEL better in my hands. But i'm used to Canon already.

TS (threadstarter) should try out the Cameras at places like Cathay Photo / MS Color / John3:16 and see which one feels better in the hands. They can also advise you on which to purchase. Note that CP and best-denki / Courts / Harvey seem to always push the cameras that get them better commission, so watch out.
 

lightning

Senior Member
Sep 2, 2004
4,640
1
0
Punggol
victor.shutterbug.sg
#13
The D90's IQ, function and features, low noise at High-ISO are all comparable to the 50D. D300 is way better than 50D - you shouldn't be comparing the 50D with the D300.
There are no comparison....D300 price is way above 50D. Do research on the details that both camera can produce at the same ISO, especially at high ISO.
 

eosdigital

New Member
Feb 11, 2008
608
0
0
#14
You do? *shrugs* I'm no Ferrari president ;)
Spent some time pondering your reply, to see the message, but anyway, in case you get misunderstood, my sour grapes was referring to Simon who asked for the thread to be closed. ;) :bsmilie:
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,903
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
#15
Why is this? The D300 is a notch above the 50D with upgrade-able fps and when it came out, it used to cost 1k more than the 40D.



I don't see why a perfectly reasonable question would make you want the thread to be closed. The threadstarter clearly wants it to be an unbiased debate, and clearly there won't be a winner. It just needs to not start a flame war.
There won't be no unbiased debates on this subject, soon or later, it will become a flame war no matter what anyway.

To TS:

go and do a search on macro and bird photography, you will see photographers using all sorts of cameras. there is no such thing as which cameras is better, most of the time, is only the photographers make the camera looks bad.
 

DeSwitch

Senior Member
Oct 28, 2005
3,202
0
0
51
1.45N 103.83E
www.flickr.com
#16
Its really more on the skill of the man behind the camera. Here are some recent shots on the 2 subjects TS mentioned. Knowing my system let me take better photo. To me both C & N are good.


Bird shot today




Macro shot 2 months ago

 

CYRN

Senior Member
Nov 14, 2002
4,575
0
36
photoevangel.com
#17
For bird photography, first look at lens availability then ask which system. Without the appropriate lens, you can have 1D/D3 and you still cannot get a good bird shot.

Have you considered what lens you need and how much is their respective price? :think:

Do you want to shoot birds-in-flight? Then you need to ask around for the respective lenses AF speed (that has nothing to do with the cam's AF speed).
 

John E

New Member
Oct 5, 2008
92
0
0
#18
Good point to consider.

I am looking at 100mm macro lense or equivalent and also a 400 zoom. Any recommendation or comments.
 

John E

New Member
Oct 5, 2008
92
0
0
#19
Fab shots...this is what inspired me to take up macro and bird photography..Thanks for sharing
 

DeSwitch

Senior Member
Oct 28, 2005
3,202
0
0
51
1.45N 103.83E
www.flickr.com
#20
Minimum for birding is 400mm and believe me, you will never have enough reach even if you have 800mm. Ideally 600mm f4 is a good birding lens. You can start with canon 400f5.6L if you choose Canon system. Nikon's birding lens are more expensive but alternative 3rd party like Sigma are cheaper. Beside body and lens, you will need good tripod and Gimbal head. The last 2 items is the most important for a birder's setup.

For macro, cheap and good is the tamron 90mm. My shot above is by that lens with a 25mm tube.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom