Canon 350 or Nikon D50

larrytucaz · Jul 22, 2005

drejc said:
And just handleing and working with D50 is much easier than
with 350D.

Durn right it is. The D50 WAY outdoes the 350D ergonomically and feel-wise. The DcResource.Com guy said so himself.

drejc said:
From all my pictures which i was taken i didn't notice any moire.
It could happen but it didn't yet. If it does PS is here and many
other SW which can handle this.

Moire was WAY overblown on the D70--just like so-called autofocusing problems on the 350D and 10D, banding on the 20D and 1D before it, soft JPEGs on the Nikon D100, etc.

But--beyond that--the DcResource.Com found no moire issue AT ALL on the D50.

To be fair, again, the 350D was given "highly recommended" by Phil and a similar high ranking by the others as well. It does apparently deliver great images and that is the main thing after all--and it does access the huge Canon system. It did get "highly recommended" and similar accolades elsewhere for a reason obviously.

It's just that, as a 300D user and someone who is sort of a Nikon fan at heart and who's handled the D50 and my own 300D, the 350D disappoints me in that regard. I can't fathom what in the world Canon was thinking having shooting parameters like WB, ISO, QUAL etc access the freaking color LCD menus. That's a point & shoot camera style of operation! Even my "crippled" 300D doesn't do that. And it's too freakin' small. It's an SLR, not a purse camera. If I wanted a purse camera I'd get the SD500 or the like. (In fact, I have a Powershot S50 for such purposes.)

--

LRH
http://www.pbase.com/larrytucaz

WBirch · Jul 22, 2005

What lenses do you own or intend to purchase?

Big decision if you haven't gone D-SLR yet. Once you chose
the dslr "make", you're 'stuck' because you have to buy the glass
and you'll invest money in those lenses that can't be used anywhere
else on other cams.

Go "hi-end point and shoot digital" to learn what you REALLY want.
You'll see what you want later on with a DSLR to make a decision.

Wayne.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wbirch/
==============================

telfer said:
Im looking to get a new Digital camera. At the moment I have an
older analogue (Film) Pentax MZ50 which has been great in the past.
the only thing is you never know what you,ve shot untill you get
them developed.

So Am interested in Digital camera with similar or better quality
than the MZ50. the two im looking at are the CAnon 350 and the
Nikon D50. what lenses aswell

Any feedback would be appreciated
Telfer

Daniella68313 · Jul 23, 2005

larrytucaz said:
You don't seem to have any lenses from Canon/Nikon up already. So
you're open to them--or to Pentax, Konica/Minolta, Olympus as well
for that matter.

I shoot the 300D, the precedessor of the 350. I shot Nikon in the
past, got the 300D because of a big price break I enjoyed getting
it (vs the D70).

I concur with the guy at DcResource.Com who prefers the D50 to the
350D. (Yes, I am posting here in the 300/350 and dare to say this.)
I find its "feel" to be of MUCH higher quality, I prefer its lower
level of dependence of the LCD menu system (even if via "shortcut"
buttons), its size is better to me (I think the 350D is too small
personally--the D50 is not huge but is "just right") and its
control layout in general is better to me.

That said, of course, you are asking here in the 300/350D forum
where many 350D owners exist and praise their camera. Phil Askey
did give it "Highly Recommended" for a reason, and you will
(understandably) hear lots of praise about it, so obviously it is a
camera with much to offer. I will admit--I like that it uses a
wired remote instead of a wireless. (Actually I think it will
accept a wireless too if that's your preference, it isn't mine.) I
do, also, like that its base ISO value is 100 vs the D50's 200.

The 6 vs 8 megapixel difference? Meaningless really. Either will
easily make poppin' 10x15s or 11x14s.

only meaningless to those who are stuck at 6mp. I am glad to use 8mp vs 6mp because the difference in detail is visible and there is more room for cropping. yes I see the difference in prints at 8 x 10.

larrytucaz said:
Ultimately--of course--the "system" is what counts. Check out what
lenses and accessories Canon/Nikon and others (Sigma, Tamron et al)
sell for each unit. Remember--a D-SLR is more than just about its
own body, but what you can add to it in a "system" as well.

--

LRH
http://www.pbase.com/larrytucaz

--

Please do not start new thread for private message to me but send them to me via email instead! thanks.

Daniella68313 · Jul 23, 2005

larrytucaz said:
DocDAT wrote:
Even IF that is true, Nikon is so close on their tails the
difference is meaningless.

meaningless to you maybe, but if you are into wildlife, all you can say is "vive la différence!" because there is a hudge one.

Either N or C easily beats anyone else

larrytucaz said:
running away, they both offer way more than anyone could ask for.

well..that is again a matter of your personal opinion, not facts. For exemple..I could ask for a 400mm F5.6 lens. Taht's what I use.

larrytucaz said:
They so outdo Pentax, Konica/Minolta and Olympus with sheer volume
and diversity that this astouding gap between N/C and everyone else
is far more relevant than the splitting-hair difference between the
two of them.

--

LRH
http://www.pbase.com/larrytucaz

--

Please do not start new thread for private message to me but send them to me via email instead! thanks.

telfer · Jul 23, 2005

thanks guys. I think the 350 sounds like the one to get. the lower noise is swaying me.

Ok wht lens should i get? the kit lense or something better?

regards
telf

Katania · Jul 23, 2005

I must warn you though: the WB presets for artificial light on the 350D are usually way off under normal circumstances.

You will need to use a custom white balance for night shots. But once you've got it set, it should work in most situations without having to create a new one each time.
During the day, I use auto white balance, during the night my custom WB.

If you shoot JPG, you just have to remember to change it or make sure you review your image after each first shot.

ohyva · Jul 23, 2005

larrytucaz said:
larrytucaz said:

...
I don't think anyone who use telezooms or who want to get close to
their subjects agree with you. 8 MP is more than 6 MP and more is
unarguably better when it's not accompanied by more noise but less.

Click to expand...

Phil Askey again disagrees, as does the DcResource.Com guy. In
fact, Phil said that the 20D--itself easily better than all of
these--wasn't different enough in resolution from the 10D it
replaced for that to be a reason for 10D owners to upgrade. He
implied as much regarding the 350D if you were a 300D user (as I
am) considering upgrading--the difference in 6 vs 8 wasn't a reason
to upgrade.

I'm not sure but perhaps we Canon users are just used to "too big" resolution" - the minimum resolution we have today in current Canon dSLRs. Nikon users seem to be quite content with 6MP (D70, D50) and even 4MP (D2H) cameras.

Just wondering why there are so many posts in Nikon forum by people raving after Nikon to give them 8MP (or even 10MP - the rumored D200)? The MPs should make no difference I have understood - and said by so many authorities in the net.

KK1979 · Jul 23, 2005

telfer said:
thanks guys. I think the 350 sounds like the one to get. the lower
noise is swaying me.

Ok wht lens should i get? the kit lense or something better?

regards
telf

Hi, i too own a MZ-50 before i switch to *istDS. Wonder what lense you have, and if you have nice prime lens, it would be a pity to sell off and switch system.. (of course, if you want to sell, let me know, I would consider getting from you if it fit into my range)

Back to selection, I bought *istDS for its design (fit my hands well), batteries, existing lense i had, large VF and LCD (of course, 350D and 50D later came with the same size LCD)

--
kk1979
Just love the Performance of *istDS
SMC-DA16-45mm, SMC-F50mm f1.7, SMC-FA28 f2.8
SMC-M135mm f3.5, Sigma 50mm f2.8 EX Macro,
Sigma 70-300
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/2863

ohyva · Jul 23, 2005

drejc said:
If Canon would make a ergonomic camera like D50 with all Canon
features (8mpix and cmos) then it would be winner for me, but in
this case i don't se much difference between 6m and 8m. And just
handleing and working with D50 is much easier than with 350D. And
in the end if you put decend lens on it there is not so much
difference in weight at all or in other words weight wasn't a big
problem for me on D50 when compare the cameras in the shop.

From all my pictures which i was taken i didn't notice any moire.
It could happen but it didn't yet. If it does PS is here and many
other SW which can handle this.

Any RAW processed images available yet for study?

D50 has implemented a "post process style" noise cancellation. This was clearly shown in the ColorFoto magazine D50 review (July-05 issue) where they measured the noise figures and the dynamic range of the pics generated by in-camera JPEG engine and those prosecced from RAW files using the Nikon tools. The down-side of this is a bit less sharpness in the pics, which may also eliminate the visible moire.

If somebody is interested the ColorFoto results were briefly such that at ISO200 there was 1 full stop more dynamic range in the in-camera made JPEG than the JPEG made from RAW. Interestingly these results are fully in line with the Imaging Resource dynamic range tests (reported with D70s review) where D50 was reported DR 9.93 bits (medium image guality) - ColorFoto reported 9.5 bits. For the from RAW generated JPEG images ColorFoto reported 8.5 bits which surprisingly well match the in Imaging Resource test reported D70 dynamic range of 8.76 bits. Will be interesting to see if this is the direction all (entry level) dSLRs start to go - more and more in-camera processing for pics. But as long as they give us the unprocessed RAW images, I'm satisfied.

For ISO400 and 800, the JPEG images seemed to have noise level of RAW images taken one stop lower ISO. Interestingly at ISO1600 there was no difference.

drejc said:
KM 5D looks for me a great deal when comes to the market.

cameras said:

Minolta is coming out with 5D also as others have said. The Canon
is ahead of the others IMO. The Nikon may still have moire'
problem, see dcrp review of D70. Canon has done a better job with
the sensor and anti aliasing filter as well as having Digic II. The
Canon is very well made, smaller but no deficiency. The Nikon is
also plastic body and pentamirror, none of them are metal in this
price range. I like my XT it starts instantly and with absolutely
no noise and perform perfectly. I am fussy and I like it. I am
using all my old Nikon and Leicaflex lenses on XT as well. Check
them all out first hand, the size is also a plus with XT much
easier to carry around and put away. The 8mp is better than 6mp,
Canon is just ahead of the others.

Click to expand...

Katania · Jul 23, 2005

The kit lens is a nice starter lens and for it's price, it's actually quite good. But if you're serious about photography, it does have some deficiencies:

Optically, the 350D can resolve more detail then this lens can produce and it needs to be stopped down to achieve sharper images.
Build quility is not so great. The front ring turns when focusing which is not usefull for such things as polorizer filters.

On the plus side, it's very light and shows minimal distortion. It's also a cheap wide solution.

So in my opinion:

1. You have no idea what lens will suit your shooting style?

Get the kit lens. It's a cheap way to figure out if you are a wide angle shooter or a tele shooter, or somewhere inbetween.

2. You're shooting style falls in the range of the kit lens

Have a look at the available lenses that are in the same range on the wide end as the kit lens. If you can afford them now, skip the kit lens and go for an opticaly better lens.

3. You're shooting style falls in the tele range

Get the kit lens. You may not use it much but you'll find it usefull for indoor situations.

4. You only plan on buying one lens for your camera.
Skip the kit lens and get the best lens you can afford.

ohyva · Jul 23, 2005

Please, note that in the JPEG images from the camera D50 has lower noise than 350D (or 20D) thanks to its noise removal done in the image pipe (meaning lower noise at ISO200 than Canon has ISO100 - verified now by two independent tests). The back-side of this is that it has somewhat lower resolving power than e.g. D70 - and even more when compared to 350D.

(With 350D images you can achieve the same and better, but that means using some post processing tools like NeatImage or NoiseNinja - and then you are in control what you want to do with your images. Typically the PC/MAC SW tools have better quality (and faster developing) algortihms than those fitted in the more limited resources inside the camera processor.)

If you want to shoot RAW, then the noise is that you can see in D70(s) images.

telfer said:
thanks guys. I think the 350 sounds like the one to get. the lower
noise is swaying me.

Ok wht lens should i get? the kit lense or something better?

regards
telf

Vlad_74 · Jul 23, 2005

larrytucaz said:
But--beyond that--the DcResource.Com found no moire issue AT ALL on
the D50.

Actualy, it's not true. check out palm leafs on DSC_0158.JPG picture. In some parts parallel needle-like leafs puttern's mixed up with strange artefacts. it's more evident on image from D70s as it's taken with better lens. I guess D50 has the same weak AA filter and you just need sharper lens to see moire

_
don't mind my english. I know It's bad

Backdoctor · Jul 23, 2005

clearly shows it has the best noise response of the cameras tested. Better take a close look if noise is an issue for you and you plan to use high iso a lot.

--
Harris

PBase/DPReview/NTF supporter
Egret Stalker #4, WSSA #29

http://www.pbase.com/backdoctor

Understated · Jul 23, 2005

this is what i've been trying to find out and the main reason why i've been wanting to switch to the canon. the WB presets for artificial light on the d70 are really bad at getting it right. so far i've seen some pretty good night shots of people who took shots using auto WB on the 350 and it showed pretty accurate colours. more accurate than the d70. i'm gonna do more research.

Katania said:
I must warn you though: the WB presets for artificial light on the
350D are usually way off under normal circumstances.
You will need to use a custom white balance for night shots. But
once you've got it set, it should work in most situations without
having to create a new one each time.
During the day, I use auto white balance, during the night my
custom WB.
If you shoot JPG, you just have to remember to change it or make
sure you review your image after each first shot.

thw · Jul 23, 2005

The D70 jpeg colors are definitely horrible (see Steve's review and compare the jpeg to raw images). However, the D50 may be really good... at least from some comparison photos I've seen between the D70 and D50.

Understated said:
this is what i've been trying to find out and the main reason why
i've been wanting to switch to the canon. the WB presets for
artificial light on the d70 are really bad at getting it right. so
far i've seen some pretty good night shots of people who took shots
using auto WB on the 350 and it showed pretty accurate colours.
more accurate than the d70. i'm gonna do more research.

Understated · Jul 23, 2005

welll i can see the D50 having the same deficiency (in terms of wb setting) as the d70. again, i still have to do more research.

thw said:
Understated said:

this is what i've been trying to find out and the main reason why
i've been wanting to switch to the canon. the WB presets for
artificial light on the d70 are really bad at getting it right. so
far i've seen some pretty good night shots of people who took shots
using auto WB on the 350 and it showed pretty accurate colours.
more accurate than the d70. i'm gonna do more research.

Click to expand...

KT_at_SF · Jul 23, 2005

Phil’s D50 review:

“the EOS 350D (Digital Rebel XT) is only $100 more than the D50 and hence must be considered competition. The difference is more marked than it was between the EOS 300D and EOS 350D, here the 350D is extracting noticeably more detail from the scene and at the same time exhibiting better per-pixel sharpness.”

KT

Daniella said:
larrytucaz said:

You don't seem to have any lenses from Canon/Nikon up already. So
you're open to them--or to Pentax, Konica/Minolta, Olympus as well
for that matter.

I shoot the 300D, the precedessor of the 350. I shot Nikon in the
past, got the 300D because of a big price break I enjoyed getting
it (vs the D70).

I concur with the guy at DcResource.Com who prefers the D50 to the
350D. (Yes, I am posting here in the 300/350 and dare to say this.)
I find its "feel" to be of MUCH higher quality, I prefer its lower
level of dependence of the LCD menu system (even if via "shortcut"
buttons), its size is better to me (I think the 350D is too small
personally--the D50 is not huge but is "just right") and its
control layout in general is better to me.

That said, of course, you are asking here in the 300/350D forum
where many 350D owners exist and praise their camera. Phil Askey
did give it "Highly Recommended" for a reason, and you will
(understandably) hear lots of praise about it, so obviously it is a
camera with much to offer. I will admit--I like that it uses a
wired remote instead of a wireless. (Actually I think it will
accept a wireless too if that's your preference, it isn't mine.) I
do, also, like that its base ISO value is 100 vs the D50's 200.

The 6 vs 8 megapixel difference? Meaningless really. Either will
easily make poppin' 10x15s or 11x14s.

Click to expand...

only meaningless to those who are stuck at 6mp. I am glad to use
8mp vs 6mp because the difference in detail is visible and there is
more room for cropping. yes I see the difference in prints at 8 x
10.

Daniella68313 said:

Ultimately--of course--the "system" is what counts. Check out what
lenses and accessories Canon/Nikon and others (Sigma, Tamron et al)
sell for each unit. Remember--a D-SLR is more than just about its
own body, but what you can add to it in a "system" as well.

--

LRH
http://www.pbase.com/larrytucaz

Click to expand...

--

Please do not start new thread for private message to me but send
them to me via email instead! thanks.

ohyva · Jul 23, 2005

Backdoctor said:
clearly shows it has the best noise response of the cameras tested.
Better take a close look if noise is an issue for you and you plan
to use high iso a lot.

True, but only with JPEG images. With RAW D50 falls into the same class as D70. See http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=14348424

But if you plan to shoot JPEG only AND do not much post processing, then IMHO D50 wins the noise battle. Also the color handling I have seen in D50 pics seem to be OK. Probably the best dSLR as today for P&S type of use. But if you want to grow in photography and evetually start to use RAW and/or more demanding picture post processing, I'd prefer 350D instead.

Sal Baker · Jul 23, 2005

larrytucaz said:
Because that's how a point & shoot camera operates, not a D-SLR.
One of THE reasons to move from point & shoot to D-SLR is because
of the interchangeable lenses & quicker operation. The quicker
operation would include more direct setting of shooting parameters
like white balance and ISO, as opposed to sticking them in menus on
the image-review LCD (albeit with shortcut buttons). It's just
totally antithetical to how a D-SLR should work.

Just to clarify to those looking to buy the XT. You don't have to use the menus to set WB or ISO on the XT. Similar to other DSLRs (D70, 20D) you simply press the button on the back labeled "ISO" or the one labeled "WB" or the one labeled "AF", and spin the control dial until the desired value is displayed on the LCD. The difference is the XT requires you to press the set button to lock the setting, and the settings show up on the color LCD rather than the mono LCD. Most of us would like to see a firmware upgrade at some point that eliminates the need to press the set button. But one never needs to touch the menu button to make these settings.

I have used my XT for several weeks in Mexico in VERY bright sun, and also for a week on Cape Cod on the beach in bright sun. The ISO, WB, and AF values pop up on the LCD as white letters over a black bar. I never had a problem seeing the settings fly by as I turned the control dial. Could the LCD be brighter? Sure, that would be great as I do need to take off my sun glasses to see the LCD if I am in direct midday summer sun.

Sal

tybeeroad · Jul 23, 2005

Hi.

I was a nikon devotee until I went to get my first DSLR. We have a nikon D100 at work and the images that I get out of my 350D are far superior to the D100.

I'd go with the Canon.

--
thanks,
Sean
Canon 350D
Sigma 150mm APO
Canon 50mm
Tamron 18 - 200mm

Canon 350 or Nikon D50

Leading Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Active member

Forum Pro

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts