Canon 350 or Nikon D50

"split-prism focusing screen"

Is it easy to put in?

Pete

--

'The probability that we may fall in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just; it shall not deter me.' -- Abraham Lincoln'

They are both Highly Recommended but Phil made a point to compare apples to apples when he compared the D50 with the 300D... Other than that he only compared it to Nikon's bodies which to me shows that the camera is squarely targeting the 300D (and probably dealing it quite a blow on feature set)...

Here's the model comparison chart...

D50 = 300D
D70 = 350D
D100 = 20D (the D100 is dated, likey to be replaced in September)
D2hs = 1D MK II (The D2h is great but resolution is a win for Canon)
D2x = 1Ds MK II (again Great Camera but resolution win for Canon)

--

'The probability that we may fall in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just; it shall not deter me.' -- Abraham Lincoln

Pete Perry said:

They are both Highly Recommended but Phil made a point to compare
apples to apples when he compared the D50 with the 300D... Other
than that he only compared it to Nikon's bodies which to me shows
that the camera is squarely targeting the 300D (and probably
dealing it quite a blow on feature set)...

Click to expand...

Actually Phil did post a studio scene comparison of the D50 vs. the 350D in his review...
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page23.asp

Sal

Pete Perry said:

They are both Highly Recommended but Phil made a point to compare
apples to apples when he compared the D50 with the 300D... Other
than that he only compared it to Nikon's bodies which to me shows
that the camera is squarely targeting the 300D (and probably
dealing it quite a blow on feature set)...

Here's the model comparison chart...

Click to expand...

D50 = 300D
D70 = 350D
D100 = 20D (the D100 is dated, likey to be replaced in September)

D2hs = 1D MK II (The IDII has a resolution win AND is likely to be replaced in september)
D2x = 1Ds MK II (again Great Camera but resolution win for Canon)

The D2x is in fact a fabulous kit. But I don't think the resolution differences, which are indeed apparant to me, matter as much as some of the other issues. Vignetting with wide angles on the 1DsII, and Dynamic Range issues with the D2x.

Reguarding the D100 replacement, unless its on store shelves by christmas, it won't matter, as the 20D replacement is due out in February.

It might not matter anyway, as Canon is said to have a BIG announcement in August for a camera that is above the 20D line, but below the 1D line.

When that happens, we'll have to redraw these comparisons again.

Member said:

--
'The probability that we may fall in the struggle ought not to
deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just; it
shall not deter me.' -- Abraham Lincoln

Click to expand...

--
--The artist formerly known as The Krakken

Hi!

I've never heard it was possible to use other lenses than Canon ones on the 350d.
Where do you find such adapters?

And also, for wich types of lenses does that exist? (and with witch limitations? e.g. no AF I assume) (I only have old Nikon AIS -bayonet- lenses.Can't use them on any resent Nikon.I find it quite strange if it happened to be possible on a Canon :s ... but if so, very interesting.)

I would also love to change the focusing screen of the canon 350d, but I don't really trust such personal arrangements. It would be much greater if Canon offered that possibility themselves! But if I buy the Canon 350d, maybe I will try to switch the screen once I can't lose my garantee any more...

PS: more information on changing focusing screens in other discussions:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=14260850

there is another discussion on this on the 20d forum, but I can't find it back.sry.

Sal Baker said:

Pete Perry said:

They are both Highly Recommended but Phil made a point to compare
apples to apples when he compared the D50 with the 300D... Other
than that he only compared it to Nikon's bodies which to me shows
that the camera is squarely targeting the 300D (and probably
dealing it quite a blow on feature set)...

Click to expand...

Actually Phil did post a studio scene comparison of the D50 vs. the
350D in his review...
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page23.asp

Click to expand...

And D50 against 300D http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page22.asp

Where "The EOS 300D (Digital Rebel) does carry a slight resolution advantage, however it exhibits more detail than this difference would suggest. The 300D image looks sharper and has better contrast, color balance is pretty much the same between the two. Noise isn't visible in either image."

And in 350D review "As I noted in my EOS 20D review the 'step' from 6 to 8 megapixels is not a huge one, you can definitely see the EOS 350D's resolution advantage in some of the finer details of the image"

That's all folk.

I think almost everything is said.

I also have to chose a Dslr now.I don't have the money for the 20d.It will be the d70,d50 or 350d.I have no lens to start with, so 'I'm free'.

GRIP/FEELING: that's indeed a mather of taste.

The 350d is quite small for me, but the d70 is really too large for me... 'funny' :s.In fact the 20d is perfect for my hand.(Pentax *istDs very great too, but image quality is lower,especially less pp possibilities) Still haven't had the occasion to test the d50, don't know if the grip is any smaller than on the d70.

The 70d feels better built, but it's only feeling! Every review states that in fact, they are all as 'well built', but doesn't all feel the same.So I won't make my choice on a feeling if it hasn't any effect on the strength/durability of the camera!

Further, the posibility to add the vertical grip on the 350d seems very interesting. In fact, the 350d appears quite small, too small, when adding a large lens like some 24-70 2.8 or sigma 12-24 etc !!! I find the vertical grip to be helpfull to adjust the balans in such cases. Don't know if anybody has field-experience with this?? I would love to know, as I only had the occasion to hold such a combination for a few seconds in a shop today.

And when you really want to travel light, you just don't have to take the grip with you.

NOISE:

I read in a French magazine (Chasseur d'Images, who has got the best and most 'scientific' labo tests I can find, working really complementary with the dpreview-reviews), that there was quite a bit more noise on the d50 than with the 350d. The numbers and graphics were very clear on this. I'm not saying any of these two reviews are wrong, but at least it means the differences won't be that enormous.Both camera's are worth theire price I think.

But they both agree that the 350d is 'sharper'! It has less noise-reduction-processing. I assume that with good postproduction (eg Noise Ninja)(comparing this action on both d50 and 350d), it will be possible to get better pictures,at very high sensitivity (800, 1600iso) with the 350d.I can't be sure of that because I haven't tried, but it seems logic and clear. So if I wan't clean high sensitivities and am ready to spend a little time on it, I think I will get better results with the 350d. (and if noise-pp seems unnecessary,depending on a lot of factors,at least I still hav pics with the best shapness I could get!!)

So, I'm still not 100% sure of it, but I think I'm going to buy the 350d+grip. I'm still very disapointed about the viewfinders, but I will have to wait to see things change in this regard.(Pentax istDs is great, but image quality and reactivity not good enough, and the Canon 20D to expensive if it's almost only for the viewfinder -haven't got the money for it)

At least, with none of these camera's images will be bad, unless I s* , but that will be my fault

The 350D has quite a bit better resolution than the D50. Just pointing that out.

to see how the Minolta 5D fares if I am in the market for DSLR. Factory quality control aside, the 5D appears to be an awesome DSLR with two control dials. And there's AS of course...

But if I absolutely need a DSLR now, I'll go for the D50. There are two things that irk me about the XT:

(i) I cannot see the blinking highlights unless the image is reduced. This kind of defeats the purpose. Same goes for the histogram display.
(ii) Why does the ISO setting not appear in the XT viewfinder?

Marc Delghust said:

I read in a French magazine (Chasseur d'Images, who has got the
best and most 'scientific' labo tests I can find, working really
complementary with the dpreview-reviews)

Click to expand...

Chasseur d'Images gave the Nikon D70 4 stars and both the Canon 20D and 350XT five stars. Personally, I cannot differentiate between all these cameras.

Marc Delghust said:

At least, with none of these camera's images will be bad, unless I
s* , but that will be my fault

Click to expand...

That's true. The differences are minor IMO.

As sharpness can have a lot to do with resolution, that is what I was meaning with telling that the 350d was sharper. The extra 2mp resolution is more interesting for me as it helps the sharpness, than as a calculating rule for large prints (not a big difference in this regard).

What I'm pointing out with the CI (Chasseur d'Images tests), is not the overall 4 or 5 stars: these stars are not very interesting,they doesn't say much, because they are only summerizing, without any differenciation depending on your own needs (just as the quots 'highly recommended' or 'recommended': for some people, depending on their needs, a 'recommended' camera can be better than a 'highly recommended' one, just as four stars can be better than 5... )

But when you compare the noise tests in the last two numbers of CI (tests of 350d and d50), the differences on this specific regard was really worth mentioning! CI showed that the 350d was at least at the higher sensitivities quite better than the d50 (' one sensitivity'). And sensitivity can be important for me, as I love shoot a lot indoor, and I hate to use a flash (I love using my tripods,but tripods are not always alowed... )

but again, even this depends on a persons' specific needs.

(+ Nikon hasn't got any equivalent to Canon 28-135 is usm yet, and I'd like to have IS on these focal lengths at that cost... is+high sensitivity,can make some difference together!)

Marc Delghust said:

Further, the posibility to add the vertical grip on the 350d seems
very interesting. In fact, the 350d appears quite small, too small,
when adding a large lens like some 24-70 2.8 or sigma 12-24 etc !!!
I find the vertical grip to be helpfull to adjust the balans in
such cases. Don't know if anybody has field-experience with this??

Click to expand...

The proper way to balance a camera is to grip it by the lens, not the body. (You'll probably find the correct stance in all the SLR manuals).

It's a lot easier to keep the camera stable if it is resting in your left hand. However, most people grip the camera by the body. If you try this with the 350D, you'll quickly suffer cramps due to its ergonomics. My first impression when handling it was: "What the $@#!* were these designers thinking of when they built this thing?!?"

Once I got used to the proper holding technique, it actually made sense and it did feel like the designers put some thought into it. While balancing the camera with your left hand, you're right hand can freely move around while handling the controls. Once you get used to it, chanses are you won't even need the grip unless you do a lot of portraits.

Marc Delghust said:

As sharpness can have a lot to do with resolution, that is what I
was meaning with telling that the 350d was sharper. The extra 2mp
resolution is more interesting for me as it helps the sharpness,
than as a calculating rule for large prints (not a big difference
in this regard).

What I'm pointing out with the CI (Chasseur d'Images tests), is not
the overall 4 or 5 stars: these stars are not very interesting,they
doesn't say much, because they are only summerizing, without any
differenciation depending on your own needs (just as the quots
'highly recommended' or 'recommended': for some people, depending
on their needs, a 'recommended' camera can be better than a 'highly
recommended' one, just as four stars can be better than 5... )
But when you compare the noise tests in the last two numbers of CI
(tests of 350d and d50), the differences on this specific regard
was really worth mentioning! CI showed that the 350d was at least
at the higher sensitivities quite better than the d50 (' one
sensitivity'). And sensitivity can be important for me, as I love
shoot a lot indoor, and I hate to use a flash (I love using my
tripods,but tripods are not always alowed... )

but again, even this depends on a persons' specific needs.

(+ Nikon hasn't got any equivalent to Canon 28-135 is usm yet, and
I'd like to have IS on these focal lengths at that cost... is+high
sensitivity,can make some difference together!)

Click to expand...

There is a Nikon 24-120 VR AFS

--
http://www.pbase.com/interactive

Why is the ISO display limited to the battery-draining LCD monitor? Why not simply put it on the other display panel? I think that's the point here.

Doesn't the 20D do it that way?

Sal Baker said:

Sal Baker wrote:
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

Click to expand...

Well I'd certainly hope the images are superior, considering how much newer the 350d is than the D100. The D100 is old technology. That comparison means nothing when evaluating the new D50.

tybeeroad said:

tybeeroad wrote:
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.

Click to expand...

notpc said:

Why is the ISO display limited to the battery-draining LCD monitor?
Why not simply put it on the other display panel? I think that's
the point here.

Click to expand...

Only Canon knows that. I have never run out of battery juice yet so it isn't an issue for me. The amount of time the LCD comes on to show the settings is nothing compared to the image review playback time immediately after taking the shot.

The real question is why doesn't the 20D or XT show ISO values in the viewfinder?

Sal

Putting such settings on the color monitor is battery draining and so point & shoot-ish. You learn to live with it & clearly it's not the end of the world, but it is so out of character for a D-SLR to me.

Yes, the 20D does do it the "normal" D-SLR way, it uses the control panel LCD for these settings--as well it should, as well the 350D should.

--



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

Marc Delghust said:

But when you compare the noise tests in the last two numbers of CI
(tests of 350d and d50), the differences on this specific regard
was really worth mentioning! CI showed that the 350d was at least
at the higher sensitivities quite better than the d50 (' one
sensitivity'). And sensitivity can be important for me, as I love

Click to expand...

I believe Popular Photography once did a test on ISO sensitivity and both Canon & Pentax are more sensitive than what is specified. For example, ISO 100 on Canon is about 150 etc while Nikon's ISO 200 is really 200. So, this is consistent with CI's findings. In other words, in Phil's chart for noise measurement, the graph for Canon needs to be translated towards higher ISO sensitivity; the result is that Canon's noise performance is actually much better than what Phil's chart shows. I suppose this is why CI is so impressed with Canon's sensor.

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.

Click to expand...

As it so happens, the only times I've actually missed shots with my 350D was when I accidentily pressed the only button on the XT that doesn't need a set confirmation and I started to hear the self timer beeping when the camera should have taken the picture instead.

Using the menu does have its advantages: All my possible choices are displayed at once. I can quickly verify my current selection and I can immidiatly see the quickest route to the item I want selected. Unlike with the self timer/one shot/continues button, I'm not forced to follow a predefined sequence to get to the item I need selected. As a result, I can change my WB in less then a second despite there being eight different presets to choose from and having to press the set button to confirm my choice. Same with ISO selection.

larrytucaz said:

Yes, it is an omission that shouldn't have been omitted. I'm glad
my 300D has a backlight. Then again, in darker lighting, I've found
it hard enough to find certain buttons by feel I needed a
flashlight anyway, so that kind of keeps it in perspective.

Click to expand...

Doesn't this defeat the whole purpose of the quicker operation that a dSLR has to offer you so claim?

So here is another advantage of the menu: I can blindly find the ISO button on my 350D in the dark. Pressing it will reveal the lit color LCD with the ISO menu in it. I don't even need to press the backlit button or waste my time fiddling with a torch and a camera both at the same time.

larrytucaz said:

Putting such settings on the color monitor is battery draining and
so point & shoot-ish. You learn to live with it & clearly it's not
the end of the world, but it is so out of character for a D-SLR to
me.

Click to expand...

I haven't heard any complaints of XTs loosing power due to changing ISOs.

The important thing is that both of the XT LCD's light up. Not having a backlit LCD to use when shooting concerts, etc, is even worse than a P&S IMO. I suppose one could learn to live with it though.

Sal

Katania said:

Using the menu does have its advantages: All my possible choices
are displayed at once. I can quickly verify my current selection
and I can immidiatly see the quickest route to the item I want
selected.

Click to expand...

Or, as with any other D-SLR in the world, you could just press the MENU button.

Katania said:

So here is another advantage of the menu: I can blindly find the
ISO button on my 350D in the dark. Pressing it will reveal the lit
color LCD with the ISO menu in it. I don't even need to press the
backlit button or waste my time fiddling with a torch and a camera
both at the same time.

Click to expand...

Even so, I STILL say it shouldn't work that way because that's just not how a D-SLR is supposed to work. Period. Phil Askey said so, luminous landscape said so, DcResource.Com said so--to me, that settles it.

That is why Canon won't have me as a customer upgrading (or side-grading if you will) via this route. MAYBE via the 20D, but not via the 350D. Having used the 300D and its far more logical way of operating only to encounter this "point & shoot wanna-be" way of operating left a bad taste in my mouth. Yes it is a small issue, it's just irritating to see them regress this way when they got it right the 1st time on the "old" Digital Rebel. Maybe if in the "400D" or "Digital Rebel 3" they go back to the "right way" of doing it, then MAYBE I could consider such a move. Not this one.

--



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