Canon or Nikon?

I am fairly new to DSLR's. Before that I used Canon P&S, the S & G series. I currently have a Nikon D60. I became more comfortable with the DSLR. However, the D60 did not have the motor in the body to work with all lenses. I currently have Nikon 16-85VR & 70-300VR. (That is a nice range for me) I believe these are lower end lenses?

I am now thinking of switching to Canon DSLR's. My thoughts are to get a lower cost body and spend more on the lenses. I have been eyeballing the 30D, 40D and the XSI. I like the price of 30D, but it does not have sensor cleaning system. I am used to that feature on my D60. Any opinions would be great. For Nikon, I am thinking of The D90.

Other thoughts:

Nikon's have a separate lamp for the AF assist. I read that Canon uses the pop-up flash for that purpose. Can anyone explain how that works? If you pop up the for AF assist will the flash fire after (even if you do not want it too)?

For lenses, everyone is suggesting the ‘L’ series. I am eyeballing the 24-105 L IS for the main lens. I am not sure about any other lenses at this time. There are too many choices.

Thanks.

The Nikon 16-85VR & 70-300VR and mid rang lenses and can produce excellent images. Above this price point you hit an exponential curve for price v IQ.

You are complaining about not having a motor yet don’t say what you are looking to get that you can’t. The amount you will pay to change systems may not be worth it unless you need a lot of screw drive lens.

Morris

--



http://qcpages.qc.cuny.edu/~morris/POD

What will the 24-105 give you that the 16-85 does not deliver?

Personally I'd be very happy with those two lenses on my ancient D50.
--
Don't wait for the Nikon D-whatever, have fun now!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/j_wijnands/

nikon... cameras, not copiers.
--
if you dont live for something you'll die for nothing!

wijnands said:

What will the 24-105 give you that the 16-85 does not deliver?

Click to expand...

1) constant f4
2) higher quality glass
3) basically... better looking photos

I Dont see the point in posting in the canon and the nikon forum, Because canon folks will say canon nikon will say nikon its obvious, Why not post in open talk.

Both Brands will take great shots, Pay more attention to the lens system you are buying into.

I am sure that you will find many new friends here at the Nikon forum - people who will help you derive the greatest enjoyment from your hobby.

Obviously, the most of the folks posting here have already selected Nikon rather than Canon, although there are some who shoot several systems.

I use Nikon equipment because the metering system, flash, and optics are exceptional.

At my office (we are in the magazine publishing business) we use Pentax DSLRs. They handle as well as the Nikon prosumer models, and if you cherry-pick the lens line, the results are easily publication quality.

Body for body, lens for lens, you save about 25%.

Rather than compare Nikon and Canon, why not compare Nikon and Pentax - unless you require the top end pro features, the Pentax system would provide a lower cost alternative to Nikon. There are a few compromises, and a few advantages to one system over the other... it should be your decision to pick the equipment that best meets your needs.

I have observed that most of the Canon amateurs use the system because they have never tried anything else... the pros shoot Canon because it suits their style... the Nikon pros chose their gear because it delivers consistently excellent results. When you can write-off the price of equipment against your business, the pro gear doesn't cost - it pays.

In the hands of a skilled photo enthusiast, ANY DSLR with a good lens can produce outstanding images - just browse the various forums to see examples.

If you decide to stay with Nikon, save up for the D90 with some of the better lenses - the investment in glass is good for decades... the investment in the body is a three to five year cycle, that's how technology goes these days.

Norm.

--Its been my experience that many people believe that their photos will improve by upgrading equipment. This may be true for specific applications, but in general the equipment is not the limiting factor.

The equipment you have is quite capable and will match the Canon D30 in most respects. Buying legacy lenses is not advisable considering the technological improvements in recent lenses.

I'm not saying that Nikon is any better than Canon, but since you already have Nikon equipment, it would be a shame to switch now. The benefit to cost ratio is negative.

Suggest you develop you skills rather than look for the silver bullet. It doesn't exist.

joer56

Constant f4 is a nice to have. Better looking photographs? Perhaps, potentially. The 16-85 is pretty awesome. You'd have to be a very skilled photographer to get the difference (if there is any, there may be, I'm not that familiar with Canon's lineup) out of that lens.
--
Don't wait for the Nikon D-whatever, have fun now!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/j_wijnands/

With the 24-105, you lose the wide-angle since that particular lens is designed for the full-frame 35mm cameras using full-frame sensors or film. But all three of the Canon cameras that the OP listed use smaller sensors (in this case, with a crop factor of 1.6x). This means that the field-of-view of a 24mm lens becomes a not-so-wide 38.4mm in the lower-end Canons. In fact, I would consider 38mm "normal," not "wide."

Speaking of the OP's 16-85 and 70-300 VR lenses, they both have the focusing motor integrated into the lens body (hence the "AF-S" designation). And most of the moderately-priced (sub-$800) lenses which can be autofocused when used with the D60 are zooms (although the AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR could be purchased for an amount that's at the very top of that range). However, this is beginning to change with the recent introduction of the AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G and the AF-S Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED - two prime (non-zoom) lenses with a street price of no more than $500 with a focusing motor built into the lens barrel.

wijnands said:

Constant f4 is a nice to have. Better looking photographs? Perhaps,
potentially. The 16-85 is pretty awesome. You'd have to be a very
skilled photographer to get the difference (if there is any, there
may be, I'm not that familiar with Canon's lineup) out of that lens.

Click to expand...

I agree the 16-85 is a good lens but put the professional level of the Canon L series high quality UD glass in the same hands, and yes, I would bet everything the L series pictures look better than the 16-85. Truer colors and better clarity.
But it's to be expected when you pay those prices.

I would want to agree accept I went looking to see what someone could do with my D40x, and I found the following pictures. They were taken with the Nikon D40X and the consumer lens Nikkor 18-200, it just proved to me that I have a lot to learn, and that my camera and lens aren't the issue.

http://www.pbase.com/happypoppeye/j_ethiopia

TFergus said:

I agree the 16-85 is a good lens but put the professional level of
the Canon L series high quality UD glass in the same hands, and yes,
I would bet everything the L series pictures look better than the
16-85. Truer colors and better clarity.
But it's to be expected when you pay those prices.

Click to expand...

--

• David

Those are excellent consumer level lenses. You need to go to some pricey pro level lenses to get better. You don't really mention any prime lenses that you are looking for that would necessitate an in-camera focusing motor. If I had older lenses hanging around it might have been an issue for me, but there are primes that are available to me that will auto-focus on my D40x and more are becoming available to the point that it really won't be an issue for me.

If there is a specific camera/lens set that works for you from Canon, sure, consider it. But judging by what you have to say, I don't see what it is that would make the switch worth the money - the D90 would make a lot more sense if you feel you are ready for a camera that gives you more control.

However, I thought about it, and decided to add a Sigma 10-20 and maybe a Sigma 30mm prime - both will autofocus on my D40x, and will probably give me a lot more satisfaction than spending the money on getting a new body.

--

Note that my post above included only Nikon's Nikkor lenses. There are a few moderately-priced prime lenses from third parties which integrate a focusing motor inside their barrels.

What's the problem with your stuff?

You've got enough good options to upgrade with your D60. You can get a SB-600 flash, a Sigma 30 1.4, an AF-S 50 1.4 and a Tammy 17-50 f/2.8 for low light zoom (newer ones have a motor). Then there's a Sigma 10-20 HSM wideangle lens...
I think that's more than enough good options to spend your money...

And by the time you've got all that and you're still not tired of photography you can upgrade to the D60 successor or get a cheap D90 (or successor).

--
http://donandre.ipernity.com

For Canon bodies you should ask the proper forum.

For Nikon, it's known that the basic kit lenses like the ones you have are better from Nikon (check this basic test http://www.digitalreview.ca/content/Nikon-D60-Compared-to-Canon-Rebel-XS-1000D.shtml where the D60 is compared to XS and also kit lenses tested).

The 16-85 is likely the best all around kit lens available from either Nikon or Canon.

The D90 is considered to have the best APS-C sensor in the market (DxO Mark: http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/DxOMark-Sensor )

In particualr considering high ISO and DR performance.

Now, its your pic, the xxD series from Canon is pretty good. I'd go for a 40D in that case.

Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)

Hi

I whent the opposite direction some years ago ... switced from Canon to Nikon. AF and metering is so much more consistent on the Nikon's. I would never look back. And the availabillity of lenses is more than enough for me .... ofcause the pro lenses are expensive, but also last way longer than the body.

Now you are not satisfied with the performance of your optics ? What is it you wanna do that you cant do ?

Instead of switching system you might be much better off to let people here help you get the most of what you got. Then maybe at some point change to a D80/D90/D300 body to get better AF (More points) and better controls (buttons instead of menu's). Then Im sure you will be more than satisfied with your Nikon system. And the lenses you mention is not bad, I would say in the better mid range.

Shoot your gear, make a list on whats missing. Fx. low light capabillity, better macro capabillity and so on. Then let people here help you decide what can be done to outcome that...I think that will be cheaper in the long run.

My 2$ anyway ....

--
Bjarne
----------
http://www.hobby-foto.dk
Nikon D80
Nikkor AFS DX 18-200mm 3.5-5.6 G VR II
Nikkor AFS 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 G VR
Nikon SB-600

I also have the D60, and you can take some amazing photos with it. Instead of looking for a new camera rather spend time to perfect your skills on the D60.

Manual focusing is not such a big issue. Especially if you use the rangefinder feature which allows you to get precise focus. And when you think you are ready you can upgrade to one of the Nikon bodies that do have a built in AF motor.

Never believe that the equipment is what makes a good photo. Especially not the body, the body is just a box with something to capture light. I reckon that 90% of a good photo comes from pure skill, 8% comes from having good glass and the remaining 2% is split between atmospheric conditions, lighting, subject matter and only a small portion is due to the body.

aronfoto said:

I am fairly new to DSLR's. Before that I used Canon P&S, the S & G
series. I currently have a Nikon D60. I became more comfortable with
the DSLR. However, the D60 did not have the motor in the body to work
with all lenses. I currently have Nikon 16-85VR & 70-300VR. (That is
a nice range for me) I believe these are lower end lenses?

Click to expand...

What has now changed?
What do you need the screw drive for?
Or is it just flexiblity for certain other lenses?

aronfoto said:

I am now thinking of switching to Canon DSLR's. My thoughts are to
get a lower cost body and spend more on the lenses. I have been
eyeballing the 30D, 40D and the XSI. I like the price of 30D, but it
does not have sensor cleaning system. I am used to that feature on my
D60. Any opinions would be great. For Nikon, I am thinking of The D90.

Click to expand...

Hummm....The D60 is already a lower cost body. The difference in price between the D60 and the Canon cameras either does not equate to the price of an L lens or they are even more expensive.

aronfoto said:

Other thoughts:

Nikon's have a separate lamp for the AF assist. I read that Canon
uses the pop-up flash for that purpose. Can anyone explain how that
works? If you pop up the for AF assist will the flash fire after
(even if you do not want it too)?

Click to expand...

If flash is important to you, you will not be using the on-board flash. You will be getting a flash unit to set in the hot shoe on top of the camera and it has an infrared AF light.

aronfoto said:

For lenses, everyone is suggesting the ‘L’ series. I am eyeballing
the 24-105 L IS for the main lens. I am not sure about any other
lenses at this time. There are too many choices.

Click to expand...

This lens does not have the high IQ that you seem to be looking for. For some reason, while a fine lens, it is not on par with other L lenses - based on multiple threads where this lens was listed.
Google Photozone to compare IQ of this lens to yours to confirm.
gk

'I'm not as smart today as I will be tomorrow.'

well said ... couldn't agree more

--
Bjarne
----------
http://www.hobby-foto.dk
Nikon D80
Nikkor AFS DX 18-200mm 3.5-5.6 G VR II
Nikkor AFS 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 G VR
Nikon SB-600