Who do you think has the best approach to a DSLR range?

I frequent a couple of forums where we often have beginners asking what they should get to step up from their P&Ss. The 3 suggestions are always CorN & Sony. What always strikes me is that with Canon and Nikon, who have pretty fully fledged lineups, the models never quite stack up - it's always staggered, the Nikon being a bit higher end than the equivalent Canon, with the exception of the pro models which go all out. Quick list, with some Sonys thrown in too:

1DSMk3/D3x/1DSMk3/D3 - all very rougly equivalent - the best each manufacturer can do, one for high MP, one for high FPS. You can quibble over which one's 10% less noisy (and for the purposes of this post please don't!), but they're pretty even - both companies gave everything they could.

D700 - ignoring the fact that the 5D MKII has more MPs and a video mode, in terms of basic photographic stuff (AF, build quality, FPS) the D700 comes out on top.

5D MKII/a900 - both offer more MPs than a D700 which will make them an automatic choice for some photogs, but both are built to a lesser standard.
D300 - again, built better than those below it.
50D/40D/a700 - pretty much even between these 3?
D90 - twin control dials, better burst rate, video all score over the 450D
450D - better than the D60

a350 - oddball - an a200 with the only liveview that's really suited to walking about

D60/1000D/a200 - I don't know enough about these to rank them - all very entry level.

Personally I like Nikon's approach - they always go for a notch above the Canon, whether it's the higher level of ergonomics (D90 Vs 450D) or the more pro spec build when Canon's upper grade of ergonomics kick in (D300 Vs 40/50D, D700 Vs 5DMKII). I guess I'm of the opinion that it's always worth scraping the barrel to get what you truly afford when making a purchase that will last you quite a while - I can't imagine using a 450D's single wheel interface without going nuts.

Not the best forum post in the world - no real point to be made - but maybe some of you have some thoughts to add to my musings?
--
Please visit my galleries at:
http://www.jaggerbramley.com

D700 - ignoring the fact that the 5D MKII has more MPs and a video mode, in terms of basic photographic stuff (AF, build quality, FPS) the D700 comes out on top.

Why ignore rendering of color, detail, weight (almost 250 grams lighter), available lens selections and the ability to deeply crop post picture if needed. All very important factors in my opinion. ... and made the difference in the final decision for me.

--
Just Marty F31fd G10 5DMkII

MartyG9 said:

D700 - ignoring the fact that the 5D MKII has more MPs and a video
mode, in terms of basic photographic stuff (AF, build quality, FPS)
the D700 comes out on top.

Why ignore rendering of color, detail, weight (almost 250 grams
lighter), available lens selections and the ability to deeply crop
post picture if needed. All very important factors in my opinion.
... and made the difference in the final decision for me.

Click to expand...

Marty what you've just brought up is a load of stuff outside the thrust of this thread. Yup - they're 2 different cameras, one's 21mps and takes Canon lenses, one's 12mps and takes Nikon lenses. It's been done to death in a million and one threads and well done for making a well-informed decision on which one to buy yourself.

But one of them, despite them being aimed at 2 different markets, is more 'pro' - it's higher up the food chain. In the areas that are common to every camera the Nikon wins.

So what do you think about that decision? Should Canon have made the 5DMkII just as 'pro' as the Nikon, ableit with the different emphasis (MPs Vs low light)? Would you appreciate a fully sealed body and a complex AF module along with the wireless flash options built in, or do you consider the lighter build and cost savings on the Canon an advantage?

That's my point - the Canons are always a step down from the Nikons, and the prices reflect that. Good thing or bad thing?
--
Please visit my galleries at:
http://www.jaggerbramley.com

Are the even numbers a step down from the odd ones or the other way around?

Everything changes every six months, anyway.

I guess it's a bit like cars, some drive Fords, others BMW and VW's, the quality and abilty of the drivers of all these vehiles will differ. Cameras are the same, you pick yours because you like it.

--
artyman
http://www.artyman.co.uk

MPCat said:

Everything changes every six months, anyway.

Click to expand...

I disagree.

Whilst there have been a few exceptions, where Canon or Nikon have gotten ahead of their competition for a while, generally speaking the line-up remains interwoven (as Bramley says).

The Canon 30D / 40D / 50D have always been one step below the Nikon D200 / D300. What I mean is that nothing changed when the 50D was released, as expected it was still not as good as the D300. Nothing changed when the D90 was released, as expected it was still better than the 450D.

I think that the Alpha 350 is the only weird one really.

--
Stuart / the Two Truths
http://twotruths.net/

I like how you left out the others (I'll leave them nameless as I'm sure the flames will now start about them).

There are many who think that Nikon, Sony or Canon don't have the best approach to DSLR's.

Perhaps they do for some . . . but not for all!

Each different camera manufacturer has the best approach for different people.

So . . . in all reality, none of them have "the best approach to DSLR's".

In the end, they all provide the owners with excellent quality images, providing the owner actually knows how to use their DSLR's.

--
J. D.
Colorful Colorado



Remember . . . always keep your receipt, the box, and everything that came in it!

When making recommendations; experienced photographers usually take into account the availability of lenses etc, average price of cameras, lenses etc, as well as after-sales support.

From Warehouseexpress (one of the UK's largest online photographic stores)...

Canon and Nikon have an excellent range of lenses available, Sony and Pentax have good ranges of lenses available. Sigma's own range of lenses is reasonable enough but the range for Olympus is very limited.

Canon / Nikon --- Excellent
Olympus --- Poor

Sony has an excellent price for it's entry-level dSLR with kit lens. Canon, Nikon, and Olympus have good prices for theirs without kit lenses. The price for Pentax is okay but there is no reasonable price for Sigma or Fuji.

Sony --- Excellent
Sigma --- Poor
Fuji --- Poor

Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Pentax all have advanced amauter cameras available at good prices. With Sigma you have no upgrade path, whereas with Olympus the advanced amauter camera is very expensive.

Sigma --- Poor
Olympus --- Poor

Pentax has a great price for its standard prime. Canon also has a pretty good price. Nikon, Sony, and Sigma all have reasonable prices. Olympus does not really have a standard prime lens.

Pentax --- Excellent
Olympus --- Poor

Sigma has an excellent price for it's all-rounder lens but it is not the greatest lens in the world (17-70mm). Nikon, Sony, and Olympus all have excellent lenses in this category (16-85mm, 16-80mm, 12-60mm). The Nikon lens is well priced whereas the Olympus lens is expensive. Canon and Pentax are both okay.

Sigma --- Excellent price
Olympus --- Poor price
Nikon, Sony, Olympus --- Excellent quality

Likewise; Sigma has an excellent price for it's not-so-great super-zoom lens (18-200mm). Olympus's super-zoom is excellent quality and pretty well priced. The rest are pretty okay.

Sigma --- Excellent price
Olympus --- Excellent quality

Canon and Nikon both have excellent ranges of third-party lenses available, with Sony and Pentax not far behind them. Olympus has very few third-party lenses available, whereas Sigma has none at all.

Canon / Nikon --- Excellent
Olympus / Sigma --- Poor

Overall; I would stick to Canon / Nikon / Sony / Pentax and I would avoid Olympus / Sigma. If you can afford Fuji then they are always an option because you can always just switch to Nikon afterwards.
--
Stuart / the Two Truths
http://twotruths.net/

Two Truths said:

Overall; I would stick to Canon / Nikon / Sony / Pentax and I would
avoid Olympus / Sigma. If you can afford Fuji then they are always
an option because you can always just switch to Nikon afterwards.

Click to expand...

Yet you assume that everyone buying a DSLR is going to purchase every lens available!

Most normal people buy two lenses . . . maybe three . . . not 25 or 30!

Nothing wrong with Olympus . . . they are great cameras and they (Oly) do make enough lenses to cover just about every normal persons' needs!

--
J. D.
Colorful Colorado



Remember . . . always keep your receipt, the box, and everything that came in it!

MusicDoctorDJ said:

Two Truths said:

Overall; I would stick to Canon / Nikon / Sony / Pentax and I would
avoid Olympus / Sigma. If you can afford Fuji then they are always
an option because you can always just switch to Nikon afterwards.

Click to expand...

Yet you assume that everyone buying a DSLR is going to purchase every
lens available!

Most normal people buy two lenses . . . maybe three . . . not 25 or 30!

Nothing wrong with Olympus . . . they are great cameras and they
(Oly) do make enough lenses to cover just about every normal persons'
needs!

Click to expand...

Just to clarify;

From Warehouseexpress, I found that Olympus had:-
(1) limited selection of own-brand lenses
(2) expensive upgrade path (E-3 costs 2x any similar camera)
(3) limited selection of prime lenses
(4) very expensive but high quality all-rounder lens (12-60mm)
(5) very limited selection of third-party lenses

I would not say that the E-520 is any better than its competitors. The E-3 has some advantages (as well as some serious flaws) but it is far too expensive for what it offers.

Whereas Olympus do make a few good lenses they have some serious gaps in their range, even for a "normal" user. Personally; I would consider that a good prime lens was essential for any photographer, otherwise you might as well use a P&S.

--
Stuart / the Two Truths
http://twotruths.net/

all that is required is a dslr body that is worthy of them! (Only joking-you cannot go wrong in buying an Oly dslr!).

ww.pbase.com/plusiotis

Plusiotis said:

all that is required is a dslr body that is worthy of them! (Only
joking-you cannot go wrong in buying an Oly dslr!).

Click to expand...

Except that the Four Thirds system has...
(1) limited selection of own-brand lenses
(2) expensive upgrade path (E-3 costs 2x any similar camera)
(3) limited selection of prime lenses
(4) some key lenses are overpriced
(5) very limited selection of third-party lenses
(6) looks like Four Thirds is being dumped in favour of Micro Four Thirds

--
Stuart / the Two Truths
http://twotruths.net/

Two Truths said:

Plusiotis said:

all that is required is a dslr body that is worthy of them! (Only
joking-you cannot go wrong in buying an Oly dslr!).

Click to expand...

Except that the Four Thirds system has...
(1) limited selection of own-brand lenses

Click to expand...

Olympus covers almost all focal ranges covered by anyone else. How many lenses do you need?

Two Truths said:

(2) expensive upgrade path (E-3 costs 2x any similar camera)

Click to expand...

What like the Canon 50D which doesn't have weather sealing or an articulating LCD?
Which cameras that comparable are two times cheaper?

Two Truths said:

(3) limited selection of prime lenses

Click to expand...

True to a certain extent but how many prime lenses do you need?

Two Truths said:

(4) some key lenses are overpriced

Click to expand...

Olympus lenses at the lower end are the best value for money you can get. All IS on an Oly body. Can you give me a lens to compare in quality and cost to the 70-300mm (EFL 600mm) or the 9-18mm which are effectively stabilised?

Can you tell me how Nikon or Canon provide stabilisation for all the legacy glass out there?

Two Truths said:

(5) very limited selection of third-party lenses

Click to expand...

Who wants lenses of variable quality when you can have Zuiko lenses instead?

Two Truths said:

(6) looks like Four Thirds is being dumped in favour of Micro Four
Thirds

Click to expand...

Oh yes, thats why the E-30 has just been released.

If you are going to be critical of a brand at least make your argument plausible/accurate.

--
667....Neighbour of the beast....Form is temporary, glass is permanent.

Oly covers the ranges with the well respected Zuiko glass. Too, the fact is the entry level Olympus kit lenses are acknowledged by reviewers to be simply the best available right now, Canon's and Nikon's included. Oly's high end glass is worth it to those who need it.

That said, Oly users who are prime aficianados can always find a hole in the line up, but the primes they do offer are stellar.

I'm an Oly user, but in response to the OP I'd have to give my vote to Nikon as having the best approach to a DSLR range...whatever that means...

--
bob naegele
san diego, ca
http://www.rjndesign.com/

The market is the low end to middle. FF is of little use for the vast majority.

For the vast majority of shooters, I would put Oly and Pentax as better than N and C. Pentax really stands out with bodies that are a bit nicer and quite a few better quality small primes.

papillon_65 said:

What like the Canon 50D which doesn't have weather sealing or an
articulating LCD?
Which cameras that comparable are two times cheaper?

Click to expand...

If were are honest, the E3 became dated the moment it was released. And it's still more expensive than a Nikon D300..

papillon_65 said:

Oh yes, thats why the E-30 has just been released.

Click to expand...

And getting a lot of stick in the Oly SLR forum for it's rather unattractive price, when it should be priced not much over the D90 level.

Olympus has to rank as one of the weakest line-ups out of all the makers, they have done very mild re-fresh jobs on the lower end E4 and E5 series..nothing dramatic from them at all.

Nikon probably has the strongest line up at present, bar the D60 which was the most feeble re-badge job in the history of DSLR's, maybe the D60x will be more dramatic

Barry Fitzgerald said:

papillon_65 said:

What like the Canon 50D which doesn't have weather sealing or an
articulating LCD?
Which cameras that comparable are two times cheaper?

Click to expand...

If were are honest, the E3 became dated the moment it was released.
And it's still more expensive than a Nikon D300..

Click to expand...

they all become dated the moment they are released. People are already talking about better picture quality from the D90 over the D300 on this site.

Member said:

Member said:

Oh yes, thats why the E-30 has just been released.

Click to expand...

And getting a lot of stick in the Oly SLR forum for it's rather
unattractive price, when it should be priced not much over the D90
level.

Click to expand...

Which amuses me as it hasn't even been released here and most of them have never even seen or used one. Those that have speak highly of it.

Member said:

Olympus has to rank as one of the weakest line-ups out of all the
makers, they have done very mild re-fresh jobs on the lower end E4
and E5 series..nothing dramatic from them at all.

Click to expand...

Olympus doesn't have a track record of releasing lots of models like Canon or Nikon but when they do they usually contain innovative features like a fully working dustbuster (most haven't even cracked that yet) and liveview (which the Canikon crowd scoffed at but now have it on all their models )

Member said:

Nikon probably has the strongest line up at present, bar the D60
which was the most feeble re-badge job in the history of DSLR's,
maybe the D60x will be more dramatic

Click to expand...

I couldn't say who has it right with their DSLR's but Oly has it right for me in that they concentrate on decent glass, innovation, and reliable value for money body's.

The value of the E-30 can only be judged when its been on general release for some time and been properly tested.
--
667....Neighbour of the beast....Form is temporary, glass is permanent.

Two Truths wrote:
I won't disagree with any of your main points...

Two Truths said:

(6) looks like Four Thirds is being dumped in favour of Micro Four
Thirds

Click to expand...

A heavy issue. For Panasonic, they said it's unlikely they will do any more 4/3 DSLR's, (no shock they were horribly overpriced and sold very pooly). Not so easy for Olympus to abandon the 4/3 format..they would get some major stick for doing so, and re-light the anguish fire that previous OM users got (ie being left to die in the wilderness!)

I wouldn't say to someone don't look at Olympus, they have some strong points (optics for one, very good, always have been), on the other hand I consistently see this from them, every time a new model comes out..it's seriously overpriced, it's almost as if Oly really don't even try to compete with their rivals..

The E3 still sells for way too high a price..it's a non starter for a non 4/3 user..

E-30 indications are it's the same strategy..and it likely won't sell that great either. Everyone expects Nikon and Sony to pump up their semi pro models..and no doubt pass the 12mp mark with ease..(not that I think this is good)

Big numbers can sell, but Oly consistently price themselves out of the market..no wonder they have such a poor market share. Only pentax has done worse..and that again was overpricing on the K20 and K200d that killed their sales.

I bet a good part of Oly sales are the blow out deals/twin kits out there from older models..they have not even attempted to compete in the super budget arena..

Two Truths said:

Plusiotis said:

all that is required is a dslr body that is worthy of them! (Only
joking-you cannot go wrong in buying an Oly dslr!).

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I'm not an Oly supporter or user but I think you make it look like more negative than it is.

Two Truths said:

Except that the Four Thirds system has...
(1) limited selection of own-brand lenses

Click to expand...

They cover most of the range needed. I would love to find an equivalent to the 12-60 in my mount of choice (Pentax). Or the 7-14, etc. They have pretty unique optics not matched by others.

Two Truths said:

(2) expensive upgrade path (E-3 costs 2x any similar camera)

Click to expand...

What is a similar camera? Once again I'd like to have the free angle LCD. The weather-sealing on the E-3 is also top notch. Quality is never cheap anyway.

Two Truths said:

(3) limited selection of prime lenses

Click to expand...

I like primes (I use Pentax) but if the quality of zooms is good enough, and they are light enough, the need for primes is less important.

Two Truths said:

(4) some key lenses are overpriced

Click to expand...

No doubt. But not that much if the quality meet expectations.

Two Truths said:

(5) very limited selection of third-party lenses

Click to expand...

True. Because it's easier for third-parties to concentrate on APS-C/FF which is like 95% of the market.

Two Truths said:

(6) looks like Four Thirds is being dumped in favour of Micro Four
Thirds

Click to expand...

Too early to tell. But at least there is an "upgrade" path.

--
Manu