Canon T1i vs. Nikon D5000 - Help

I like the positioning of the Nikon wheel myself. But once you get used to the Canon position, it's no worse. The D90 has its second command wheel mounted horizontally on the front. That is awkward.

gif wrote:

the control dial in the 400d was near the shutter release button, in a vertical orientation. ergonomically, that makes absolutely no sense. the d40/d5000 have their control dial on the back of the camera in a horizontal orientation. this allows for easy manipulation with the thumb while holding the camera. with the 400d, you have to take your index finger off the shutter release button to operate the control dial... or you have to have index finger on one, middle finger on the other. that's a bad design in my opinion.

in addition to the d40, i also have a d90. to me, the button/dial locations are perfect. the user interface is ideal. it feels very intuitive and natural. from an ergonomic standpoint, i like the d90 way more than my d40. my pictures aren't any better, but it is way more fun to go out and shoot.

Darrakk said:

I like the positioning of the Nikon wheel myself. But once you get used to the Canon position, it's no worse. The D90 has its second command wheel mounted horizontally on the front. That is awkward.

Click to expand...

zigi_S said:

You are kidding right?

The T1i is a disaster if your concern is noise. Look at the crops. See the color shift between iso 100 and 400. Not to mention iso 800 and above. I just don't get it, how this camera can get a highly recomended rating. For what? Video? Even DR is much poorer than the competition. Canon is better only to sony and just because it doesn't have such huge blotches like sony. Canon blowed it this time.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zeegee/

Click to expand...

Left in JPEG mode and used in the situations the camera picks ISO 1600 for, there is very little noise and this is how most people will be using it outside of RAW and removing noise in PP. On the examples I have from a low light situation at ISO 1600 with large shadowy areas, I got a perfectly printable image with no visible noise at reasonable, practical, or useful image sizes. Outside of labs and shooting pieces of white paper trying to find noise, my ISO 800 images have turned out so well that it's a setting I'd use without hesitation when it was needed.

In real use, the T1i/500D beats the Nikon D5000 in high ISO.

brightcolours said:

In real use, the T1i/500D beats the Nikon D5000 in high ISO.

Click to expand...

You're kidding, right? You should see real size samples at equal ISOs and you'd see you're wrong. Facts are facts... the 450d and 40d were better cameras regarding IQ.

And about DXOMark, do you really think they don't know what they're doing? Who knows that? You do? Are you better than them?

--
Jose Rocha

http://olhares.aeiou.pt/jplacebo

Jose Rocha said:

brightcolours said:

In real use, the T1i/500D beats the Nikon D5000 in high ISO.

Click to expand...

You're kidding, right? You should see real size samples at equal ISOs and you'd see you're wrong. Facts are facts... the 450d and 40d were better cameras regarding IQ.

Click to expand...

http://www.photographybay.com/2009/06/09/canon-rebel-t1i-vs-nikon-d5000-review-iso-comparison-part-ii/



Right.

You are just full of nonsense, and why do you claim the 450D to be a better camera regarding IQ?

And the above site gives you full samples, so print away, make real size samples, and hold them side by side. And this is JPEG, not RAW, I know.

If you know any REAL side by side sources of REAL life high ISO images in RAW format, let me know. but I guarantee you, the results will again show the same (that the D5000 is not "better", and especially not "better" to the extent silly DXOmark states it to be.

Jose Rocha said:

And about DXOMark, do you really think they don't know what they're doing? Who knows that? You do? Are you better than them?

Click to expand...

Yes, they either don't know what they are doing, or they DO know their measurements are not measuring what they claim it is they are measuring, and that makes them morally wrong.

But if you do not have the ability to look critically at their claims... that is your short coming, not mine. One hint: compare DXO mark "results" from an 1D mk III and a D5000, then compare actually RESULTS from both cameras. You might get a clue.

Just thought that I'd post the first comments from the article cited above :

1. Bob Agens

June 9th, 2009 at 8:57 am

I think testing noise with factory defaults an jpeg is stupid. Everybody knows Canon puts a lot more noise reduction than Nikon by default. In this test the D5000 looks a lot worse the the Rebel. It may be a litlhe worse in fact, but if you look at level of detail captured instead of the noise itself you’ll see they they are very similar. Look at the two fine lines on the wall for example. At ISO 6400 the are just as visible on both, maybe a little more on the Nikon. With equivalent noise reduction they would be almost the same.

In my opinion this kind of test should be done with RAW and original brand converting software with zero noise reduction. Some people claim that Canon reduces noise even if you set it to zero. If that is true, then a common software like ACR should be used to read the raw.

1. jOsE

June 9th, 2009 at 10:13 am

I think you are totally biased, this test is absolutely useless, take a look at dpreview to learn how to make good and independent reviews.

lol

Get the Nikon, less baby rabbits are killed in the manufacturing process.

Matt

yeah, do not post all other responses, just pick out these two. And especially, do NOT look at the images yourself, and do NOT try to interpret what you are seeing, and what it means. Especially in the light of nonsense being spouted by DXOmark and such.

Don't want to start a war here, I was just trying to help the OP with his decision. I will not discuss it anymore, it's up to him to decide. I'm not bashing the 500D, it's simply the EISA winner this year on its segment.
But take a look at the 500D review here on DPReview:

• High ISO:

"The Nikon does the best job by maintaining more detail than the others and keeping the image relatively noise free, there are hardly any signs of chroma noise in its JPEG output.

Further up the sensitivity scale Nikon maintains its number one spot. The D5000's ISO3200 and 6400 results show visibly more detail than the 500D which also suffers to a greater degree from chroma noise blobs."

• DR (JPEG):

"The EOS 500D is slightly lagging behind the competition in terms of highlight range in JPEGs. Both the Nikon and Olympus have almost a 2/3 EV advantage over the Canon. To a large degree this is due to the default tone-curve applied to the JPEG output but nevertheless at standard settings the competitors produce more highlight detail than the 500D."

Stop being a fanboy and look at the facts. Or are you better than the DPReview reviewers too?

I'm not a Nikon die-hard, I just bought my D50 because it was the cheapest 4 years ago, the 350D was better but was 200€ more expensive, so...
Let the OP decide and good luck.

--
Jose Rocha

http://olhares.aeiou.pt/jplacebo

Jose Rocha said:

Don't want to start a war here, I was just trying to help the OP with his decision. I will not discuss it anymore, it's up to him to decide. I'm not bashing the 500D, it's simply the EISA winner this year on its segment.
But take a look at the 500D review here on DPReview:

• High ISO:

"The Nikon does the best job by maintaining more detail than the others and keeping the image relatively noise free, there are hardly any signs of chroma noise in its JPEG output.

Further up the sensitivity scale Nikon maintains its number one spot. The D5000's ISO3200 and 6400 results show visibly more detail than the 500D which also suffers to a greater degree from chroma noise blobs."

Click to expand...

And look at the DPreview results yourself, and wonder where the extra detail is, and also wonder why DPreview always still only tests standard JPEG output anyway, it is not hard to see all the faults in how DPreview goes about things.
Can it be done better? Yes. Do most other sites do better? No.

Jose Rocha said:

• DR (JPEG):

"The EOS 500D is slightly lagging behind the competition in terms of highlight range in JPEGs. Both the Nikon and Olympus have almost a 2/3 EV advantage over the Canon. To a large degree this is due to the default tone-curve applied to the JPEG output but nevertheless at standard settings the competitors produce more highlight detail than the 500D."

Click to expand...

A default tone curve, or actual dynamic range? What are we trying to determine here?

Jose Rocha said:

Stop being a fanboy and look at the facts. Or are you better than the DPReview reviewers too?

Click to expand...

I am certainly more critical, and maybe more analytical.

Jose Rocha said:

I'm not a Nikon die-hard, I just bought my D50 because it was the cheapest 4 years ago, the 350D was better but was 200€ more expensive, so...

Click to expand...

The D50 was a good choice. The D5000 is a bit less of a good choice, nowadays.

Jose Rocha said:

Let the OP decide and good luck.

--
Jose Rocha

http://olhares.aeiou.pt/jplacebo

Click to expand...

OP should get a 450D and not pay the 25% price markup for the newest gadget. In a couple of years, you'll be able to buy a 50D for less than what you will pay for either the 500D or the D5000 today. And the quality glass you buy in the meantime will be just as quality.

Darrakk said:

OP should get a 450D and not pay the 25% price markup for the newest gadget. In a couple of years, you'll be able to buy a 50D for less than what you will pay for either the 500D or the D5000 today. And the quality glass you buy in the meantime will be just as quality.

Click to expand...

I agree! But then I'm a cheap guy Seriously, the 450d is not less capable camera than the 500d.

--
Jose Rocha

http://olhares.aeiou.pt/jplacebo

even if that's true, no one should care. that is a pixel-peeper's nitpick. it shouldn't enter into the equation when deciding between the two cameras.

brightcolours said:

In real use, the T1i/500D beats the Nikon D5000 in high ISO.

Click to expand...

gif said:

even if that's true, no one should care. that is a pixel-peeper's nitpick. it shouldn't enter into the equation when deciding between the two cameras.

Click to expand...

Exactly. It's the job of reviewers to show every last pixel and spend all day studying lab tests. When it comes to reviews, some say the 500D outdoes the D5000 in many things, others will say that the D5000 is a superior camera to the 500D. Reviewers aren't immune to bias, the best thing to do would be to go to a site like Flickr or Pbase and search the databases there for images taken by both cameras, view them at various sizes, then decide. That's using real world examples and showing what can be done with both cameras.

(Just saying this for anyone who depends on lab tests and reports heavily for buying decisions)

brightcolours said:

If you know any REAL side by side sources of REAL life high ISO images in RAW format, let me know. but I guarantee you, the results will again show the same (that the D5000 is not "better", and especially not "better" to the extent silly DXOmark states it to be.

Click to expand...

The difference is less than half a stop in favor of the D5000 at low ISO, diminishing to no difference at all at a measured ISO 3200. Which seems to correspond with converted RAW samples from controlled testing. Not sure what's so wrong about those measurements, maybe elaborate on where they went "wrong"?

brightcolours said:

brightcolours said:

And about DXOMark, do you really think they don't know what they're doing? Who knows that? You do? Are you better than them?

Click to expand...

Yes, they either don't know what they are doing, or they DO know their measurements are not measuring what they claim it is they are measuring, and that makes them morally wrong.

Click to expand...

Their measurements seem to tell exactly what we can see here:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCGH1/DMCGH1RAW.HTM

Jose Rocha said:

brightcolours said:

In real use, the T1i/500D beats the Nikon D5000 in high ISO.

Click to expand...

You're kidding, right? You should see real size samples at equal ISOs and you'd see you're wrong. Facts are facts... the 450d and 40d were better cameras regarding IQ.

And about DXOMark, do you really think they don't know what they're doing? Who knows that? You do? Are you better than them?

Click to expand...

The same DXOmark shows that the D5000 and the 500D have almost identical noise. The Nikon is slightly better below 1600, the Canon is slightly better above that.

The samples on DP are shots taken with very different parameters. The Canon image is heavily sharpened and has more contrast. The Nikon one shows signs on NR, and looks teriible to my eyes.

Darrakk said:

Yes, but there are many more that are D lenses. Additionally, check the cost on ebay. There are currently 5 times more used D primes than S. As Michael said below, this is one of the reasons I went Canon rather than Nikon.

PerL said:

There are Nikon primes with AF-S that AF-focus with the D5000 - like the 35 1.8 AF-S, 60 2.8 Micro AF-S, 105 2.8 VR Micro AF-S, 300 F4 AF-S, and of course a bunch of expensive super teles (200 F2, 300 2.8, 500 F4, 600 F4).

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

For someone who posted this message in every thread about a low level Nikon body for a couple days you would think you would get it correct eventually. The "D" designation simply means that the lens transmits distance information to the camera, this helps with flash controll. As stated above, the true distinction is between "AF-S" and "AF" lenses. AF-S lenses have the focus motor in lens and can be focused by any Nikon body. AF lenses use the screw drive motor in the camera body to focus and cannot be auto focused by the D5k and below.

As for selection, the lack of cheap fast AF-S primes is a weakness in the Nikon lineup (though the 35mm 1.8 is wonderful and cheap). However, comparing the lens availablility for these cameras can get to be rather silly. One could argue that the 90 something lenses available as AF-S is too small. Others could argue that the fact that you cannot mount a Canon lens made before 1986 means the Canon lineup is too small (compared to being able to go all the way back to 1959 with Nikon). The point is, at some point you have to just draw a line and say "I dont give a crap" because it really has no practical effect on you.

That said, choice of lens is so much more important than body choice, so if one company has a lens that you must have that should certainly help you decide. The L series of f4 lenses is interesting and doesnt really have a Nikon equivalent.

As for the D5k v. T1i, I really have no opinion. I personally dont like the feature/price point of the D5k (not better than the D60 enough to be worth the price jump, not cheaper than the D90 enough to be worth the savings) but that's just me. In the D5000s defence, however, there are enough customizable buttons to never really have to go into the menus on a frequent basis (at least, in my experience).

dradam said:

For someone who posted this message in every thread about a low level Nikon body for a couple days you would think you would get it correct eventually. The "D" designation simply means that the lens transmits distance information to the camera, this helps with flash controll. As stated above, the true distinction is between "AF-S" and "AF" lenses. AF-S lenses have the focus motor in lens and can be focused by any Nikon body. AF lenses use the screw drive motor in the camera body to focus and cannot be auto focused by the D5k and below.

Click to expand...

I am aware of this. I just found it easier when I was considering lenses to look at the D designation instead of the AF vs AF-S. Yes, there are a very few AF-S lenses that are also marked D, but for the most part if you see f/#.#D is means no in body motor. G lenses also transmit distance information to the body. I do unserstand the difference between AF and AF-S.

dradam said:

As for selection, the lack of cheap fast AF-S primes is a weakness in the Nikon lineup (though the 35mm 1.8 is wonderful and cheap). However, comparing the lens availablility for these cameras can get to be rather silly. One could argue that the 90 something lenses available as AF-S is too small. Others could argue that the fact that you cannot mount a Canon lens made before 1986 means the Canon lineup is too small (compared to being able to go all the way back to 1959 with Nikon). The point is, at some point you have to just draw a line and say "I dont give a crap" because it really has no practical effect on you.

Click to expand...

The problem is that Nikon DOES have a really impressive selection of fast primes. You just can't use them on the D5000. My argument is simple: If you are interesting in buying a Nikon, don't buy lower than the D90. It's a fantastic camera, miles ahead of the D5000, plus you get access to a lot more quality Nikon glass. In my opinion, buying into the Nikon system, and NOT getting a D90, is a huge mistake.

dradam said:

That said, choice of lens is so much more important than body choice, so if one company has a lens that you must have that should certainly help you decide. The L series of f4 lenses is interesting and doesnt really have a Nikon equivalent.

Click to expand...

Again, it's not even that Nikon doesn't HAVE the lenses. They do. They just choose to make cameras that don't work (fully) with those lenses. I realize this is a cost issue, but it is an issue none the less.

dradam said:

As for the D5k v. T1i, I really have no opinion. I personally dont like the feature/price point of the D5k (not better than the D60 enough to be worth the price jump, not cheaper than the D90 enough to be worth the savings) but that's just me. In the D5000s defence, however, there are enough customizable buttons to never really have to go into the menus on a frequent basis (at least, in my experience).

Click to expand...

I don't like the feature/price point of either to be honest. The T1i isn't nearly enough of an upgrade over the XSi to justify the price. For the D5000, I agree with you entirely. In fact if you can afford it, the best way to enter digital photography (body wise) is with the D90.

Darrakk said:

dradam said:

For someone who posted this message in every thread about a low level Nikon body for a couple days you would think you would get it correct eventually. The "D" designation simply means that the lens transmits distance information to the camera, this helps with flash controll. As stated above, the true distinction is between "AF-S" and "AF" lenses. AF-S lenses have the focus motor in lens and can be focused by any Nikon body. AF lenses use the screw drive motor in the camera body to focus and cannot be auto focused by the D5k and below.

Click to expand...

I am aware of this. I just found it easier when I was considering lenses to look at the D designation instead of the AF vs AF-S. Yes, there are a very few AF-S lenses that are also marked D, but for the most part if you see f/#.#D is means no in body motor. G lenses also transmit distance information to the body. I do unserstand the difference between AF and AF-S.

Click to expand...

Actually, G is the designation for lenses that do not include aperture ring. The D5000 and below can autofocus anything that is designated AF-S or AF-I. But if the other way is helpful to you, by all means. I just wanted to clarify.

Darrakk said:

Darrakk said:

As for selection, the lack of cheap fast AF-S primes is a weakness in the Nikon lineup (though the 35mm 1.8 is wonderful and cheap). However, comparing the lens availablility for these cameras can get to be rather silly. One could argue that the 90 something lenses available as AF-S is too small. Others could argue that the fact that you cannot mount a Canon lens made before 1986 means the Canon lineup is too small (compared to being able to go all the way back to 1959 with Nikon). The point is, at some point you have to just draw a line and say "I dont give a crap" because it really has no practical effect on you.

Click to expand...

The problem is that Nikon DOES have a really impressive selection of fast primes. You just can't use them on the D5000. My argument is simple: If you are interesting in buying a Nikon, don't buy lower than the D90. It's a fantastic camera, miles ahead of the D5000, plus you get access to a lot more quality Nikon glass. In my opinion, buying into the Nikon system, and NOT getting a D90, is a huge mistake.

Click to expand...

I think we are closer to agreement that it may seem. My argument is: for the market that is generally interested in the lower end cameras would also not generally be in the market for rare legacy lenses. Because of this, when people keep bring it up as a factor for those making decisions it simply is unneeded info that can scare people away from an otherwise fine camera for reasons that will never be important to them.

Darrakk said:

Darrakk said:

That said, choice of lens is so much more important than body choice, so if one company has a lens that you must have that should certainly help you decide. The L series of f4 lenses is interesting and doesnt really have a Nikon equivalent.

Click to expand...

Again, it's not even that Nikon doesn't HAVE the lenses. They do. They just choose to make cameras that don't work (fully) with those lenses. I realize this is a cost issue, but it is an issue none the less.

Darrakk said:

As for the D5k v. T1i, I really have no opinion. I personally dont like the feature/price point of the D5k (not better than the D60 enough to be worth the price jump, not cheaper than the D90 enough to be worth the savings) but that's just me. In the D5000s defence, however, there are enough customizable buttons to never really have to go into the menus on a frequent basis (at least, in my experience).

Click to expand...

I don't like the feature/price point of either to be honest. The T1i isn't nearly enough of an upgrade over the XSi to justify the price. For the D5000, I agree with you entirely. In fact if you can afford it, the best way to enter digital photography (body wise) is with the D90.

Click to expand...

Again, we are in agreement. If I hadn't had very specific reasons to choose a D60 I absolutely would have gone for a D90 or similar. Given the same decision today, I think I would have made it again without the D5000 even really entering the thought process.

dradam said:

Actually, G is the designation for lenses that do not include aperture ring. The D5000 and below can autofocus anything that is designated AF-S or AF-I. But if the other way is helpful to you, by all means. I just wanted to clarify.

Click to expand...

Just for clairification, the reason the D designation was more helpful to me than just AF is because when I was looking into all of it it was with the intention of pairing lenses to the D90, and I knew the AF lenses with the D designation would allow have full functionality of the camera (all the mtering modes and the like). Whereas some AF won't have 3D matrix metering and won't have the ability to use TTL flash. So, all said it was easier for me to think in terms of "AF-S is good, as are lenses with D designation".