Choosing a DSLR

Those are the two top brands and neither has an advantage over the other. The best advice is to hold the two brands in your hand and choose the one which is most comfortable. That's a pretty important way to judge, because serious photography involves seeing the viewfinder settings and adjusting them without removing the camera from your eye. It boils down to which fits your hands, fingers and face best.

$700 is pretty entry level, believe it or not.

Enjoy your new hobby.

Chapin said:

Chapin wrote:

Hello,

I am trying to decide between some DSLR Cameras mostly between Canon and Nikon. I really do not know much about cameras i know enough about some lenses but I would really like some help on picking a camera that I can have and use for many years. The reason that I am getting it is because I am taking a digital photo class, but I would like to find a camera that I would be able to use in that class and be able to use for personal purposes afterwards.

So, which brand of camera should i be looking at, Canon or Nikon?

I have a reasonable price range but nothing over $700.

responses are appreciated and thank you

Click to expand...

Nothing much between them. I went with Nikon because I like the added benefit of using old manual lenses.

Your budget will get you a good camera of either make, but then you'll need some lenses and accessories so budget will increase. Better to have a good look at the 2nd-hand market.

Chapin said:

Chapin wrote:

Hello,

I am trying to decide between some DSLR Cameras mostly between Canon and Nikon. I really do not know much about cameras i know enough about some lenses but I would really like some help on picking a camera that I can have and use for many years. The reason that I am getting it is because I am taking a digital photo class, but I would like to find a camera that I would be able to use in that class and be able to use for personal purposes afterwards.

So, which brand of camera should i be looking at, Canon or Nikon?

I have a reasonable price range but nothing over $700.

responses are appreciated and thank you

Click to expand...

Canon? Nikon?

It doesn't matter even the tiniest little bit.

If you can actually handle them to get an idea of what they feel like, you'll know pretty quickly which one to go with.

Do the same with some Pentax and Sony DSLRs - they are just as good.

Chapin said:

Chapin wrote:

So, which brand of camera should i be looking at, Canon or Nikon?

I have a reasonable price range but nothing over $700.

responses are appreciated and thank you

Click to expand...

Canon v. Nikon -- zero real difference if you don't already have a reason for one vs the other.

For $700 you might chose a used Nikon d300. Or a used Nikon d200, which would leave more money for lenses. If you go used, get it from a shop that has a good return policy and a warranty. Don't get it until you have time to put it through its paces and verify functionality.

These two cameras (and I'm sure there are exact equivalents in Canon, I just don't know what they are) are professional level bodies, but a few years old. The advantage they have is extra buttons to make changing settings easier. Since you mention a photography class, being able to change settings easily will come in handy.

I have a Nikon d200 and I think it's great. It has more than enough picture quality to make 18x24 prints (i.e. A2)

I don't buy into the ergonomics hype. The camera is a tool. Good ergonomics are good, but they're not the primary thing. But this comes from someone who has carried around a big old 4x5 camera and those rugged metal 35mm cameras of a previous generation. Imagine if Ansel Adams had chosen something other than an 8x10 camera for his work in the west on the grounds that the 8x10 was too heavy.

Within a given price range Nikon, Canon, Pentax, and Sony are pretty much equal in quality. I'm also a believer in handling the cameras and choosing based on how the camera feels in your hands and how you like the layout of the controls and menus. If you're not comfortable with the feel of the camera and the working of the controls there's a good chance that you will not be happy with the camera.

BobSC said:

BobSC wrote:

BobSC said:

Chapin wrote:

So, which brand of camera should i be looking at, Canon or Nikon?

I have a reasonable price range but nothing over $700.

responses are appreciated and thank you

Click to expand...

Canon v. Nikon -- zero real difference if you don't already have a reason for one vs the other.

...

I don't buy into the ergonomics hype. The camera is a tool. Good ergonomics are good, but they're not the primary thing. But this comes from someone who has carried around a big old 4x5 camera and those rugged metal 35mm cameras of a previous generation. Imagine if Ansel Adams had chosen something other than an 8x10 camera for his work in the west on the grounds that the 8x10 was too heavy.

Click to expand...

So if there are 'zero differences', and I assume you mean in image quality, then surely ergonomics then do matter and could well be the deciding factor.

Brian A

which brand of camera should i be looking at, Canon

Chapin said:

Chapin wrote:
So, which brand of camera should i be looking at, Canon or Nikon?

Click to expand...

Millions own Nikon and millions own Canon. Ford and Chevy. Do you really think there's a right answer ? Buy based on a friends recommendation, how you like the feel, some feature that appeals to you when you read reviews (I hope you're reading reviews on this site and not JUST asking random strangers for advice !), or based on price ... if you're not aware of some reason that you need something offered by one company and not the other, then it honestly doesn't matter.

I chose Nikon over Canon because at the time, the Nikon camera I was looking at offered a quiet shutter option and the Canon didn't, and because the Nikon offers Auto ISO in M mode with exposure compensation and the Canon didn't. Two features that 99% of photographers might not use, but both systems are so good that I had the luxury of choosing based on those features.

- Dennis

BobSC said:

BobSC wrote:
I don't buy into the ergonomics hype. The camera is a tool. Good ergonomics are good, but they're not the primary thing. But this comes from someone who has carried around a big old 4x5 camera and those rugged metal 35mm cameras of a previous generation. Imagine if Ansel Adams had chosen something other than an 8x10 camera for his work in the west on the grounds that the 8x10 was too heavy.

Click to expand...

Agreed on this.

Also, I don't know where the OP lives, but I live in London and finding a shop with camera on display to "try the ergonomic feel" is becoming almost impossible... In the few remaining places you tend to find only current or previous generation low-end models of 2-3 brands. Good luck if you're interested in a specific model! Moreover in those shops the cameras are chained and you can fondle with them for a few minutes in not ideal positions. I'm not sure you can honestly make up your mind on ergonomics in these conditions.

As Bob, I bought my first DSLR (Canon 350D) based on specs and then got used to its way of working. I discovered the value of better ergonomics only after I moved up a step in Canon's food chain (20D), but again I bought it for its specs. The fact that it was more pleasurable to use was icing on the cake.

To he OP: I also agree that given the your (lack of) requirements, any entry level camera from any of the major brands (including but not limited to Canon & Nikon) would do. Or any previous-generation mid-level second-hand camera from the same brands. Get also an entry-level zoom and, if you have money left, wait till you've decided what kind of photography you want to focus on.

With your budget you are restricted to the bottom of the line of any dSLR system.

I would look very hard to find a kit or bundle that contains Nikon D5100 and Nikkor AF-S 18-105 mm VR.

If you like more Canon then look for Canon 600D bundled with Canon 18-135 km IS.

Good luck!

Hugowolf said:

Hugowolf wrote:

Hugowolf said:

BobSC wrote:

Hugowolf said:

Chapin wrote:

So, which brand of camera should i be looking at, Canon or Nikon?

I have a reasonable price range but nothing over $700.

responses are appreciated and thank you

Click to expand...

Canon v. Nikon -- zero real difference if you don't already have a reason for one vs the other.

...

I don't buy into the ergonomics hype. The camera is a tool. Good ergonomics are good, but they're not the primary thing. But this comes from someone who has carried around a big old 4x5 camera and those rugged metal 35mm cameras of a previous generation. Imagine if Ansel Adams had chosen something other than an 8x10 camera for his work in the west on the grounds that the 8x10 was too heavy.

Click to expand...

So if there are 'zero differences', and I assume you mean in image quality, then surely ergonomics then do matter and could well be the deciding factor.

Click to expand...

No. I meant there was no /real/ difference, including ergonomics.. they both score 10 out of 10 in ergonomics. I've used all sorts of cameras including square TLRs and disposables. I can't think of a single instance in all those years where I can blame missing a shot on ergonomics. I've missed shots for not knowing how to use the gear, and I've missed shots because the gear wasn't up to the task, but I've never missed a shot because of how it felt in my hand.
If you're a pro and you're going to be shooting the Olympics, say, 18 hours a day for two weeks, then I see how miniscule differences in ergonomics would be a real difference for you, but for the rest of us I just don't see it. Even for them differences in ergonomics are probably outweighed by other factors.

BobSC said:

BobSC wrote:

BobSC said:

Hugowolf wrote:

BobSC said:

BobSC wrote:

BobSC said:

Chapin wrote:

So, which brand of camera should i be looking at, Canon or Nikon?

I have a reasonable price range but nothing over $700.

responses are appreciated and thank you

Click to expand...

Canon v. Nikon -- zero real difference if you don't already have a reason for one vs the other.

...

I don't buy into the ergonomics hype. The camera is a tool. Good ergonomics are good, but they're not the primary thing. But this comes from someone who has carried around a big old 4x5 camera and those rugged metal 35mm cameras of a previous generation. Imagine if Ansel Adams had chosen something other than an 8x10 camera for his work in the west on the grounds that the 8x10 was too heavy.

Click to expand...

So if there are 'zero differences', and I assume you mean in image quality, then surely ergonomics then do matter and could well be the deciding factor.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

BobSC said:

No. I meant there was no /real/ difference, including ergonomics.. they both score 10 out of 10 in ergonomics. I've used all sorts of cameras including square TLRs and disposables. I can't think of a single instance in all those years where I can blame missing a shot on ergonomics. I've missed shots for not knowing how to use the gear, and I've missed shots because the gear wasn't up to the task, but I've never missed a shot because of how it felt in my hand.

Click to expand...

I have held entry level camera that very quickly it was obvious that I wouldn't be able to shoot with them for more than a few minutes because of the hand grip. Nikon's mounting of lenses counter-clockwise is also difficult to get used to, since almost everything else in the world (from the tinest screw or nut and bolt) mounts clockwise.

Maybe you have small hands, but I certainly could not give 10/10 for ergonomics to all Canon and Nikon entry level cameras.

Brian A

Hugowolf said:

Hugowolf wrote:
I have held entry level camera that very quickly it was obvious that I wouldn't be able to shoot with them for more than a few minutes because of the hand grip. Nikon's mounting of lenses counter-clockwise is also difficult to get used to, since almost everything else in the world (from the tinest screw or nut and bolt) mounts clockwise.

Maybe you have small hands, but I certainly could not give 10/10 for ergonomics to all Canon and Nikon entry level cameras.

Brian A

Click to expand...

Funny. In nearly 30 years of using Nikon cameras I never noticed that it was counter clockwise. I always just lined up the dots.

But whatever. If things like that bother you then it's an issue for you, and if you perceive it as an issue then it is. Some people obviously have issues with ergonomics. I suspect that (just like everything else) the people with the issues are going to be more vocal than those without, so I like to point out that not everyone has the same opinion in that regard.

Here's an ergonomics issue that /does/ bother me: on the iPhone 4 it is nearly impossible to use the side mounted take-a-photo button without getting one's fingers in front of the lens.

Obviously the ergonomics of a camera is important to some people and not to others. However the only way the OP can know if ergonomics matters to him is to handle the cameras.

Hello Friend, its very tough to compare both the brands, as they both are equally good and have turnover of millions of dollars. It would be idiotic to make a comparison between them. Both Nikon and Canon makes lenses and camera body for commercial, military, space agencies from decades. $700 is a good budget and you will be able to get some best lenses, which are smooth and technically have good features. Just do some research over internet or by visiting their sites and you would get to know all the details. If you are a beginner then you can get good models in both the brands below 700$, go ahead and Good Luck!

mgd43 said:

mgd43 wrote:

Obviously the ergonomics of a camera is important to some people and not to others. However the only way the OP can know if ergonomics matters to him is to handle the cameras.

Click to expand...

After working with a variety of cameras for a decade or more a person will have a good idea how important they really are for them. But for someone who has never done it to spend 10 minutes in a camera shop they will learn nothing about how important it is to them. It would be like picking a guitar without knowing how to play one, or picking a car without knowing how to drive one. The odds of making the right decision are against.

The exception would be perhaps something like the Nikon Coolpix 5000. When it came out (2001) testers in the USA (presumably with larger hands than the engineers in Japan) realized that there was a light sensor on the front of the camera (for flash) that one's finger tended to obscure.

BobSC said:

BobSC wrote:

BobSC said:

mgd43 wrote:

Obviously the ergonomics of a camera is important to some people and not to others. However the only way the OP can know if ergonomics matters to him is to handle the cameras.

Click to expand...

After working with a variety of cameras for a decade or more a person will have a good idea how important they really are for them. But for someone who has never done it to spend 10 minutes in a camera shop they will learn nothing about how important it is to them. It would be like picking a guitar without knowing how to play one, or picking a car without knowing how to drive one. The odds of making the right decision are against.

The exception would be perhaps something like the Nikon Coolpix 5000. When it came out (2001) testers in the USA (presumably with larger hands than the engineers in Japan) realized that there was a light sensor on the front of the camera (for flash) that one's finger tended to obscure.

Click to expand...

I disagree. I think one can tell fairly quickly if they like the ergonomics of one better than another. If not, then ergonomics is not a factor for that person.

mgd43 said:

mgd43 wrote:
I disagree. I think one can tell fairly quickly if they like the ergonomics of one better than another. If not, then ergonomics is not a factor for that person.

Click to expand...

But a neophyte has no idea of the relative importance.

As they say, it has to make a difference to make a difference. A neophyte will have no way of knowing if, after he puts in the hundreds of hours necessary to attain basic competency, whether the difference in ergonomics will make any difference in the photographic outcomes.

For me, wearing bifocals, being able to see what I'm doing is way more important to photographic outcomes than how the camera feels. Being able to predict what the camera will do (e.g., focus lag, metering mode etc.) is way more important too.

Consider the iPhone. Could the ergonomics be worse for a camera?