Phineas Tarbolde , Mar 11, 2010; 02:21 p.m.
I recently had my beloved Fujifinepix S5Pro stolen and am in the market for a replacement DSLR.
It seems there are two gaps in the current Nikon product line:
1. between the D90 ($900) and D300 ($1520) ....difference of $620
2. between the D300 ($1520) and D700 ($2400) ...difference of $880
Furthermore Canon always seem to "give" you a bit more than Nikon.
Take for example similarly priced full frame DSLRs...Nikon D700 (12MP, $2400) vs Canon 5D Mark II (21MP, $2500). Am I missing something here? Is Canon truly a better value or is Nikon a better DSLR in terms of technology and build quality when compared to an similarly priced Canon?
Im sure its going to see-saw back and forth in the near future with new products from Nikon. But for now, I'm going to hang tight since Nikon just doesnt seem to offer what I want...which is a camera that sits/priced between D90 and D300 or D300 and D700. Thoughts?
Ray - , Mar 11, 2010; 02:27 p.m.
Well, AFAIK Nikon is way better in high ISO than a Full frame Canon.
If you want full frame D700, compare to price to Canon 5D but it doesn't do high ISO that good.
As for best bang for dollar. I use a Nikon D70, 6MP b/c I don't use high ISO. Haha. With Nikon you can acess the manual focus lenses too. Canon has changed their mount although you could hack it I think.
With my 6MP, I routinely print A3 out, that is about 16x12. I have printed 20x30 or larger I think. I have no reason to get more MP. It's gone to camera club exhibitions and competitions.
My mate got a Canon 400D or 500D or something. He doesn't print at all. Haha. He's very materialistic, he even wanted a titanium body.
Ray - , Mar 11, 2010; 02:28 p.m.
If you want pixels just shoot digital medium format. Sheez.
Arthur Richardson 
, Mar 11, 2010; 02:28 p.m.
Both systems are great. Each with their pro's and con's. If you already have a set of Nikon lenses, you'd be throwing money away chosing Canon.
It's an endless discussion......
Ray - , Mar 11, 2010; 02:31 p.m.
Hey, if pro's have shot with both brands? Does it mean neither is good enough for you?
I read that National Geographic for a double page magazine spread only require a 6MP file as its editorial. Source, Bob Krist.
Sanford Edelstein 
, Mar 11, 2010; 02:40 p.m.
Do you really want to walk around with a camera that the word "REBEL" on it?
Stephen Lewis 
, Mar 11, 2010; 02:43 p.m.
I think best bang for your buck really depends on the specifics of what you plan on doing with your treasure trove of lenses and body. Each manufacturer has something which appeals more to one camp than another...and then it changes. If you already have excellent lenses which fit either line, choose the appropriate line, simple economics.
Shun Cheung 
, Mar 11, 2010; 03:11 p.m.
Take for example similarly priced full frame DSLRs...Nikon D700 (12MP, $2400) vs Canon 5D Mark II (21MP, $2500). Am I missing something here? Is Canon truly a better value or is Nikon a better DSLR in terms of technology and build quality when compared to an similarly priced Canon?
What exactly is "value" to you?
For example, have you compared the AF capability between the two cameras? How about frame rate, weather sealing, the ability to control remote flashes ....
The 5D Mark II clearly has more pixels. To some people that is important; to some it is not. And there are other factors ....
Mihai Ciuca , Mar 11, 2010; 03:18 p.m.
Phineas,
Good luck to shop Canon! This way you'll save money to pay for an expensive lesson: "What you pay is what you get!" When you'll end bored by the cheap AF performance in Canon we will welcome you back to the dark side as a hopefully repented prodigal son!
Mark L , Mar 11, 2010; 03:29 p.m.
Then buy canon if megapixels are everything to you.
This discussion is closed.
