Nikon or Canon??

I have worked with both Nikons and Canons for professional model photography, and catalog photography, unmoving products. In all aspects Canon HIGHLY outperforms. I wish I had never bought my Nikon 70D and instead gotten a Canon Eos series. Even the rebels are better. Nothing compares. I will try and post comparison pictures here

 

I'd love to hear some specifications. How, in your opinion does Canon "outperform"? Every expirience I had with both Nikon and Canon tells me, that both are on equal standarts, picture quality wise. Everything else, like handling is just personal preference and should be treated as such.

By the way: the lense does a WHOLE lot for the quality too.

 

I've always wondered if you can switch lenses between nikon dslr and old non-digital lense nikons, I'm asking this not because I have a brand preference, it would just save me lots of money because I have a 35mm nikon that
I used to use for photography class serveral years ago, and I have spare lenses for it (80-200mm and 28-105mm) then I could just buy the camera body right? I really love the 80-200 lense so it would be great to be able to use it again.

 

Most old Nikkor lenses can be used on the newer DSLRs. I'd need to know the exact name of the lense (it's not only called 80-200mm, there are a couple of letter-combinations, which hint to the exact model your lens is) to tell you exactly, but unless it's a REALY old lense, you should be fine ^^

 

Thank you so much ^_^ this will really make the leap to DLSR so much easier.
I have a point and shoot at the moment, but I'm looking forward to making the switch.

 

We seem to keep revisiting the same Nikon vs. Canon platitudes in this thread. *amused*

"It's not about the bike." - Lance Armstrong

The true issue and one that we seem to be skirting because it's pretty arbitrary at the end of the day is this - established brand loyalists are going to be hard pressed to switch brands when they have lenses and familiarity with a brand and the "issue" is how to advise someone who is trying to buy into a dslr "brand" for the first time! We also seem to leave out the fact that there are other companies that build dslrs! If one is going to feel compelled to compare, then the correct comparisons need to be used - the Canon Rebel is not the camera to put up next to the Nikon D200. This is an important distinction and one that seems to be forgotten in the chest beating. The Canon 40D is the equivelant of the Nikon D300 - but if you're shopping for either body then you're most probably not persusing this thread for brand advice.

The popular start-up rigs for comparisons sake would be the Canon Rebel xTi and the Nikon D80. Either kit would be a wonderful way to learn digital slrs - shop for bundled kits, shop for price, and consider the family of "affordable" lenses each brand offers.

Flip a coin. Or do the right thing and choose Nikon. *runs*

 

I could post in this thread, but Zagzagael already said it all. Including the Nikon lean at the end....

*Runs after Z screaming "...and Zeiss!" *

-K

 

I have never heard of a Nikon 70D and relax, look at any sporting event, see all those black zoom lenses? there professional photographers using Nikons to make a living. If there was any significant advantage to using Canon they would All be white lenses. As it stands theres a healthy portion of both.



Zagzagael - the Nikon D300 is sooooo close to Double the price of the 40D while they are similar in specs there certainly not competing in price, the D300's price is much closer to Canons full sensor 5D.

I Agree with everything else you said, and lets hope people are not basing there purchases off this thread alone.

 

hrm actually its the photographer XD not the camera as posted above....

to me i fell in love with canon becos of Sassystrawberry.... i have a close friend of mine using a nikon and i tried to use it but hrm didn;t get the hang of it [neither did said friend get the hang of my canon]

but if u ask me i do think pricing wise canon is better [i mean with same amount u get a nikon u can get a canon with more stuff? *cough cough*]

but its true professionals prefer nikon [i have not figure that out yet?] but there are many switching to canon.... XD

for doll photography i guess as far as i know [meaning the people i know XD] uses Canon XD [has no idea y either]

on another note sometimes the photography i produced is just abit Woah to me, like 'did i produce that?' kinda thought... so yeah... for someone going to get a new dslr go with what u feel comfortable with XD [and not based on a forum :P]

so to say i think nikon has a bigger frame the canon [i have small hands XD]

but there;s also sony which has tempted me [i want a 350? soon >.>'] and also my dream camera was a Panasonic L1 [still dreaming XD]

so thats my 2 cents XD

 

my friends told me that NIKON is suitable for taking people, and CANON is suit for taking scenery~ i am using CANON now( OLD VERSION ==), the pic is great and colouful !! I LOVE CANON!!!

 

i currently own a nikon D80 but i haven't had the time to fully explore and play with all its function.

 

I also had to face this question a few months ago myself when I bought my first SLR. The conventional advice is "buy what you already have" (as in lenses you already own from film cameras) but to a total newbie with no existing collection, that is unhelpful. I'll list what I have observed and follow with my decision and reasoning.

• Canon and Nikon have comparable optics within price classes. Each makes lenses targeted at different price levels. Within these rough classes, the lenses as a whole are more or less close enough in performance to each other.
• Canon is the bigger company and updates their SLR lineup, both bodies and lenses, more frequently. This is both a blessing (new tech earlier) and a curse (upgrade treadmill).
• Nikon's lens mount is older and has more lenses in total. This is both a blessing (good and cheap used lenses--especially used manual-focus ones) and a curse (huge compatibility charts for lenses and bodies).
• That said, Canon has more autofocusing lenses in their lineup.
• Nikon has a nicer flash system. I don't/can't really know the specifics so much, but there seems to be largely consensus on this, even among Canon shooters. But what I do know that middle-class ("prosumer") and better Nikon cameras have a built in wireless commander which can control Nikon flash units that are off the camera. Canon does not offer similar built-in functionality at any price.
• Nikon supposedly has better ergonomics and service support. (That's the reputation anyway.)
• Ultimately the choice doesn't matter since both systems are excellent. (But a choice still needs to be made!)

Knowing all this, I really really wanted to go Nikon. But in the end, I ended up going Canon after all. For those in the same boat, let me tell you why.

• Cost. Between comparable lenses in matching price classes, Nikon generally charges more. Anywhere from 0%-50% more, but usually around 20%. It is not so noticeable on cheaper lenses but it is really noticeable on the more expensive glass. That said, Nikon offers a 5 year warranty instead of Canon's 1 year so YMMV.

This was made clear as day to me when I made a huge spreadsheet of all the current lenses sold on Adorama and made projections of the lenses I thought I would buy over the life of the system. For me, the cost difference was about 40%! No extended warranty is worth that! Widening the gap, Canon runs rebate periods seasonally and predictably twice a year, potentially further reducing up-front cost. It helps that the rebates are instant now rather than mail-in.

I'll list a few other things, but since I don't make money on photography, cost was the biggest factor by far. The rest are justifying edits in comparison, so they sound rather self-assuring. That said, here they are anyway:

• Development speed. Canon updating more frequently is positive to me, since new technologies and features can be offered more quickly, which also pushes down prices on stuff that already exists more quickly. In theory, this also means that Canon should be able to address their shortcomings faster than Nikon can.
• Ease of compatibility. Canon lenses have motors built into the lens, no focus motor necessary in-body. Canon abandoned their FD manual focus mount instead of patching it as Nikon did. So EF lenses work on EF mounts, all functions supported, always. Easy. Nikon have large compatibility charts and even more alphabet soup in their lens names due to their history. These charts become especially important if you actually want to take advantage of the cheap used manual focus lenses. That and the Nikon D40 and D60 bodies (consumer, i.e. cheapest) require lens motors since they lack in-body autofocus motors. Since I would be stuck at the cheap end of the bodies to afford buying my first lenses, this mattered.
• More autofocus lenses. Mentioned above.
• Exotic lenses. Nikon has PC (perspective control) lenses but from what I understand, there are compatibility concerns about mounting these on certain bodies. Canon TS-E equivalents have no such concerns and cost about $500 less across the line. The Canon MP-E dedicated macro lens is something that has no equivalent on Nikon's side. It was just nice to know that if I wanted something weird, I would already be in the right system.
• EF-mount accepting other lenses. Due to physical differences in focal distance and mount diameter, it is possible to mount lenses from many other manufacturers onto a Canon body, including Nikon lenses. A lot of automated functions will be lost, but it will work. An interesting novelty only available to Canon users. Sadly, what I'd really like are Canon lenses on Nikon bodies...

These were all factors for me. I made a decision that I believe is correct for me. Things I like may not matter to you and vice versa. The cost difference may be totally different or irrelevant depending on your interests and lens choices.

I thought I would share my thought processes for new users stuck in a similar Canikon rut. Thanks for reading!

 

Very nice post ^ I believe the higher end canon speedlight flash is able to wirelessly control other speedlights. Which isnt a bad thing to leave out of the body as most people wouldnt use it, especially on the consumer/prosumer models.

 

High end Nikon flashes also have commander mode, which is missing from D40 and D60. But to be missing it on Canon bodies, two things:

• You need a commander unit, be it the standalone transmitter ($200) or a 580EX ($300-350). It's extra cost for an "inferior" flash system. And if you are using the Speedlite as commander, this implies that you are buying two Canon flashes! If I was serious about off camera flash, I can get a full featured off-camera setup with a Vivitar 285HV for the price of a single midrange Speedlite.
• A barebones off-camera lighting configuration for travel--one body and one flash--is impossible. Canon users must have an extra hardware item to keep around (and the batteries for it).

I've reached the point where I have the lenses I need for the near/near-ish future. Now that I'm considering flashes, I always wonder what could have been if I'd gone the other way...

BTW, Nikon recently released a DVD video tutorial of their CLS flash system. Supposedly, it is excellent instruction.

 

Gaiswill, thank you for such an informative and very well-researched post!!! You definitely did your research!!! I had often wondered about the differences between the 2 companies and your post definitely helped!

 

You're very welcome! It took me a lot of time to make the decision for myself so I would like to see the info compiled and shared for maximum benefit to others. Canon vs. Nikon is one of those holy war things so cutting through the fanboy crap is always good.

Even though I chose Canon, I think it's pretty clear that I'm not really a fanboy of them. Their relative inadequacies in flash is the major sticking point for me in my masochistic search for buyer's remorse.

And I do not mean to ignore non-Canikon cameras. They are fine machines that fought seriously in my mind also. Olympus, Sony and Pentax are great innovators and make great products. I did not ignore them when I considered my SLR. But SLR systems are about lenses and not bodies, and in that they were simply not the dominant two. I was fully intending to grow the system now and over many years and for that, Canikon have the advantage.

I would like to end with an offer to others, old photogs and new. I have created spreadsheets of most currently available in-production lenses for both the Canon EF and Nikon F systems. These are the logical "children" of the original comparison spreadsheet that I had used to decide between the two systems.

PM me with your email address and I'll send my most recent versions of both to you.

I live in the United States and so the pricing data may be less useful for those elsewhere. If it's available new from Adorama or B&H, it should be on the chart. I use those stores as the benchmarks since the prices there don't fluctuate stock market style like on Amazon. The prices are slightly dated since the last time I could work on it was over a month ago. Due to holiday and recession distortions, I will probably not update prices until well into January.

However, because I shoot Canon now, that document takes precedence and is and will be more complete and updated overall. The Nikon lens data has significant gaps in physical dimensions info and such. But the core data, the list of lenses, their specs and prices, are there.

I do not ignore any lens, for even though plastic kit lenses may have questionable build quality and optics, they are cheap and very light, yet still sharp when stopped down--thus becoming worthy of notice. (200g feels much much lighter than 1kg, I must say!) I log in everything for convenience and completeness: physical size, mass, aperture blade counts, compatible lens hoods, current estimated street price, etc. The only thing missing are lens tests. (That would be beyond the scope of this price survey.)

I even have a convenient column for crop factor conversion for users of small sensor (APS-C) SLRs (that includes me). Canon APS-C sensors are slightly smaller than the competitions' since they designed and manufactured them on their own instead of getting them OEM elsewhere (from Sony, I believe?). So Canon crop factor is approximately 1.6x vs. 1.5x for Nikon. It's pretty minor overall, but I paid attention to it anyway.

My friend picked up Canon and Nikon's lens catalogs on a recent trip to Japan. This should really help me fill in the nitpicky details, when I get around to it.

Aside: he bought Canon because he willing to trust that I'd evaluate everything about the systems more completely than he would. That and we can now share and loan lenses. Your RL photog friends may make your decision for you!

You are, of course, free to use the documents as you see fit without crediting me. It is just a product survey and I do not own rights to anything there. However, please do not make additions with the intent to send them back to me as a favor. I appreciate the thought, but reconciling the data will probably take more work than to input it on my own--which is time-consuming, but rather brainless and "easy".

 

I shoot Nikon and prefer their glass over all other dslr brands - of course, I also shoot Hasselblads and prefer Zeiss optics over anything in the universe. Perhaps there is a noticeable difference in price on comparable pro glass - I haven't noticed this, but I do know - from experience - that the long-term Nikon warranty is worth its weight in gold.

How many lenses would a hobbyist actually need???? Even as a professional shooter, I only use three lenses and one of those over and over and over....

It's an intriguing cost analysis - congrats on your new rig!!! Happy shooting!

 

This thread is really interesting. My fiance and I have finally agreed that we need another camera body. We haven't decided if we should get another Canon or a new Nikon. We don't have strong opinions about either. I have personally played with a D80, D300, Rebel XT, Rebel XTi, 40D, and something Mark 1 or 2 I think (I really have no idea, giant camera was thrust into my hands and I had fun). I have also played with a Fujifilm infrared camera, now that was awesome. Each of the cameras had their pros and cons. The professional camera took awesome low light pictures, but the body was incredibly large for my hands and very heavy, the price was a bit out of my range as well. Besides being confusing the Nikon cameras worked fabulously, but I didn't have enough time to really figure out if they were right for me. The 40D has live preview, it is extremely handy and a major player in our future decision.

My partner and I are weighing our decision on a few other factors. One, with another Canon we can share lenses with each other as well as with our friends who have more money in their glass than their brand new car. If you have a friend you trust in town, sharing lenses can be very useful. Nothing compares to being able to test drive a lens, body, or flash before buying. Two, we have really enjoyed toying with another friend's Nikon macro set up with his crazy awesome flashes. Again with the ability to test drive things. I shoot only a few specific things usually: dolls, tarantulas, and people (mostly candids). Considering what I shoot and when points me in the direction of what lenses I want. Performance in low light is important for me in both lenses and bodies because my favorite time to take photos is at night when I am awake.

I am a very adventurous person. If I am not on a bus traveling somewhere new, I'm at home whining about being home. My camera goes everywhere with me. It has to be durable and versatile. I tend to pick one lens as a favorite and it lives on my body. So while I love many of Canon's lenses, a comparable Nikon one would suit me fine. Smaller is better in my case. Because we currently only have the one camera and just two lenses, our ability to change brands is quite easy at the moment. As soon as we start to buy more lenses our options will be greatly narrowed.

I have smaller hands and prefer smaller camera bodies, so I'll often go with one that is lower in the line up than one with all the bells and whistles. Aside from having to learn how a new body works, I am fairly open minded about things. Currently all I have is an older Rebel XT that I have used so much the rubber grip is gone in the shape of my fingers. It frequently has errors because I've dropped it one too many times, and there is bits of paper towel taped over the flash into a mini diffuser. Anything would be better, but I just love my old klunker so much I haven't been able to give it up. I'm at least its third owner, and the fact that it has performed this well until now is remarkable.

I have no idea if this is helpful to anybody else, but it is to me. Just think about what you want to accomplish, where and when you'll shoot the most, and what combination of body specs and lenses you'll need to get there and it will make the decision easier. Both brands are equally good, just in different ways.

 

My DH prefers Canons over any other brand of camera so he has bought me a new Canon CP some numbers IS. I will read the manual as well as got to handle camera at store where it was purchased. I don't get it until Christmas Eve but I am excited as this will be my first brand new never owned by anyone camera since my DD was a baby 30 years ago. I bought back then a SLR camera I had always wanted. Now I am getting as close to that in our budget as possible to me. I have a bigger viewer, I decide when flash is used and also I can even download wireless pics to my PC. Just waiting on the card.

 

When I first saw this thread, I ignored it as I had a Sony. But as time passed I found specific features that could not be met by Sony. The specific features I needed were tethered shooting and an accurate live view system (as opposed to fast AF live view on the Sony). On those, Canon seem the most developed of the big players and I ended up with a 50D. I guess I'm feature lead, and on that note Nikon's only significant unique advantage to me is their much more generous AF points but not enough in itself to be of interest.

Not knowing what you do I'm only guessing, but as a professional wont you be more likely to be doing the same sort of thing repeatedly? Therefore using the same lenses.

I can very much imagine a more experimental hobbyist to use more lenses depending on the situation. The basic range could cover standard zoom, telephoto zoom, a fast prime. Add the more specialist stuff like macro, wide angle/fisheyes and tilt-shift as required. For fun, I've done pinhole with a DSLR and recently I have had a telescope connected as much as a conventional lens. And if Pipos didn't distract me with their cute kitties, I'd be looking at fisheye now...

 

gaiaswill, thank you so much! You helped me out in my floundering for a new camera.

 

You should consider posting a poll. it'd definitely show which one tops.

 

I'm kind of NIKON Addict. LOL my family used this brand for so long and I can only remember my father was holding it then took a photo of my and my little brother.
Anyway, for me NIKON is better choice for many reasons, e.g. lens, endurance, colour! XD

If you're deciding to buy a camera, important thing is ask yourself if you're comfortable with it? Try hold it, take a picture, touch it, use it with every way you can (and the seller let you to) before you make a decision. Choose what is right for you, suite you more not with the look or details or quality or anybody suggestion! ^^ that's it, you will find your camera.

 

I would go with nikon; ive always had better quality and ease with nikons vs canon, though I would go with whichever has the better eatures for what YOU want.

 

haha, well I have a Canon AND a Nikon. if it says anything, I'm selling my Canon.
you can definitely tell the difference between them... my Nikon takes much sharper, clearer pictures, while my Canon picks up color better. (however, you can tweak settings in the Nikon to pick up color better)

I have the Nikon D90, which is the equivalent to a Canon 50D. I really /do not/ like the Canon 50D. even though it's less professional, I like the Canon XSi better.
if you want a less professional Nikon, I'd recommend the D40x, which is about the equivalent to the Canon XSi (450D)
I know that one reason people like Canon better is because they make their own parts to the cameras... but I don't really care about that xD

the Canon I have (Rebel XT) had several problems. it's light sensor wasn't working right, and the flash broke. I just got it back from repair, actually, and the flash is starting to break again. literally, a day later >.>
it doesn't pick up light well at all, and the pictures it produces aren't very clear. in low light, the pictures are really yellow or orange. also, it's really hard to shoot in manual mode because sometimes the buttons to adjust aperture/ISO/shutter speed won't register.

also one more thing I've noticed about Nikon > Canon is that the Nikon LCD screen seems to be more true to what the picture /actually/ looks like. the Nikon also makes it really easy to figure out how to shoot in manual mode. but, of course, that could just be because I have a Rebel XT and a Nikon D90, which aren't even close to equivalent.
I bought my Nikon while my Canon was in for repairs, and when I got it back I was like "wtf? THIS was my camera?" xD

also, as everyone else is saying, lenses can also make a big difference. I haven't had much experience with many different lenses, though. all I had was the Rebel XT kit lens, a Canon EF 75-300mm zoom lens, and the Nikon lens that I have now (Nikkor 18-200mm 1:3.5-5.6).
my Canon lenses weren't really any good, but they were also really cheap ones. my Nikon one is really nice- but it was really expensive, as well.

 

The Canon and Nikon lines don't match up exactly. The D90 is definitely in a lower class than the 50D, which in turn isn't quite up to the D300. The recently launched 500D might be closest to the D90, at least it will be after the "just out" prices drop to more normal levels.

Also it is a bit unfair to compare the XT and D90 directly, as they're two generations apart (over 3 years).

 

i've a Canon 400D and for me it's the best...but i think that for have a goo choice, it should be great try both cameras (nikon and Canon) . for me Canon is much easy to use (also for keeping).

 

i love canon. my old 35mm slr was luff...then i switched to a new dslr and it was set up the same except no film. the only thing i'm adjusting to is having to figure out all the different lenses. i have the canon XTi with the lens kit and just picked up a new canon zoom lens - 55-250. it is a great lens for the price. the reviews on it rate at just below those stupid expensive L series ones. I have tiny tiny hands and when i went to look at the difference between the 2 companies, the canon felt better...the nikon was just too big.

i say try to stop by best buy or some electronics or camera store and see if you can test them...another thing to keep in mind is that nikon will always be way more expensive than canon and in the end i think it also comes down to the user. a great camera isn't going to make you take great pictures...

 

I mentioned that, I thought.

 

I'm just going to add a question of mine in here since its really a Nikon Vs. Canon thing.

My debate is compairing a Nikon 60D to a Canon EOS Rebel XS. I have no idea how they compair to eachother, although I like the feel of a Canon camera more then a Nikon--I'm willing to get used to the Nikon if its better. What are the pros and cons of both? Put beside eachother what is more worth the $? As well lenses! I won't be settling for a kit lense (even though I'm going to be buying a kit...would it be better to buy the body then the lense instead?) so I'd like to know which has better lenses (quality>price) as well. ^_^

Thanks! I hope sticking this is here is okay..hmm..

EDIT: I realise this is also part personal opinion ^^'' I don't mind though, I'd like to hear both sides~

 

Those two cameras are very very similar in performance. Their real differences are in the details, as in how they handling, but more importantly, what their brand has available in lenses and accessories. Right now, the D60 costs a bit less, but the difference is pretty small.

You can see a side-to-side comparison here from DP Review, but honestly it is a pretty boring chart since the features are almost the same.

The kit lenses for both are also almost exactly the same, a mostly plastic 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom with anti-shake (IS to Canon, VR to Nikon). Are you starting out in photography or do you already have a very clear idea of what you'll need? If you are starting from scratch, I'd suggest you take the standard kit lens. They are very good for their price. Of course, if you already know your needs clearly, you obviously can think for yourself regarding this.

For the record, Canon lenses tend to cost somewhat less than comparable Nikon lenses, but Canon only has a 1 year warranty while Nikon has 5 years. The price differences get worse the more high-end the lens is. Canon has more autofocusing lenses total, as well as more (very expensive) specialty lenses for professionals. But there are many older and inexpensive Nikon lenses on the used market if you don't mind manual focusing.

Note that the D60 does not have an autofocus motor in the body, so only Nikon lenses with "AF-S" will autofocus with it. This may be an issue, but probably not; professional lenses have it anyway because AF-S performs better than the standard autofocus and cheap consumer lenses have it because Nikon knows that their low end cameras need it. (This is not an issue with Canon; all Canon lenses have autofocus motors in the lens.)

I chose Canon because of the greater lens selection and lower prices. Most of my lenses were bought used, so the longer Nikon warranty does not really affect me. But Nikon was THAT CLOSE to winning me over instead, especially now that I'm using flash and feeling envy at Nikon's more advanced & user-friendly CLS. Honestly, you can't really go wrong with either system; you'll envy features the other brand has either way!

I use Nikon lens caps and polarizers and would proudly say so, promoting both brands. That's sort of my "apology" for not choosing them, though of course it helps because these items are excellent!

 

To add my 2p to this perennial discussion:

I myself use Nikon gear in the "prosumer" range, and am extremely happy with it. I have yet to find any particular Canon feature that would make me envious, and since I don't see myself collecting any large number of lenses, any price difference in that regard won't make too much of a difference in the long run ... and besides, third party lens makers such as Tamron and Sigma (and Lensbaby!) cover much of the difference in cost and selection quite amply.
Rather, I'm a very happy camper exploring the apparently limitless possibilites of CLS and multiple Speedlights...
But that's me.


All that being said, in the choice between Nikon and Canon, in my view it's a toss-up.
Both are brilliant, and the pros and cons of each cancel one another out completely.

The only relevant question is which one suits you - not me, or anyone else: you - better.

Therefore, my recommendation is to go to a store where you can actually handle the hardware and physically compare the cameras you're considering, side by side. How do they feel in your hands when you hold and handle them? How do they make you feel?
Which one is the most comfortable and sensually pleasing, which one has the user interface (controls & menus) that seems to make the most sense to you, which one feels "better" and more reassuring in your hands.

Which one makes you feel "Oh yes! You're mine!"


What I don't recommend you to do is to listen too closely to us people that already made a choice either way.

It is an unfortunate but undeniable fact of human psychology that we tend to seek validation for our choices after the fact. When it comes to difficult purchasing choices, that validation generally comes from seeing others make the same choice as we. Hence, wittingly or unwittingly, we have a tendency to try to influence others to make the same choices we made ourselves. Of course, this isn't always the case, but it is certainly general enough to the human condition to muddy the waters quite thoroughly.
I mean, of course I myself would recommend Nikon, because Nikon's obviously the best ... because if it wasn't best, I wouldn't have bought it! Stands to reason, right?

Honestly though, while it is always a good idea to seek the benefit of the wisdom of greater experience (in this case, the experience of owning the stuff), in a case such as this, this is best done with a modicum of care ... and some grains of salt.
The very fact that we do own the stuff does also make us somewhat less than fully qualified to recommend what you should buy...

 

I'm a Canon user in the Point and Shoot range but own a Nikon DSLR. For someone just starting out in photography, it really doesn't matter much which one you end up buying. The consumer level offerings are about the same in terms of features, quality, and usability. When you hit the semi-pro and pro lines, there start to be some differentiating features.

The most important thing about buying that first DSLR is ergonomics. Is the camera comfortable in your hand, can you get to all the controls, and is it easy for you to shoot with? No review or advice can really tell you what it's going to be like for *you* to hold. Personally, I prefer the shutter release on my Nikon over the Canon's I've tried. I like the rounder button with the on/off switch around it. To me, it's more comfortable to shoot with, but that's my personal preference. Strangely, the shutter release is more like my Canon SX10, which I love. Oddly, that style choice did not carry over to the Canon SLRs.

On lenses, you can go with the in-house Canon or Nikon lenses, but there are also third party manufacturers that make lenses for both mounts. Some of those are cheaper (like Tamron) while some compete directly with the first party (like Sigma). With a piece of glass, you definitely get what you pay for, but certain lenses will be better value for money.

There actually is something else to consider if you think of yourself as a "social shooter." If you have friends with SLRs, you may want to align yourself with them so that you can steal lenses from them. If you plan on traveling with an established group, it may be worthwhile following the trend as long as everything else adds up for you!

 

It's personal preference, really, me and my dad are both photographers and we personally use Canon. He had a Nikon for a while that was very nice in low light situations, but it's little things that are super important. Like, the lens screws on backwards and he could NOT get used to it. I'd honestly give the advice to just pick a camera you like, and stick with the brand. (:

 

well i had a nikon coolpix that broke on me....i think it got sand in its lens....i loved the camera but there was something about the quality of the picture that i didnt really like (when i uploaded it)...i would love to try out a canon and see if i like it more....

 

I have owned several Canon DSLR's (kept upgrading), and I can say that I have really liked them all. I find the through-the-lens preview on the XSi is very convenient. I also like the smoothness of the pictures produced, and the color is very good. The view screen it a nice large size. Oddly enough, the XTi was much easier to focus, but on the whole I really like the XSi better.

Settings on both cameras are easy to use. Both range from letting the camera take complete control of the picture, to taking over all settings yourself. There are also choices for in between.

As for lenses, I'm afraid that I haven't been able to afford much yet (my money goes into dolls). But I do have the Canon 60mm Macro lens, and it's great for extreme closeups. It also does very good portraits, giving a nice focus on your subject while the background is more indistinct. This is the lens I use the most with my dolls. The only other lens I have is the old Rebel kit lens, NOT the anti-shake one. I had the anti-shake version for awhile, and did not like it. The focus was just too soft for my taste.

I can recommend either the XTi or the XSi for you, but I'm sure that you can get the XTi for much less money. Heck, now that the T1i is out, you can probably get an XSi at a decent price. You might also consider second-hand; I bought my first 3 Canons second hand, and didn't have any problems. However, I did examine them personally before I bought them. Just be careful!

In the end, as everyone else has pointed out, it's really a matter of individual taste. Here is a link to help you out; they have feature and photo comparisons. The site is called dpreview, and I found it very helpful when I was considering all of my digital cameras. If you go to the end of each review, there are photographs from the featured camera, as compared to other cameras.

 

I have a Nikon camera, and i totally love it. I don't have much else to say. Just that I love Nikon. My parents have a Canon camera, but they are not happy with it.

 

If you're used to Nikon (like I am), it's the Canon lenses that screws on the other way! XD Likewise I could never get used to it.

 

Most of my friends are serious photographers, and they prefer Canon for portraiture and Nikon for dynamic reportage-kind of imagery. I have a second-hand Nikon, and I've discovered that Nikon lenses definitely lend a blue tint to the image, while Canon is much warmer. For doll photography though, I honestly don't see any difference as far as the brand goes, it's a doll for God's sake, not a fidgety child, or an athlete in motion, or panorama of a city being bombed. I'd try different lenses rather than different models.

 

That, I must confess, gets me a bit curious ... I assume in that case you must be shooting film, not digital? Because with the white balance adjustment of DSLR's, I'm figuring it would be very difficult to isolate the effect of the lens on the WB when shooting with cameras of different brands...

 

On lens mount direction, if anything, Nikon is the backwards one there. Canon, Sony, Olympus, C-mount all rotate clockwise to mount (looking at camera from subject side). Now, if you also introduce the zoom twist direction and focus direction, things can get confusing quickly if moving between brands.

On colour output, Canon DSLR default output is warmer than average compared to other brands. The likely culprits are the sensor colour characteristic and related processing. I don't think it is the lens. If it is really important, you can always work in a colour calibrated workflow.

 

I have a Nikon D60 and love it! The really cool thing about Nikon is that the old lenses from their film SLR cameras will work with their DSLR cameras although you will have to use them manually. I frequently visit thrift stores with my camera looking for old lenses. I found a nice 24mm for $6 that takes amazing photos! I may upgrade the camera to a higher model Nikon in a few years but won't have to worry about having to get a new set of lenses and accessories since they will still be compatible.

You can correct for coolness or warmness of the photos by adjusting the camera settings beforehand.

However, the best thing to do is go into a store and see how the cameras feel in your hands and play with the settings. You may be able to rent a camera if you have such a shop nearby (we have such a shop here)

 

I never would have thought to look at a thrift shop for old lenses... almost doesn't seem like a place where people would drop stuff off. Will have to take a look sometime though!

 

A lot of the old film lenses end up in thrift stores. Its amazing as they are still functional. I bring my camera and test them out in the store.

 

That's a really good idea! =D I need to drop by salvation army sometime.

 

I've been thinking of buying Nikon D3000, any opinions about this camera?

 

Well, depending on the research you do (since I was caught between the same tug of war when I was searching for a camera) you can make a good deal out of it through a pro-camera site that's like a photographer's ebay. It's called keh.com. I got my Canon XTi on there for about $275 brand new with a battery charger and a basic 18-55mm lens. I didn't have a memory card or a USB cable, but that was fine since I could easily get those for cheap online as well. I tried finding the same camera new on other sites but it was always 500+ no matter what I looked for. So keh.com is something to consider if you have a budget! You just gotta look carefully at what's included in the sale!

 

And to go off of what Mika said about KEH, don't let the BGN (bargain) gear set you off. The people that label the BGN stuff must be blind because the stuff is pretty much perfect!

 

I was asking myself the same question when I'm buying my first DSLR. I love the feel of Canon body but I also love the vivid color of Nikon image. I was really having a tough time deciding. So finally, I went to the store and let my instinct do the picking...and I ended up buying a Sony DSLR...haha. It just feels so right in my hands and I still love it to bits. I had a play with my friends' Nikon and Canon afterwards too but they just don't feel right for me. So I would say pick the one you're most comfortable with and your emotions would shine through the pictures.

 

WOW what a good deal! I paid a lot for my XTi on amazon last December >< But lens is very important too. The basic lens that came with XTi is not good at all for doll photos since dolls are very small and if you want to take photos in low lighting it is basically impossible with the basic lens. So I have moved onto 2 other new lens later on. Extra lens are a must for DSLR.

 

I felt with Canon, its best for people/ dolls and Nikon best for "Action"

 

The Nikon D3100 is out in certain countries which is like an upgraded version of D3000 ^^
I'd suggest to put only a bit more money for the new and improved one

hum... I'm not too sure... as from what I've read from previous replies and from my friends who are very into photography, they suggests Nikon is the one for still life photos and Canon is the one for actions instead :/
I'm not sure myself though, because I haven't been using cameras from both company...

 

Maybe in the end its user preferences? I have a D700 Nikon and Canon 5d MK II
My Canon just doesnt have the fast focusing speed that action shot requires so I end up with Nikon for outside
and appreciate the portraiture skin colors / resin colors Canon has for still life.

 

On optimisation for a particular task, it depends on the specific model, not the brand. Different models have different specifications. On the low end, there isn't much in it between them. In the mid range Nikon does seem more generous in the AF performance than Canon, who tends to go for potential detail instead. In particular the D700 and 5D2 are very different beasts with the only thing common between them being they're the cheapest full frame sensor cameras currently made by each manufacturer. Unless you have very particular and specific needs, any current DSLR is good enough for sill life.

 

Ah, the age-old Nikon vs. Canon debate. :P

I'm a Nikon fan myself. I have a D40.

One thing I want to say about lenses, though, that so many people don't realize, is that a lens is a lens is a lens. You can put Canon lenses on a Nikon and vice versa, and you can buy lenses made by other companies to fit on both. If it fits, you can use it on your camera regardless of manufacturer!

Now me, I've been wanting to get a really good macro lens. I like to do action figure photography and I think this would help me. When I finally get my doll it will be great for her, too!

 

There are adapters for Canon lenses on Nikon cameras, but the AF will not work. So people who prefer AF would probably prefer to stick with bodies and lenses from the same company.

 

Nikon lens to Canon body adapters exist, sure. But not the reverse.
(Go ahead and Google it. I'll wait.)

Summary:
Canon uses a shorter distance from mount to sensor than Nikon does--Nikon bodies are "too thick" for Canon lenses. You would lose infinity focus. You could keep infinity if the adapter had optics, but that would change the focal length as a side effect. Either way, the lens would simply not work the same.

A bigger issue is that all Canon EF lenses have electronically controlled apertures, so you would need electronics to change it, or a Canon body to constantly remove the battery from. This is much more important in actual use than just losing autofocus.

(In contrast, older Nikon lenses have aperture control rings and do not need electronics to work.)

Thus, while an EF to F adapter is theoretically possible, addressing the impaired functionality of such a setup is too troublesome and expensive to bother with, so you won't find commercial products to do this. Easier and cheaper to just buy a Canon body really.

 

Or Nikon.

I'm afraid a lens is not quite just a lens. An SLR system lens is built to fit a specific system, with its specific attachments, connectors, and interfaces.
While it may or may not be possible to build an adapter ring to fit a lens from one particular system to a body from another, you would always by necessity lose and/or alter some functionality.

But since this discussion specifically pertains to Nikon vs. Canon, it must be noted that there is really little need to do any of that, because there are certainly enough lenses available to either system for most needs, both from the manufacturers themselves and from various third party lens manufacturers. Also, the number lenses available to either system that don't have equivalents available to the other is small enough to be all but negligible.

If the question pertained for instance to Sony's (formerly Minolta's) system, well, it might be a different story, since the selection of lenses available to that system is much more limited, but for Nikon's, as well as Canon's, systems, you will always be able to find pretty much any lens you need, and with the third party vendors, often at a wide selection of price points.

 

I own a Nikon (D90), my daughter owns a Canon. They're both good, just different pros and cons, that's all. I agree with those who say it's more about the lens than the camera itself anyway, to a great degree.

 

I'm a Nikon kind of guy, I've had both brands and I believe they are pretty even when it comes to DSLR's but be warned the D5000 (my current model) does not take night photos too well.