DIGITAL SLR! Canon or Nikon??

[Tom B.]

Unbelievable!:hat1:

I'd like to purchase a digital SLR camera but don't need a million dollar unit. Just something I can use in doors with a flash and setting to cover the distance of the average gymnasium or there about. What do you all think? Might be buying tonight or tomorrow???

Thanks in advance!!:clap2:

[dreddd2000]

I just bought the Nikon D40 and I'm loving it. Bestbuy currently has a deal on it (in my area, not sure of others) where you get the camera, the 18-55mm standard lens and also the 70-200mm upgrade lense for $570-ish. The camera with small lens normally runs $500 and the big lens is normally $200 more. It's only a 6MP camera, but it's the best camera I've ever owned by a long shot. :)

I should also mention that the reviews on it are stellar and my research found it to be the smallest, lightest and cheapest DSLR available.

[Gonzo]

I like both the Canon and the Nikon, but have you considered Sony? I have the DSC-H2 and am very happy with it, especially considering the price$.

I based my shopping on the recommendations by Consumer Reports.

[dmulk]

I'd vote for the Canon Rebel XTi or XTs.

The i is 10.1MP and the s is 12 MP.

Both come with the free Canon photo editing software which saves you a couple hundred buck and works really well.

<D>

[MNwing]

I have the Nikon D40 and its a great camera for the money. Lots of good buys around if you do some shopping.

[kinzer1]

Canon Rebel XT works great.

[dr1954]

My opinion. Go with Canon or Nikon. Whatever feels good in your hands. Make sure the controls are easy to use. As far as lenses look at Sigma. I have 5 or more and they work flawless. Unless you are going with huge enlargements you will never see the difference.

[vossman]

Can't go wrong with Nikon or Canon these days. I have the Nikon D200 and the wife has the D50. Both are easy to use and have enough horsepower to cover most situations.
Lenses are more important than the camera itself IMO and if you're gonna be shooting the distance of a gym, you'll want a fast lens and a powerful flash. PM if you want more info or have questions.

[Tom B.]

I like both the Canon and the Nikon, but have you considered Sony? I have the DSC-H2 and am very happy with it, especially considering the price$.

I based my shopping on the recommendations by Consumer Reports.

I have a small Sony digital camera and while it has been pretty bullet proof, and has good clarity, I've never been impressed with the color reproduction. Pictures seem fairly drab compared to my little Canon a570.

I like the a570 for taking on the bike but with all the indoor activities my kids are in, I'm having trouble getting clear shots due to the lack of flash range and or non-flash settings not getting fast enough for the movements!

I have a Pentax K1000 which will take pictures that will rival some very expensive digital SLR's but when you are out in the field, it sure is nice knowing if you got the shot or not! I hate waiting to get film back just to find out I botched it or what ever. Plus digital allows a ton more pics for a whole lot less money...

Funny story! My Dad got me started on the K1000 because he had one and liked it! Years later his croaked so he moved on to a more automated camera. Anyway, when I got married, I handed him the K1000 he'd given me, a ton of film and I said shoot to your hearts content! Now it has been common knowledge among our friends and relatives that more than one pro-photographer lost a few wedding shoots to my armature Dad. Dad just had an eye for a good shot and people loved having him do their events. With this in mind, I was sure that I'd get some great shots and wouldn't need as many from the pro we'd hired for our wedding. Besides, it thrilled my Dad that I thought so much of him to ask him to take the photos and he loved the ideal of re-acquainting himself with an old friend!!! Well, wedding is past and we are home from the honeymoon. A visit to Mom and Dad's turned up a sad faced disgruntled father. He'd done just as I'd wanted and shot away... Well he'd been so emotionally caught up with my wedding that he wasn't realizing that he wasn't running out of film. Yep, you guessed it! When I'd loaded that 1st roll of film for him, it didn't catch on the take up spindle. No wedding pics off that camera. Dad felt awful, then I felt awful for putting him in that position! I couldn't care less about the lost photos, I just felt bad for Dad. At least we laugh about it now!!!:crackup :crackup :crackup

So now I guess I'll go look at the Nikon D40 and the Canon XTi. Thanks guys! Any thing else???

[dreddd2000]

Get the upgraded lens. 55mm isn't enough zoom for very much distance...

[Tom B.]

Get the upgraded lens. 55mm isn't enough zoom for very much distance...

Best Buy has both camaras on sale with a bundled zoom lens so that won't be an issue! Me not being a pro-I may not even need to buy better ones either! Used both Tokia (SP?), Sigma and another I can't recall the name of but had good luck with them all on the old K1000.

The Nikon D40 comes with a 55-200mm and the Canon XTi a 75-300mm. Should be good to go with either, though I'll probably look for something more like a 30-80mm for future use...

[Gonzo]

...and OH! by the way...

PERFECTIONISTS SHOULD NEVER HAVE A DIGITAL CAMERA

[Tom B.]

...and OH! by the way...

PERFECTIONISTS SHOULD NEVER HAVE A DIGITAL CAMERA

:crackup :crackup :crackup

[Blue STreak]

I've been a Canon shooter since the days of manual focus film cameras. But both Nikon and Canon make excellent cameras today. You probably can't go wrong with either.

Two things to consider: 1) If you shoot, or think you'll shoot, a lot of available light shots at night, or in dim indoor light, Canon's in general do much better at high ISOs. (The new high end Nikon's break this generality, but are a lot more expensive that you want to look at, I suspect.

2) Buying an SLR is buying into a system. Look at the lenses you think you might be interested in, and their prices. One advantage of Canon, IMHO, is the much larger number of lenses with image stabilization (greatly reduces blur caused by camera shake at low shutter speeds) in their lower priced lenses.

HTH,

Bob

[Blrfl]

2) Buying an SLR is buying into a system. Look at the lenses you think you might be interested in, and their prices.

And don't get your stomach in knots when you're looking at some of the prices, either. A few years ago, I was going back and forth about whether or not I wanted to plunk down almost two kilobucks for a AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED (http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Camera-Lenses/2139/AF-S-VR-Zoom-NIKKOR-70-200mm-f/2.8G-IF-ED.html) (ain't that a mouthful?) when someone pointed out that I will probably go through several camera bodies during the time I own that lens. That clinched it. I bought it and haven't regretted it since. It turns in some really gorgeous work (CLICKY (http://www.notonthe.net/flotsam/70200-1.jpg), CLICKY (http://www.notonthe.net/flotsam/70200-2.jpg) and CLICKY (http://www.notonthe.net/flotsam/70200-3.jpg)). Those are straight-from-the-camera images taken with my ratty old D1; I imagine the D300 that's going to replace it will do even better with the same lens. The moral is that you don't have to have an uber-expensive body anymore, and if you can afford the good glass, buy into the system and use it for years to come.

Both marques are producing really good stuff, and every year it gets better and cheaper. The only thing about Canon that I don't like is that to some extent, they've drawn a line between film and digital when it comes to lenses. You have to be much more careful selecting a lens on a Canon digital, where the list of lenses not compatible with the Nikon D series is relatively short.

One advantage of Canon, IMHO, is the much larger number of lenses with image stabilization in their lower priced lenses.

Nikon has been catching up in that department. Nikon's VR is quite useful once you understand how it works. I haven't shot with Canon's IS yet, but I can't imagine it being any less good.

--Mark

[clmixon]

We are heavy Canon users at work in my dept and PR is por Nikon, both are great.

Are you aware that Pentax makes a pretty good DSLR that can use the k1000 lens set?

http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00HD1k

Chris :06biker:

[clmixon]

And slight hijack...

My baby, still clickin, still mine...:)

http://www.camerapedia.org/wiki/Canon_FT

It cost me more than the total worth of the body to get the shutter fixed when the curtain started to stick a few years ago but I could not put it on the shelf. I carried this thing daily from 1974 to 1998 before replacing it with an F1, an OM 10 and assorted others that ended up sold or back in the bag.

Original all glass Canopn 55 mm/ F1.2 and a Soligor 250 mm /F2.5 with me all the time, wide angle and zoom stuff never got out of the bag most days. Slide mount, bellows attachment and assorted neato stuff accumulated when all I wanted to farkle was my darkroom and cameras.

Chris

[dreddd2000]

So...I said I bought that D40 Sunday before last. It went on sale comboed with the zoom lens last Sunday. Today I called and was told they'd hook me up with the sale deal since it was within 14 days of purchase. I just got home with my 70-200mm lens for and extra $70. Considering list on that lens was $200+, I"m a happy camper.

I also grabbed another 4GB card for the camera...which they forgot to charge me for somewhere along the way. I'm an EXTREMELY happy camper. :D

[curmudgeon]

At my age and shakiness an Image Stabilization lens in a must. So in the Canon I would make sure it has IS and for the Nikon VR lens. I saw a bundle at Costco of a Nikon D60 (10.2MP) with 18-55VR and 55-200VRlenses for $874.95.
Seen here:

http://tinyurl.com/4f5jdc

[Medicine Bear]

I just gave up a truckload of farkles and sprang for the Nikon D300 with the 18-200 VR lens. I let Ken Rockwell at www.kenrockwell.com (highly recommended reading no matter what you buy) justify (read: talk me into it) going on the idea that it won't go obsolete for at least 6 months. On Ken's site he recommends the Nikon D40 for 90% of what most folks need and says "megapixels don't matter". They do if you get into heavy cropping or durn big prints but, otherwise, I agree. Since I do a lot of cropping I turned down the D40 in favor of the D300.

For Chris Mixon: I still have my Canon F1 in pristine condition. I suspect it's worth maybe $20. :D I loved it but I'm sure having fun with the Nikon.

Fred :03biker: :confused:

[clmixon]

I just gave up a truckload of farkles and sprang for the Nikon D300 with the 18-200 VR lens. I let Ken Rockwell at www.kenrockwell.com (http://www.kenrockwell.com) (highly recommended reading no matter what you buy) justify (read: talk me into it) going on the idea that it won't go obsolete for at least 6 months. On Ken's site he recommends the Nikon D40 for 90% of what most folks need and says "megapixels don't matter". They do if you get into heavy cropping or durn big prints but, otherwise, I agree. Since I do a lot of cropping I turned down the D40 in favor of the D300.

For Chris Mixon: I still have my Canon F1 in pristine condition. I suspect it's worth maybe $20. :D I loved it but I'm sure having fun with the Nikon.

Fred :03biker: :confused:

Fred, Fred, Fred... My friend. Tell ya what I 'm gonna do just for you...;) I'll give ya $25 for it and throw in a bike wash as soon as you get the 03 dirty again.

Poor examples of the F1 (body only) are going around $260 and pristine bodies with canon lenses are $550+:p:


Chris :06biker:

[Medicine Bear]

Chris - you're my buddy! How was I to know a bike wash was worth ~$525? Seriously, if there weren't so many things I can do after the picture is taken digitally I'd still be shooting film. Oh yeah, and then there's that 2 week wait for the slides...

Fred :03biker: :confused:

[Blue STreak]

Please, please, please, whatever you decide to do ignore Ken Rockwell. This guy is a clown, who is absolutely laughed at by everyone with a serious knowledge of photography. He is so pro-Nikon he will do anything to try to make Nikon come out on top.

The one thing even Nikon fans have acknowledge over the years is Canon's superiority in low-light, high-ISO situations. But KR manages to do tests that somehow make Nikon look better.

His ideas on photography technology and theory are equally uninformed.

If he didn't have such an audience, he's be an entertaining joke, but as it is he's a dangerous idiot.

There are lots of good points to both Nikon and Canon.

An (mostly) unbiased source of good information is the tests on DPReview.com. (But don't pay too much attention to the forums. There's as much (maybe more) uninformed drivel there are there is useful information.)

[Putt]

And slight hijack...

My baby, still clickin, still mine...:)

http://www.camerapedia.org/wiki/Canon_FT

It cost me more than the total worth of the body to get the shutter fixed when the curtain started to stick a few years ago but I could not put it on the shelf. I carried this thing daily from 1974 to 1998 before replacing it with an F1, an OM 10 and assorted others that ended up sold or back in the bag.

Original all glass Canopn 55 mm/ F1.2 and a Soligor 250 mm /F2.5 with me all the time, wide angle and zoom stuff never got out of the bag most days. Slide mount, bellows attachment and assorted neato stuff accumulated when all I wanted to farkle was my darkroom and cameras.

Chris

Lordy... I have one of those that I purchased in Germany back in 1968...
Also have a 28mm, stock 55mm Canon, 200mm tele, and a 2X teleconverter.. Shutter curtain is hanging up... Lots and lots of rolls of film through that workhorse...

Putt...

[drmedak]

You can't go wrong with the Nikon or the Canon. When you buy either, you are buying their "system." I own a Canon EOS 20D DSLR that I have used for almost 2 years and like it a lot. It is very user friendly. Then again, I did move over to the DSLR world from a Canon EOS A2, so the Canon DSLR was "familiar." I also had a Canon flash and a few lenses that also work on the EOS DSLR, which meant a large savings in getting all set up.

I also use an Olympus SP350 point and shoot digital camera because I can stuff it in the front-left pocket of my Aerostich, no-can-do with a DSLR.

Whichever you choose, you'll love it.

[MARCUS ST1100]

I have a Nikon D80 and love it,the Rebel and D40 are great cameras but are limited to the lens you can use on them,if you going to get into photography look for one you can grow into.

[Medicine Bear]

Please, please, please, whatever you decide to do ignore Ken Rockwell. This guy is a clown, who is absolutely laughed at by everyone with a serious knowledge of photography. He is so pro-Nikon he will do anything to try to make Nikon come out on top.

The one thing even Nikon fans have acknowledge over the years is Canon's superiority in low-light, high-ISO situations. But KR manages to do tests that somehow make Nikon look better.

His ideas on photography technology and theory are equally uninformed.

If he didn't have such an audience, he's be an entertaining joke, but as it is he's a dangerous idiot.

There are lots of good points to both Nikon and Canon.

An (mostly) unbiased source of good information is the tests on DPReview.com. (But don't pay too much attention to the forums. There's as much (maybe more) uninformed drivel there are there is useful information.)

Well, I guess I'm a clown too as I hold many of the same ideas as KR. I don't agree with everything (or even most) of what he says but I like his photography however he got there. He does give Canon good reviews - he just thinks Canon is better at some things and Nikon at others. We all have our opinions but I wouldn't call you a clown just because our opinions differed. There are better ways to say some things. As for his audience, seems he's either doing something right or else there are a boatload of us clowns out there.

Fred :03biker: :confused:

[Tom B.]

Unbelievable!:hat1:

Calling all clowns, calling all clowns...no fighting among the ranks please!!!:crackup :crackup :crackup

Indoor sports or action photos are not trivial. I doubt you gonna be happy with low end equipment; lens not fast enough and flash not enough power.

Pro gonna use a (big, long, heavy) fast F2.x lens standing on tripod or monopod for this type work.

I think I inadvertently suggested I was going to do sports or action shots indoors...well, not really. Stuff like the kids concerts, award ceremonies, plays, etc...and refereed to the Gym as a frame of reference for our auditorium size!

Anyhow, thank you one and all for the great information! It was a great help. I purchased a pkg deal on the Canon Rebel XTi and all the info here helped me not fear that I was buying something that I would regret. If money weren't an issue, I'd have stepped up to something in the $2,500.00 range but even my wallet would have screamed if I did that! I'm thinking that, according to your personal taste, the Nikon D40 and Canon Rebel is the best bang for the buck if one is not intending any serious photography.

$649.99 EOS Rebel XTi Body with EFS 18-55mm lens
$187.99 EF 70-300f/4.0-5.6 III zoom lens
$239.00Speedlite 430EX flash
$39.99 4G CF Extreme III card
$4.99 Ultraviolet lens filter
$119.99 4 year if I break it warranty (cause I will if I don't buy the warranty just like I already to my less than 1 year old Canon A570is...:censored ! They don'tlike to be dropped multiple times and even kicked once...:o4: )

I played with it all day and have had a ball! Me the tri-pod and the new Canon gonna shoot some nice pics at my son's grad ceremony tomorrow!!!:clap2:

I picked the Canon over the Nikon D40 only due to it's better in the lowlight stuff and has a few more settings for the hobbyist in me! I'm not planning any new lenses in the near future or any real serious photography just an entry level DSLR to take those few pics I couldn't get with the little A570is. The only lens I might consider is a IS 18-80mm as an all around universal lens but who knows, right now I'm broke...:o4: .

Thanks again for all the help!!!:clap2: :clap2: :clap2:

[BlaSTr]

Unbelievable!:hat1:

I'd like to purchase a digital SLR camera but don't need a million dollar unit. Just something I can use in doors with a flash and setting to cover the distance of the average gymnasium or there about. What do you all think? Might be buying tonight or tomorrow???

Thanks in advance!!:clap2:

I'd be curious as to your photographic experience.

If you're new at it then any digital camera that allows interchangeable lenses will probably do. Some bodies have a Program mode that allows you to point, compose and shoot. While you'll get good images with a fixed zoom lens point and shoot, the only way you're going to get good images from across the floor is with a higher magnification lens, something that generally isn't found on the point and shoot digital cameras. And ignore that BS about digital zoom - the important thing to understand is that optical zoom does what you need.

If you're graduating from a modest P&S then there are a lot of choices. The more advanced camera bodies (Nikon D100 for example) have automated modes -sort of an advanced point and shoot. Most users are happy with that mode but many learn that the limitations require learning another mode or two (Aperture or shutter priority for example).

You next need to figure out how big the images are going to be if you decide to print them. The greater the sensor size (6MP vs 12MP for example) will become evident as you increase from about 5x7" to larger print sizes.

You get what you pay for whether it's a Nikon, Canon, Sony, Pentax, etc. Image quality, speed of focussing, image noise, ISO ratings, focusing speed, lens availability, and durability all cost. If you're going to shoot occasionally then spending a lot of money may not be the best use of funds.

In my experience, lenses determine image quality far more than bodies. The greater the zoom range (18-200 vs 70-200), the better the chance of poor image quality. Big lenses (i.e. lenses that have large front optics and therefore better low light imaging capture) cost more than comparable smaller front optic lenses. Vibration reduction is expensive but the results can produce a much better image than without.

A lot can be gained by buying a package but some times the lenses included aren't as good as searching elsewhere or buying from another vendor (Tamron, Sigma, etc). In general, the big lens/camera houses make better lenses.

You mentioned indoor with a flash. Most camera body flashes have a limited range of coverage. Good indoor flash photography generally requires a more powerful flash either to supplement or act as the main light source when needed. Some inexpensive bodies don't work with external flashes very well.

At the next event you'd like to shoot you might want to chat with the photographers there to see what kind of lenses they use (size as opposed to make). That would give you a baseline to search from.

Finally, most indoor gymnastic events forbid flash and many either force the photographers to shoot from the stands or severely restrict the size lenses allowed in. Forbidding flash means a fast lens (lower f-stop or larger glass front lens) or higher ISO (images sensor sensitivity) which can produce significant noise. Another consideration is that in order to stop motion and prevent blur a fast shutter speed is required - and this means a fast lens and higher ISO. If you have to stand back a considerable distance or are forced to use a lens that doesn't have enough magnification/reach to get a properly sized image (zooming or enlarging captured images adds noise, among other things) fast long lenses are costly. And many photographers use a monopole to support the camera body to help control camera movement which can cause sharp images to blur.

I'm not trying to dissuade you, just give you a few things to ponder before you hand over a few dead presidents. Photography can be a rewarding, passionate, and pleasant hobby - or job. I'd hate to see you buy only to find that you can't get there from here, so to speak. While you're deciding you might chat with some of the photgraphers there to see if they'll take some pictures for you in exchange for compensation (more of those dead presidents). That way you won't miss out on the memories and have time to make an informed decision.

I'm through talking now. ;)

[RideTN]

i apologize if this has already been said as i have not read the entire thread but my new consumer reports magazines has an article on SLR cameras...might be helpful.

[Blrfl]

$4.99 Ultraviolet lens filter

Unless you got a massive discount on that filter, I would strongly recommend replacing it with a one that's at least of the same quality glass as that in your lens. Otherwise, you're forcing everything behind it down to the level of the filter. For $35-40, you can get a Sigma EX, B+W or Nikon filter. Even Canon's house-brand UV filter is under $20.

Also worth mentioning are cleaning supplies. Again, spring for the good stuff. Most of what's sold as lens paper can be harmful to multicoated lenses and filters. A $20 investment in a bottle of Eclipse (http://www.photosol.com/eclipseproduct.htm) cleaning solution and a pack of PEC*PADs (http://www.photosol.com/padproduct.htm) is money well spent. They're made by Photographic Solutions and are available online or at any camera store that serves professionals (i.e., not the camera store in the mall).

Enjoy your new camera!

--Mark

[Tom B.]

Unbelievable!:hat1:

You are all terriffic! THe information is fantastic! This crowd never ceases to amaze me in ow you all help each other and myself all the time! Thank you all so much! All this info is well worth looking into and will certainly propell me into this hobby with a well rounded knowledge base!!!:bow1:

I used the Rebel XTi at the Graduation ceremony and it worked flawlessly. I'll post some of the pics in the next day or two but I was up till 2:00 am this morning and getting up again for work @ 5:30. I think I'm spent!

As a quick side note, some of you were reveling in old SLR's that you use to have or still do! At the moment I'm looking at a Petri 35mm that is, oh, close to 40-50 years old! Quite an inovative camara for it's day! It has a solar powered light sensor built around the lens. I'll take a pic of it and share it too here in the next few days! Very cool and still takes amazing pics except the focus gizzy no longer works and you have to set it to infinity to use like a box camara...:(
My dad had bought the old girl while he was in the army and stationed in Korea sometime in the early 60's?? He sent it home so my mom could take pictures of his new born daugher and then a new born me...:-D !

Well, I'm pooped so until the next post!

Thanks again everyone!!!:clap2:

[Texas_ST]

I have been a Nikon shooter for more years than I really like to think about. I still have a '65 Nikon F that has shot more rolls of film than I can remember. As others have said both Canon and Nikon are great cameras but it is not so much about the camera as it is about the glass. Invest in some good fast glass and you will be more than happy with which ever you choose.

[Bones]

RE: image stabilization and buying into a system.
Pentax image stabilization is built into the camera body rather than the lens, which keeps the cost of lenses down.


RE: Canon vs. Nikon.
How about those Red Sox?

[Blue STreak]

FWIW, the new issue of Consumers Reports has a write-up on digital SLRS. In the "basic" category, they like the Nikond D80 best, but it's quite a bit more costly than the D40 / EOS Rebel. In that class they rank the EOS / D40X / D40, in that order, but their overall rating is so close it's basically a tie. (Although I don't think they rated the latest version of the EOS Rebel, which just came out.

Anyone who is still in the market might want to check out the write-up. But it really comes down to what features matter to you, and which seems to feel better / work better in your hands.

[wjbertrand]

FWIW, the new issue of Consumers Reports has a write-up on digital SLRS. In the "basic" category, they like the Nikond D80 best, but it's quite a bit more costly than the D40 / EOS Rebel. In that class they rank the EOS / D40X / D40, in that order, but their overall rating is so close it's basically a tie. (Although I don't think they rated the latest version of the EOS Rebel, which just came out.

Anyone who is still in the market might want to check out the write-up. But it really comes down to what features matter to you, and which seems to feel better / work better in your hands.

Bob, you beat me to this. I just received that issue of Consumer Reports myself and it looked to me that the Canon, Nikon and Olympus all performed really well in the "prosumer" arena. Of interest though was that among those three brands, Canon and Olympus appear to have better reliability than Nikon. Not only that but the Olympus prices look attractive as well.

I've got a soft spot for Olympus ever since I got my OM-1 way back in '77. That camera has been through hell and back and still works as new. Alas, no one shoots 35mm much anymore.

[Shutterbug]

OK, I have to jump in on this one. I have been a Nikon shooter for 35 years and been shooting digital since 1991, I am a pro photographer by trade. I have used Canon also, but prefer Nikon. The quality is the same on either platform, but the Nikon menus are more "intuitive" and easier to understand as are the program settings on the top of the camera.
Image stabilization in the body is OK, but IS or VR built into the lens is better, but makes the lenses cost more.
You can't go wrong with either brand. If I was going to pick a camera for a non pro it would be the Nikon D60. Each new model brings new technology and improvements. And yes, there is a difference between 6 mp and 10 mp. I can see it! If your prints are small you may not notice, but start making 11"x14" or 16"x20" prints and the difference is stunning.
I normally shoot "raw" format (NEF is Nikon's version) because I have so much more control over all aspects of the image compared to Jpeg. I will use Jpeg for family snapshots when quality isn't a priority. Raw images do require more post processing in Photoshop which means more time. But since I bill by time, it's not an issue for my clients.
Check out www.dpreview.com for info on DSLR and point and shoot cameras, lenses and accessories.
The July 08 issue of Consumer Reports has an excellent write up in the Nikon D300 (I have one) and point and shoot cameras too.

[Blrfl]

I normally shoot "raw" format (NEF is Nikon's version) ... Raw images do require more post processing in Photoshop which means more time.

If you haven't tried Bibble (http://bibblelabs.com), give it a look.

--Mark

[indypup]

I have a Canon Digital Rebel XT and it works just fine for me. I've had it for a couple of years. They have an XTi version out now that is 10 MP. The canon is easy to use but also has advanced features in case you need them. I can't speak for the Nikon.

[Blue STreak]

The quality is the same on either platform, but the Nikon menus are more "intuitive" and easier to understand as are the program settings on the top of the camera.

I have to disagree a little on this one. For me, the Canon menus and controls are more intuitive. I think it's mostly which you are used to (and what generation of camera you're using--the old EOS 1D serires menus and controls were awful, but the amateur bodies and the current pro models, are much better).

I've shot mostly Canon, but some Nikon, for many years, and always found the Nikons to be confusing, with buttons sticking out all over the place, and no consistency from one body to another.

Like I said, it's all in what you're used to. I agree, though, both are capable of taking very good photos.

[chokozip]

Check out circutcity.com We got our XTI there for a smoking deal.

Just remember when you make the purchase that from that point on you buy that brand.The reason is the money you will pork out on lenses.

The XTI has been a great camera.

For all of you that have your camera bodies.
If you have not grabbed a wide angle lens and played with it I recomend it.
We went with the 10-22mm wide angle lens and have been very happy with it.The price was a bit to choke down as it cost more than the camera body but wow great pictures of scenery.

Sean:biker:

[cmguerrero]

They're both the most popular cameras on the market. Both brands are great! It's just a matter of how the ergonomics of the camera fits in your hand. I have always used Canon. Checkout my website and see...

[okmurdog]

You really can't go wrong with either camera--cameras by either manufacturer are generally quite good.

A lot of new models hitting the streets as of late, with features constantly improving. If you're on the fence about a certain camera, check out www.dpreview.com to compare specs, options, etc.

[scribe556]

If you're gonna buy a DSLR, you should check Adorama.com. I got my Nikon D60 for $725
with two vibration reduction lenses an 18-50mm and a 50-200mm. 10MP. Nice and friendly camera for beginners and experienced shooters.

Scribe556

[Sarcastic_one]

Can't go wrong with either Canon or Nikon. The most important factor in determining the quality of the picture is the person pushing the shutter release. I've seen some great pics from point and shoots.
I went with Nikon because I have a Nikon film camera and the older lenses with fit and still have TTL metering with the D200. As a bonus my 400mm telephoto now becomes a 600mm on the D200:)

[ST1300 Alicia]

Cannon 50D (17 Mega Pixel) with a couple of Professional Red Ring lenses and a Power pack. Throw in a Good Professional Flash, Filters and Tripod and your still under the cost of a good used Goldwing. :eek:

[Blue STreak]

LOL. I think the 50D will be my next body (replacing my 20D), assuming it lives up to its claims.