Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[sadunbar]

So, who are the resident camera experts.  I am looking at the Nikon D 200, Nikon D 300 and Canon D5.  Any opinions?  Are there any other options I should be considering?  Lens choices?  My current Nikon film camera is equipped with several lens choices - the most used is a 70 - 200 zoom.

thanks   

Scott

[Twolanerider]

Further blurring the lines between the full pro SLRs and anything less is the soon to be released Canon XSi.  Release date supposed to be April-ish.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=16303

[sadunbar]

Well, that is another interesting choice... 

I find I usually agonize about making a buying decision for items like this, when there is likely no substantive difference between any of the choices.  But I always want to get the most for my money - even if only a pro could tell the differences in the results.   

Scott

[lilbear]

So, who are the resident camera experts.  I am looking at the Nikon D 200, Nikon D 300 and Canon D5.  Any opinions?  Are there any other options I should be considering?  Lens choices?  My current Nikon film camera is equipped with several lens choices - the most used is a 70 - 200 zoom.

thanks   

Scott

Scott,

I don't consider myself an expert by any means, but I do have a fair amount of experience with the Nikon product line.  Having both the D200 and D300, I can say that the appreciable difference between the D200 and D300 really comes down to money.  There isn't a photo that you will take with the D200 that you will look at and say that would have been so much better with the D300.  Both are excellent cameras and have vitually identical operations.  I have pretty much always been a fan of Nikon film cameras and thus the progression to the D series of Nikons.  In film, I was a big fan of the 35-135mm lens as it offered the image possibilities that best fit my style.  In the D series, if I could only purcase one lens, it would be the AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm.  I have always liked Nikon over Canon for people pictures, but that's a personal preference (Nikkor lenses rock).  I shoot professionally on occasion and do a lot of product work as well.  PM me if you want any specific details on the cameras, lenses, strobes, etc. 

Craig

[sadunbar]

Scott,

I don't consider myself an expert by any means, but I do have a fair amount of experience with the Nikon product line.  Having both the D200 and D300, I can say that the appreciable difference between the D200 and D300 really comes down to money.  There isn't a photo that you will take with the D200 that you will look at and say that would have been so much better with the D300.  Both are excellent cameras and have vitually identical operations.  I have pretty much always been a fan of Nikon film cameras and thus the progression to the D series of Nikons.  In film, I was a big fan of the 35-135mm lens as it offered the image possibilities that best fit my style.  In the D series, if I could only purcase one lens, it would be the AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm.  I have always liked Nikon over Canon for people pictures, but that's a personal preference (Nikkor lenses rock).  I shoot professionally on occasion and do a lot of product work as well.  PM me if you want any specific details on the cameras, lenses, strobes, etc. 

Craig

I appreciate your comments.  I agree most amateur or less then amateur photographers like myself would have a hard time distinguishing between images taken with the D 300 vs. D 200 vs. something else.   

[sadunbar]

Scott,

I don't consider myself an expert by any means, but I do have a fair amount of experience with the Nikon product line.  Having both the D200 and D300, I can say that the appreciable difference between the D200 and D300 really comes down to money.  There isn't a photo that you will take with the D200 that you will look at and say that would have been so much better with the D300.  Both are excellent cameras and have vitually identical operations.  I have pretty much always been a fan of Nikon film cameras and thus the progression to the D series of Nikons.  In film, I was a big fan of the 35-135mm lens as it offered the image possibilities that best fit my style.  In the D series, if I could only purcase one lens, it would be the AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 18-200mm.  I have always liked Nikon over Canon for people pictures, but that's a personal preference (Nikkor lenses rock).  I shoot professionally on occasion and do a lot of product work as well.  PM me if you want any specific details on the cameras, lenses, strobes, etc. 

Craig

I do like your lens suggestion...  and I agree the Nikkor lenses are great!  That range of lens certainly is versatile...

Scott

[nightvet]

If you already have a collection of good Nikkor glass, seems the decision as to brand is a no brainer. You really can't go wrong with any of the Nikon bodies. Just picked up a D40x to complement my D1x and am quite happy with it. The D40x (or 60 which is imminent) might not be sturdy or feature rich enough for you needs, but even though I've just started playing with it, I'm very happy with the images it produces.

[amigo Jorge]

Hello mi amigo Scott........I have understood that Terry has a lot of experience in cameras at least I see him with a good one.....

[Coolbreeze]

momentary  to those that know...
 
I just bought the wife a D40x, with 3 lenses... (cost-co gig), and got in very deep doo doo with her over the fact that you HAVE to use the view-finder, as it does not project the image onto the LCD screen for clicking...  (primary use is on the move quick shots...)   

Is there a fix for this that we're missing? 


and now back to the original thread...   

[Twolanerider]

momentary  to those that know...
 
I just bought the wife a D40x, with 3 lenses... (cost-co gig), and got in very deep doo doo with her over the fact that you HAVE to use the view-finder, as it does not project the image onto the LCD screen for clicking...  (primary use is on the move quick shots...)   

Is there a fix for this that we're missing? 


and now back to the original thread...   

Shannon, what is often called "live view" through the LCD screen has not been a common part of Digital SLRs.  SLR users are used to using the viewfinder I guess.  Lots of data projected in there on modern cameras that can be helpful at times.

Having said that there are Digital SLRs hitting the street now (or very soon) that are adding live view.  The mftrs are wanting to open the market to the more expensive camera bodies to folks who've not used them before.  A lot of "small" digital camera users are used to just looking at the screen.  So SLR's are starting to add that. 

Having lenses from a particlar mftr/family is a big incentive to stay with a body from that same family (unless the lenses suck).  Lacking that the field is wide open though.  That soon to be released Canon XSi is one of those new models seeking to straddle the fence between pro SLRs and less demanding users.  It will offer a live view, relatively high res and good speed, auto modes that will make it as point and shoot as any "little" camera along with a good selection of "pro" features.  Interested in seeing what their price point will be for that one.

[RJ749]

Most likely not up to the level you are looking but I have a Canon Rebel that a friend recently sent me with a 70-200 autofocus lense with the motion dampening, lots of camera for my needs.

Takes great pics too.  I love the view finder rather than the big screen on my Sony Cybershot.
I have a Nikon F1 35mm and this Canon is equal quality IMO.

[porthole]

Nikkor lenses rock

Your not talking about kit lens here right Craig?

For the most part the Nikon bundled kit lenses are mediocre at best. The lens you mentioned (18-200) is an almost $600 lens, that's more then some kit bundles.
Very disappointed with the last two kit cameras I bought for my wife.

Average camera + great lens and take great shots
Great camera and + average lens will only take average pictures.

[porthole]

This one of the many excellent sights to do some research on.

http://www.dpreview.com/

[sadunbar]

This one of the many excellent sights to do some research on.

http://www.dpreview.com/

That's a great site...thanks!   

[lilbear]

Your not talking about kit lens here right Craig?

For the most part the Nikon bundled kit lenses are mediocre at best. The lens you mentioned (18-200) is an almost $600 lens, that's more then some kit bundles.
Very disappointed with the last two kit cameras I bought for my wife.

Average camera + great lens and take great shots
Great camera and + average lens will only take average pictures.

Duane,
Not a kit lens, but I have seen it bundled with some of the D series (D200 & D300) as an upgrade.  Yes, it is expensive, but it easily covers the range of 2 or even 3 mediocre lenses and is a premium lens to boot. Like I said, if you could only have one lens, that would be my choice. It has pretty much the best of all the features.  The only complaint with the lens is that I would like to see a larger aperture, but that only comes into play if you want limited depth of focus effects which can also be easily accomplished post shoot with photoshop. All in all, it is a great lens and well worth the money.  You are correct, superior optics and less than ideal camera body will take much better photos than inferior optics with the very best camera body.