Cameras

[robo mantis]

No its my grad present. Also we went cheaper than that.

 

[Asa]

Oh. Still, when I was young we didn't hav-

Just kiddin' no lecture this time.

 

[robo mantis]

lol

 

[athicks]

What did you get if you don't mind me asking?

 

[robo mantis]

A Canon powershot S3 IS with a raynox macro lens.

 

[Asa]

And it cost?

 

[ThorEH]

As the market stands you probably want to go with Canon because their bodies give a lot better performance than Nikon bodies. Nikon picture tend to look more "flat" compared to the Canon equivalents. They also have a wider current lens selection which is more important. Canon has a great variety of macro lenses. You actually should plan to spend more money on your lenses than the body that you buy because the lenses really make the picture.

Rubbish, you get just as good performance with a Nikon! With Sigma and Tamron both making quality lenses for Nikon (and Canon) u get just as big a variety of lenses to Nikon

If you're in for a budget DSLR, check out Nikons D40x, which outperforms the equivalent Canon on picture-quality (according to all the test I've read )

But one things right, put you're money in the lenses !

My recommandtion for a dedicated macro-lens would be Sigma EX 105mm f/2.8 DG Macro

Which is the lens I've used on the pics I've posted

bw

Thor Håkonsen

Norway

 

[Asa]

Guess it's all opinion.

 

[robo mantis]

I'm happy with what i got.

 

[athicks]

Go Canon!

 

[athicks]

But really, it's the person that takes the photos, not the camera.

 

[robo mantis]

Athicks got a point

 

[ThorEH]

But really, it's the person that takes the photos, not the camera.

Offcourse, but why are you then first telling you that Canon is the best.. and then when I'm telling you it's not, it's suddenly all up to the photographer (which I offcource agree with you on)

Just look what Igor Siwanowicz can do with a Canon 20D, then just imagine what he could do with a Nikon

 

[robo mantis]

I hear Nikons are expensive and they are if i went nikon i would lose 1k

 

[ThorEH]

Thats rubbish

Here's some prices :

Nikon D40

Canon 400D (XTi) 10mpx, body only : $662

Nikon D40x 10mpx, body only : $649

The Nikon is a camera that comes better out the comparisontest between the two, then especially on userfriendlieness and picture quality.

Both prices from b&h photo in the US

 

[Asa]

Thats rubbish Here's some prices :

Nikon D40

Canon 400D (XTi) 10mpx, body only : $662

Nikon D40x 10mpx, body only : $649

The Nikon is a camera that comes better out the comparisontest between the two, then especially on userfriendlieness and picture quality.

Both prices from b&h photo in the US

Umm, that's expensive. I'm not really seeing how Nikon and Canon are really any different. I doubt he's really planning on doing photography for a living, just an enjoyable pastime.

 

[robo mantis]

yes what asa said its for mantis photography.

 

[OGIGA]

Really? I think that's really cheap. We're talking about professional photography, aren't we? And I hope that's not going to be used for ONLY mantises.

 

[robo mantis]

No its now my camera for taking all kinds of pictures but i'm being careful with it.

 

[athicks]

Offcourse, but why are you then first telling you that Canon is the best.. and then when I'm telling you it's not, it's suddenly all up to the photographer (which I offcource agree with you on) Just look what Igor Siwanowicz can do with a Canon 20D, then just imagine what he could do with a Nikon

Well, Canon is the best. I was just trying to avoid trying to prove my opinion

It is hard to convert anyone from the equipment that they use because of the huge costs associated with selling lenses, flashes and bodies and then re-buying everything. Because of these inherent difficulties, to some extent, you can never impartially examine the benefits of either side's (Nikon vs. Canon) arguements unless you are new to the camera world.

Also, you get used to the equipment that you are using. If you have a technical handicap of high noise while using your higher ISO settings you are going to start shooting longer exposures and composing your shots differently. You'll even start to THINK differently about how to photograph situations.

However, if for a few minutes, we abandoned all preconceptions and began to look up reviews and technical comparisons we will begin to see differences emerge.

Canon always has a better dynamic range because of a better sensor design. (except in the case of the Nikon D1x which had a beautiful sensor.)

Nikon frequently offers faster shooting speeds of 5fps compared to Canon's often 3fps.

Canon offers better noise performance and less flattening of dynamic range as ISO increases. (once again due to their sensors)

Nikon offers better ergonomics and pop up flashes even in some of their higher models like the D200. (Where they don't really need a pop-up flash.)

The differences go on and on. And, in the end you have to fall to your own preferences of what feels right.

And, what 'feels right' for the most people probably is right. (Democracy?) You can think of market share as people casting votes for their favored brands. Canon leads, way above Nikon.

Here's some prices :Nikon D40

Canon 400D (XTi) 10mpx, body only : $662

Nikon D40x 10mpx, body only : $649

Also, price is not a good indicator of quality. Canon and Nikon have to be similarly priced as that is such a huge consideration for 99% of all consumers. You price what the market will bear.