I just have a mcbain...im still bent on ethier the canon 60d or nikon d7000 anybody want to share perspectives of both brands without starting a war?

 

I think the Canon 7D is closer to the Nikon D7000 than the 60D. And having owned a 7D, I think the two are very close in performance, with a slight edge to the D7000.

But it really comes down to which feels better to you, and what manufacturers' glass do you already have or want to have. Many bought Nikon "half frame" (DX) sensor cameras because they wanted that "magic" 18-200mm VR Nikkor that had no real equivalent in Canon's system. But Canon had better "L" quality f4 zooms on the longer end, and I really liked the Canon 10-22mm zoom. Canon now also has a 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom that I think is really good, and it seems that many Nikon zooms were relatively slower (e.g. would be max f/6.3 on the long end, vs. 5.6 for Canon, though Nikon now has a 16-85 f/3.5-5.6). The "wheel" on the back of the Canon DSLRs is also handier to use to adjust exposure compensation (+/-). I also think overall you could build a Canon system for less money than a Nikon system.

There was a period a few years ago where I felt the Canon DSLRs were superior to the Nikons (before the Nikon D300), and the Canons were less money, so despite having legacy Nikkor glass and having used Nikon film cameras for years, I got into DSLR photography with Canons. When I went to a full frame sensor DSLR, I was torn between the D700 and the Canon 5D Mk II. Since Canon didn't really have an equivalent to the Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 (in my post above I mistakenly referred to it as a 12-24) and I really wanted to take advantage of the full frame format with a superwide, I switched "back" to Nikon.

Eventually, after the D7000 came out, which let me use my Nikkor legacy lenses with it as well as the D700, I sold off most of my Canon equipment. Bottom line though, is you can't really go wrong with either Canon 7D or Nikon D7000, and they keep coming out with new bodies all the time.

 

Thats the thing though, I don't have any glass. Last night I went to black in cow town and was talkin witht eh lady while holding the canon and nikon and she said if your not invested in class both will be a great buy. And the wheel ont he canon seems more comfortable to change settings. i also like how the screen flips out and the buttons are not on the left side rather on top byt he screen.

I like the nikon cuase its more advance...better photograpghers camera thent eh 60d, high iso and better niose control over all, 100% viewfinder, and partial mag/allow body. its also alot smaller then the canon but Im starting to lean towards that. I plan on biking alot and i rather not car a bigger heavier camera.

This may be silly, but i like the look of the canon...haha

AND im nnot invested in any glass, so this is why i am debating the body so much.

 

Seems like it's a tie. How about this? If shooting in low light where better high ISO is an advantage, and you want lighter weight for taking along with your bike, then get the Nikon. Not to tip the scales too much because I think the Canon is much closer than this review would suggest, but read what Ken Rockwell says about the D7000. Nikon D7000

 

1

 

My dream camera is my 1976 Rollieflex SLR, yes I said "Rolleiflex SLR". So many folks didn't even know they made one I am used to repeating myself. I have owned it since 1981, and it is quirky but I take great pics with it.
I only have one 50/80 tele photo lense for it. So my wish list is a smaller lense that would fit my Rolleiflex. 28 ML? Or even a wide angle?
Alas they are like hens teeth. I am using my dinosour camera less and less these days.

In my day to day real life I use a Sony cybershot digital with a 14.1 megapixel with a Carl Zeiss lense.

This is my first visit to this camera thread, Quite nice

Cheers.

JustV12.

 

the canon 7d is closer to the nikon d300/s from what ive read. I try not to be a spec junkie but its jsuts so hard haha.

Ive decided ont he nikon I could care elss about video and I had a good converastion with the girl at blacks, about the canon and nikon...and held them both finally without the gawking slaesmen around me. The canon weighs alot for only be made of plastic ( poly carbon). I like the nikon menu's a bit better too.

So my dream set up...a sigma 8-16....that can fit filters....
other then that a 18-200 vr, or a 24mm.
and a **** load of filters

 

correct and a s**t load of memory cards. I could care less about flashes since i never use one lol

 

Taken with D7000

 

My freinds got that one camera...famous for the light leaks I can remember the name of it but its ancient. He loves it though and would never give it up.

For me though I love perfection though in the images, but I dont mind light graffiti

This ig a good disccusion we got going.


Im adding another to my dream/future gear
the sigma 8-16mm ultra wide...with some type of filter holder

 

I remember the Rolliflex. Dual lenses one on top of the other, the top used for focusing. Roll film. They were/are great for shooting things that aren't moving. Another great from that era: Hasselblad 500c. NASA equipped astronauts with it. One took the first photos on the moon. Sharp pics with giant negatives like the Rolliflex. Both quirky because the viewfinders did not have pentaprisms so things moving to the right would appear on screen to be moving left.

 

Although one could argue this point but I think Film is still a little above Digital. I never thought in my wildest dreams that I would say that until I used a medium format camera on a photo shoot. I rented the camera and lenses and had a blast. I was photographing a gold plated model indy car that was presented to the driver at a private party. Lighting was a challenge but I ended up with a great photo.

 

I dont have etheir of those...now i have my ehyes on the new sigma 8-16mm and just using the kit lens for for nikon now. hmmm

Oh and currently Im using my 8.1 megapixel phone camera...its actauly better some previces cameras i used to own

 

On the Nikon D7000, the crop factor is 1.5x vs the Canon's 1.6x, as the Nikon sensor is slightly larger physically. So, an 8-16mm Sigma is like a 12-24 mm full frame angle of view. That is wider than my favorite 14-24 f/2.8 Nikkor FF lens. So if you like wide, like I do, you may really like the Sigma.

FWIW, I know the 18-200 transformed DSLR photography, but personally, I prefer the 16-85. It gives up the long end for the extra 2mm shortness, which I find handy more often than not for indoors use and for creative effect outdoors. Think how much more useful in FF terms a 24mm is vs 28mm indoors and you see my reasoning.

 

Hello there Need4speed:

Wrong rolleiflex if you refer to my post, I have an actual SLR, it looks the same as a canon the same as a Nikon etc etc, it is an SLR. Everyone makes the same assumption about a Rollieflex when I say I have one, remembering the famous and far more common dual lense one.. It [the SLR] is a great camera for action shots and for me better than any camera I have ever used. I have owned Nikon, Nikormat, Ricoh, Canon etc. I have shot many airshows with it and lots of car racing shots.
So again it is NOT the dual lense, it is an SLR. and it used standard 35 mil film.

I never had a problem with light leaks though. (Don't tell me I may not want to know, LOL!)


I am smiling here this is a conversation I have had a thousand times in the thirty plus years I have owned the Rollei. More than once I actually had to produce the camera to PROVE that Rolleiflex DID in fact make an SLR.
Another time an otherwise knowledgeable camera guy told me to my face I was "full of it" Rollei NEVER made an SLR...I made him eat those words later by showing him the camera, and AGAIN...
Makes me glad over digital cameras, I never have to explain this anymore.


So cheers everyone,
JustV12.

 

IVE DECIDED ON THE LENS the legendary....wait for it, wait for it.....50mm prime
Im picking upt he d7000 tommorrow ( i hope it in stock) and
get ethier a used f1.4 or f1.8 50mm. Now which one should i get.

The 50mm f1.8 has a aperature ring ( means is must be set to f22 to use on the nikon d7k) and the f1.4 g( non- aperature ring will work fine.)

What are the pros and cons of each lens other the then obvious f-difference

 

Awesome. You got me! Is your camera one of these? I just found this on the web.

 

OMG i was helping my dad clean out a foreclosed property and I was looking around and I found this camera and flash ont eh ground...i tried to get the lens off but it wouldnt budgel ( maybe cuase it was -35 out?) i ended up leaving it on the ground in the garage....

 

Also I have decided to pick up the camera today..witht helens being wait for it wait for it etheir a 50mm f1.4 or 1.8. Which one should i get the 1.4 is more expensive at 275 or the 1.8 at 65 bucks. Both are used and much cheaper then new.

 

Depends on your budget. The main advantage to the 1.4 is that it provides better bokeh - the ability to provide soft, pleasing out of focus things in the background. If you don't want to or expect to use it that way, but rather will be taking pics most of the time stopped down to 4 or smaller, the 1.8 will do fine. Note that because of the crop factor, a 50mm lens on a D7000 is going to be around 75mm equivalent in a 35mm film camera. This is more of a portrait lens than all around lens on the D7000.

Here is an example of what I mean (this was taken with a full frame D700 using a 24-70mm f/2.8).