Today’s cameras change every day like computers, phones & notepads purchase it today and tomorrow it is old technology. My Nikon D100 that took the photo posted above only has 6.1 megapixels (MP) and the photo was blown up to an 8x10 with no distortion. Most people look at the megapixels as they were the only thing that will give you a great photo, the sad part is that the average person would not see the difference between 6.1 MP and 10 MP. I have a Canon point and shoot camera that has 10 MP but I would not use it to take portraits. The advantages of newer cameras that is most noticeable is the advancement of the CCD that gives you better color, white balance and speed along with a few bells and whistles, nothing that PhotoShop could not compensate for. I do agree that a good lens and the understanding of light is a good start for a great photo.

 

FINALLLY SOMEPEOPLE WHO ARE INTO PHOTOGRAPGHY.

The fast 50mm, is a great lens, nothing beats the price or quality. And the t2i is a amazing camera, i almost bought one but back offed lol.

Are you pissed that the t3i came out and the t3i?

Im not looking for a jack of all trades, otherwise the 18-200 would do that very well, espciallyt he new one.

Im looking for a good wide angle, 400 is very good, but I also have to remember, its going on a crop body. so 1.5x on the nikons.? any specific suggestions

 

HEY, don't foget about the noise in the pictures with high mega pixels, more isn't always better.

 

With many of the newer mid-to-high-end bodies out there, noise has stayed approximately the same but the megapixel rating has increased, actually making high iso photos more usable. That and better processors have increased quality somewhat.

 

Thats true, but more mega pixels still effect noise level. if you look at nikon cameras, and canon, canon is more mega pixel, but the nikons with much lower still out perform in noise.

just my 0.02 cents.

 

I have one for EF mount. It's a VC (like IS,OS,VR) lens. It was for sale the day I got it. Never enough light it seems. If you have a DX camera, keep in mind, your crop factor is 1.5, so a 28mm is a 42 mm. IMHO Nikon cam, Nikon lens, Canon cam, Canon lens. Even the little 100.00$ 50mm 1.8 (but far from wide with crop) is one of the best lenses there is. Maybe one should look for the small DX zooms Nikon makes and be happy. My wife uses the 18-105 VR DX which has average ratings and she does great with it. 16-85 VR I think is good. There are many available. Check Nikon site and Ebay. Except for the 24-120 VR (one) all VR zooms are great, even the the cheapest ones. The only Tamron lens that's great is the 90mm macro. Some people hate him but Ken Rockwell is good information.

 

Best crop camera on the market now, breat buy. Love the Nikon system.

 

If you have not purchased yet, the 5D mk3 should be here 3rd quarter. I have a MK2 and not too crazy about it. Ergonomics are like 1960 Buick, lol. I use a Distagon 21mm f2.8 with it and I get great results.

 

Great low cost lenses Canon and Nikon same price f1.8 but 75 mm on half frame.

 

I had my 1.8 Nikon for years 1.8=100.00, 1.4=400.00. I would have one for darkness only, that's where the 1.4 shines, lol.

 

Yea but I held it and it feels...small compared to the 60d...i think im still going nikon cause its a photographers tool, where as canons more video orienteted. not that ethier are bad at video or photos.

But i want to spend around 16 tops, i dont need a full frame and it has to be portable. Ill be using it to hike mountains and naviagate some nasty terrain.
Thats why i like the d7000 good, great camera, and great body.

Also the nikon bodys seem to be stronger built then canons.

Im considering just getting the d7000 body, then the 18-200 vr2 or just a prime probally the 50

 

50mm on a crop camera is not very useful, a 28 Nikon prime is great. 18-200 VR the lens that changed digital photography, II is even better. Paired with a D7000, dream combo. 5D mk2 feels and looks cheap compared to 3.5 years D300. I have a Nikon 70-200 VR, basically useless except for low light action, heavy and bulky. A best buy at Nikon is the 70-300VR, use it much more than he 70-200. I have a 17-35 f2.8, the Nikon lens I prefer, but heavy and $$$. Image stabilisation not important on wide zoom. Ken Rockwell is a must before purchasing DSLR (101). Thom Hogan is higher level (201), lol.

 

I know but the d700 is a good cam too...its just a bit expensive and long int he tooth now. The prime is still good, its not a 50mm, hows the 28, its works out to 42 mm on a crop nikon. I might take that or the just a fast fifty.

And the 18-200 great walk around, general lens. What camera do you have?

 

My camera bag today has 2 lenses. 17mm – 35mm 2.8 and a 60mm 2.8. I also have a 35mm – 200mm 3.5 – 5.6 that I use as a general kick around lens. I have a few old lenses that I used on my F100 but I must keep in mind that the plane of the digital is different. For example an old film lens that is rated @28mm will become a 35mm +/- a few on a digital frame. Used lenses are great and the price is right just know what you are getting. As a side note I would love to have a d700!

 

Unfortunatly D700 is outdated (same generation as my D300), reason why I went to 5D because I was mad about Nikon not updating D700, lol. Apparently Nikon will release FF replacement next fall.

Do yourself a favor, stay away from a 50mm, you wont be able to take viable pictures indoor (too narrow angle). You will have to buy another lens. Here's a link on the 24mm AF. According to Ken Rockwell it's better than the 28mm. But if you read both reviews, he says that on a DX (like D7000) camera, the way to go is 18-55mm VR. I agree. I had one of those and they are great and cheap. A D7000 with this lens would make for a nice setup on a budjet. Don't be fooled by the price, it looks cheap feels cheap but has equal or better optics to the 18-200 VR.
Nikon 24mm f/2.8 AF-D

I have a D50 that I purchased for my wife, dont use it any more.
D300 purchased four years ago, still prefer it to the 5D.
Lenses:
Nikon 20-80, cheap but great. FF buy used at 80.00 and enjoy
Nikon 17-35 pro lens. FF
Kikon 50 1.8 FF ackward on DX
Nikon 75-300 good but outdated FF
Nikon 24-120 VR worst Nikon VR lens FF
Nikon 70-300 VR great FF
Nikon 70-200 VR pro lens. FF gathers dust
Nikon 18-105 VR OK (very light). DX
Tamron 90 macro a must. FF
As a general rule FF lenses work on DX cameras but DX lenses are for DX cameras.

Canon 5D mk2 purchased a year ago
Canon 50mm 1.8 great. FF
Canon 28-135 IS. cheap, good and light for travel. FF
Carl Zeiss Distagon 21 mm manual focus. Absolutly fanstastic. FF
Tamron 28-300 VC. Worst lens I have, It's for sale, bad in low light. FF

The Canon is fantastic for portrait or landscape (3 frames per sec). The D300 is superior for action with more noise (7+ frames per sec).

D7000 is THE crop camera replacing the excellent D90. I would buy one if I was not hooked on FF.

I hope this helps.

 

Hmm i wish i Could afford a full frame...but Im being forced to give my jag up and look for anotehr ride. I Love the d700 but like we both said...its a little outdated. There supposed to be coming out with one this year.

I do alot of rough work, Im most in the back mountains, not signs of human life...not even a plane. Thats why I like teh d7000, i think canon/nikon should make a full frame around 1500, I would instantly buy it. I hate buying used cameras cuase... well you never truly know what it was, or how it was used.

But for lens its fine.
Have you done the magic lantern hack on your canon?

 

I need a tough camera, that has some weather resistant properties. I loved the 60d..but its plastic, and slower then the older 50d, and not as strong. But I love the screen on it. And its feel. but nikon d7000 is built better, but dosent feel right. Just cuase its smaller. hmmm to bad they dont rent cameras for a day

 

Out-perform? If you take a high-iso picture from a Canon and an equvalent Nikon and did a blind test comparison I find it highly unlikely you'd be able to tell which is which. And in a situation that you need the high ISO performance, realistically neither brand will get you a usable shot when the other won't.

Performance, and really quality of lenses and prices aren't a consideration when choosing Nikon vs Canon, IMO. Buy the one that has the feature set you want and the ergonomics that fit in your hand the best. I like Canon for the ease of use, the Nikon for the gadget factor. They're both excellent systems.



Yeah, I decided to hold off. I'll just stick with my Leica for film and my pocket camera for digital for the time being. I may just buy a used 1D3s when the 5Dmk3 comes out. Still not sure. In the process of finding an apartment while I'm looking for a house so a new toy isn't a priority and can wait a bit.


I'm not sure about the 1.8 Nikon, but the 1.8 Canon is pretty much a throw-away lens.

 

looking into an EOS myself......
they're sweet camera's......

 

Im going to wait and see if canon comes out with a 70d....I really like the feel of canons, they feel so right but I hate there eos plastic bodys and the 7d is due for a update soon so im holding out.

Ethier way, there both good cameras, nikon and canon.