Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 7, 2003, 11:55 AM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 64
Default

thanks for your help in looking at other aspects than the body. one thing i like about the nikon is you can see the 5 focus points and also see which one is locked on when it's illuminated till you take the picture. does the canon have a feature similar to this with the points illuminated til the shot is taken? the other features i like about the d100 are the grid lines in the view finder, the AF assist light, and the faster focusing speeds. but, the price of getting into a system is easier with canon, and that's attractive.
pspeyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 7, 2003, 12:37 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

"A simple test". Certainly. But IMO this shows exactly how Nikon underexpose it's shots. And what a great result. It reveals details than many other cameras do not.
Just remember that it's easier to restore details in an underexposed shot, that from one with burned out highlight like those clearly shown in the pics from the 300D.

These cameras should not be compared. D100 is older, but still in a higher "class".
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2003, 8:58 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 610
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pspeyer
thanks for your help in looking at other aspects than the body. one thing i like about the nikon is you can see the 5 focus points and also see which one is locked on when it's illuminated till you take the picture. does the canon have a feature similar to this with the points illuminated til the shot is taken? the other features i like about the d100 are the grid lines in the view finder, the AF assist light, and the faster focusing speeds. but, the price of getting into a system is easier with canon, and that's attractive.
The Canon 300D has the 7 focusing points and you can set and choose any of these points manually, when it lock in focus, it will illuminated in as red dot inside the red spuare. As for the grid lines, as long as you understand the rule of third and know how to apply it, you don't need that at all. For the AF, Nikon can't beat Canon 300d with Canon USM attached, period...

The Nikon may have a better value in a better built body, but for the current technology, it aready behind Canon technology in many ways. Canon Rebel has so many features that will assist you to take better photograph easier. But I would say it also depends on the person behind the camera and how much experience that person has in the photography field. To me, I can achieve the same results on both camera. One thing I know for sure the Canon with CMOS chip combined with DIGIC technology will produce less noisy picture in lowlight compare to the Nikon CCD chip.

So it's up to you, you can save over $600 to get the Canon 300D, and use that money on some excellent Canon USM lenses or you can get the old (age) D100 for $1,500 that will be replaced soon by Nikon to compete with the Canon 10D.

May be the comparison between the 10D and the 300D make more senses:

10D has 17 custom functions, the 300D has no
custom functions

10D has a metal body (magnesium alloy), the 300D
is plastic

10D has a PC socket for flash, the 300D doesn't

10D has a rear control dial, the 300D doesn't

10D shoot at 3 fps for 9 frames, the 300D shoots
at 2.5 fps for 4 frames

10D has ISO up to 3200, the 300D has ISO up to
1600

10D takes the same grip (BG-ED3) , the 300D has the BG-ED1

10D takes the RS-80N3 remote, the 300D uses the RS-60E3

10D has a pentaprism, the 300D has a pentamirror


Cheers
tuanokc@hotmail.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2003, 10:59 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

I will only argue one point in [email protected]'s comments.

Nikon with AF-S can be just as good as a Canon with USM. Not all AF-S lenses are created equal, not all USM are created equal. The new 70-200 VR AF-S is just as fast as Canon's 70-200mm f/2.8L USM IS (from all I've read.) On the other hand, Nikons 80-400 AF-S VR is so slow it's silly. The Canon 100-400L is much faster focusing. It's intentional on Nikon's part... and a dumb decision. The Nikon 200-400 f4 VR AF-S is really a replacement for that lens (in every way but price) and it's AF-S is very good from all I've read.

As a side note, I didn't know that the 300D takes a different grip than the 10D. Interesting, I wonder why?

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2003, 11:30 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 610
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eric s
I will only argue one point in [email protected]'s comments.

Nikon with AF-S can be just as good as a Canon with USM. Not all AF-S lenses are created equal, not all USM are created equal. The new 70-200 VR AF-S is just as fast as Canon's 70-200mm f/2.8L USM IS (from all I've read.) On the other hand, Nikons 80-400 AF-S VR is so slow it's silly. The Canon 100-400L is much faster focusing. It's intentional on Nikon's part... and a dumb decision. The Nikon 200-400 f4 VR AF-S is really a replacement for that lens (in every way but price) and it's AF-S is very good from all I've read.

As a side note, I didn't know that the 300D takes a different grip than the 10D. Interesting, I wonder why?

Eric
In general I would say the Canon USM is more afordable than Nikon AF-S in term of pricing and since they came out first, there are so many improvements built upon the new versions so in most cases are faster. But I do agree that not all of them created equally, for the most part, Nikon Af-S are more expensive than Canon USM.

For the grip, 10D grip's cost is $169, the Rebel grip is $99, cheaper version. A note: both the Rebel body and grip are made in Taiwain, on the other side, both 10d and the grip are made in Japan.
tuanokc@hotmail.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2003, 3:34 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

One of the big reasons I went with Canon was because the lenses were cheaper (I consider the D100 and 10D close enough in quality that I looked at the rest of the "system" for differences.) All it takes is a quick look at the long lenses (extreme cases, I know) and you'll see that the Canon lenses are much cheaper:

Canon Nikon
600mm $7,199.95 $8,999.95
500mm $5,499.95 $7,199.95
400mm f2.8 $6,499.95 $7,699.95

That is a huge difference. Since I expect to get one of those some day (not this year, that is for sure) financially it was clear that Canon was the wiser choice.

I believe that Nikon is in its 3rd or 4th generation of AF-S, Canon is in its 4th gen of USM.

But I/we digress a bit.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:22 PM.