Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 8, 2010, 3:43 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 6
Default advice - D5000 vs. T1i

Hi all,


Could use some advice... the pics I see online from Nikon D5000 seem to have richer color and less peripheral blurriness and chromatic aberration than the Canon T1i, but most reviewers seem to favor the Canon. Am I right in thinking the Nikon is slightly better for rich vibrant color and in-camera image processing?

The DxO labs data seems to say the Nikon is superior in terms of pic quality, is that a reputable source?

This is my first dSLR since film days, I will learn to do RAW processing but would prefer the camera takes the best possible pics on its own. Can post-processing software improve the color vibrancy of RAW images?

I dislike the softness of many of pics I see in online samples too. It seems softness can be fixed via a tweak to camera settings but Im not so sure about the loss of detail peripherally in zoomed images- Im thinking maybe the Nikon kit lens are better.

I also want to get an 18-200mm zoom lens. Will be taking pics for my own enjoyment (wildlife, architecture, some landscape and eventually children).

Could consider a T2i or D90 if the image quality were much better but would prefer the cost savings at this point ... willing to accept 720p video.

Thanks!
daneeka is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 8, 2010, 4:00 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Unless you are pixel peeping you really will not see a difference. They both take great pictures. If you are planning to add lenses. The T1i will work with all Eos lenses, the D5000 will only auto focus with af-s and af-i lenses with built in motors. Both are good camera's.

The T2i will most likely will not get to the stores till april the earliest, but it may not show up till may like the t1i last year. So you need to factor in when you need the camera. Also since since it is brand new, there will be no discounts on it, expect it to be at full msrp till xmas season.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2010, 4:20 PM   #3
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Some additional thoughts - the 18-200 lenses are going to do a poor job at wide angle architecture shots and at only 200mm they're going to be VERY, VERY short for wildlife. So while both cameras are quite capable, the all-in-one zooms aren't great for your intended purposes.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2010, 4:41 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

The "richer color" is a camera setting, and the "peripheral blurriness" and "chromatic aberration" are from the lens, not the camera. And while the Canon kit lens does have more chromatic aberration than the one from Nikon, it's also a lot sharper, so I think you may be judging the cameras based on the performance of different lenses.

And while the DxOMark results indicate that the D5000 has less noise and more dynamic range than the T1i, the difference isn't great.

The Nikon 18-200 is a very good superzoom lens, but, as with all superzoom lenses, it has a lot of distortion and chromatic aberration at the wide end, which would make it unsuitable for architecture photography, and it's not very long, so it wouldn't be very good for sports/action/wildlife shooting.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2010, 4:42 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 6
Default

It seems like the color vibrancy is the thing that moved me the most comparing the online pics. My old camera was a Canon though and they outsell Nikon by a wide margin so I dont want to make a mistake if my impression is wrong based on limited samples.

Sounds like Ill feel the limitation of the general purpose lenses fairly quickly, but I need the flexibility for now. It seems like Canon lenses tend to be less expensive for the future though, point T1i. I need it by early March so I guess the T2i is out
daneeka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2010, 4:46 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daneeka View Post
... My old camera was a Canon though and they outsell Nikon by a wide margin ...
Not so much. Canon outsells Nikon, but together, they share about 85% of the market.

BTW, do you have any of your old Canon lenses? They might work on a Canon dSLR, which would save you some money.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2010, 4:47 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 6
Default

Hmm Tcav, interesting. You think the Canon can be tweaked via settings to look as good in terms of color? I know the online comparisons tend to be done at factory default settings. Is it true that the sharpness of the lens focus is a direct tradeoff with the chromatic aberration and peripheral blurring? Hmm, maybe the Canon is better in the end...
daneeka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2010, 5:09 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daneeka View Post
... Is it true that the sharpness of the lens focus is a direct tradeoff with the chromatic aberration and peripheral blurring? ...
It's not 'one or the other'. it just works out that, between those two lenses, the Canon has better edge sharpness, but the Nikon has less chromatic aberration.

And if you're not interested in the kit lens for either camera, the flaws in the respective kit lenses are not material to your decision anyway.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.

Last edited by TCav; Feb 8, 2010 at 5:13 PM.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2010, 5:33 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 6
Default

Oh I see.
daneeka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 8, 2010, 6:27 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

In reality you're splitting hairs. Both cameras will do a fine job, although as was mentioned, a superzoom may not be your best choice. All lenses have tradeoffs, strengths and weaknesses. Truthfully, most kit lenses are solid performers, and the only real drawback is the plasticky build quality. Rather than pixel peeping a lenses finest details, the focus for most consumers is learning proper shooting technique (both in handling and and using the right settings for each situation). With lack of knowledge and poor technique, even a $5000 lens will yield poor results.
rjseeney 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 12:24 PM.