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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 26, 2005, 11:54 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8
Default

I don't want to start a Canon vs. Nikon thread, but I have an Fz5, and I am wanting to step up to a low end Dslr. There are 2 cameras that I have been reading and reviewing, the Rebel and the D50. Both are very similar. My friend has a Rebel XT, and he swears by it, but I have read the same about the D50. Is there anybody out there that has used both the Rebel (not XT) and the D50? And which is the better camera as far as the picture quality goes. The Rebel to me has better color saturation, but the D50 is less noisey at higher ISO's. I am also considering I have a 1 gig SD card that could be used in the D50 and if I get the Rebel, I would have to get compact flash for it.
I am an amateur photographer who is wanting to step up out of the point-n-shoot cameras. I mainly take general pictures, but love doing macro shots and sports...I shoot alot of night football games and I just can't get a decent stop-motion picture in low light out of the FZ5.
Thanks for the replies in advance.
Tony

viper3two is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 27, 2005, 10:06 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

If your thinking of a Rebel, I think your looking at an XT.

That's a very tough question, the Xt versus the Nikon D50.

First of all, you'll be investing in lenses. Once you start investing in Canon versus Nikon, it would be expensive to switch from one brand to the other, because you'd have to sell off your lenses (at a loss, usually) and start over with lenses in the other brand.

Here's a few things to think about:

- The Rebel XT is an 8 meg camera versus the D50's 6 meg camera. It makes a difference, specially when cropping.

- The Nikon D50 has 1/500th flash synchronization versus the Canon Rebel XT's 1/250th a second. Can make a difference if your shooting moving action and want to do some "fill flash".

- The Canon CMOS sensor is very smooth, with useable photo's at high ISO's (sensitivity setting). I've seen some very nice shots off the D50 but I'd give a slight edge to the Rebel XT.

- The Rebel XT has a flimsy looking plastic body whereas the D50 looks more substantial. However I like a light camera even if it means a bit of plastic.

- I think Canon lenses are better than Nikons at the same price point (ouch!)

- You will probably have better upgrade options in the Canon that Nikon. Canon comes out with more models sooner than Nikon.

- Re-using memory is a minor consideration in your decision process. You are buying into a long term "system" of either Nikon or Canon.

- Maybe try handling the D50 and the Rebel XT if you can. Each will have a different feel. Somehow I think a D50 owner will end up taking more "Nikon-like" pictures in comparison to Canon owners taking "Canon-like" pictures.

I will let you know I am biased towards Canon.

-- Terry
terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2005, 7:20 AM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 8
Default

Terry,
Thanks for the replies. I am probably going to get a chance next weekend to check out both models and play with them a little. I know that the Rebel is 8 megs vs the D50 6 megs. The FZ5 that I have now is 5 megs, and it seems to be doing pretty good with the 8x10 printouts, but I will probably want to go bigger later on, and get a better printer, so the Rebel would outweigh the D50 in this area.
I too have seen samples from both the D50 and the Rebel, and I really, to be honest, can't tell the difference between the 2 as far as clarity and colors are concerned. It seems that the Rebel is a little better with the colors than the D50, some pictures on the D50 seem to be washed out a little.
I am on a fixed budget for this camera, around 900-950. I found the D50 with both the 18-55 and the 55-200 lens for 980 on line. Do you think I can get the Rebel with a lens kit similar to that for around the same price? I am waiting to purchase this after the beginning of the year, so I am watching prices now.
Like you said, I am buying a system that will be added-on in the future and I am having a hard time trying to decide which one. I think that maybe when I get a chance to play with both models that I will make my mind up.
Thanks alot for the input! I appreciate the reply.
Tony


viper3two is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2005, 9:33 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
terry@softreq.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

If I were you, I'd wait and play with the kit lens for a while.

You didn't give me any specification on the 55-200, but my guess is your buyingthe 55-200to "fill in" your focal length coverage beyond the kits lens.

Maybe save your cash and look at a decent F2.8 tele zoom later.

Those F3.5 max aperture lenses are so so at best.

Your better off buying one quality lense at a time, and then wait for a while until you can afford another good one.

Nothing wrong with playing with the kit lens for a while until you get used to the camera and figure out which focal length lenses will fit your photographic style the most.

My guess is you will find a wide angle lens, like a Tamron 17-35, will get far more use than the long zoom, unless your into nature/animal photography or something.

-- Terry



terry@softreq.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2005, 4:07 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
airshowfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 115
Default

Quote:
- I think Canon lenses are better than Nikons at the same price point (ouch!)
I agree. Especially the kinds of lenses that can do what a Panasonic can do.

I was recently in the same position - wanting to go from a Panazonic FZ10 to an SLR. I loved the big, fast, image-stabilized zoom in the Panasonic, and I knew that I would eventually be spending a good deal of money to buy lenses for my SLR that could approach that kind of performance. So I looked at the Canon lenses in the 300 and 400mm range, and the Nikon lenses in the same range, and figured that the top-notch lenses for those focal lengths (as well as the next-to-top-notch ones, and so on) were less expensive on the Canon system. For example, I ended up getting a 100-400L-IS. That kind of "white" Canon lens is a little more versatile and a little less expensive than its Nikon counterparts.

Besides, all the photographers I know shoot Canon (I do aviation photography), so we could trade expertise and borrow each other's lenses while shooting. This way I got to compare the 300mm prime, the 70-200, the 100-400, etc, on the field, without spending a dime on rentals. So if you know any photographers who are into one or the other system, I think it might be helpful to go along that same system.
airshowfan 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 11:43 AM.