Canon vs. Nikon in entry level DSLR cameras

[TimM]

Ok -- so I think after the repairs by Canon I've finally figured out how to get what I want out of the S100 most of the time.  However, that said, it seems that it's probably just not going to do what I really want. Wanderlust? Grass is greener phenomena? Maybe - maybe some of both - I don't know.

However, in preparation for my upcoming Cabo trip I've been thinking about getting an entry level DLSR camera. Needless to say there are tons of options.  Haven't spent a LOT of time sorting through them yet but it seems that it largely comes down to a Nikon vs. Canon situation.  What do you guys think about these manufacturers products at this price point?  Do I see myself growing well beyond an entry level DSLR - no I don't - but then I also thought a pro-sumer P&S was probably the right answer for what I want too...so who knows how much my perceptions are worth in this area? 

Thanks for any constructive input guys.

[jarrod white]

May god bless you before you jump into this

[grumpy]

May god bless you before you jump into this

2nd that, main thing, how does the camera feel in your hands, are the buttons where you want them, both companies have good equipment.
I was going over some of my pics the other day, some of my Sony shot's are fantastic, as well as the Canon shot's when i had the DSLR's, i prefer the Canon colors over other's i have seen, it ain't the camera as you know, it's the operator

Grumpy

[MikeA]

What is it that your wanting from the S100 that you can't get? Let me assure that wanderlust your feeling never goes away. There is always that next level especially when long glass comes into play.

To me it comes down to this. If you want to shoot wildlife with big zooms and do it "relatively" cheaply then Canon is the best choice. Personally I would skip the entry level and go straight for a used prosumer body from a reputable company (B&H, Adorama, KEH,) or from POTN. The 7D is a great camera that covers most shooting situations and can be had for a good price used. Full frame is the next level but I don't think you want to go there based on the availability of used bodies and the price of the new ones.

I can't speak alot for Nikon except to say they are very low noise and a great system. They seem to be the choice of pro shooters who shoot mostly indoors at higher ISO. That's not to say Canon is a slouch at high ISO. Currently in the newest bodies they have closed the gap maybe even taken the lead by using less MPs.  


Next suggestion would be a 4/3's system. I've seen some amazing photos from these little guys. They offer up to 10 fps, super low noise, and some amazing glass. I think sony has Zeiss lenses for theirs. The major drawback IMO is reach. If you want to shoot birds with a 400mm your outa luck. Otherwise I think they would make a great system to enable a casual user to take professional images.


One last note. a 10D canon can be had for about $100 and if paired with a great lens it'll make wonderful images. A 1Dx Mark IV is about $7000 and if you put a crappy lens on it it'll take crappy images. Find a good middle of the road body and buy high end glass. Glass usually holds or increases in value, bodies drop like a rock.
Also, Photoshop lightroom is a must if you are serious about your images.

Lots to consider give me a shout if you want and I'll offer advice to help you avoid the mistakes I made.

 

[TimM]

Thanks for the good info guys.  Mike, you gave me a lot to think about for sure and even though I  really don't know what's what in this arena your approach makes sense to me intuitively.   I wish I understood more about what differentiates a good lens from a great lens or a crappy lens.

Yes, I suspect you're correct too that the wanderlust thing will never go away. Kind've frustrating in a way....sorta what it must be like to have a substance abuse issue.


As for this ....

May god bless you before you jump into this

Thanks for a laugh to start the day!

[MikeA]

  I wish I understood more about what differentiates a good lens from a great lens or a crappy lens.

Basically it's Aperture. The larger (the more light it lets in) the aperture the better the lens.  To let in more light you have to have bigger glass. Bigger glass is expensive. Once you've seen how high quality optical glass is turned into a curved lens with zero imperfections you'll understand why it costs so much. Next is the Auto focus system and QC. Not all lens manufactures top of the line lenses are equal. Sigma is a third party that makes lenses for many bodies and they are usually cheaper. They often fall short of the OEM version.

For Canon their L series (red ring lenses) are the top of the line Canon lenses. There are some non L's that shine as well. I'll go over them if you decide to go with a Canon DSLR.

[grumpy]

What is it that your wanting from the S100 that you can't get? 

100 yd shot's at wildlife, one of these days i hope to have another one, love the little 100 for what it is though.

Grumpy

[TimM]

Thanks guys.

I'm vacillating on the camera thing. A lot of expenses coming up the next few months so this might get back-burner'ed for a while.  

Then again I'm thinking of using some of my frequent traveler rewards stuff to get something. I don't know if I'll ever go back to Cabo, let alone get to fish like this again, and there's bound to be a lot of interesting things to try to photo. So when I think about it (rationalize it) that way it seems like a much more reasonable thing to do!