Which DSLR?

[marksomebodyelse]

Costco has the Canon T1i kit with 2 lens and case for $850. They also have the Nikon D5000 2 lens kit for $825. The Canon is 15.1 megapixels and shoots 1080p video. The Nikon is 12.3 megapixels and shoots 720p video. Both cameras are quality products. Which would be a better choice for an amateur photographer?
Both cameras include image stabilized lenses of equal focal lengths. I have read that pixel count does not always translate into better pictures.

[wowzer]

You are correct that higher pixel counts do not translate into better pictures. I dont know much about Canon, but the Nikon 5000 with 2 kit lenses is a decent camera. If you want to shoot the kids, it will be fine for birthdays (but you'll have trouble with blowing out candlelight pictures--not sure if the video would be good). The Nikon kit lenses are good--and you'll be able to obtain excellent pictures...I use the 18-55 vr with my D300 sometimes and the pictures look good.


The single most important issue to me is the feel of the camera...the dials on the Nikon just feel right. I've played with Canon cameras and the second dial just doesn't seem to be in the right place...of course for the lower end models, they have only 1 dial. The T1i's dial is up top while the Nikon is a thumb dial.


In the end, I think you'll be fine with either camera...both should be robust cameras, but I tend towards Nikon as they 'feel' right to me.

[Bixby]

Agree with Wowzer - you must feel them in hand before making the decision. When I was first looking for a dSLR, I basically had my heart set on a Canon 40d until I held it in my hand. I ended up going with a Nikon.

[wowzer]

Way to go, Bixby...Nikon is the only way. ;-)


pRon will be angry with me. ;-)

[Don Kiyoti]

Compared to Pentax, a Nikon feels like you're holding a squirming cactus! ;-)

[pRICE cUBE]

wowzer wrote:
Way to go, Bixby...Nikon is the only way. ;-)


pRon will be angry with me. ;-)

I am unsure where you get the impression that I am anti Nikon. I believe my criticisms of the of the company are fair and you seem to forget that I own Nikon gear to the tune of the price of a new Corolla.



As for the OP's question:
It is all going to depend on your needs but I will try to break it down quickly. You will be happy with either camera. First blank out megapixel count, it is negligible and you would be hard pressed to see a difference at all, even in larger prints.


T1i pros: 1080p 20fps video mode, iso 100-12800, all 9 af points are cross sensor, all eos AF lenses will af even older used affordable ones, slightly larger lcd, 920,000 dot lcd

cons: 4.3 frames per second shooting, no kelvin white balance scale, chubby spot metering,



D5000 pros: flip out reticulating lcd, 4 frames per second shooting, kelvin white balance scale, spot metereing,

Cons: manual focus only for video mode, no pin motor so manual focus only for great and vast selection of pin motor lenses, ISO begins at ISO 200 instead of 100, Video mode is 5 minutes in 720p max, 230,000 dot lcd



To expand on the pin motor issue: in order to have autofocus you need to buy more expensive lenses for certain focal lengths. For instance, a Nikon 50mm 1.8 is great for low light and costs $100 used or refurb. The D5000 will not AF, you need to buy Nikon 50mm 1.4 G or Sigma's 50mm 1.4 HSM to have AF for $500. There are also great lenses from Nikon past such as the 80-200mm 2.8 that go for $400-500, to get a simlar focal length for the D5000, you will need to buy sigma starting at $700 or used Nikon 80-200mm AF-s for $900 or 70-200mm 2.8 CR for $1900.

If you don't plan on expanding beyond those lenses or like paying for the newer gear with built in motors then this is a non issue. I personally have a 60mm 2.8 Macro i picked up for $200 and a 80-200mm 2.8 for $300 and 35mm f/2 for $200. The money I saved on those I kicked in toward the 200-400mm f/4 nikkor.

[Billybob]

I agree that it is not a clear-cut choice.

I shoot mostly Canon and have a slight preference for the Canon UI. However, when I'm just shooting at an indoor social gathering, I typically grab my D90 mainly because of the 35mm f/1.8 that is almost always attached to it (otherwise, I put a 85mm f/1.8 on it, which is great for portrait shooting). The 35 will AF on the D5000; the 85mm will not.

I'm headed to France next week, and I'm just taking my Canon DSLR. I've rented a 35mm f/1.4 for the week, so I won't miss the Nikon.

If you think that you might buy additional lenses, then the system choice becomes more critical. Both Nikon and Canon produce fabulous lenses. Some argue that the best Nikon lenses are superior to Canon's best. However, I wouldn't know, because, as a non-professional, I can't afford the best Nikon lenses. They tend to run $1700 and up (e.g. 14-24mm, 70-200mm etc.). By contrast, The Canon alternatives tend to be closer to $1000, and some are even less. For example, I picked up a Canon 70-200 f/4.0 IS-considered to be one of the best zoom lenses available -- for about $1000 this summer. Nikon doesn't make an equivalent lens, and their least expensive "pro" version is closer to $2000.

When I compare photos, I typically have to look at the exif data to distinguish between camera bodies. However, I can more often identify the lens that took a photo. For example, the Nikon 85mm and Canon 135mm take photos that have a special look to them. The 35mm is more of my workhorse lens that simply takes very sharp photos.

[marksomebodyelse]

Thanks for all the info. I will need to buy a wide angle lens to take pictures of the interiors of hoses I have listed. Does this make a big difference in my choices. I do not want to spend a grand on a wide angle lens.

[AllGold]

Nikon does have better wide angle lenses but only at the high end. If you're not spending the big bucks on lenses, then there's no real difference.

[vision63]

If you got staggeringly drunk and picked the camera you threw up on, you'll be very happy with it. 2 great products.