Nikon and/or Canon dslr?

[Roy Ledgerton]

Having used Nikon SLRs for many years for natural history record photography I eventually tired of humping a lot of gear around. I switched to a Panasonic FZ20, which as you will know has 12x IS Leica lens as well as an electronic viewfinder. Although a splendid camera I find the EVF too small to be usable and the lcd screen poor in many light conditions unless I use hood. Therefore I am seriously thinking of buying a Nikon D50 body to use with my SLR lenses or a Canon 350D plus two lenses. My principal interest is plant and insect photography. The lens I used mostly for this with my slr was a Sigma 70-300 with macro facility. I would appreciate the opinions and/or recommendations of anyone who has used either of these cameras.

Thanks in advance.

Roy

[postcardcv]

Originally Posted by Roy Ledgerton

Therefore I am seriously thinking of buying a Nikon D50 body to use with my SLR lenses or a Canon 350D plus two lenses. My principal interest is plant and insect photography. The lens I used mostly for this with my slr was a Sigma 70-300 with macro facility.

I use the Canon 350D and am very happy with it - it has a very fast start/wake up time (quoted as 0.2 seconds), image quality is excellent, all round a good little camera. That said if I already had Nikon lenses I doubt I'd consider switching to Canon. There are a lot of Kinon users around who are very happy with the dslr's, and I've seen some great shots taken with the D50.

As you are planning on doing lots of shots of flowers and insects I'd recommend getting a dedicated macro lens. I have the Sigma 105 f2.8 and am very pleased with it, certainly gets better results than the 70-300 APO macro that I used to use with my film camera.

[postcardcv]

here's a shot taken last week with the EOS350D and the Sigma 105 f2.8 macro.
http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...1&limit=recent

[Roy Ledgerton]

Originally Posted by postcardcv

here's a shot taken last week with the EOS350D and the Sigma 105 f2.8 macro.
http://www.worldphotographyforum.com...1&limit=recent

Thanks for both replies. Stunning photograph. As my Nikon lenses are well-used and showing their age I may go down the Canon route.

Roy

[postcardcv]

The one criticism that many have of the 350D is how small it is in the hand, so make sure you try one before you buy. Personally I was not impressed with the size or feel of it, but within a week of getting it I was used to it and I now don't notice it at all. Being such a popular camera I'm sure any local camera/electrical shop will have one in that you could try.

[Don Hoey]

Nikon or Canon you can read reviews here http://www.dpreview.com/

Once you have set a budget you really do need to get your hands on your shortlist. Image quality is good from either but ergonomics will play a large part in your satisfaction with the final choice.

When it comes to macro lenses I agree with postie that a prime rather than zoom will give the best image quality. Focal length will depend on your subject and how close to the lens it will be.

[yelvertoft]

Originally Posted by Roy Ledgerton

As my Nikon lenses are well-used and showing their age I may go down the Canon route.
Roy

I wouldn't rush to change systems quite so readily, just because your existing lenses are old doesn't mean they aren't any good compared to more modern items. Some of the older lenses could well be better than some of the newer items.

As a previous poster has said, I think you should try all the models that you are interested in and make your decision based on ergonomics more than anything else. In terms of technical performance, there's no such thing as a "bad" dSLR on the market at the moment. The one that will take the best pictures for you, is the one you get on best with when you are using it in the field.

Duncan.

[Don Hoey]

Accessories also play a part. When I got my D100 a few years ago, one of the major things that swung it for me was the optional battery grip. Having used motor drives on my FM, F2's and F3 I found the body only not so easy to hold due to its compact style. This was even more obvious with an 80-200 f2.8 attatched.

Now there is a camera that is a good deal with the upcomming D200. Just had a cry at Warehouse Express prices. Cannot really complain though as I traded my Bronica outfit for my D100 just before 2 1/4 square prices fell through the floor.

[jseaman]

If you have existing lenses that would work with a new digital Nikon and if they are of focal lengths that you can use I would say stick with them. But ... if you are going to be buying into a new system please check out the other brands.

I'm the owner of an Olympus UZ-700 and an UZ-725 I also have a Nikon CoolPix 5000 and a Sony video camera. Brand loyalty does not drive me in my purchases. I buy what works best for me. When it was time for a DSLR, I studied the situation for several months then bought into the Canon system.

Being the owner of a SLR system already, you know that deciding what brand of body to use is a big decision that controls other decisions, especially your lens purchases. The lenses are going to cost more and last longer than any digital body. One indicator of a product's value is what it is worth on the used market - just look at the resale value of used Canon EOS lenses. They hold their value to an amazing degree. That told me almost everything I needed to know.

But, if you don't ever plan to expand your photography (ie purchase additional lenses for landscape, telephoto, portrait or macro) don't worry too much about which system. Just price out (for each brand) the costs for body and lenses that you know you need then buy what is less expensive and gets the job done.

[rayl]

I use the D50 and am perfectly happy with it. If you go down this route, it will certainly be the cheapest option to get you up and running (D50 body £400). I agree you must try before you buy, for me the 350D is just too small in my hand. Performance wise I don't think there is much in it.

Ray