I boutght a Nikon D5000, my brother in law bought a Canon in a same price bracket. We both took shots at a wedding and I was hugely disappointed with the Canon pictures when comparing them to mine. The Nikon software or the sensor seem to be considerably better than the current Canon.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: What's the most interesting small town you've visited in South Africa?
Better in what way? I'm willing to wager any significant differences were due to the user and not the sensor.
Rosaudio
First Officer
Which Canon?
Its a better model, but technically not an upgrade. I believe the D5000 came out first, then nikon realised theres a gap in the market wrt to an entry level and brought out the D3000. I've learnt that the more your research, the more difficult your decision becomes
Have you settled on a budget yet... I think before you go any further, get a figure in mind.
Just remember one thing, theres no such thing as a bad camera, only bad photographers
Also, consider your budget regarding the extras, which I considered to be fairly important:
- an SLR backback (the Lowepro Fastpack goes for about R800-R900)
- a spare battery (R670)
- a 4Gb SD card (I went for the Sandisk Extreme III for R350, but there are cheaper, slower versions)
- cleaning kit (lenspen for R100, microfibre cloth for R50)
- 2 UV filters (R100 for Kenko)
Next, you may want a tripod. A basic, crappy one will frustrate you, but a decent Manfrotto set of legs plus head can cost upwards of R2,000.
- an SLR backback (the Lowepro Fastpack goes for about R800-R900)
- a spare battery (R670)
- a 4Gb SD card (I went for the Sandisk Extreme III for R350, but there are cheaper, slower versions)
- cleaning kit (lenspen for R100, microfibre cloth for R50)
- 2 UV filters (R100 for Kenko)
Next, you may want a tripod. A basic, crappy one will frustrate you, but a decent Manfrotto set of legs plus head can cost upwards of R2,000.
My observation is purely based on the image review, hardly scientific, I know. We shot in the church and the Nikon seemd to handle the contrasts better. The Canon image seemed to have much more flaring around the artifical light. What may have contributed to that is that he used a 18-200mm Sigma lens and I used the 18-55mm Nikon one. However, I can hardly belief that the Sigma lens would be that bad (it was bad).
My choice of Nikon was based on finding that all the 18-55mm Canon kit lenses seem to have a sticky point when zooming. I want a zoom as smooth as possible. The choice of the D5000 was because I need Liveview for a certain project.
Which Canon was it? Don't know exact model but he bought it about a month before Christmas, so it is one of the latest models.
Flaring is more likely to be as a result of the lens or the use of UV filters (which are completely unnecessary btw) though even a subtle difference in positioning can make all the difference. Then there is post processing to take into account. Did one/both of you shoot in RAW? If you did what raw converter was used? If not what in camera settings were there . . .
Canon has Highlight Tone Priority. I'm still undecided about how worthwhile modes like that are and from the look of it so is this guy. http://blogs.oreilly.com/digitalmedia/2008/02/active-dlighting.html
Its a better model, but technically not an upgrade. I believe the D5000 came out first, then nikon realised theres a gap in the market wrt to an entry level and brought out the D3000. I've learnt that the more your research, the more difficult your decision becomes
Have you settled on a budget yet... I think before you go any further, get a figure in mind.
Just remember one thing, theres no such thing as a bad camera, only bad photographers
I am thinking of between R5,000 and R7,000
BTW, what is Live view?
web
Executive Member
Dayav07 I see you are in Durban go to the Pav and go and look at Govan Manni they always have good specials on Nikons there....
You are asking questions, many of which I can't answer, at least not right now. As both our cameras were quite new, and the situation did not allow much time, I assume that we both shot using basic modes and default camera setups. I am not saying that the Nikon is much better than the Canon but only that I was surprised at the differences in the image review pictures, pictures which were taken with us standing next to each other.
SubliminalThought
Senior Member
lol... you're stepping on shaky ground when you crit camera brands. Suffice to say, each has its pros and cons. Browse around on pixel-peeper.com and look through camera brands. You will see amazing and crap photos from each. Its all about the photographer and how well he/she knows how to handle the equipment.
Then I think a D3000 twin lens bundle will do you very nicely
@ around 7k.BTW Live view would be just like ur point and shoot... where u look at the "live" image on ur screen before you take the photo. If you really want that feature then gofo the D5000, that will cost you around 8k for a single lens.
I think sacamera.co.za would probably be a good benchmark for prices, they seem very reasonable..
Once last thing. just be sure if you do go the nikon route that the lens that you buy have Vibration Reduction (VR). That helps with camera shake.
Question:
I have seen many bundles for the Nikon D3000 with two lenses (ie: 18 - 55mm VR and 55 - 200 mm VR). What I really want to know is it really necessary for me to buy the bundle and get the extra one now? seeing that im a noob xD. Should I rather buy the body and the 18-55mm VR lens or should I buy the bundle with both of them.
What does the measurements on the lenses really mean?
With the 2 lenses : 7000
Just with one lens: 5600
saving 1400 if i take the single lens
something else i noticed on this site:
http://www.sacamera.co.za/product/149/Nikon.html
the body of the d3000 costs 5700, but directly above that the body AND the lens costs 5600? how does that work??
I have seen many bundles for the Nikon D3000 with two lenses (ie: 18 - 55mm VR and 55 - 200 mm VR). What I really want to know is it really necessary for me to buy the bundle and get the extra one now? seeing that im a noob xD. Should I rather buy the body and the 18-55mm VR lens or should I buy the bundle with both of them.
What does the measurements on the lenses really mean?
With the 2 lenses : 7000
Just with one lens: 5600
saving 1400 if i take the single lens
something else i noticed on this site:
http://www.sacamera.co.za/product/149/Nikon.html
the body of the d3000 costs 5700, but directly above that the body AND the lens costs 5600? how does that work??
the 55-200 VR lens sells for about R2.5k itself, so it worth getting now than buying separate later. I've actually been looking for a second hand one and they are really hard to come by. I dont know the reason why bodies sell for more than with a kit lens... Its nothing different, just sells for more for some reason.
the measurements are pretty much like the optical zoom u find in a point and shoot. just brings u closer to the subject.
the measurements are pretty much like the optical zoom u find in a point and shoot. just brings u closer to the subject.