File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Hi /p/ I've been a digital user for a while, and now I think it is time for me to take it one step further and get an SLR.

From reading various articles and looking at reviews it seems the 2 best 'starter' SLR's are the Nikon D40/D40x and the Canon 400d, both are in the price range I am looking at.

I'm leaning more towards the 400d though, because it has a focusing motor, and the 9 point AF.

What does /p/ think?
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKONCamera ModelE4100Camera SoftwareE4100v1.0Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Focal Length (35mm Equiv)35 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:02:10 19:10:12Exposure Time5/53 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating50Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length5.80 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width600Image Height449RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownColor ModeCOLORImage QualityNORMALWhite BalanceAUTOImage SharpeningAUTOFocus ModeAF-SISO SelectionAUTOImage AdjustmentNORMALLens AdapterOFFAuto FocusCenterSaturationNormalNoise ReductionOFF
>> I||ICIT !!mknjFN/v/49
canonfag here, so its pretty obvious what i reccomend ;)

also, cool background, ive seen it done before, tried too, but a white wall isnt that interesting :P
>> Anonymous
if moniez dont matter i'd go canon
>> Anonymous
Yes I've heard some weird things about the D40x, they upgraded it from the D40 and didn't change any of the actually bad things with it.

>>162115

Thanks! Although It needs to be dimmer.
>> Anonymous
>>162116

The d40x and 400d are around the same price where I live so it doesn't really matter.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>162116
If monies DO matter, I'd go Canon. Cheap 50/1.8 that'll autofocus, slightly less cheap but still not bad 35/2.0 that'll autofocus, etc.
>> Anonymous
Depends on how seriously you're going to be taking photography. The real issue is in the lenses. Both the D40(x) and the 400D are capable bodies. Nikon has cheaper lenses but most won't autofocus on the D40(x). Canon has more expensive lenses but has autofocus on the lower end.
>> Anonymous
>>162120

I've read that the 400d body is better than the d40x, but the D40x kit lenses is better quality than the 400d.

I'm probably going to be upgrading my lenses in the future anyway. Which is the best one I can advance with when I learn new skills etc...?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>162120
>Canon has more expensive lenses but has autofocus on the lower end.
Clarification: This is only true if you're buying old, manual-focus lenses on the used market. With new lenses, Canon tends to be a bit cheaper at the low-medium end, and close enough that it doesn't really matter (or unique enough that there's no comparison) at the high end.

>>162123
>the D40x kit lenses is better quality than the 400d.
They both pretty much suck, though, compared to each companies other offerings. So it's sort of a "Would you rather get punched in the kidneys or kicked in the shins" sort of choice.

On the other hand, Canon has an 18-55 IS and Nikon has an 18-55 VR that are much better, both of which cost about $100US more than the kit lens. So if you're really concerned about it, you could get the body-only version of the camera you go with and then get the stabilized 18-55 from the appropriate manufacturer.

>Which is the best one I can advance with when I learn new skills etc...?
I'd say the Canon does, simply for the much larger selection of autofocus-capable lenses. But you should keep in mind that I'm a huge canonfag, so I'm biased.
>> catswiththumbs !!kNKksjfYe0p
>>162127
somebody say canonfag?
>> Anonymous
>>162127
Thanks for the info, but has anybody used both or isn't biased?

All the web reviews are a bit half arsed when it comes to doing a comparison and are like well the 400d is technically better but the d40x has better quality blah blah blah.

I can't really find a conclusion too which one I'm better invested my money into?
>> Anonymous
>>162113
you do know your desktop wallpaper only works at a specific angle. that sucks
>> Anonymous
Nikon D70

/thread
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>162179
Thats why I'm buying an SLR so I can take a better background picture.
>> Anonymous
>>162180
I'm pretty sure the 400d is better than the D70
>> Martin
>>162181
made me laugh.
i hope your joking,
>> Anonymous
>>162183
Im pretty sure the D40 is better than the D70
>> Anonymous
>>162179you do know your desktop wallpaper only works at a specific angle. that sucks

1. buy swivel/multi angle bracket for LCD
2. attach video camera on bracket and record
3. set video as background
4. move LCD at same angles you recorded
5. ???
6. prophet
>> Anonymous
>>162188
or,
1. buy a small (i mean postage stamp-size) webcam
2. attach to back of monitor
3. set live feed as desktop background (this can be done! with html and shit and blah blah go to /g/)
4. calibrate zoom and shit
5. ???
6. profits
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>162175
>Thanks for the info, but has anybody used both or isn't biased?
Everyone's going to be biased towards one or the other.

See, the thing is, both systems will give you the same image quality and there really won't be a huge difference in handling between them. People who started out with Canon systems will have a preference for the Canon, and people who started out with Nikon systems will have a preference for the Nikon.

The only real advantage the Canon has over the Nikon is a wider array of available autofocus lenses. The only real advantage the Nikon has over the Canon is (according to Nikonfags) that it feels better in their hand.

So. Go to a store that carries both, ask if you can grope 'em a bit to see which one you like best. If it's the Nikon, try to decide if the better handling is worth it to you given the inability to autofocus with most of Nikon's current lineup of lenses.
>> Anonymous
Frankly, you can trust Nikon gear. The same goes for high end Canon gear. It's reliable. It's sturdy. It will take the abuse that goes with professional rigors. You can pick up a Nikon every day, and use it, just like you use a tool. Hell, you can drive nails with old Nikons. That's the quality we're talking about here.

When you make your livelihood, you don't choose the brand that offers an equivalent, even similar system, you choose the brand that is a trustworthy and time-tested tool. Thus, Nikon. There are always distinctions to be made between Nikon and Canon, but I've often heard this statement, and I believe it: Canons are the best cameras made by engineers, but Nikons are the best cameras made by photographers. It's a generalization, but that feels very true to me.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>162198
>The real advantage the Sony has over the Canikon is a wider array of available autofocus lenses. The other real advantage the Sony has over the Canikon is (according to everyone) that it feels better in their hand.
>> Anonymous
>>162198
Or he could just get a D50.
>> Anonymous
>>162209

Why do Nikonfags always fall back to that argument?

So you have to go find a used and no longer manufactured camera for it to be any decent when you can buy a Canon/Sony/Pentax/Olympus for less that isn't castrated by Nikon?
>> Anonymous
>>162195
small webcams have shitty quality and aren't that wide angled. It'll only work if you're on an Eee sized screen.
>> Anonymous
if your upgrading from a point and shoot, the one thing that will interest you is gonna be the ... durrrrrrrr "big lcd screen" so you can see your pictures.

d40
>> Anonymous
Pentax K100D Super.

Cheaper camera, cheaper lenses, better shake reduction (in-body not in-lens), and just as good build quality.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>162215
Only the sonys have bigger screens :P
>> Anonymous
>>162216better shake reduction (in-body not in-lens)

i lold

try harder
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>162207
GTFO Troll
>> Anonymous
>>162220

What's to LOL about?
Pentax's shake reduction is in the body, which means the lenses are cheap and relatively light.
Canon's shake reduction is in the lens, which means the lenses are expensive and relatively heavy.

I guess if you only plan on using 1 or 2 lenses Canon is great, but thanks to in-body shake reduction Pentax users can get tons of cheap lenses.
>> Anonymous
>>162227

nice one

1/10 for effort
>> Anonymous
>>162234

If it's a troll, how is it wrong?
$10 says you're Butterfly.
>> Anonymous
>>162244

Butterfly would actually agree since Pentax and Sony both use sensor shift. lulz
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>162234
I actually just checked Adorama and the Pentax lens prices do look noticeably lower than Canon lens prices.

I'll agree that lens-shift is better, for lenses that have lens-shift IS, but sensor shift IS is better than nothing for the many, many lenses out there that don't have IS built in.

And there's nothing saying that Pentax can't add in-lens IS to the lenses that would benefit from it (except for the fact that they so far haven't). Four Thirds cameras feature both in-Lens and in-body stabilization.
>> Anonymous
>>162250I actually just checked Adorama and the Pentax lens prices do look noticeably lower than Canon lens prices.

that's because their shit sucks, that's why it's cheaper

same reason why nikon is more expensive than canon, they suck more.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>162282
So? Even if that were true, and I'm certainly not conceding it is without any argument other than your trolling assertion, your level of suck is pretty much going to overshadow the level of suck from any lens from one of the big camera companies. For example, I've never once seen a shot on /p/ taken with the Canon rebel kit lens or the Nikon D40 kit lens where the optical quality of the lens was the worst thing about the photo.
>> Anonymous
what the fuck are you talking about you retard

nikon costs more because they are better than canon

canon costs more because they are better than pentax

WOW THAT'S HARD TO UNDERSTAND
>> Anonymous
No matter what camera

if you suck at photography, everything you take a picture of will suck along with you
>> Anonymous
that's not relevant at all

Nikon produces better quality products, plain and simple, they cost more

Canon produces good quality products, they cost less

Pentax shit sucks, they cost even less
>> EvenSteven !!RBDL+S5h60X
>>162315

You forgot to mention that you can use Nikon cameras as a hammer. Thats a big plus in my book.
>> Anonymous
I use Pentax lenses as a butt plug.
It's a major plus in my book.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>162247
Yeah but butterfly knows better than to call them the wrong things.

THIS > THAT
/troll
>> Anonymous
OP here, I have been a digi user for a while but I used to own a film SLR about 15 years ago. So I generally want something I can advance with and not just 'point and click'.

Am I better getting the 400d?

And whats so good about the 50/70d.
>> Anonymous
>>162989And whats so good about the 50/70d.

>>162341Nikon cameras as a hammer.

Go figure.
>> Anonymous
>>162341
I agree because the Canon bodies are cheap and hard to get a good grip on them...
>> Anonymous
So what nikon>canon just because they're easier to hold? Thats the most retarded thing ever.
>> Anonymous
>>162997
OP again.. I might add my hands are fucking massive.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163000
>So what nikon>canon just because they're easier to hold? Thats the most retarded thing ever.
Not when everything else is pretty much equal and it's a tool you're (ideally) going to spend hours and hours holding and using in a given day.

(That being said, I like the feel of my Canons just fine)
>> Anonymous
Well I'm going to go and try and them out today.

Canon do look more technically better, and some sample photos from reviews are negotiable against the D40x but I would prefer to have the lenses compatibility, DoF preview, 9 point AF and the anti dust features. The only thing the Nikon offers is that its easier to use, and I'm not retarded so I'm pretty sure the canon will do fine. + by lurking on /p/ a D40 seems to make you into an instafag.
>> Anonymous
>>163000
Successfully trolled
>> Anonymous
>>163010<<
>> Anonymous
>>163012>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<&l
t;<<<<<<<<
>> Anonymous
seriously though what does the d50/d70 have that the 400d doesn't?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163015
D70 has dual control wheels (although at the expense of ZOMFGNOISE at high ISO. 1600 on an XTi is a hell of a lot more usable than on a D70).

They both also have a price advantage (since neither are currently in production, you can pretty much only get 'em used or clearance stock), and the Nikon name if you're into that sort of thing.
>> Anonymous
>>163017

XTi is still in production.
>> Anonymous
is that the only reason? I can get the 400d off ebay for around the same price as the D70, and still with a 12 month warranty. I don't care about the name thing, and I won't be taking pictures at 1600 iso
>> Anonymous
why do people bother with the 400d now that the 450d is a cunt-hair away from being in stores around the world?
>> Anonymous
I'm also curious why people give a rat's ass about the brand of the body, when in all probability they'll be spending more money on lenses in their first year, than the camera is worth.

In fact, even if you plan on buying just one lens, a decent top-quality zoom will run you more than either camera. You can change up the camera in a couple of years, but good lenses can easily last you 20 years.
>> Anonymous
>>163038
The 450d costs alot more than I want to spend

>>163039
This is what I mean, I want to know which body will be best to start off with, as I will be buying better lenses in the future. I want a camera I can advance, keep the lenses and then move up to a better body when I advance my skills.

I hope I'm right in thinking the 400d would be better here because it has a focusing motor.
>> Anonymous
get a D80
>> Anonymous
bump
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163038
Three hundred dollars?
>> Anonymous
>>163053
Only $200 because it includes the wonderful 18-55 IS, and I'd much rather have the better grip, brighter viewfinder, 12 mega pixels, and LIVE VIEW.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163043
>I hope I'm right in thinking the 400d would be better here because it has a focusing motor.
Technically the 400D doesn't have a focusing motor either. Just that all Canon EOS EF and EF-S lenses have had focus motors in the lens since day 1. I.e., if it can autofocus on anything, it can autofocus on a 400D.

But other than that, yeah.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163054
Still. For people considering the low-end of the Canon line, that $200 (or $300, depending on how much you want IS) is significant. Money doesn't grow on trees.
>> Anonymous
ill get the 400d then, cos i haven't got a spare $300 and >>better grip, brighter viewfinder, 12 mega pixels, and LIVE VIEW isn't that amazing
>> Anonymous
>>163056
True. I had a customer yesterday who refused to buy an XTi and was dead set on getting an XT because that $200 was way too fucking much.
>> Anonymous
>>163058
Grip and viewfinder are actually pretty great, but at that point you might as well just get the D80.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
The camera body really doesn't matter. The LENSES are the important thing. So first decide what lens family you want to use, and then pick a camera body. The full-functioned entry level bodies from canon or nikon will do just fine to start with.

But don't use the fucking kit-lens. Buy an L-level zoom, or a quality prime lens, and you'll see orders of magnitude better quality.
>> Anonymous
>>163056

> Still. For people considering the low-end of the Canon line, that $200 (or $300, depending on how much you want IS) is significant. Money doesn't grow on trees.

If someone is worried about spending $200, then why are the even buying an SLR in the first place?
>> Anonymous
>>163066
If someone is worried about spending $200, then why are the even buying an SLR in the first place?

Because we're not all Ken Rockwell
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163063
>But don't use the fucking kit-lens. Buy an L-level zoom, or a quality prime lens, and you'll see orders of magnitude better quality.
Quality prime lenses won't autofocus on the low-end Nikons. That's the point I'm trying to make.

Also: especially when just starting out, it will be a long, *long* time before the image quality of your kit lens becomes the limiting factor in the quality of your pictures.

>>163066
>If someone is worried about spending $200, then why are the even buying an SLR in the first place?
Because they want SLR quality? Poorfags might be able to scrimp and save and work up $500. That extra $200 might represent months of extra savings. Or, alternately, it might represent the difference between getting just the kit lens and getting the kit lens + 50/1.8 and a nice camera bag to carry it in.
>> Anonymous
>>163070
not the point... if spending a couple of hundred bucks is an issue, it'll be an issue tomorrow too...

so all you'll end up with are the worst products in any category... that's gonna make for some hot pics.

if 200 bucks is an issue, then you really don't want an SLR - you can get some very nice pictures out of a prosumer camera. Getting a very nice one of those will save you more than 200 bucks in lenses and kit, and with some of the on-board lenses having f/2.8 equivalency you're not missing much.

Chances are because you have no money, you'll be using slow glass that distorts a lot anyway.
>> Nikon !!eX1E3IhZL8k
>>162198

Talk about a Canonfag spreading FUD.

Not only does do Nikons feel good in the hand, but their lenses and image processors are better than Canons. I've used both Canons and Nikons and time after time the image quality on the Nikon is much better.

Photographer > Lenses > camera body
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163074
>I've used both Canons and Nikons and time after time the image quality on the Nikon is much better.
Uh huh.

I think your name suggests a slight bias, sir.
>> Anonymous
>>163074
LOL.. yeah you sound unbiased.

going by your priority there, nikonfag... canon owns all, as due to the EF mount being bigger than nikon's, you can get an adapter to fit nikon lenses on your canon body if you really want.

With all your nikon optics at my disposal, as well as canon's unbeatable lineup, where's the choice?

There's no more than 5% difference between the way a canon feels in your hand to the way an equivalent nikon does. They're all fucking camera-shaped, for crying out loud.

I've never known of someone to say "omfg this thing just doesn't feel nice"
>> Zenit !!00V0S+qwiZD
>>163074

Talk about a Nikonfag spreading FUD.

Not only does do Zenits feel good in the hand, but their lenses and image processors are better than Nikons. I've used both Nikons and Zenits and time after time the image quality on the Zenit is much better.

Photographer > Lenses > Nikon!!eX1E3IhZL8k
>> Anonymous
>>163077
Eh, there's no adapter to use Nikon G-type lenses on Canon, at least not in mass production.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163077
>I've never known of someone to say "omfg this thing just doesn't feel nice"
I have. Lots of people flat out can't stand the Rebel unless it's got the battery grip on it for extra size.

I'm perfectly comfortable with mine, despite having huge gorilla mitts, but others aren't. Different strokes and all that.
>> Anonymous
>>163081
either way, disliking the rebel specifically doesn't nail canon into the ground... the comparable nikon is a doorstop.

ok, maybe a doorstop that feels better in the hand?

the rebel lineup is for chicks anyway, they have smaller hands and use kit lenses for their super-creative self-portraiture which can be found on flickr.
>> Nikon !!eX1E3IhZL8k
>>163077

Tell me something, Canonfag - can EF-S lenses be used on cameras with an EF mount ??? Hmmmm???? Care to answer that question for every one here?

On an important side note, every Nikon lens with fit on any Nikon camera. Period.
>> Anonymous
You need a camera with it's own focusing motors so that you can get additional lenses that are not crappy.

The 400d might be good just because of that. But Nikon has better image quality, as well as build quality, on both their lenses and cameras.
>> Anonymous
OP here... fuck it I'm gonna get a Nikon D70s
>> Anonymous
>>163085
Yes, they can be used on cameras with an EF-mount, as all EOS cameras have an EF mount, you momo.

They have to have APS-C sized sensors, but they will certainly also have an EF mount.

Seriously, what's your point anyway? - all EOS cameras take EF lenses, so it's your choice whether or not to buy an EF-S lens to stick on your APS-C body.
>> Anonymous
>>163071

> Quality prime lenses won't autofocus on the low-end Nikons.

Which is why I said any of the FULL-FEATURED entry level bodies will do just fine.

> Also: especially when just starting out, it will be a long, *long* time before the image quality of your kit lens becomes the limiting factor in the quality of your pictures.

Bullshit. If you want your photos to look any different than your point-and-shoot vacation photos, then you're gonna have to give up that kit lens.

> Because they want SLR quality?

Then buy one of the higher-level point and shoots. The ENTIRE POINT of SLRs is the ability to use many different types of lenses. If you're going to scrimp and only buy one lens for your SLR, then you don't need an SLR in the first place.
>> Anonymous
>>163090
>Then buy one of the higher-level point and shoots. The ENTIRE POINT of SLRs is the ability to use many different types of lenses. If you're going to scrimp and only buy one lens for your SLR, then you don't need an SLR in the first place.

I absolutely agree - and if money is that much of a concern, then honestly the higher-end non-SLR cameras aren't that bad when it comes to glass either...

24-460ish mm f/2.8-3.5 is pretty damned nice if you're only ever going to own one lens.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163086
>The 400d might be good just because of that. But Nikon has better image quality, as well as build quality, on both their lenses and cameras.
Find me some tests that indicate that Nikons have better image quality than Canons on price-comparable bodies and lenses. Otherwise, GTFO Troll.

>>163090
>Then buy one of the higher-level point and shoots. The ENTIRE POINT of SLRs is the ability to use many different types of lenses. If you're going to scrimp and only buy one lens for your SLR, then you don't need an SLR in the first place.
...

You've never actually used a DSLR, have you?

The quality difference between the output from a P&S sensor and a DSLR sensor is very noticeable, even with the cheapest of beat-up, third-party flea market lenses slapped on there.

The ability to change lenses is one of the advantages of DSLRs, but it's far from the *only* advantage.
>> Anonymous
>>163095
ok, smaller sensors are noisier - all granted... but the choice isn't between a full-frame 35mm sensor, and a pocket camera.

we're talking about essentially two different sides of the line between SLR and non-SLR.... the difference between them isn't that great...

the higher end non-SLRs have sensors similar in size to the smaller sensors found in your rebels, etc.
>> Anonymous
I love how every thread on /p/ turns into a war between canon and nikon fags
>> Anonymous
>>163099
it's because the nikonfags just won't fucking die already.

nikon sells cameras on the strength of its history. There's literally nothing better about them in today's world, unless you count the regular leapfrogging which new versions bring.

today nikon's latest is better than canon's latest, but tomorrow, canon's is better by that same cunt-hair, and so forth...

that stuff can be ignored when buying a body, because the body is the least important thing in the equation anyway... and canon's lens lineup is fucking awesome.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
>>163097
>the higher end non-SLRs have sensors similar in size to the smaller sensors found in your rebels, etc.
If by "similar in size" you mean "five times smaller than", sure...

Seriously. You've never actually used an SLR, have you?
>> Anonymous
>>163097
Four non-SLR digital cameras have been produced with sensors the size those found in SLRs:

The Sony DSC-R9 (IIRC, that's the name of it.)
The Epson RD-1
The Leica M8
The Sigma DP-1
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>163095

> You've never actually used a DSLR, have you?

Here is my current gear list:
Canon EOS 400D
Canon EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS L
Canon EF 24-70mm 2.8 L
Canon EF-S 10-22mm Wide Angle Zoom
Canon EF 50 1.4
Canon EF 85 1.8

So I know a little bit about dslrs.

> The quality difference between the output from a P&S sensor and a DSLR sensor is very noticeable, even with the cheapest of beat-up, third-party flea market lenses slapped on there.

Bullshit. Compare the output of a Canon Powershot S5 IS (pictured) with a rebel xti with the kit lens. It's gonna look the same, and it only costs $395. And the lens on the powershot goes down to 2.7, which beats the fuck out of the xti's kit lens.

If you're not willing to spend money on new glass, then don't buy an slr.
>> Anonymous
>>163101
you can't use one or two cameras as representation of all higher-end consumer cams.

for the record, I'm not the guy you first said that to, but I shoot a 40d these days, with a range of lenses, not the least of which is my 70-200 f/2.8L IS. The way I see it, there's only one reason to buy an SLR - and that's if you're going to stick it on the end of a lens which costs more than the body.
>> Anonymous
>>163100
How is Canon's lens lineup better than Nikon's? I'm also trying to decide between the two.
>> Anonymous
OP here again after doing lots of research etc. I have come down to this conclusion.
I want a body that I can add lenses too, that function properly so the D40/x are out of the question. I also want to be able to grow with my camera add better lenses and then eventually get a body when I advance. So I have filtered it down to these 2 bodys to get me started:

Canon EOS 400d and
Nikon D70s

I'm going to use the kit lense for now, then at the end of the month when I get paid I'll upgrade the lens.

So which body should I get?
>> Anonymous
>>163106
The quality of optics is absolutely on par. Both companies make excellent lenses.

However, Canon offers more flexibility in their creative lenses. Just one example of that is the tilt/shift series, which Nikon has no rival for.

If you ever plan to graduate to really creative landscapes, or if you enjoy shooting cityscapes, canon offers 3 completely unmatched lenses for you to choose from.

They're never going to be someone's first or only lens, but they're an excellent example of why you would want to start collecting EF lenses. Simply put, one day you'll want to do something that Nikon just won't let you.

That day you'll wish you went with canon gear.
>> Anonymous
>>163111
to add to that....

you're going to fucking hate changing your mind when you have 10 or 20 grand worth of lenses 10 years from now....

if you can't see that ever happening, then you probably don't really want an SLR.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163103
>So I know a little bit about dslrs.
Okay, then you've never used a P&S, right?

>And the lens on the powershot goes down to 2.7, which beats the fuck out of the xti's kit lens.

But the PowerShot at ISO100 looks noisier than, say, an XT at ISO400, so the S5's less-than-a-full-stop advantage over the 18-55 II disappears.

I can't do it right now, 'cause I'm at work, but if you're persisting in this idiocy when I get home, I'll pull out my old 18-55 II and take the same shot with it and an S5.

>>163104
>you can't use one or two cameras as representation of all higher-end consumer cams.
I wasn't using "one or two cameras".

That little graph shows the standard sensor sizes. I've only heard of one P&S with a sensor larger than 2/3" (the Sony mentioned elsewhere in the thread), and even 2/3" sensors are rare. Most high end cameras are 1/1.8" at best.

An APS-C sensor has around 5 times the surface area as a 2/3" sensor.
>> Anonymous
>>163111
So both are generally the same in quality.

What about price? I don't mean Canon lenses vs. Nikkor lenses. I mean EF mount lenses vs. F mount lenses.
>> Anonymous
>>163109

I'm the canonfag with all those lenses list a few comments ago. I went with canon due to their lens lineup. But I'm sure the lenses from Nikon are just as good. I will admit, however, that the shutter sound of the Nikon is much better than the canon.
>> Anonymous
>>163114
if you're not talking about actual brand-name lenses, then there's extremely little (if any) price difference between say sigma or tamron lenses for either mount.

that issue is negligible.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163114
Generally price comparable. F-Mount lenses average a little pricier, but not really enough that that should sway you, especially if you're not buying the really expensive four-digit-priced lenses.
>> Anonymous
>>163116
now you're just talking about nikkor's patented 4-blade aperture system... sharp-sounding indeed ;)

... and that bokeh... unique!

*runs for cover*
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
OP here again after doing lots of research etc. I have come down to this conclusion.
I want a body that I can add lenses too, that function properly so the D40/x are out of the question. I also want to be able to grow with my camera add better lenses and then eventually get a body when I advance. So I have filtered it down to these 2 bodys to get me started:

Canon EOS 400d and
Nikon D70s

I'm going to use the kit lense for now, then at the end of the month when I get paid I'll upgrade the lens.

So which body should I get?

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D40XCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 MacintoshMaximum Lens Aperturef/5.7Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern838Focal Length (35mm Equiv)75 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:11:09 12:18:22Exposure Time1/8 secF-Numberf/16.0Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width536Image Height800RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlNoneContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
>>163113

> I'll pull out my old 18-55 II and take the same shot with it and an S5.

Please do. Also note that the zoom range on the powershot completely owns the base rebel with kit lens.
>> Anonymous
>>163124
That's like saying a Honda Civic is better than a Porsche 911 because the seat covers it comes with are better.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163124
Telephoto range of superzooms vs. SLRs is a completely different argument from the image quality argument and doesn't need to be rehashed here.

To keep you occupied until I can get around to doing this test, though, here's DPReview's standard picture comparison of the Rebel XTi at ISO 400
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/nikond80/Samples/ISO/400d_iso0400_crop.jpg
and the S5IS at ISO80
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/CanonS5is/Samples/ISO/ISO80_crop.jpg

Note how the 400D is cleaner two stops over its minimum ISO than the S5 is at its cleanest setting.
>> Anonymous
>>163126
well, you do spend more time using your seat covers than you do looking at the outside of your car... so in some respects....

shit like that is important to someone who's only likely to have one lens - or to someone who is very likely to spend a thousand dollars buying lenses to make up the same focal lengths.

MOST consumers buy cameras solely based on zoom spec... generally speaking, someone looking to buy their first SLR isn't much more clever than that, and are consequently quite disappointed with what they can do with their camera.
>> Anonymous
Jesus fucking christ can we actually relate to OP and help him decide between a 400d and a D70s

I say D70s
>> Anonymous
>>163126

All I'm saying is that buying an slr with only the kit lens is kind of pointless. Might as well buy a nice point and shoot.
>> Anonymous
>>163135
>>163123
I'm going to use the kit lense for now, then at the end of the month when I get paid I'll upgrade the lens.

read what what the OP's saying

HE IS GOING TO UPGRADE IT FROM THE KIT LENSE.

But i think the D70s is a better chioce IMO.
>> Anonymous
>>163134
well fuck me, you were a lot of help, weren't you?

why the fuck should he put any weight on you saying "d70" or me saying "400d"... that's just bullshit coming from people who aren't him.

He has all the information he's ever going to get... now HE needs to decide... no amount of evenly matched canonikonfaggotry is going to help...

meanwhile there's a thread here we can argue in, so stop getting in the way :P
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163131
And for those people, I would (and often do) recommend P&S cameras.

But the fact is, for someone who knows what he's doing, you'll get better quality out of a DSLR with a kit lens than you will with a high-end P&S.

Incidentally, the S5IS mentioned has a 1/2.5" sensor size, which means it's around one thirteenth the size of an APS-C sensor. Compare to the difference between APS-C and full frame (the full-frame being just twice as big)
>> Anonymous
>>163136
>HE IS GOING TO UPGRADE IT FROM THE KIT LENSE

TO WHAT? would be my question. If he knows what lens he's going to upgrade to, then he should buy whatever fucking camera fits on the end of it.

How hard is this ??
>> Anonymous
>>163135
So the Honda Civic is better if you never plan on changing seat covers. Got it
>> Anonymous
>>163136

If OP is going to upgrade lens soon, then he should just skip the kit lens. You can buy the camera body by itself for $80-100 cheaper than the body+kit lens.
>> Anonymous
Flip a coin. Seriously.

It's already over a 100 replies and everyone already knows how Canon and Nikon are both equally comparable to each other and going with either is a good thing because it's a win-win situation
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
D70s vs. 400D:
I've heard the D70 series had crappy high-ISO noise quality, but I just checked dpreview and it doesn't look that bad. People who've shot actually pictures with it at ISO1600 rather than just test shots seem to think the 1600 is pretty much unusable, though, whereas I've gotten a lot of decent shots at 1600 from my 400D.

Note: This is based on basically one report of someone on here who has a D70 and, so it might be he's just bad with it.

The D70 does have the advantage that it's got dual control wheels, which makes it a lot nicer for full-manual shooting if you're into that sort of thing, and generally just a slightly nicer semi-pro rather than intro-level body design.

Disadvantages, however, include the fact that it's 4 years out of date. So, for instance, only 6 megapixel (but that's not a big deal). Too lazy to look up other tech issues where it loses to the 400D--you can check DPReview.com as well as I can.

I'd go with the XTi, but that's probably 90% just because I'm a canonfag.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163144
>If OP is going to upgrade lens soon, then he should just skip the kit lens.
Disagree.

1. The kit lens gives you a nice 28mm-equiv (give or take a millimeter depending on whether he goes Nikon or Canon) wide angle. You can't get that from any other lens for cheap.
2. Going without any lens would leave him with just a body until he could upgrade to a different lens. What the hell's the point in that?
3. Price is a factor in this guy's decision. "Getting a new lens" probably means getting himself a nifty-fifty, not getting himself a 24-70L. 50mm as your only lens on a crop sensor suuuuuuucks.
>> Anonymous
>>163151
Also, if you go to resell the body people want the kit lens and you'll probably get a considerable amount more interest along with money.
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
     File :-(, x)
>>163148
IS1600 are go!

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D70Camera SoftwareVer.2.00Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)30 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2008:02:26 04:33:41Exposure Time1/50 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/2.8Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length20.00 mmCommentCopyright 2008 Patrick BridgmanRenderingCustomExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationLowSharpnessHardSubject Distance RangeUnknown
>> Anonymous
I'm going to buy the kit because I want the 18-55 lense. I'm then going to get either a decent wide angle or telephoto lense for it at the end of the month. I still want the 18-55 for everyday use such as family shots etc.

I can then add to my lens collection as I go on suiting my needs to whatever I need. I'm not just going to buy the body because when I eventually will want to sell it on it will be easier to sell with a kit lense.

I just want a decent body that will last me until I upgrade when the hobby becomes more serious.

I understand that everyone on here is going to be totally biased so I think I need to go and test the cameras myself, although for the D70s that will be a problem as its out of production xD
>> Anonymous
OP again.. 400d seems my ideal choice. I can get a warranty with it and reading some of the things about the D70s there seems to be a few bugs with the raw programs and also the ISO is crap.

I might wait a little longer and get the IS 18-55 lenses as well and buy body only.
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>163173
bugs?
>> Anonymous
>>163176
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/page27.asp

not raw sorry rgb
sounds like aids or something
>> thefamilyman !!rTVzm2BgTOa
>>163180
that review is using the orginal firmware (1.0 or something like that). Firmware 2.0 obviously fixes that problem.
>> Anonymous
fuck it im gettin the 400d simply because I can say im canonymous

LOLAOLZOLOLLOL"L"OLOLZLKDOKNIONO!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111
>> Nikon !!eX1E3IhZL8k
>>163173
Upgrade the firmware on the D70 and that will fix the problem.

D70 > 400D
>> Anonymous
arghhhhhhh I want to know why the D70 is better than the 400d?

Can anybody justify to me in simple terms please.

Because I really can't see why, other than you're being a biased Nikonfag.
>> Anonymous
>>163214

Nikon is an obvious troll. A fail troll at that.

Ignore anything he has to say.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163214
Dual control wheels.

It was targeted as a mid-level SLR when it came out, so it should have a bit better handling than the 400D. But you have to balance that against the fact that it's a 4-year-old model in an industry that moves forward technologically like zoom wow bang.
>> Anonymous
I'd rather get the 400d for the warranty as well, I don't want to get the D70 only to find it has mechanical herpes and I'm crying because I can't get it fixed. Also looking at comparason the 400d is technically better 10MP 9 point AF better ISO etc etc.
>> Nikon !!eX1E3IhZL8k
>>163214

- All Nikon lenses will work with the D70 (old & new)
- Bigger sensor
- Faster shutter speeds
- Better grip, overall comfort
>> Nikon !!eX1E3IhZL8k
>>163215

Right, because we're supposed to believe everything 'Anonymous' says?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163225
>- All Nikon lenses will work with the D70 (old & new)
Can't meter with manual-focus lenses, though.
>- Better grip, overall comfort
Should be *arguably* better grip, overall comfort. Some people genuinely prefer the Canon feel.
>- Bigger sensor
Three years worth of Moore's Law advancing the technology in the XTi's sensor trumps the extra size. And 1.5x crop isn't noticeably different from 1.6x crop even with current technology.
>- Faster shutter speeds
This is very true, and if you get hardcore into flash photography, it's a reason to get a D70 even if you can easily afford a D3.
>> Anonymous
>>163228Right, because we're supposed to believe everything 'Anonymous' says?

Because we actually make sense.

All you've done is troll Nikon threads in a fucking bad and obvious way.
>> Anonymous
>>163225- Bigger sensor

Time has proven CMOS is superior to CCD. Why do you think the D300 and D3 are using CMOS?
>> Nikon !!eX1E3IhZL8k
>>163230

Trolling? LOL, you're quick to jump to conclusions.

No, my fellow anon... I'm just stating the obvious.

Ultimately it's up to the OP to decide what's best for him. He should go down to the local camera store and see which he likes best.
>> Anonymous
>>163074Not only does do Nikons feel good in the hand, but their lenses and image processors are better than Canons. I've used both Canons and Nikons and time after time the image quality on the Nikon is much better.

No one called you out on this but I'll do it using ac's quote:

>> Find me some tests that indicate that Nikons have better image quality than Canons on price-comparable bodies and lenses. Otherwise, GTFO Troll.

All you've been doing in recent threads is pop in, say some bullshit and run away like a little bitch.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
Its obvious Nikon has better sensors, SONY make them.

Clearly SONY is the best company in the world...
>> Anonymous
lol sony is for people with aids and people called butterfly and have aids
>> Anonymous
>>163251

butterfly dide that way
>> Anonymous
- All Nikon lenses will work with the D70 (old & new)
- Bigger sensor
- Faster shutter speeds
- Better grip, overall comfort

The canon works with all the lenses I will need.
Canon senser is teh winz0rz
I wont be taking pictures of things fast enough for the 1/8000 to be of any use
I have massive hands so I think the Canon grip will suit me better.
>> Anonymous
seriously, I'm a canonfag.. but anyone who thinks sony make shit imaging sensors is a fucking idiot.

just look at all the hyper-expensive shit your favourite HD shows are recorded on. It's almost ALL sony stuff, and it's worth more than your fucking house.
>> Anonymous
>>163253

butterfly is dead? rip ;____;
>> Anonymous
>>163258It's almost ALL sony stuff, and it's worth more than your fucking house.

Video camera that is more expensive than a fucking house is better than a still photography crop sensor, NO WAI DUDES
>> Anonymous
>>162315
>Nikon produces better quality products, plain and simple, they cost more
>Canon produces good quality products, they cost less
>Pentax shit sucks, they cost even less

PRICE = QUALITY YOU FAGS
IF IT ISN'T HORRIBLY EXPENSIVE IT'S GARBAGE!!!!!!
>> Anonymous
>>163266

Obvious Troll is so fucking obvious even a downs syndrome with no eyes could spot how obvious he is trolling.
>> Anonymous
I say D70(s) because of the fact the build quality is much better, it has a real focus motor and Dual control wheels.

Who cares about MP, and 4 more focus points?

Not me sir, thats who!
>> Anonymous
>>163260
could you be more of a fucking idiot?

there's a correlation there. if you can make fucking excellent sensors, then why would you avoid using some of that knowledge when making your cheaper ones?
>> Anonymous
>>163282
The knowledge has changed, SEND TO CHINA!
>> Nikon !!eX1E3IhZL8k
>>163240

Look here:
- http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-11396_7-6654246-7.html?tag=lnav
- http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/nikon-vs-canon.htm
- http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/5062/nikon-d300-vs-canon-eos-40d-a-hands-on-workout.html
- http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/4625/cnetpollla0.jpg


>>All you've been doing in recent threads is pop in, say some bullshit and run away like a little bitch.

And apparently, I'M STILL FUCKING HERE.
>> Anonymous
Nikon and Canon fags need to stop crying.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163288
>http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-11396_7-6654246-7.html?tag=lnav
"Though they're evenly matched for photo quality[...]"
>http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/nikon-vs-canon.htm
The entire thrust of this article, start to finish, is refuting the very point you're trying to make, so I'm confused as to why you're including it...
>http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/5062/nikon-d300-vs-canon-eos-40d-a-hands-on-workout.html
"[...] output from the two cameras being virtually indistinguishable to us when we compared RAW files in Adobe Lightroom
>http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/4625/cnetpollla0.jpg
This is not an argument. This is a poll. All it says is more nikonfags were reading CNet that day than canonfags.

So... thanks for doing the research to prove my point, I guess?
>> Anonymous
>>163282there's a correlation there. if you can make fucking excellent sensors, then why would you avoid using some of that knowledge when making your cheaper ones?

lulz like the sony sensors have been so stellar so far, am i rite?
>> Anonymous
HERE IS THE ANSWER:

Canon and Nikon produce pretty much equal products. But you should just buy the Canon. Otherwise you're gonna be constantly explaining to people why you chose Nikon over Canon.

Nobody ever asks Canon owners why they didn't buy a Nikon.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>163305
Stellar enough for George Lucas to use.
>> Trent !craoLd8Ou2
>>163307

Thank you....finally someone with a set of brains. nikonfags, take note.
>> Anonymous
Threads like these are the reason why people choose Pentax.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163327
A pentax is fine too.
>> Anonymous
>>163327
...and they deserve the steaming pile of shit they get.

it's like fucking leica users... choosing cameras that add character to a photo... if you actually value the crud your camera adds to a picture enough to call it character, then you're not a photographer, you're a big fucking gallery-dwelling faggot with a shitty camera.
>> Anonymous
>>163356BAWWWWW I CAN'T AFFORD A LEICA

fix'd
>> Anonymous
>>163318

we're talking about dslr sensors here you fucking retard
>> Anonymous
>>163364
lol you can always smoke out the leica uberfags... that is, when they're not smoking each other out.
>> Anonymous
>>163307Nobody ever asks Canon owners why they didn't buy a Nikon.

because you know you have a quality product when it's a canon

if you wanted something to drive nails with, you'd buy a nikon
>> Anonymous
>>163369
I just don't know how you can selectively ignore 80% of a company's imaging division when discussing the quality of their ... imaging equipment.

Sony will make you the sensor you ask them to make you. If you want a fucking kick-ass uber excellent super-clean sensor, they'll deliver.

Sony isn't the problem with nikon. Nikon are the problem with nikon.
>> Anonymous
>>163376I just don't know how you can selectively ignore 80% of a company's imaging division when discussing the quality of their ... imaging equipment.

Because we're discussing DSLR cameras here? Just because they make amazing video equipment doesn't AUTOMATICALLY mean they make amazing photo equipment.
>> Anonymous
>>163376
the problem with nikon is that they're still stuck in the mindset that they make cameras not computers, and certainly not film.

a camera is a very basic piece of equipment. It's a hole in a box, glass optional.

That's what nikon made their reputation on.


Now of course they're quite powerful computers inside, and nikon has little interest in that, or user-interfaces, and even less interest in this digital film stuff, whatever you call it....... fuck we'll just let sony do that cos it's too hard.

You just can't really equate nikons digital line with the reputation they earned prior to that.
>> EvenSteven !!RBDL+S5h60X
     File :-(, x)
>>163318

Right on man. We all know that Lucas hit the top of his game with those cameras.

SONY ROCKS!!!
>> Anonymous
CANONYMOUS LAWL
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163391
On the other hand, Nikonymous works nearly as well.
>> Anonymous
>>163385
it does actually... sony's cameras are actually quite good, and compare really favourably to similar priced gear from canon and nikon.

they don't make pro photo gear, because they're not in the pro stills market, otherwise they would quite easily - after all, how much more would it take to put a sony badged box around the same shit they sell nikon?

they don't do it though, because it's not a good business decision to enter a market which has so much zealotry and that puts such huge weight on completely irrelevant traditions.

photographers are worse than audiophiles that way... particularly old-school die-hards, and therefore people who wanna be just like the old-school die-hards.
>> Anonymous
>> sony's cameras are actually quite good, and compare really favourably to similar priced gear from canon and nikon.

and only die hard sonyfags would say something like that

one thing both nikoncanonfags can agree on is sony shit sucks
>> Anonymous
in b4 butterfl... o wait.
>> Anonymous
>>163401
heh, I'd be surprised if a nikonfag agreed with you, given he has a 'sony inside'... seriously, how can you be so dense?

Try actually using more than one fucking camera in your life.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163401
I'll agree that Butterfly sucks, and I'll agree that I personally don't care for the Alpha line, but that doesn't mean they suck. They're on par with price-comparable Canon and Nikon cameras technically.
>> Anonymous
most nikon d-slr's use sony sensors.
>> EvenSteven !!RBDL+S5h60X
>>163405

Canon makes great sensors, while Sony doesn't. That proved to be one major weakness of Nikon gear over the past few years, when compared to Canon.

I own a D200 and several Nikon film slrs.
>> Nikon !!eX1E3IhZL8k
>>163295
If you hadn't of made such asinine assumptions and read the reviews start to finish you would have seen that overall the Nikons triumph over the Canons.

Now, that's not to say that Canons are bad...of course not. Several years back I purchased the original 300D when it first came out and I was quite impressed that Canon was able to deliver a compact DSLR at that price point, but after I decided to upgrade to a Nikon D50 and after that everything changed. Nikon optics are just that much more superior. Sure, Canon has tons of specialty lenses and their "L" line is superb, but no matter how much glass they produce, they could never match the quality that Nikon's optics deliver.

And to those who think I'm trolling withe the name "Nikon", I could have easily called my self "Bob" and delivered the same conclusion.

/truth
>> Anonymous
>>163413
all that proved, and as I had stated above quite explicitly, is that Nikon's spec to sony wasn't up to scratch.

Nikon simply didn't want to shell out for a slightly more expensive sensor - preferring instead their own profit margin.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>163416And to those who think I'm trolling withe the name "Nikon", you're fucking right.
>> Anonymous
Too much Butterfly in this thread.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163416
>If you hadn't of made such asinine assumptions and read the reviews start to finish you would have seen that overall the Nikons triumph over the Canons.
The reviews were comparing a D400 to an 80D and a D40 to a 300D. I.e., comparing Canon cameras to the next-model-up (in price and features) Nikon. If they compared the 5D to the D300 and the XTi to the 40D, it would say that the Canons are better.

So, I repeat: GTFO troll.
>> Trent !craoLd8Ou2
>>163426
LOL you go girlfriend!
>> EvenSteven !!RBDL+S5h60X
>>163419

Sonys SLRs use the same sensor as Nikons SLRs. Does that mean Sony just doesn't feel like shelling out extra cash to make their cameras better? Or does it mean that Sony really doesn't make the best sensors, especially APS-C sized.

Another funny thing is the Nikons produce marginally better looking images than the Sonys with the same sensor. I guess they at least shell out the cash for the better onboard processors.
>> Nikon !!eX1E3IhZL8k
>>163426
>> a D400 to an 80D and a D40 to a 300D

A D400 to an 80D???
That CLEARLY proves you weren't reading the reviews. Maybe you're the one who's trolling?!
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163434
Fuckin' Nikon and Canon, having absurdly easy to confuse product designations.

Besides the point, anyway. GTFO TROLL.
>> Anonymous
>>163369
lol fail for not being specific.
>>163390
He didn't hit the top with this, He changed the film industry's view of video by showing that the film portion of episode 1 and 2 is indistinguishable to scenes that were shot with HD video.
>> OPFOR !8vKpfCqy8A
Way too much fail in here.

>>162113
Get what ever you want. You like Canon, get a Canon. You like Nikon, get a Nikon. You like Sony, get an Olympus... I kid I kid
>> Anonymous
>>163431
>Does that mean Sony just doesn't feel like shelling out extra cash to make their cameras better

That's exactly what it means. They're not in the same market in any sense of the words.

Sony's cameras are targeted squarely at the consumer. Mass-produced, mass-appeal, cheap and profitable.

Nikon really should have higher standards than that -- after all, they're nikon right?

Sony *can* make better sensors (and they do) they just cost more.

As for the difference in output, its obviously down to the firmware, not the processor. A little in-camera on-the-fly photoshopping is essentially what happens once an image is taken. You can bet your ass that the firmware devs use the same libraries for their on-camera image processing too... they just use different settings.
>> Anonymous
OP here my final verdict is I'm going to get the 400d, not just because its canon but because all the other cameras in that price range are inferior. The D40/x are fail and I can't get the D70 with a warranty. Also I can attach Nikon lenses so BAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
>> Anonymous
>>163441

Different image processors AND firmware can make a big difference, even if the sensor is the same.
>> Anonymous
>>163448
no argument...

not sure what that has to do with anything though - as those benefits could quite easily be applied to a better sensor, as they are to a worse one.

Nikon just need to shave a few bucks off their stellar margin for few years, and actually begin to deserve all the zealotry they inspire in people.
>> Anonymous
>>163405heh, I'd be surprised if a nikonfag agreed with you, given he has a 'sony inside'... seriously, how can you be so dense?

How can you be such a Sony fanboy and idiot?

Just because they use a sensor made by Sony doesn't mean shit. Do you really think Nikon just pops in the Sony sensor and calls it a day? There's something called "image processor" but hey, that doesn't count for anything eh?

Compare the D300 to the A700. The A700 is consistently worse than the D300 despite using the same sensor.

Fucking morons sometimes.
>> Anonymous
>>163449not sure what that has to do with anything though

>>163441As for the difference in output, its obviously down to the firmware, not the processor.

self ownage ftw
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
The ammount of sony hate in this is insane.

Sony are pretty much brand new to the SLR/pro world for stills and yet they have made a bunch of cameras that perform well next to the leading brands. So the canikons perform better, they fucking should given the amount of exp they have. Yeah sony bought KM but its not as if KM were stunning dSLR manufacturers either.

Yup, nikon do better work with sonys sensors, its the same sensor but then they have a lot more exp working with it in a dSLR so why shouldnt they have better control?

This entire thread is BAWWWWWW, if you want a comfy camera with decent lenses, buy a fucking sony, they have considerably better ergonomics than anyone else. Anyone who thinks otherwise has either never picked up an alpha or is trolling.

PS
The dynax/maxxum mount is OLDER THAN THE CANON EOS MOUNT.

also, fags.
>> Butthurtfag !1V7B3l1SG2
>>163576SONY SUCKS BECAUSE IT'S NEW AT THE GAME, STOP COMPARING IT TO NIKON AND CANON BECAUSE THAT'S NOT FAIRE GUYS. OH AND BY THE WAY, JUST A RANDOM PIECE OF INFORMATION, THE KM MOUNT IS OLDER THAN CANON AND THAT MAKES IT BETTER

fixd
>> Anonymous
>>163576The dynax/maxxum mount is OLDER THAN THE CANON EOS MOUNT.

Hmm.. okay? And what does that have to do with anything?

Even if it is relevant, it was introduced in 1985, 2 years before the EOS EF. So uh, yeah, congratulation?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
>>163124
Hokay. First up, S5IS.

As a model, my lovely 2 megapixel VuPoint camera.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot S5 ISMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.7Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaLens Size6.00 - 72.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware Version 1.01Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2008:04:17 06:53:18Exposure Time0.6 secF-Numberf/2.7ISO Speed Rating80Lens Aperturef/2.7Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length6.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3264Image Height2448RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeAv-PriorityFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessNormalSaturationNormalContrastNormalShooting ModeManualImage SizeLargeFocus ModeSingleDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalSubject Distance0.420 mWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed149Image Number101-2013
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
>>163584
And here's the XTi shot. Only PP on these was a resize--this is the JPEG straight out of the camera.

I think the XTi has much nicer colors. Additionally, it has some actual control over the depth of field, unlike the S5.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XTiLens Size18.00 - 55.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware 1.1.1Owner NameunknownSerial Number0420104373Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:04:17 18:51:19Exposure Time1/4 secF-Numberf/3.5Exposure ProgramAperture PriorityISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/3.5Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length22.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3888Image Height2592RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeAv-PriorityFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeCenter-WeightedSharpnessUnknownSaturationNormalContrastUnknownShooting ModeManualImage SizeLargeFocus ModeOne-ShotDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalSubject Distance0.460 mWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed224Camera Actuations-236715824Color Matrix34
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>163582
but seriously, you lot are the ones bawwing. Dont forget that on price/perfomance, sony is slaughtering everyone :P

Enjoy being ripped off buying canikon <3

Oh and if i didnt, you lot would just be bitching aboug canon vs nikon again, you get to team up now!
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
>>163584
>>163585
Now, so far, not a *huge* difference. I think the XTi shot looks nicer, but that's mostly subjective based on the colors and depth of field, both of which could theoretically be adjusted in the S5 shot to match.

BUT: That S5 shot was at ISO80, the S5's minimum, whereas the XTi was at ISO400. Here's how the S5IS looks at ISO400.

Bit of a quality drop there.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon PowerShot S5 ISMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.7Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaLens Size6.00 - 72.00 mmFirmware VersionFirmware Version 1.01Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2008:04:17 07:06:23Exposure Time1/6 secF-Numberf/2.7ISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/2.7Exposure Bias0 EVFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length6.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3264Image Height2448RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardExposure ModeAv-PriorityFocus TypeAutoMetering ModeEvaluativeSharpnessNormalSaturationNormalContrastNormalShooting ModeManualImage SizeLargeFocus ModeSingleDrive ModeSingleFlash ModeOffCompression SettingFineMacro ModeNormalSubject Distance0.400 mWhite BalanceAutoExposure Compensation3Sensor ISO Speed224Image Number101-2014
>> Anonymous
>>163587
Only in your world butterfly.
No more talking unitll you post more pictures. Namefags have to contribute.
I'm not contributing so i'm not a namefag.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>163587Dont forget that on price/perfomance, sony is slaughtering everyone :P

Oh hai, here's my friend Pentax.

If they didn't want Nikon or Canon, I think just about everyone would rather have a Pentax than a Sony. At least they're making respectable products.

>> Enjoy being ripped off buying canikon <3

Enjoy your inferior product.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163597
>>163592
>>163583
>>163582
Dear dumbasses:

Butterfly is a troll. She's trolling you. You're being trolled. Stop responding.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
     File :-(, x)
>>163592
Everyones world

Also

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelDSLR-A100Camera SoftwarePicasa 3.0Maximum Lens Aperturef/5.6Focal Length (35mm Equiv)27 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationUnknownHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:04:10 00:02:43White Point Chromaticity0.3Exposure Time1/3 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating800Brightness-0.8 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length18.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width800Image Height571RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastHardSaturationHighSharpnessHardUnique Image ID394ecb2fc666bce9b41913d537ded459
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
     File :-(, x)
>>163597
hahahahaha
10/10

Pentax, good. Seriously, do you do standup?

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSONYCamera ModelDSLR-A100Camera SoftwarePicasa 3.0Maximum Lens Aperturef/5.6Focal Length (35mm Equiv)24 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationUnknownHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:04:10 00:02:07White Point Chromaticity0.3Exposure Time1/2 secF-Numberf/5.6Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating800Brightness-1.8 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashFlash, CompulsoryFocal Length16.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width571Image Height800RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastHardSaturationHighSharpnessHardUnique Image IDfbe9d13b89dfdff557d9760036d2e371
>> Anonymous
>>163589BUT: That S5 shot was at ISO80, the S5's minimum, whereas the XTi was at ISO400. Here's how the S5IS looks at ISO400.

ROFL

this only proves the S5 can take better shots because it can do ISO 80 and you're using ISO 400
>> Anonymous
>>163603
>>163606
THESE are your fucking club pics?
>> Anonymous
>>163606
Start a new thread if you posting pics.
also more with the hot wommenz and less of the 16 year old Acne ridden Ravers
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>163609
Yes and did someone post under the impression i have ever said anywhere they are awesome?

>>163610
no and no, im also not posting any more.
>> Anonymous
>>163606Pentax, good. Seriously, do you do standup?

They cost even less than your Sony. So using your logic, that makes it better, am I rite?

TROLL LOGIC IS AWESOME
>> Anonymous
>>163608
Lol wut?

But a.c., the XTi looks slighly blurrier. I've noticed this on a few comparison sites.
>> Anonymous
I wonder how ugly Butterfly is.

I imagine that she's severely overweight and has very wide-set eyes.
>> Anonymous
>>163613
No but you get more credit on here the better your pictures are. Right now all you do is rave about Sony gear, but when it comes down to it, your pictures are usually just average.

Heavyweather, AC and Vincent all have their niche, and they are "mostly" respected for it. (among other namefags)
Beethy is an exception i guess lol
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>163615
sure but then a cheap sony p&s is even better than your pentax OH ICE BURN.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>163628
The reason i dont post many photos is because I know im not very good, ive only been shooting for 8-9 months you know. Ive posted those because everyone (and that means one bad troll) has been wanting to see what I spend most of my time shooting. Its fun to do and has loads of other perks, which is why i do it.
>> Anonymous
>>163628
>when it comes down to it, your pictures are usually just average.

I don't think they're her pictures.
All of them are resized to fuck, like they were pulled from Flickr.
>> Anonymous
>>163629sure but then a cheap sony p&s is even better than your pentax OH ICE BURN.

now you're not even trying

it's pretty sad
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163608
>this only proves the S5 can take better shots because it can do ISO 80 and you're using ISO 400
No it doesn't. The point I'm making there is that the S5IS at ISO80 looks about the same noise-wise as the XTi at ISO400. If I were to pull the XTi back to ISO100, it would be way clearer than the S5.

>>163617
>But a.c., the XTi looks slighly blurrier. I've noticed this on a few comparison sites.
Shallower DoF.

Well, also, this was a kind of long exposure and the S5IS has the advantage of built in image stabilization. The XTi would be a bit clearer if I had been using my 18-55 IS rather than my old 18-55 kit lens.

(And the 18-55 IS is the kit lens on the newer XSi)
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>163633
flickr photos wouldnt have exif :P Also why would i post bad photos if i could just go pull awesome photos?
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>163638
neither were you, since i said price/performance but you kina forgot that because you couldnt argue on it...
>> Anonymous
>>163640flickr photos wouldnt have exif :P

uh, flickr lets you save exif, lrn2flickr
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163615
>TROLL LOGIC IS AWESOME
Troll logic goes like this: "I will say something dumb and make some jackass respond angrily to me" and it FUCKING WORKED PERFECTLY YOU GODDAMN IDIOT.

>>163638
>now you're not even trying
And yet you're STILL FUCKING RESPONDING.

RAGE
>> Anonymous
>>163632

When all is said and done, it's nice to see that some people on /p/ actually take pictures rather than get into retarded arguments forever. I'd rather someone takes mediocre pictures and learns than someone posts another fucking gear thread or political thread or something as stupid.
>> Anonymous
>>163643neither were you, since i said price/performance but you kina forgot that because you couldnt argue on it...

uh, what?

sony has costs x, and delivers y performance
pentax costs less than x and delivers y performance

shut the fuck up faggot
>> Anonymous
>>163632
Have you even used another DSLR camera body other than your Alpha?
8-9 months isn't exactly a lot of time to form an educated opinion on the options available for DSLR buyers.

Even I have used 2 Alpha's, a Pentax *ist, 4 or 5 nikons, and 3 Canons, and I don't believe thats enough time to get a feel for the bodies and lenses.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>163645
but really we're both trolling you. Also im untrollable.

>>163646
I take over a hundred photos a week normally.
>> Anonymous
>>163645

it takes a troll to troll a troll

SHUT TEH FUCK UP NOW
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>163648
ofc i played with other cameras before i bought the sony, all the canons ive played with have been waay to small for my (small) hands and uncomfortable to hold for even a short ammount of time. Put on top of that the weight of lens+flash i carry on my sony, im sure i couldnt do the same with a canon (rebel xt was what i played the most with)
>> Anonymous
>>163649
>I take over a hundred photos a week normally.

Post some.


>>163640
>flickr photos wouldnt have exif :P Also why would i post bad photos if i could just go pull awesome photos?

Then why are they so fucking small?
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>163651

Speaking of that, I've got my 70-200 2.8 IS arriving tomorrow (I hope). I think it's going to look like a big white whale stuck on the ickle camera. Just as well I got the battery grip or else it wouldn't feel right at all. I'll see what it's like to lug around soon on the XX0D or Rebel size bodies.
>> Vincent !!8LCSE0Zp1mL
>>163653
Shoudn't be too bad, I used to use Nikon's 80-200 F2.8 (af-s) on a D50 Its a little heavier than the 70-200 VR.

It looks funny, but since you support the lens with one hand it doesn't feel akward
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>163652
I just did. They are small because im only posting them to post them, if i wanted critique (which i dont) id post bigger ones wouldnt i. At least demand something which isnt just fucking stupid.

Im sure i can take a shot of something to show i have an alpha if you really feel that insecure about my glorious trolling.

I have to go work early tommorow so i cant stay up trolling you all, im sure someone else can do that for now. Bainii~
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>163654It looks funny, but since you support the lens with one hand it doesn't feel akward

Good point. The centre of balance will be shifted to compensate. That doesn't sound too bad.
>> Anonymous
does anyone else think butterfly is a viral marketer for sony?
she sounds a lot like their edgy ad campaigns.
also no girls on 4chan etc.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>163964
>does anyone else think butterfly is a viral marketer for sony?
No, of course not. Maybe a viral marketer for Canon or Nikon, but she actively turns people off to the idea of using Sony products.