A&P Canon or Nikon or ?? 35mm--> Digital SLR

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by eighteen_psi, Nov 17, 2003.

  1. eighteen_psi

    eighteen_psi Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2003
    Messages:
    2,381
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    925
    As I've mentioned a couple times I'm looking into a newer SLR camera (move my old-school Fujica to backup duty) I can continue to learn on and use to take (among other things) my own stock images (I'm a graphic designer).

    Introduction asside, I've also mentioned my experiences with a Canon Elan II-E and have heard nothing but good things about it for my application. A body/lens setup to fill my needs is still a bit out of my price range but it won't be for long. This brings me to my question: is this a cost-effective camera to buy in the sceme of things when I plan to invest in a top-notch digital SLR upon graduation (december of 2004)? What about a similarly spec'd Nikon?

    I hear plenty from users of both about how their cams are best "because they are" but I take it both make fine lenses and bodys or so many people wouldn't use both. Which serves me best now and which migrates a lens investment to digital best?

    If there's a reason I should go digital now, let me hear that too but my research has led me to believe I can get better quality from my scanner and prints than any digital I can afford...true story?

    BTW this is a fine opportunity to pimp your own gear too :) I will be buying before year end.
     
  2. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have the elan 2e and a D30. I sell cameras and camcorders, and thus have the opportunity to try everything out. The 10d is going to be almost identical in performance and ease of use as your Elan. Definetly worth the money. I particularly don't care for the rebel, but for the price, its not bad.
     
  3. eighteen_psi

    eighteen_psi Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2003
    Messages:
    2,381
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    925
    viperx27: I've heard nothing but good about the 10D but I can't even begin to afford it. i don't actually HAVE a IIE but I've been using a borrowed one for the past couple weeks. I have no intention of buying a cheep DSLR..when I go that way I'm going to go high end (it may not be for a while...at least a year). We can talk if you're interested in selling your Canon.

    EuphoricSoul01: I have an HP scanjet 6300C (1200dpi optical, unlimited interpolation) flashed for 48bit color depth. It produces scans well beyond anything I really need at this time (though a bit more resolution would make scanning negatives an option for large-format print). Keeping it clean is tough, no doubt. Do you have a suggestion for a cleaner? I've been following the manual's suggestion to use a damp cloth (oakley sunglass bag) with some highly diluted soap. It works great...but you're right, it gets dusty quickly. Do you have a suggestion for a Nikon model I can look into (or a couple) that are comperable to the II-E?

    Thanks guys.
     
  4. mojito

    mojito New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2003
    Messages:
    62,877
    Likes Received:
    0
    a nikon equilavent would be like the N70/N80/N90. Also check out the Canon 7e if you liked the 2e, just a newer model with a 7 point autofocus instead of 3.
     
  5. Vilnius

    Vilnius Bruised, battered, and scarred but hard. OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    Messages:
    16,209
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Toronto
    Couldn't disagree more, Canon sucks at the UW lenses, but overall their lens technology (IS, USM, Large Aperture, DO, etc) far eclipses the equiv Nikon, and actually costs less.

    As for actual visual quality of the lenses, I'd say they are about equal. No clear winner on either side.

    Regarding bodies, it's more or less a wash, as they have similar product offerings in most categories, except the high end and low end, (1Ds/300d) to which Nikon has not yet responded (but will eventually).

    VSM
     
  6. eighteen_psi

    eighteen_psi Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2003
    Messages:
    2,381
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    925
    Care to elaborate on the Canon > Nikon lens matter? For instance, what do UW, IS, USM, DO and what not stand for? I understand the concept of apature and what not..perhaps I just don't know these acronyms.

    As far as bodys go, if you're saying basically Canon has a wider range than Nikon but inside the range they're roughly equal, that's helpful (though by next year this will surely change).

    Thanks guys.
     
  7. Vilnius

    Vilnius Bruised, battered, and scarred but hard. OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    Messages:
    16,209
    Likes Received:
    23
    Location:
    Toronto
    http://www.usa.canon.com/eflenses/technology/index.html

    See the above link for explanation.

    For the most part Nikon has equiv technology, (except for DO) it's just that Canon has this technology available on more lenses, from the prosumer line all the way up to the professional line, and in most cases the equiv Canon lens is still cheaper even though it has IS&USM, when the Nikon does not.

    However, Nikon has something, that Canon doesn't DX lenses, which basically compensates for the cropping factor of a digital SLR with less surface area than a 35mm peice of film. Canon has instead decided that a larger sensor is the answer. ($$$ 1Ds) Unfortunately, this doesn't help the people who have a D30/300D/D60/10D sized (1.6x) sensor.

    See this link

    http://www.nikon-image.com/eng/Nikkor_Lenses/autofocus.htm

    That's kind of what I meant, but there's more to it. Canon only has one body, that Nikon does not have an equiv, and that's the 300D. Canon has also released their cameras more recently, so they are a bit more updated. (exception being the D2h from Nikon)

    You could make a case for the 1Ds (Canon) as it's a completely different beast to the D1x (Nikon) but realistically, they are both the top of the line camera that each respective company makes.

    The cameras stack up like

    1Ds vs D1x
    1D vs D2h
    10d vs D100
    300d vs ____

    HTH.

    VSM

    (I do own Canon equipment, (1Ds) so I am biased in that I am more familiar with that equipment, as opposed to Nikon's offerings.)
     
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2003
  8. eighteen_psi

    eighteen_psi Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2003
    Messages:
    2,381
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    925
    I've been looking around local shops, ebay and craigslist at various cameras from both manufacturers and still haven't quite decided what I want to do. Lack of reviews and information regarding the difference between the Nikon N70/80/90 are complicating things.. what can the better ones do that the lesser cannot?

    Without knowing specifically it looks like I can afford an N80 but probably not an N90...or an N70 with more money left over for lenses or a better tripod or whatever. I'm also seeing F80...the auction/listing leads me to believe the body is the same as the N80 (though they're colored differently)..is this true?

    Finally (for now), just how much image quality will I loose from a wide range zoom lens? I'm heavily tempted to grab a pair (or one) lens that I can get most of my shots with and then grab some fixed length ones later when I have more money...is this a mistake? I don't think I'd get one of the 28-300mm's or anything but what about 75-300 as my tele lens? Should I stay with Nikon lenses for the Nikon or Canon for the Canon? What other companies (in your experience) produce quality products worth considering?

    As usual, thanks for the input, I appriciate it.
     
  9. ProgWRX

    ProgWRX Citizen Dildo

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    3,389
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Juan, Puerto Rico
    IIRC the F80 is the euro/grey market version of the N80
     

Share This Page