Advice wanted: How are my Pictures..?

Dark_Templer_102

Dark_Templer_102

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2004
Messages
1,679
Location
Alpharetta, Georgia. U.S.A
Car(s)
Subaru Legacy GT
Well, all i've been useing lately is point and shoot cameras, and i wish to get an SLR type soon. I am currently an amature (obviously) and i want to get a camera that i can keep for a while (as in..i can learn with it and then take good pictures, i dont want to keep buying cameras)

Soo i've been thinking of either a

Canon EOS 350D / Digital Rebel XT
OR
Nikon D50

They seem to be competitors in their area and they are starting to get a lot cheaper now, both around 500-600.

Does anyone have any advice for me on this subject or should i go into more detail.

Also, i don't know much about Lenses, i've looked so far on the D50 and it seems a 18-55mm one is good to start off with, i don't know much for the 350D yet.
 
I'm obviously biased, but I say the D50. It's got better feel, I find spot metering very handy, and I find the 18-55 kit lens is sharper than the Canon kit lens. The XT feels small and rather plasticky, while the D50's magnesium frame makes it feel much tougher - not that you should be dropping it on a regular basis.

The only "flaw" in the D50 is that the secondary LCD (the primitive one) isn't backlit. this seems like it could be a problem, but anything displayed on that screen can be controlled through the menu on the nicely-backlit main LCD menu and/or through the viewfinder's display. It's gotten to the point where I really only use the LCD to check my ISO and WB on a regular basis, both of which can be done through the menu.

That being said, both cameras are very capable and you'd probably be very happy with either. Just find the cheapest price and go nuts.
 
I'll reccomend the D50 as well, but there's nothing wrong with the 350D. The ergonomics of the D50 are better, IMO, but that's personal preference of course.

My only complaints about the D50 are the lack of a backlit top display(as mentioned), and lack of on-demand grid lines(if you have a previous camera that had these, you'll miss them).
 
350D BABY!!!!!


To explain why? I dont know, i have been a canon fanboy for a while. Aren't most canon lenses cheaper than nikkor stuff by atleast 30 dollars? That's the general feeling i have beteween my friend's d50 and my 350d. I'm quite happy with pictures i take at 1600 ISO speeds too... I dont know if the d50 can do the same.
 
ya just pick one up and see which one you like more. That's how i did it. but i have ot sa, right now on my backpacking trip in europe, i see more 350d than d50/d70s. Maybe I'm blind to the d50 but most ppl have the canon for some reason....
 
Mostly people talk about the feel of the thing appealing to them. Go to a camera shop and ask if you can play with one. Maybe even rent it, see how you like it. Then do the same thing with the other one.

Me? I prefer Canons, but for a dSLR experience, I can't reccomend the RebXT. To light, too plasticy, to many buttons to pres to change critical settings. And even in my tiny hands it feels really small.
 
I've drifted away from my Rebel but I am still in love with it. Both the 350d (I have the 300d, which is a much lesser camera) and the d50 are amazing cameras for the price. You get absolutely astounding quality for the price. The problem is that to improve image quality you need to spend exponentially higher for each increment of performance.

But that's beside the point. I have shot some of my favorite pictures on the 300d/kit lens combo. It may not feel solid but it has endured remarkably well, from drops on the ground to 0˚F shooting skiing in the snow my rebel has acquitted itself remarkably well. We all po po the kit lens quality ( I know I do) but how many of us could really tell the difference? The $700 17-40mm L series lens is a joy to use but is it ten times better than the $70 kit lens. Of course not! Also, that's the beauty of the SLR. We can upgrade the lens. That's the path I followed and I'm glad I did.

I'd lobby for the 350d because I'm bias. But no matter which one you choose, you really can't go wrong. If you find yourself exceeding the camera, buy a new lens instead of camera. It will open up another world and prove to be a good investment.
 
I do quite a lot of post-processing, because I don't like the flat and grey colours that the camera gives. Here's an example shot, first one with camera settings and second one edited with photoshop. This is shot with a 350D + 28-70 Sigma.


viina2.jpg


viina.jpg



That shot has the contrast, shadows, levels and curves done, background desaturated, bottle masked and leveled on its own etc.
 
couple notes:
The Canon name alone means that more people will buy Canon in the end than Nikon these days. That however has very little to do with whether someone should buy one or the other. Don't make the mistake of assuming otherwise.

Second, at large events where lots of high priced photographers are shooting you're more likely to find Canon these days as well (not everywhere.. but in most places). Again, this is partially because Canon has the name.. partially because they have the extreme upper small format market.. and partially just because they're more expensive than Nikon at the high end and when you can afford to spend several grand on a body, why not get the most expensive?

In all honesty Nikon and Canon are very similar in most every way. Your choice should come down to price, easey of use, comfort, and lens selection (different systems have different strengths). Remember that it's easier and cheaper to change the body down the road than an entire lens system.

Currently the majority of experienced people out there agree that Nikon has the edge in the low end slr market and with ergonomics. But that doesn't mean that everyone thinks the Nikon SLR's are ergonomic. Always try to get ahold of each SLR you're considering before making a decision. There may be some outstanding features about the camera that really make you feel at home or make you feel like you're using 80s technology. The D50 is a better camera than the 350d, but only marginally iin the end. And again, if you have bunch of Canon lenses or like the Canon system or just think that their prices and selection will match you better then the differences between the two big brand low end bodies shouldn't matter as much.

Just don't make the mistake of thinking that because you see a bunch of Canon's around that it means anything. Just in my very local area I can go to one car event and see a ton of Canon's and little or no Nikons.. and then I can go to another and see two Canon SLR's and 20 Nikon's (plenty of which are D70's or better too). In the end the sample I see is too small to try and judge how many people use each brand. It just doesn't work that way.

Good luck with your choice. And don't forget to shoot as much as possible. In the end it's not about the equipment... it's about the person behind the equipment!
 
Well put. Very true about how you want to think about the whole picture versus the base line cameras.
 
I see, i'll have to go to different places to look for cameras to use.

Question any tutorial on PhotoShop or something? I have the program (legit) but i've only used it to resize pictures. I haven't messed with any of the real features to make pictures look...better
 
Thx rootrider, well written tutorial. Spent half of the day reading it and experimenting, filled a lot of dark areas in my photoshop (and shooting) skills :)
 
I have the 350D. I chose it because Canon seems a bit more on the bleeding edge of developing new technology. And some friends recommended Canon - even one that has Nikon. I suggest spending a large portion of your budget on lenses. They can last you longer than the camera body. And if you build up a collection of lenses, you pretty much have to stick with that brand. Or change your entire collection of lenses. So it's more about choosing the brand than just the camera.

I got 18-55mm kitlens, the 50mm f1.8 lens which is less than $100 - it's awesome. And the 70-200mm f4L, which is very very nice as well. If I buy a better camera body in, let's say, 5 years, I can still use those lenses.

I have tried the Nikon D50 and it feels nice to hold. But I think the 350D is fine too.
 
if you get canon...
i have to tell you that the 18-55mm HAS TO GO.



a friend of mine just got a 30D with the 18-55mm...and me coming from the much faster and superior nikkor 18-70mm (you can't deny this...)

was horrendously disappointed at the poor performance of the 18-55mm lens.



canon or Nikon....i'm obviously biased to Nikon, but i will say that Canons produce a "smoother" image than do Nikons. i've personally come to very good terms with the slightly higher level of noise and "grain" from the Nikon DSLRs, but most people find the smoothness of Canon images a must. i also stuck with Nikon in the end because the Rebel XT couldn't even accomodate my small asian hands--my pinky had nowhere to go!! (not to mention the vastly superior kit lens...)


if i had no previous knowledge about cameras and no brand bias (my dad has been shooting nikon since the 70s...) i'd have a difficult time between the D50 and the Rebel XT...but once you hold the cameras...the D50 does feel a bit more solid and more substantial. the Nikkor 18-55 that comes with the D50 is really not that bad of a lens either-- a little behind the 18-70mm, but still much better than the Canon 18-55mm lens.


either way...
you have to acquaint yourself with either camera...and once you acquaint yourself with a certain system (whether it be Canon or Nikon), you will most likely stick with one.


(i'm kinda rambling..adding to the fray..)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top