I plan to go with Canon long-term due primarily to Canon’s 24-105 4L and 70-200 4L, for which Nikon has no equivalents (the 2.8's are too heavy for me at these focal lengths). The fact that the two photographers that I can trade/borrow lenses with shoot Canon helps, too.
However, Nikon’s D90 outperforms the t2i (for my purposes), according to an in-depth DP Preview article.
I am into:
Shooting primarily subjects
Low light photography (without a flash)
High burst rate (so I can capture the instant)
I do not care about having more than 12 MP.
No matter what I decide now, I plan to buy a new Canon body once Canon licenses the Sony sensor technology that Nikon uses, and improves low light autofocus on its sub-$1000 models. Hopefully this will be within 2 years. I own a Canon 28mm 1.8 (which I guess I could sell). A friend of mine plans to upgrade his Canon 28-105 3.5-4.5, so he’ll probably let me borrow it indefinitely or sell it cheap. I could then add the Canon 50mm 1.4 for more serious work, and borrow his upgraded zoom sometimes.
Just how much better is Nikon’s low light autofocus system (for example, with the kind of light that would require settings of ISO 3200 at f/2, shutter of 1/80)?
Is it worth investing in Nikon now, and later selling the Nikon body and lenses and switching over in a couple of years? Or would it be advisable to simply bite the bullet and buy the t2i (and just switch out the body later).
I’m tired of puzzling over this, so any opinions are appreciated.
EDIT: I am actually quite put off by Canon's high MP's on its consumer line, maybe more so than I should be (though do I see the high MP's potential use in the prosumer/pro line).
Do the people here think Nikon will "stick to its guns" with the reasonable 12 MP on its sub $1000 consumer cameras, or up the MP's to "compete" with Canon's consumer marketing strategy? (Surely Canon will not go down from 18 MP now.)
However, Nikon’s D90 outperforms the t2i (for my purposes), according to an in-depth DP Preview article.
I am into:
Shooting primarily subjects
Low light photography (without a flash)
High burst rate (so I can capture the instant)
I do not care about having more than 12 MP.
No matter what I decide now, I plan to buy a new Canon body once Canon licenses the Sony sensor technology that Nikon uses, and improves low light autofocus on its sub-$1000 models. Hopefully this will be within 2 years. I own a Canon 28mm 1.8 (which I guess I could sell). A friend of mine plans to upgrade his Canon 28-105 3.5-4.5, so he’ll probably let me borrow it indefinitely or sell it cheap. I could then add the Canon 50mm 1.4 for more serious work, and borrow his upgraded zoom sometimes.
Just how much better is Nikon’s low light autofocus system (for example, with the kind of light that would require settings of ISO 3200 at f/2, shutter of 1/80)?
Is it worth investing in Nikon now, and later selling the Nikon body and lenses and switching over in a couple of years? Or would it be advisable to simply bite the bullet and buy the t2i (and just switch out the body later).
I’m tired of puzzling over this, so any opinions are appreciated.
EDIT: I am actually quite put off by Canon's high MP's on its consumer line, maybe more so than I should be (though do I see the high MP's potential use in the prosumer/pro line).
Do the people here think Nikon will "stick to its guns" with the reasonable 12 MP on its sub $1000 consumer cameras, or up the MP's to "compete" with Canon's consumer marketing strategy? (Surely Canon will not go down from 18 MP now.)