Ready to buy my DSLR... insight on options needed

[Apple Ink]

Wow you remember my comments from a long time ago. I'm either freaked out or impressed. I said people shouldn't say a product is bad if they have never genuinely used it (most people I think on the internet say they have used xxx product to make them look more credible).

Using your analogy the Canon would be the Dell (cheap, plastic and can be bought at Walmart) and the Nikon is the Apple of the camera world. See we can play these tit for tat games all day, Canonboy. I, however, am quick to bash Nikon when they deserve it.

The Nikon 70-200 VR is world class and Nikon's 105mm is awesome. We can debate all day which company makes better lenses, but it is all just opinion at the end of the day.

I do find it funny when I visit the Canon sites and find many of their little fanbois have those fancy little signatures with the L in red and with italics. I guess whatever makes them feel special. Maybe insecurity does that to some people.

Now that's a good retort... rather than bashing people for suggesting a brand by making stupid off topic comments(though you haven't completely foregone this but it's a start) you have given a solid rebuttal this time that you hate canon's build... and I have no problems with this comment since the OP can actually make some use of it...

As for brands... LOL. I dont give a heck for the body.. it's the lens and the performance I want and both will give a beginner more than enough of that!! It's the lenses you should be researching because you've told us you have an interest!!

 

[MacJenn]

Now that's a good retort... rather than bashing people for suggesting a brand by making stupid off topic comments(though you haven't completely foregone this but it's a start) you have given a solid rebuttal this time that you hate canon's build... and I have no problems with this comment since the OP can actually make some use of it...

As for brands... LOL. I dont give a heck for the body.. it's the lens and the performance I want and both will give a beginner more than enough of that!! It's the lenses you should be researching because you've told us you have an interest!!

Don't play the victim and act like I bashed you before in another thread. You dished it out pretty well yourself. You are better than that aren't you? Now I will give you this. Your retort this time was a little better, but you still had to put a bash in there by implying my answers in another thread weren't productive which they were. You just disagreed with them.

I actually agree with you mostly about lenses. They are the most important aspect for the most part. I disagree with many who discount what a quality body can do over a cheap one. I think the body is very important also. Now I think Nikon lenses are better than their Canon rivals which is why I own a Nikon. You own a Canon most likely because you think the Canon makes better lenses overall. That is where neither of us are wrong because that is how we (I) honestly think. Both make great lenses though and at the end of the day it is just a persons personal opinion and everyone has one.

 

[luminosity]

As a Nikon guy, I'd like to cast a vote for giving Pentax a try. Their stuff seems to have outstanding value for the money.

 

[ProwlingTiger]

One tries to be objective when choosing a brand. Each have pros and cons. But you must remember that once you gather enough equipment with a brand, it becomes hard to switch.

Personally, I've been shooting Canon for years. However, this past month I bought a Sony Alpha to use as a second body. I like the feel, quality, etc, and determined it would be better fit for a smaller companion that I could take mostly everywhere.

I still shoot most my stuff Canon and would highly recommend their cameras. I will admit I have not shot much with Nikon. I didn't like the UI and the feel so I cannot offer any advice there.

I have extensively used the 40D and can say it's an awesome camera. The only reason I would never get a Rebel XSi is due to the fact that it uses SD cards. While I have plenty of them around, I shoot with Compact Flash as it's interchangeable with my other cameras. Something minor, I guess, but worth noting for me.

 

[Mr. G4]

Olympus E-420 because it just feels like its going to slip out of my hand lol.

The E-420 is the smallest DSLR in the world and doesn't have a grip to rest your finger to hold the camera. Olympus just corrected that with the announcement of the E-620 which is the smallest DSLR to have in body image stabilizer.

In order, to choose a brand to buy in you need to look further than the body. You need to look at the quality/price of lens.

Like many Apple users and buy into "Think Different" I went with Olympus because like Apple, Olympus is an innovative company. They were the first to come out with the self cleaning sensor, and until today no one was able to duplicate what they did. They were the first to introduce "Live View" that everyone said to be gimmick...now every one have one. With the E-30 they introduced the first electronic level so your picture won't look crooked and it is very useful with wide angle so your picture won't look distorted. Now with the E-620, they put illuminated button so you can see which button is which in the dark à la Macbook Pro keyboard...you might say that is not going to help in picture quality...granted but it's liitle innovation like that that make us like what Apple does, isn't it?

As far as glass is concerned, Zuiko, that how Olympus calls their optic department, they made the best lens for the money...just look at their kit lens...it's the best of any kit lens from any manufacturer.

Which ever body from which ever company you choose will let take great picture, but if you are serious about photography you should look into lens first and decide for the body later, because you always keep the lens and not the body...Think Different

 

[Max Archer]

I played around with an E-420 the other day, actually, saw 'em for really cheap at the Circuit City bankruptcy sale and considered getting one to play with. I didn't actually mind the shape, it reminded me quite a bit of the way old camera bodies felt in the hand, which I always liked.

However, I don't think it's really the best choice. My opinion is that the D90 and the 40D are the real options in the price range. I'm a Nikon guy myself, but I've shot relatively extensively with the 40D and liked it quite a bit, for a Canon. The D90's also a great little camera, and I'd choose it simply for the high-ISO performance.

In regards to an earlier post, Nikon's closest competitor to the 70-200 f/4L is the 80-200 f/2.8D. You pay slightly more (depending on where you buy it), but get a more "solid" lens, and real "fast" glass. It's one of the biggest examples of the difference in philosophy between the companies - Canon goes for a smaller, lighter lens that relies on technology (IS), while Nikon goes for the big, solid, traditional solution.

I'm going for the (hopefully coming soon) D400 as soon as it comes out, myself. I'm using a D2X right now, but have too much invested in DX glass to move to the full-frame D3, and I want the crop factor because I tend to shoot a lot of telephoto sports work, and I'd rather carry the relatively mobile (and versatile) AF-S 70-200 f/2.8VR that I own, than the huge and "slow" 300 f/4.

 

[Astroguy12s]

Thanks for all the responses, I think this is a great photography community!

TheReef, I remember reading the review on the K20D when it came out but a few of the comments turned me off, I like how feature filled it is for the low price but the reviewer noted that it had noisy low light performance, consistently underexposes, outdated UI and relatively slow burst rate. I will definitely go to a photo store and give it a whirl though, thanks for your suggestion. (BTW what good glass is available for Pentax?)

Ideally, I'd like to get a telephoto zoom lens, a wide angle and a macro lens for my insect work.

Let me guess, the reviewer is dpreview? Take it with a grain of salt, read people's reviews in the forums to get a general feel. Having just bought a dslr (went with the Pentax K200d), Pentax appealed to me because there is a vast assortment of lens available, built in image stabilization, and I very much liked the quality feel to it compared to the competition. ANY lens ever made for a Pentax camera will work with your new Pentax dslr....and many can get picked up quite cheap (and all will have image stabilization since Pentax builds it into their bodies). In fact, my buddy who bought a XSi before me was a bit jealous of the difference in build quality of the body and lens in comparison his. Check our pentaxforums.com for lens review and see if something may meet your requirement. Good luck!

 

[LittleCanonKid]

Let me guess, the reviewer is dpreview? Take it with a grain of salt, read people's reviews in the forums to get a general feel. Having just bought a dslr (went with the Pentax K200d), Pentax appealed to me because there is a vast assortment of lens available, built in image stabilization, and I very much liked the quality feel to it compared to the competition. ANY lens ever made for a Pentax camera will work with your new Pentax dslr....and many can get picked up quite cheap (and all will have image stabilization since Pentax builds it into their bodies). In fact, my buddy who bought a XSi before me was a bit jealous of the difference in build quality of the body and lens in comparison his. Check our pentaxforums.com for lens review and see if something may meet your requirement. Good luck!

Pentax is a great brand that most people discount fairly quickly without much merit. If I were the OP I'd do some research in Pentax.

My personal love for continuous shooting, though, would probably stop me from getting a K200D. The buffer is 4 shots at 2.8fps, right? I'm a fairly trigger-happy guy, maybe I should look into stopping that.

 

[TheReef]

Let me guess, the reviewer is dpreview? Take it with a grain of salt, read people's reviews in the forums to get a general feel. Having just bought a dslr (went with the Pentax K200d), Pentax appealed to me because there is a vast assortment of lens available, built in image stabilization, and I very much liked the quality feel to it compared to the competition. ANY lens ever made for a Pentax camera will work with your new Pentax dslr....and many can get picked up quite cheap (and all will have image stabilization since Pentax builds it into their bodies). In fact, my buddy who bought a XSi before me was a bit jealous of the difference in build quality of the body and lens in comparison his. Check our pentaxforums.com for lens review and see if something may meet your requirement. Good luck!

There tends to be a mindset against Pentax in this industry, perhaps people feel better as part of the main crowd. (Kind of reminds me of Apple vs Microsoft 10 years ago).

Not having any previous slr or lens collection (So I'm hopefully unbiased ), in search for a dSLR, I found the Pentax K10D the best in features and price at the time, yet the saleman responds "Is there any reason you are buying a Pentax?, let me show you a nice Nikon D200 over here".

So even the shops salesmen sometimes steer you away from Pentax, their margins are less simply because of bulk distribution from Canon and Nikon. I'd say the reviewer is one of those people.


It's a shame because they are excellent cameras. (Jimbo Slice, be sure to check out reviews of people who own the camera, on Cnet it rates almost 10)

TheReef, I remember reading the review on the K20D when it came out but a few of the comments turned me off, I like how feature filled it is for the low price but the reviewer noted that it had noisy low light performance, consistently underexposes, outdated UI and relatively slow burst rate. I will definitely go to a photo store and give it a whirl though, thanks for your suggestion. (BTW what good glass is available for Pentax?)


Ideally, I'd like to get a telephoto zoom lens, a wide angle and a macro lens for my insect work.

I'm not sure where you read about noisy low light performance, it is meant to be very good, google K20D low light performance.

I can't speak for under exposure but I've never noticed anything like it on my K10D? I doubt there would be a major problem in that area.

The UI is perhaps a little bland, it is perfectly clear and functional though. The K20D has a plenty of on-body controls (which means you don't spend a lot of time in the menus anyway) and the interface offers heaps of customization for these, I have ISO assigned to the second thumb dial, and moved AF from halfway press to a dedicated spare AF button for example.

The burst rate is 3 FPS, not the best but not terrible. Keep in mind the buffer is unlimited, you can shoot continuously until the card is full which is nice.



Pentax have been expanding their lens offerings, all of which are here:
http://www.pentaximaging.com/camera-lenses/


Pentax is renowned for making very high quality glass, but if you want 3rd party for savings try these:

Sigma 70-300mm, Tamron 28-75mm (very very sharp, more so than Canon's equivalent) and various Sigma and Tonika wide angles.

For budget Macro, possibly look into coupling an extension tube with a used 50mm Manual F1.7 Focus for cheap off eBay. (K20D will be backwards compatible with any K mount lens).

Whatever your choice have fun!

 

[ProwlingTiger]

Not having any previous slr or lens collection (So I'm hopefully unbiased ), in search for a dSLR, I found the Pentax K10D the best in features and price at the time, yet the saleman responds "Is there any reason you are buying a Pentax?, let me show you a nice Nikon D200 over here".

It's a shame because they are excellent cameras. (Jimbo Slice, be sure to check out reviews of people who own the camera, on Cnet it rates almost 10)

3.5 out of 5 stars? Well, that's the editor's rating. However users are rating it very highly...4.5 stars.

 

[Kiwi Mac]

I played around with an E-420 the other day, actually, saw 'em for really cheap at the Circuit City bankruptcy sale and considered getting one to play with. I didn't actually mind the shape, it reminded me quite a bit of the way old camera bodies felt in the hand, which I always liked.

However, I don't think it's really the best choice. My opinion is that the D90 and the 40D are the real options in the price range. I'm a Nikon guy myself, but I've shot relatively extensively with the 40D and liked it quite a bit, for a Canon. The D90's also a great little camera, and I'd choose it simply for the high-ISO performance.

In regards to an earlier post, Nikon's closest competitor to the 70-200 f/4L is the 80-200 f/2.8D. You pay slightly more (depending on where you buy it), but get a more "solid" lens, and real "fast" glass. It's one of the biggest examples of the difference in philosophy between the companies - Canon goes for a smaller, lighter lens that relies on technology (IS), while Nikon goes for the big, solid, traditional solution.

I'm going for the (hopefully coming soon) D400 as soon as it comes out, myself. I'm using a D2X right now, but have too much invested in DX glass to move to the full-frame D3, and I want the crop factor because I tend to shoot a lot of telephoto sports work, and I'd rather carry the relatively mobile (and versatile) AF-S 70-200 f/2.8VR that I own, than the huge and "slow" 300 f/4.

You could carry the huge and "fast" 300 2.8 VR instead! I'm seriously looking for one of those at the moment.

It is worth noting too that the DX format does not give you more actual magnification - only narrower fov, which appears to be more magnification when compared to FX. Nothing changes about the lens; it's simply the amount of the image we use from the back of the lens.

 

[luminosity]

I've seen outstanding images from Pentax cameras online, and that includes their somewhat older DSLRs like he K200D. If I were starting over again, I might really think about going with Pentax, particularly from a cost standpoint.

 

[Jimbo Slice]

Wow I feel like I have so much more reading to do, no problem though as I love to learn about things that I enjoy. Thanks for the excellent feedback everyone, I'm definitely going to dedicate some time to do some pentax reading

 

[Wingnut330]

Wow I feel like I have so much more reading to do, no problem though as I love to learn about things that I enjoy. Thanks for the excellent feedback everyone, I'm definitely going to dedicate some time to do some pentax reading

I got overwhelmed too which is why my advice a few posts ago was to make a decision and begin shooting. A few reasons I feel that way. 1. All of the cameras discussed here are good choices and the 4 you started out with are fine choices. 2. Camera equipment (that is well cared for) generally holds it's value pretty well, so if you buy something shoot with it and change your mind, you can usually sell it and get something else. (I'm not advocating wasting money, I'm simply saying that once you've held it, tested it in a store you will likely enjoy it in the field BUT if not, you won't get killed trying to sell it) 3. The hobby is about taking pictures and enjoying it, all this time researching is less time shooting! : )

I would decide which lens brand and features you like and buy the corresponding dSLR. I liked Canon lenses because they work with most all (if not all) Canon bodies. They focus in the lens not the camera. Others like Nikons because they focus in the camera and not the lens. This is good for some but has limitations related to lenses - would you ever run in to that limitation? Maybe, maybe not. Will you notice the difference between Nikon glass and Canon glass? Maybe, maybe not - heck will you ever even compare them once you make your decision?

The folks on this forum are very knowledgeable and very technical. That's good and bad. Everyone is trying to be as helpful as possible, but sometimes you can get bogged down in analysis paralysis.

I say get a good camera, better lenses and start shooting! It's tons of fun!

 

[epicwelshman]

However, this past month I bought a Sony Alpha to use as a second body. I like the feel, quality, etc, and determined it would be better fit for a smaller companion that I could take mostly everywhere.

Can I ask why you went with an Alpha to complement your Canon? I'm not attacking, I'm just curious, because in my mind it would make sense to stick to one brand so you can share lenses between the cameras. What's the point in having to buy lenses for two systems, simply because you like the 'feel' of the Alpha? Again, just curious...

 

[jbg232]

Obviously you've done your reading and have invested many hours into this choice but I was in a similar situation to yours a few months ago and here's how I chose to get the XSi (over the 40D and the XS/XT/XTi).

First off I chose to go with canon because the lens I wanted for bird photography (the canon 100-400mm L IS or 400mm L prime which are considered the standards in the bird photography world) are made by canon, thus necessitating a canon body. I don't really have anything against nikon, I just have never used them and I owned 2 canon point and shoots before I bought the XSi and really like the quality of them. From my limited research into nikon vs. canon I would say that to me it seemed like you got more bang for your buck at the XSi price range and that the image quality was slightly better from comparison shots but I am quickly leaving my realm of knowledge so I'll leave it at that.

I chose the XSi over the 40D (good comparison chart here because the image quality was for the most part identical and the real differences were the body which was more heavy on the 40D and more rugged, the increased fps/shutter/ISO speed, and on camera LCD display. Personally I wasn't shooting sports photography so I didn't need the increased fps, I didn't see myself shooting at 1/8000 shutters or 3200 ISO so those weren't of concern either. While I liked the LCD display in practice for a day that I borrowed both and compared them I really didn't use it much and actually found the XSi to be an easier to use camera for myself. Lastly, while I think I would have liked to have the more rugged body, the price wasn't worth it to me for that feature so I went with the XSi over the 40D and am very happy with my decision.

I chose the XSi over the XTi/XS for different reasons. From testing I could tell the the image quality (the most important feature probably) was different. I also like that my wife could use the live view mode to shoot pictures if she desired which was the deciding factor in my choice and worth the extra money.

Obviously from my experiences it is really a personal decision. What are you shooting? What lenses do you need? What features are most important to you? What is your budget? One thing that I should mention that I have learned now is that good lenses are very expensive (I'm now saving up for that $1500 lens) but are the ENTIRE reason you are buying a camera. In my opinion I would save money on the body (like an xsi vs. a 40d) to get a better lens because the truth is that in 5-10 years you will most likely get a new body anyways, but you will not likely get a new lens (or even if you do, they retain a tremendous amount of their resale value for when you decide to upgrade, unlike the bodies). Enjoy!

 

[foulmouthedleon]

Get the D40, it does everything you need it to. If money is no object, get the D90.

 

[ProwlingTiger]

Can I ask why you went with an Alpha to complement your Canon? I'm not attacking, I'm just curious, because in my mind it would make sense to stick to one brand so you can share lenses between the cameras. What's the point in having to buy lenses for two systems, simply because you like the 'feel' of the Alpha? Again, just curious...

Well, you're right in the sense that it doesn't make sense to buy lenses for 2 systems. I know of several people and companies personally that do though; they often carry Nikon and Canon. But with my Alpha I mainly use only 2 lenses. For me, it's used as a general purpose camera, just if I'm walking somewhere or have some quick things to photograph. It weights considerably less than my Canon so I can more comfortably.

I wanted to buy a lower range DSLR for my second body. I had used a few Rebels in the past, never owned one though. I like the XSi but it uses SD cards and I'm biased a bit towards Compact Flash. I was going to look online for a good deal on the XTi until I caught an Alpha at CC's liquidation sale for a good price. That sort of sealed the deal for me.

 

[MacJenn]

I got overwhelmed too which is why my advice a few posts ago was to make a decision and begin shooting. A few reasons I feel that way. 1. All of the cameras discussed here are good choices and the 4 you started out with are fine choices. 2. Camera equipment (that is well cared for) generally holds it's value pretty well, so if you buy something shoot with it and change your mind, you can usually sell it and get something else. (I'm not advocating wasting money, I'm simply saying that once you've held it, tested it in a store you will likely enjoy it in the field BUT if not, you won't get killed trying to sell it) 3. The hobby is about taking pictures and enjoying it, all this time researching is less time shooting! : )

I would decide which lens brand and features you like and buy the corresponding dSLR. I liked Canon lenses because they work with most all (if not all) Canon bodies. They focus in the lens not the camera. Others like Nikons because they focus in the camera and not the lens. This is good for some but has limitations related to lenses - would you ever run in to that limitation? Maybe, maybe not. Will you notice the difference between Nikon glass and Canon glass? Maybe, maybe not - heck will you ever even compare them once you make your decision?

The folks on this forum are very knowledgeable and very technical. That's good and bad. Everyone is trying to be as helpful as possible, but sometimes you can get bogged down in analysis paralysis.

I say get a good camera, better lenses and start shooting! It's tons of fun!

A ton of Nikon lenses have AF (auto focus) on their lenses like the Canons. Once again a Canon owner acting like they know a lot about Nikons when they have no clue. Of course their older ones don't have AF, but nor does Canons.

 

[gkarris]

jaseone, I have been to a few Best Buy's, Future Shops and Henry's to mess around with the cameras but its hard to gain an idea of what its ike to use it in the real world by just messing around with it in the store, the ergonomics of all of my options are pretty good, the only camera's ergonomics I didn't like all that much was the Olympus E-420 because it just feels like its going to slip out of my hand lol.
I was hoping that people who own the cameras that I'm looking at would give me good insight as they're actually living with it and would have information I might not read in a review.

What about those of us that have small hands?

I ordered one online as a second body and it has IS to compliment my E-500 and 2 lenses. The E-420 is replacing a like-dSLR I just sold.

I played around with an E-420 the other day, actually, saw 'em for really cheap at the Circuit City bankruptcy sale and considered getting one to play with. I didn't actually mind the shape, it reminded me quite a bit of the way old camera bodies felt in the hand, which I always liked.

However, I don't think it's really the best choice.

How much are they going for? The Circuit City's around me have already been picked clean for weeks.

I found a body only online for $320 (free shipping/no tax).

Great choice if you already have lenses.

OP - I understand, if you are just starting out with dSLR's - Nikon and Canon are the way to go.

 

[Mr. G4]

A ton of Nikon lenses have AF (auto focus) on their lenses like the Canons. Once again a Canon owner acting like they know a lot about Nikons when they have no clue. Of course their older ones don't have AF, but nor does Canons.

Isn't that true if you put a lens that doesn't have a motor on a D40 and D60 it won't autofocus, because the D40 and D60 don't have the motor in the body while other Nikon bodies do?

What about those of us that have small hands?
I ordered one online as a second body and it has IS to compliment my E-500 and 2 lenses. The E-420 is replacing a like-dSLR I just sold.

I think you mis-spoke ...the E-420 does not have in body stabilization. The new E-620, which has almost the same form factor, do have the IS.

 

[MacJenn]

Isn't that true if you put a lens that doesn't have a motor on a D40 and D60 it won't autofocus, because the D40 and D60 don't have the motor in the body while other Nikon bodies do?



I think you mis-spoke ...the E-420 does not have in body stabilization. The new E-620, which has almost the same form factor, do have the IS.

That is true. There are also some disadvantages of having the AF in the lens rather than the body. The poster I quoted made it sound like it was a negative that many Nikon bodies have AF built in which is a great advantage of the Nikon in my opinion.

 

[Wingnut330]

That is true. There are also some disadvantages of having the AF in the lens rather than the body. The poster I quoted made it sound like it was a negative that many Nikon bodies have AF built in which is a great advantage of the Nikon in my opinion.

Well you're right on one thing, I don't know as much about Nikon cameras or lenses as you. But you admit there is a difference in the lenses between Canon and Nikon.

I think that 1. you read to much into my comment and 2 (and more importantly) you took it personally. You appear to be very proud of your decision to go with a Nikon and that's great for you, but that doesn't mean that they are for everyone.

I was simply pointing out to the OP that there are differences in the brands but at the end of the day he might not even notice. I'm simply encouraging him to get shooting rather than spending months trying to decide.

Chillax a bit.

 

[MacJenn]

Well you're right on one thing, I don't know as much about Nikon cameras or lenses as you. But you admit there is a difference in the lenses between Canon and Nikon.

I think that 1. you read to much into my comment and 2 (and more importantly) you took it personally. You appear to be very proud of your decision to go with a Nikon and that's great for you, but that doesn't mean that they are for everyone.

I was simply pointing out to the OP that there are differences in the brands but at the end of the day he might not even notice. I'm simply encouraging him to get shooting rather than spending months trying to decide.

Chillax a bit.

I didn't take anything personal. I don't even know you. Also please don't tell me to chillax out. I think you said that because you were called out for posting BS (to divert the attention away from your lie/BS). If you post BS on a message board someone will call you on it. I will post whatever I want within the guidelines of this board.

Your above post was wrong factually about Nikons and it made it seem like Canon lenses were better than Nikons. IMO they both are great and it depends on the user. However I do think Nikon makes a better lens for me. I used Canon for a few years and decided to make the switch. I prefer Nikon much better, but I won't lie about another brand to make Nikon look better.

 

[LittleCanonKid]

I didn't take anything personal. I don't even know you. Also please don't tell me to chillax out. I think you said that because you were called out for posting BS (to divert the attention away from your lie/BS). If you post BS on a message board someone will call you on it. I will post whatever I want within the guidelines of this board.

Your above post was wrong factually about Nikons and it made it seem like Canon lenses were better than Nikons. IMO they both are great and it depends on the user. However I do think Nikon makes a better lens for me. I used Canon for a few years and decided to make the switch. I prefer Nikon much better, but I won't lie about another brand to make Nikon look better.

MacJenn, I don't know you very well either, but it often seems like it's your goal to find anything remotely close to "wrong" about Nikon and attack anyone who says anything about it, even if it's just pointing out a feature/non-feature of a body. Yes, it's a fact that the D40/40x/60 don't have an in-body focus motor. Wingnut even brought up that it's very possible that it wouldn't make a difference: "Others like Nikons because they focus in the camera and not the lens. This is good for some but has limitations related to lenses - would you ever run in to that limitation? Maybe, maybe not." Wingnut brought that up and even said that it's possible that it wouldn't make a difference, but there is a possibility that it could and so it's worth noting. He didn't say "auuuugh no AF motor in body means YOU CAN'T USE ANY LENSES NOOO". He never denied what you said:
"A ton of Nikon lenses have AF (auto focus) on their lenses like the Canons." I don't recall him saying that a ton DON'T. Nikon's pushing out a good number of AF-S lenses, like the new 35mm f/1.8 which is great for an entry-level Nikon user, and even owners of the D90!

I guess what I'm trying to say is don't assume that every person who shoots Canon knows nothing about Nikon and is only out to ruin their name. Please don't overgeneralize by brand name usage...