What DSLR brand do YOU have, and why?

[mcmadhatter]

I am curious to see how many people use the various DSLRs on the market, not because any one brand is better than an other, just to see why people chose what they did.

So heres a poll, and please feel free to give an explanation of your choice.


Personally I went for the Canon EOS 350D, beacuse I got a new one for £350 cheaper than the price of a Nikon D70 at the time, and it meant I could borrow dad's lenses on holiday.

 

[RBMaraman]

I was all set to buy a Canon Digital Rebel XT. I'd read reviews online, read what people were saying on MR, checked different sites for prices, and so on. But, I'd made up my mind that I was going to buy it from my local camera store.

So, I went into the store, asked to see the Rebel XT, and as soon as it was in my hands I realized I hated it. I didn't like the layout of the buttons or menus, I wasn't very impressed with the kit lense, and the camera just didn't feel right. I explained to the woman that this was my first dSLR, actually my first SLR period. She pulled down the Nikon D70 and said she thought I would like this better. It was perfect. Loved the button and menu layout, thought the lense was better than the Nikon, and it just felt right.

That's how I ended up with my Nikon D70.

Moral of the story: ALWAYS hold all options in person before buying.

 

[edesignuk]

I got a 350D, simply because at the time it was the best in my price range. Although I haven't actually used it as much as I had hoped I would, I am always pleased with the results when I do.

 

[FocusAndEarnIt]

Well, I don't have a DSLR camera, but if I had to get one, it would definitely be a Cannon.

 

[Clix Pix]

Nikon, Baby, All the Way!

I've been using Nikon cameras for many, many years.... Nikon N90 film SLR, several Coolpixes, Nikon D70, Nikon D70s, Nikon D200.... and of course the necessary lenses.....

In stores I've handled both Nikon and Canon, but have never shot with a Canon. I definitely dislike the plasticky feel of the Digital Rebel and rejected it out of hand at the time I was deciding on my first DSLR. I've also handled the 10D and the 20D, and while they don't seem as uncomfortable to me, I just prefer the way the Nikon feels in my hands and I definitely prefer the placement of the various controls and the way they do their menu system. True, because I was already famiiar with the basic layout of a Nikon camera, this might have something to do with my preferences.

Cameras from either Canon or Nikon will do a very fine job in making the image. Ditto for those from other manufacturers. What's more important is the person who is holding that camera body and lens and what he or she does with it. Someone can have the most expensive camera and the finest lenses and yet still not produce particularly good images, while in the right hands, even the least sophisticated camera can produce surprisingly good results.

 

[Benjamindaines]

I have both a Canon 20D and a Nikon D200, they are both amazing cameras.

EDIT: Does anyone have a Pentax?

 

[Grimace]

I have a Digital Rebel XT and LOVE it! A lot of preference comes from the feel of cameras you've had before. I had a Pentax 35mm and a Sony point-and-shoot, so I would have had to learn a new layout regardless.

If you decide to go with a Rebel XT, get the camera body alone. Or, if they can package it with an IS (image stability) lens, go that route. They are more expensive, but the results are phenomenal.

 

[rasp]

Having not read the thread, I'm not sure how much this question really matters. My vote is Canon, simply because I like the handling better. Each system has pros and cons which can be important in specific situations, but, for general photography, I doubt there is much difference. In the end, pick a system, and learn it. It's far more important to be there and able to see, than what gear, just as long as you have a camera along.

 

[bousozoku]

I have an Olympus E-1, for a couple of reasons.

It's all digital, which of course, limits the lens choices but maximises compatibility. There are currently about 15 available and they cover everything pretty well.

It doesn't suffer from dust because it has a patented device to shake it off the sensor and trap it.

I've always had great luck with Olympus SLRs and ZLRs since the late 1970s. While I sold most brands at one time, only Olympus, Nikon, Fuji, and Pentax felt right in my hands. The alternatives weren't all that great when I bought my E-1 around two years ago. I'm sure you've seen that I didn't mention Canon. You don't want to get me started talking about Canon.

 

[djbahdow01]

Went from a Canon Rebel film camera to a Nikon D70 Digital. One of the main reasons was that the Digi Rebels seemed cheaply made and the D70 was solid. Also after reading many reviews of both I went with the D70 and have had no problems, and some great shooting experiences.

 

[Kirbdog]

D70s

I use a Nikon D70s, the best reason I can think of is that's what my brother uses. He's a professional and I am amateur if I use the same stuff its easy to get advice and share lenses. I had a Coolpix 5700 before I got an DSLR, it was a good camera but I needed more than it could offer. I have always felt Nikon makes good quality products. IMHO they make the best lenses.
Now if only my backordered Nikkor 18-200mm VRII would arrive before summer.

 

[150hp]

I just picked up a Nikon D70s w/ 18-70 kit lens.

I have been shooting since high school (circa 1989) with a Pentax K1000. I had wanted to pick up a Nikon N90s when they first came out but I couldn't justify spending that much on a 35mm as I had moved up to medium format with a Rolleiflex TLR & a couple of 4x5 view cameras. I just love the large negatives.

Well, I thought about trying digital & was given a Nikon Coolpix 2500 as a Christmas present. I enjoyed it & decided I needed a dslr as I got frustrated with the lack of manual controls on the 2500. So since I had wanted a Nikon slr since the early 90's, I just had to get the D70s as I just had so much monentum internally that all other makers were out of the question.

So now I just need a couple more lenses. My next one will be a Lensbaby 2.0

That is all.

 

[OutThere]

I've had my Canon D. Rebel for a little more than a year now...just passed 6000 exposures last week. I know some other people with D.Rebels and so I was comfortable with the button layout and operating procedure, plus I could borrow lenses...so it was an easy choice.

 

[NinjaMonkey]

Olympus E500

I went with Olympus for a lot of reasons. The 4/3 mount is the most modern and is all digital, and Oly makes very high quality lenses. Since I wasn't tied to Canon or Nikon because I never had an SLR I decided Olys all digital system was the way to go for me. The only downside to 4/3 is noise at high ISO speeds but for me and most prosumers that isn't an issue.

The EVOLT series also has the dust reduction system which is nice.

For me it came down to the Rebel XT which I hated from the moment I saw it in person, it got even worse when I actually picked it up. And the Nikon D50 which is a nice camera but I got a better deal on the E500.

 

[joepunk]

If I had a DSLR it would be a Nikon as I already have lenses.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

OK, so I have both....

[Sorry for the long post - but working in a camera shop, I too get bitten by the "buying" bug. But I hope that my thoughts will help, and give pause as others decide "which way" to go.}

I started with having a Canon Rebel Ti when I was ready to jump to digital. So I got a 10D, and then followed that up with the Rebel XT. All because I had some lenses already. That grew into a system with a 12-24, 17-40, 28-135IS, 28-75 Tamron (for speed), the 28/2.8 and 50/1.8 for low light) and the 75-300IS. Along with two 420EX's and the ST-E2 for wireless flash.

Come late last year/early this year, I was thinking of getting a "super zoom" camera like the Panasonic FZ series for my planned trips this year - to have a light weight one lens solution. That was until our Nikon rep came in with the Nikkor 18-200VR just before Christmas. Man, such a sweet lens. Sharp, good close focusing ability, and a super VR/IS capability. In the store I was able to shoot at 5.6 @ 1/30 fairly consistently!

Had the chance to buy the 18-200VR BEFORE the popularity made it go on back order. And had the $150 rebates available for buying the PictureMate and the D50 together. So I jumped at it. Add to that Nikon has the 10.5 fisheye (that can be corrected for distortion in Nikon Capture), so I splurged for that lens too - always liked the semi-fisheye effect.

So I now shoot both Canon and Nikon. Its been only three months in having the Nikon D50 in my gear box. And I love it. JPEG images are truly ready to print. The 18-200VR is a truly great travel lens.

I will probably be paring down my Canon kit. Already swapped out the 12-24 Tokina for Canon to Nikon. Most likely will sell off the 10D and the Ti, they don't see much use - though both are great cameras. As well as thinking of the 28, 50, and 75-300IS. Why? Cameras are tools. You get the tools that will best do the job that you need it to do.

But for me the Nikon D50 and the 18-200VR replaces my need for the 75-300IS to a degree. And in some ways because of the 4 stop ability of VR, the 28 and 50 Canon lenses. Though I have sights on a great Nikkor 35/2.0 for really low light.

But based on my experiences recently, I would be very tempted as new purchaser to go with any Nikon DSLR with the 18-200VR for "general" shooting. I say "general", for while the 18-200VR is a sharp lens, it is not like the 17-55/2.8 or the 70-200VR/2.8; or the Canon equals.

Add your choice of an ultra-wide zoom (my choice is the Tokina 12-24), a 35 or 50 f/2.0, and for adventure the a semi fish-eye (hope that Canon offers one soon for the 1.6x factor). As a person that loves wide angle, these are my choices. Otherwise if you are more telephoto, a 200 to 400~500 zoom lens would be of more use than the semi fish-eye.

 

[Abstract]

I have used Canons all my life, and my current P&S camera that I use very regularly is still a Canon. I'll also buy another Canon P&S in several years. I have around 4 friends with Nikon Coolpix cameras bought within the same year, and they were all crap. Even after 2 years, they just completely stopped working. I really didn't think much of Nikon at the time.

Anyway, I now have a Nikon D50. I was all set on buying a Canon 350D/Rebel XT, and it felt like junk in my hands. It was uncomfortable to hold, and after shooting with a Rebel XT for an entire hour at a picnic, I think it's horrible to use. The menu system is easy for me to understand because my family and I have always bought Canon, even film cameras (although we had a Minolta SLR, I think), but the button layout, feel, quality, and just my experience using the camera left a bad taste in my mouth.

Like I said in another thread, if you're going to buy Canon, make sure it's a 20D.....bare minimum. Although I used a 20D last Wednesday for the first time and thought the button layout and overall ergonomics was still not nearly as good as on a Nikon.

Oh, and since I didn't have any lenses, I found that Nikon had everything I wanted, including that 18-200 mm VR lense that I can't afford yet.

The Nikon D50 has been a dream so far, though.

@Chip: THe 28 mm and 50 mm lenses still have use in your Canon, so unless you're switching to all-Nikon, why bother? THe 50 mm lense you have isn't even an expensive one to buy when brand new.

 

[homerjward]

i have a d50. i bought it because it was a) the cheapest dslr at the time and b) i LOVED the handling compared to other dslr's. the 350d felt like a toy, and the e500 had an awful, tiny viewfinder. i didn't even look at pentax, which, after looking at it was kind of stupid because the DL and DS are very nice cameras. sure, i wish it had CF cards, more info in the viewfinder, etc. but it's a great camera that makes great images. i'm starting to suffer from lens lust so i need to get a job so far i have the kit lens and a 50 1.8D but i'd really like to get a decent telephoto zoom and the 10.5 fisheye

 

[revenuee]

Nikon, i've shot Nikon for several years, brand loyalty ... just like buying an apple

 

[Clix Pix]

I went with Olympus for a lot of reasons.

Since I haven't really used any of Olympus' digital cameras, not going to comment on those one way or the other, but just am going to say that, yes, Oly does make nice lenses. One of my favorite film cameras was the IS-3 DLx. It was a "bridge" camera not unlike what we see today in many digital prosumer cameras. I really loved that camera and it did give me some very nice results. I've still got it, actually, but it hasn't had a roll of film in it for at least three or four years. One day I had a look, realized that oops, there was still a roll of Fujifilm 400 or something in it, never exposed, but took that out, as it has been at least eight or nine years since I've shot with film.

Anyway, yes, Olympus does do a nice job with lenses....

The 18-200VR is a truly great travel lens.

Isn't this just the greatest walkaround/travel/all-purpose lens? I think it has so much appeal because it can fulfill so many purposes for many people. For those who are coming right from a P&S to a DSLR but who aren't quite sure about this whole interchangeable lens thing or who don't have a lot of money to immediately plunk down for various lenses it fits the bill. For those who have other lenses but who don't necessarily want to carry a heavy bag full of gear for a trip or even a walk around the neighborhood, this lens fits the bill.... I am just so pleased with the results that I've been getting with mine. Yes, an image is not going to be the same with that lens as when I slip a faster or a longer lens on, but it sure does cover a lot of territory! For travel, IMO it cannot be beat.

Though I have sights on a great Nikkor 35/2.0 for really low light.

I've seen some really fantastic results that people have gotten with that lens.

I would be very tempted as new purchaser to go with any Nikon DSLR with the 18-200VR for "general" shooting. I say "general", for while the 18-200VR is a sharp lens, it is not like the 17-55/2.8 or the 70-200VR/2.8; or the Canon equals.

I have to second this! While I love my 18-200 VR, it definitely is not a substitute for either the 17-55 or the 70-200. On another forum I saw a post where someone was considering selling off their 70-200 f/2.8 VR because they now had the 18-200 VR. Um..... I guess they aren't really cued in to the fact that while the 18-200 VR is a wonderful lens, it is nowhere near as fast as the 70-200! I spent some time last week doing some shooting around my neighborhood with the 18-200 VR and while it does really well, there's no way that it can take the place of the much faster 70-200 VR under certain shooting conditions.

Add your choice of an ultra-wide zoom (my choice is the Tokina 12-24), a 35 or 50 f/2.0, and for adventure the a semi fish-eye (hope that Canon offers one soon for the 1.6x factor). As a person that loves wide angle, these are my choices. Otherwise if you are more telephoto, a 200 to 400~500 zoom lens would be of more use than the semi fish-eye.

Yeah, one of these days after I've finished sorting out some financial stuff I need to handle and evaluate and compare the 80-400 and the 200-400 lenses.... I'm really fine as far as the wide-angle and fast lenses for shooting in low light end of the scale but I want to have something that reaches beyond 200mm in order to shoot the local wildlife/wildfowl around here.... From what I understand, while the 200-400 is an outstanding lens, it also is a bit heavy, so I'm concerned about that vis-a-vis trying to wrestle one of those on to the tripod.... I really prefer hand-holding and shooting without a tripod.

That 10.5 fisheye would be a lot of fun and maybe one of these years after I've built up my "must-have" lens collection, I'll have one, but right now my priority is focused on lenses with which I can do a lot of shooting under various conditions, either wide-angle, low-light or telephoto....

 

[Mike Teezie]

Canon all the way!

I have a Rebel XT. I added a battery grip to make it feel better, and I love my camera.

However, I'm about to about to order a 30D (it'll have the battery grip as well), so the XT will be moving into a backup camera position.

 

[Chip NoVaMac]

Anyway, I now have a Nikon D50. I was all set on buying a Canon 350D/Rebel XT, and it felt like junk in my hands. It was uncomfortable to hold, and after shooting with a Rebel XT for an entire hour at a picnic, I think it's horrible to use. The menu system is easy for me to understand because my family and I have always bought Canon, even film cameras (although we had a Minolta SLR, I think), but the button layout, feel, quality, and just my experience using the camera left a bad taste in my mouth.

Good reason to go to a local dealer and pay the price to feel and see how the camera feels in your hands. Many dealers even have easier "return" privileges if gear does not meet your needs.

Having both the XT and the D50, I come from a different place. Yes, the XT has a "cheaper" feel; but that does not mean it is any less of a camera. Personal feel is a different matter. For myself, I love the light weight body of the XT compared to the rest. For I tend to heavier lens (like the 17-40, the Tamron 28-75, and the such), and have found that I prefer the balance of the the lens being primary, verses the lens and body trying to out weigh each other.

The only issue I have with the XT is the ability to turn on the self-timer without knowing it. Otherwise I prefer the menu structure of the XT over the D series cameras.

Like I said in another thread, if you're going to buy Canon, make sure it's a 20D.....bare minimum. Although I used a 20D last Wednesday for the first time and thought the button layout and overall ergonomics was still not nearly as good as on a Nikon.

To each his own. That is why I suggest to my customers that they try each camera out for ease of use. As much as I am used to "pro" cameras; I love the ease of use of the XT. I put up with the D50 interface for the ability to use lenses that makes sense for me.

Oh, and since I didn't have any lenses, I found that Nikon had everything I wanted, including that 18-200 mm VR lense that I can't afford yet.

The Nikon D50 has been a dream so far, though.

There is a technical difference between CMOS (Canon) and CCD (Nikon). That lies in the tendency of the CCD to look at a joining pixel sites in high light situations and "blend" that highlight information to a joining "cells". Not something that everyone will see, but it can cause a casual user concern when they see it.

@Chip: THe 28 mm and 50 mm lenses still have use in your Canon, so unless you're switching to all-Nikon, why bother? THe 50 mm lense you have isn't even an expensive one to buy when brand new.

Other than sheer size difference between the 28/2.8 and the 18-200VR, there ends up to be just one stop difference in lens speed. The 50/1.8 is not something that caught on as I would have hoped for.

The Canon kit is down to the 17-40L and the Tamron 28-75/2.8 with the ST-E2 for multiple flash work. Tools for the right reasons.

 

[POHeerwig]

Canon 20D

A few reasons:

(edit - pushed too soon..)

1. Months of research on DSLRs
2. Battery life. Had (still have) a Canon G4 that I took into the Amazon basin for a week of solid shooting. The battery lasted the entire week. I loved that camera. Canon battery life is great.
3. 5 frames per second, virtually instantaneous start-up, 8.2 pixels, 9 point focus
4. It was described as a baby EOS-1D (I think that was the clencher )

 

[ChrisA]

I am curious to see how many people use the various DSLRs on the market, not because any one brand is better than an other, just to see why people chose what they did.

The decision was easy for me. I have three Nikon film bodies (F2, N2020, N90) and a collection of Nikon Lenses both manual focus and auto focus. So I bought a D50 (and another lens, the 18-70 f/3.5-4 People who already own a lot of Canon gear would likely by a Canon digital body.

I notice when people are starting from scratch with little experiance with SLR camera what they get depends on how they go about choosing. If you read specs Canons looks better but if you hold the camera and play with it you buy Nikon. OK there are exceptions

I think the Nikons have better usabilty they have better meters and better flash exposure systems and nikon's low end lenses are betterthen canon's low end. At the Top end they are both very good. (and expensive)

One thing that made me switch to Nikon (from Minolta SLRs) was that Nikon has never and will never change the lens mount. All Nikon lenses mount to all bodies. Canon switched mounts and so did Minolta.

In the end either will work fine differences are minor.

... I'm really fine as far as the wide-angle and fast lenses for shooting in low light end of the scale but I want to have something that reaches beyond 200mm in order to shoot the local wildlife/wildfowl around here.... From what I understand, while the 200-400 is an outstanding lens, it also is a bit heavy, so I'm concerned about that vis-a-vis trying to wrestle one of those on to the tripod.... I really prefer hand-holding and shooting without a tripod.

WHen you get past a 200mm lens you are talking about using a tripod. That 1/(lens focal lenght) rule will get you. At 400mm you are limited to shooting at 1/400 and faster unless you are using a tripod. and even 1/400 is slow if you want very sharp shots.

Get a tripod head with a quick release plate built into it. Then it will be easy.

 

[0098386]

Canon EOS 350D

I just googled Digital SLR, or something, and pow! There it was. top result. thought this must be good. did some research and found it had rave reviews. Talked to my mum about it. She put towards £200 on this camera site and the rest is history.

I'm no pro though. I just love experimenting with lights. My sister is always willing to help out too, so shes top. Someday I'll get to grips with f. numbers, lenses and all that. I did learn a couple of days ago that flash's (at least the built in one) drowns out warm colours, resulting in extreme white/blue-heavy images. Now even you non-photographers knew that, but I love learning. and teaching myself new things.