Whats Best: Nikon D50 or Canon EOS-D350

[annk]

That's interesting because I always thought that the clunky menu system was one of the annoying things about the canon. Instead of hotkeys on the camera taking you directly to the control, they take you to a menu.

I don't have any experience with Nikon layouts, but I've heard the same - that people who've used both, like the Nikon layout better. My 350D does have a few hotkeys that take you right to the function, though.

Coming from the S2 IS, I liked the fact that I knew and recognized the menu layout on my 350D. One guy I spoke with about this in a good camera store said that if I were to go over to Nikon, I'd be just as happy with the menu system there in a short period of time. He said I shouldn't make it a big issue in my choice.

In the end, I guess it often boils down to what one is used to.

 

[oldpismo]

I have the Canon 350D, and I have been perfectly happy with it. I also use the stock lens that it comes with and if you are just starting out with an SLR then it is fine, and you don't need to pay loads for a 50mm lens. Maybe do that later on if you feel you need to.

I don't know much about the Nikon, but I'm sure that you won't be disappointed either way.

The canon is easy to use (even in the dark - alot of my photos are astronomy ones) and the battery life is very good.

Peter

 

[annk]

...and you don't need to pay loads for a 50mm lens. Maybe do that later on if you feel you need to...

The Canon 50 mm 1.8 II is very inexpensive, but lots of people are very enthusiastic about it. I have it and am amazed at the great images it can produce. It's definitely in a different class from the Canon kit lens. But for all I know, Nikon may also have one at the same price and of the same quality.

 

[compuwar]

The Canon 50 mm 1.8 II is very inexpensive, but lots of people are very enthusiastic about it. I have it and am amazed at the great images it can produce. It's definitely in a different class from the Canon kit lens. But for all I know, Nikon may also have one at the same price and of the same quality.

$114.95 at B&H for the Nikkor. It's very well regarded. 50mm is about the only place fast and great and inexpensive all intersect.

 

[oldpismo]

The Canon 50 mm 1.8 II is very inexpensive, but lots of people are very enthusiastic about it. I have it and am amazed at the great images it can produce. It's definitely in a different class from the Canon kit lens. But for all I know, Nikon may also have one at the same price and of the same quality.

I'm not doubting that it is a good lens. What I was saying is that if you are getting an SLR for the first time, the kit lens is so much better than the compact digital lens that you have been using in the past that it is fine.

Then, after you have used that for a bit you will have a better understanding of what lens you really want and need. The 50mm is a good lens, but if you only have one and are just starting the stock zoom lens is perfectly adequate.

Peter

 

[compuwar]

Seems ood to make such a long lasting decision based on button placement on one camera body.

For lots of people, the ergonomics of a body make the choice between systems a no-brainer. I know folks who can't shoot the whole day with a Canon body, who can with a Nikon one. I know folks who can't shoot all day with a Nikon body too. The major controls and layouts from both companies don't change all that much inside of a line of bodies, though they change between lines. For instance, the D1's ergonomics weren't materially changed when the D2 series came out. The layout of my old 8008s, which I got around 1990 isn't all that different from my D2x today.

If you're going to spend serious time with a camera, then ergonomics matter, and it's more important to folks who's hands aren't "average" size.

 

[Abstract]

Then, for the night time shots I need a '50 mm f/1.8' lense?

B.T.W: What does 50 mm f/1.8 mean?

Thanks in advance

That "f" value refers to the size of the aperture (ie: "hole" in the lens) that lets in the light. It's a ratio between the focal length (eg: 50 mm) and the diameter of the hole. Lower numbers are better, so an f/1.4 lets in more light than an f/1.8.

And just for your information, an f/1.4 lens will let in 2x more light than an f/2 lens.
An f/2 lens will let in 2x more light than an f/2.8 lens; and an f/1.4 lens will let in 4x more than an f/2.8 lens.
An f/2.8 lens will let in 2x more light than an f/4 lens; an f/1.8 lens will let in 4x more light than an f/4 lens; and an f/1.4 lens will let in 8x more light than an f/4 lens.

Here's an easier way to explain it. In order: f/1, f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11, etc. Each lens after f/1 will let in half the amount of light as the previous aperture on the list. So I suggest a 50 mm f/1.4 lens if you want to shoot a lot of photos at night, although a 50 mm f/1.8 is ok as well. Just remember that if you need to take a photo at 1/4th seconds using the 50 mm f/1.8, you'd only need 1/10th seconds with the 50 mm f/1.4 lens, which could be the difference between a blurry shot and one that's sharp enough to use.

(these aperture sizes are adjustable, so you can make the aperture smaller if you wish (ie: you can make that f-number larger). The number on the lens is just the maximum aperture size)

I'm not doubting that it is a good lens. What I was saying is that if you are getting an SLR for the first time, the kit lens is so much better than the compact digital lens that you have been using in the past that it is fine.

Actually, that's not entirely true. Some of these fancy point and shoot cameras have excellent lenses that are likely better than the Canon kit lens, and sometimes the Nikon D50 kit lens.

You're really going to get decent shots using the kit lens in most lighting. The differences between a good lens and a bad lens isn't that high if you're not completely anal about details and are just starting out. So if anything, get the kit lens and a 50 mm f/1.4.

Good luck, man. Ask more questions if you need to.

 

[beavo451]

Here's an easier way to explain it. In order: f/1, f/1.2, f/1.4, f/1.8, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11, etc. Each lens after f/1 will let in half the amount of light as the previous aperture on the list.

This is wrong. In steps of 1 stop, this is the correct numbering:

f/1.0, f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11

Only in full stops does the amount of light gets halved.

f/1.0 -> f/1.2 is 2/3rd of a stop
f/1.4 -> f/1.8 is 2/3rd of a stop
f/1.8 -> f/2.8 is 4/3rd of a stop

Edit for tehcnical detail:

F/stop actually refers to the ratio of the focal length to the diameter of the aperture. So the diameter of the aperture on a 50mm lens is different from the aperture of a 200mm lens when both are at F/4.

To get even more technical, the aperture diameter is a measurement that takes place right behind the front element of the lens. Example: A 400mm lens at f/2.8 should have a diameter of ~143mm. The lens mount is (very) roughly 50mm. Since the aperture blades are placed at the rear of the lens, the aperture hole can be made smaller. But the front element has to be at least the 143mm. This is why the fast super telephotos are so humongous.

 

[Abstract]

This is wrong. In steps of 1 stop, this is the correct numbering:

f/1.0, f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11

Only in full stops does the amount of light gets halved.

f/1.0 -> f/1.2 is 2/3rd of a stop
f/1.4 -> f/1.8 is 2/3rd of a stop
f/1.8 -> f/2.8 is 4/3rd of a stop

Yeah, last night I was thinking about that post for some reason and I knew I butchered it, especially the f/1.4 to f/1.8 part being 1 stop. I practically woke up in my sleep thinking, "Wait a sec.....that's not right. f/2 is a stop, not f/1.8. My apologies.

Yes, f/1, f/1.4, f/2.

 

[greenmac]

I think if you like the canon shop around and see if you can find a deal on the 400D. Here in Adelaide I can get the 400D cheaper than the superceded 350D. (department store sale) I havent seen the 350D But I have seen the 400D, and I own a D50. I like the focus points on the 400D (9 points vs 5 on the D50) But I also like the LED screen on the D50 vs the settings being showed on the LCD on the 400D. It's these sorts of things that you need to decide what u feel more comfortable using.
My only other suggestion is if you bought the D50, maybe consider the AF-S DX 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G lens over the standard 18-55 kit lens.

 

[wisredz]

I say go with the D50 coupled with the kit lens. Nikon produces really good bodies and even better glasses. Have had no experience with canon but those are great cameras as well. Get the one that feels natural to you and consider the lens selection of each brand before buying. They both have great lenses actually

Anyway, if you can get the 50mm 1.8, that is a great lens for the money. But other that that, I don't think it is advisable to spend small amounts of money in glass. If you invest money in a lens, than get the best lens suited to your needs. £150 lens won't do you much good over the 18-55 kit lens. Put aside some cash in time and than get a really good lens.