How do these two outfits compare?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Chris Stolpe - 07 Jul 2005 22:30 GMT

I'm looking at putting together a completly new outfit for myself from
either Nikon or Canon. Based on B&H prices and current rebates it looks like
I would save $470 with Nikon.

Kit 1 Nikon Kit 2 Canon

D70 w/18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 G-AFS ED-IF Rebel XT w/17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS
70-200mm f/2.8 VR 70-200mm f2.8 IS
60mm f/2.8 micro (1:1) 100mm f/2.8 macro
(1:1)
1.4x Teleconverter 1.4x
Teleconverter
SB800 Flash 580EX Flash

I don't like the range or construction of the Canon kit lens which is why I
subsituted the 17-85 IS ($500 more than the kit). The only plus on the Rebel
XT I can think of is the 8mp. I do have several batteries from my P&S that
should fit as well. The nikon has slightly faster ED glass. It sync's at
1/500th sec and can be a commander to the SB800. The Canon 17-85 has IS but
overlaps the other zoom. I do have hand tremmors so the IS would probably be
good. The Nikon 60mm micro is a less expensive 1:1 macro lens and could be
used as a 90mm portrait lens although I believe the Canon would give me
twice the working range. But this will be my first real macro lens and the
novelty may wear off so having a second use would be good. I don't think
there are any significant differences between the 70-200 or the 1.4x. The
Canon flash has a higher guide number and sends white balance info to
camera. Other than that is there any big differences I've missed?

TIA
Chris

Reply to this Message

frederick - 08 Jul 2005 00:03 GMT

> I'm looking at putting together a completly new outfit for myself from
> either Nikon or Canon. Based on B&H prices and current rebates it looks like
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
> TIA
> Chris

Forgetting the pixels, which won't make much difference:
You don't get spot metering with the 350d.
You don't get mirror lock-up with the d70.
Both are IMO important features for macro. Both cameras lack something
that I would like in one camera.
The 60mm micro probably won't be much good for portrait - the 18-70 is
probably better.

Reply to this Message

frederick - 08 Jul 2005 00:09 GMT

"I do have hand tremmors so the IS would probably be good"

Don't buy either the Nikon or Canon.
Get a KM 7d. The camera body is more expensive, but it has in-camera
IS, which gives you IS with all the lenses you buy. Once you have
bought two lenses you are winning on price.

Reply to this Message

Tandaina - 08 Jul 2005 14:57 GMT

Agree 100% on the KM 7D recommendation. I don't have steady hands
either and the AS body has saved more shots than I can count. I can
hand hold a 400mm lens with AS on, something I can't do with any other
camera body.

I also perfer the feel of the camera. Yes its a bit heavy (I like
that, some don't) but the controls are accessible without a menu or
display check. It fits my hands well and the image quality is superb.
I compared a lot of cameras before I bought mine and it came down to
this:

Canon, Nikon and Minolta 6 - 8 MP bodies will all take pictures as good
as my semi-pro film body. Period. The 6 to 8 MP didn't make enough
difference to be visible printed at anything short of 11x14. So I
chose on build, controls, feel and features. The 7D had the features I
needed, the build I loved, and the feel of a real photo tool.

Hope that helps!
Tandaina

Reply to this Message

Mauerson - 08 Jul 2005 13:37 GMT

> I'm looking at putting together a completly new outfit for myself from
> either Nikon or Canon. Based on B&H prices and current rebates it looks
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> D70 w/18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 G-AFS ED-IF Rebel XT w/17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS
> 70-200mm f/2.8 VR 70-200mm f2.8 IS

--Snipped here for brevity--

Both are excellent cameras. Go play with them at a photo store, and buy the
one that feels best to you. Either way, you really can't go wrong.

Reply to this Message

Rox-off - 14 Jul 2005 14:10 GMT

> I'm looking at putting together a completly new outfit for myself from
> either Nikon or Canon. Based on B&H prices and current rebates it looks
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
> TIA
> Chris

The Nikon outfit is considerably better than the Canon one. With the
savings you would also be able to buy a very good tripod to counteract
your tremors (or a few cases of whiskey).

The D70 is the most capable camera for the price you are likely to find.
There is very little that it can't do, unlike the Rebel, which is missing
some rather important features.

Reply to this Message

Richard Stark - 15 Jul 2005 21:12 GMT

One big difference is the service AFTER the sale. You may pay more for the
Canon, but if it needs repaired the Canon service is MUCH better and 2 to 4
weeks faster than Nikon.
Additionally you will get less noise from a Canon than Nikon. Almost
everyone I know with Nikon's is switching to Canon's due to noise and
service issues.

js

> I'm looking at putting together a completly new outfit for myself from
> either Nikon or Canon. Based on B&H prices and current rebates it looks
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
> TIA
> Chris

Reply to this Message

Tandaina - 15 Jul 2005 23:19 GMT

I had a very bad experience with Canon service actually. I bought a
Canon film body back in around 97. Used it very lightly (honestly was
not really impressed). Literally a week out of the 1 year warantee the
thing died. I sent it in for Canon service and they quoted me more to
fix it than I'd paid for it in the first place. I told them to forget
it and went back to my Minolta SRT 101.

Not to say everyone will have bad service from Canon but I've had much
better experience with Minolta than Canon (never owned a Nikon) and I
will never go back to Canon for any reason.

(Just my experience, I can't say this is common or how most people
experience Canon)

Tandaina

Reply to this Message