Filed under: Accessories, Peripherals, Odds and ends
Mac Digital Camera Update
Thanks to everyone who weighed in with their recommendations for a good DSLR camera.I haven't purchased yet, but I have made my decision. Once I started looking carefully at the replies in the comments to my previous post on this topic and then going to informative sites like Digital Photography Review and Steve's Digicams, the playing field of choices quickly narrowed down to two good cameras that fit within my budget: the Canon Digital Rebel XT (350D) and the Nikon D70. Several of you mentioned that I shouldn't obsess over the megapixels, as everything over 5 would be really good, so I actually was looking at both the 8 megapixel Canon 350D, and the original Digital Rebel 300D, thinking I could get the 300D for less and invest in a good macro lens.
Unfortunately, while all the web resources are extremely helpful at narrowing down the purchase decision to two strong contenders within my budget range, they are extremely unhelpful at helping one decide between more or less equal quality cameras. If anyone from these sites happens to read this, I think it would be helpful if you had some quick chart on these cameras, ranking the top 3 you recommend for different types of photographic situations: Top 3 studio DSLRs, Top 3 Macro DSLRs, Top 3 Sports cameras, etc.
Continue reading after the jump to see which I chose and why.
Ultimately, the internet fails us in these situations. It can get us 90% of the way there, but then non-internet steps have to be taken. So, on the better advice of the TUAW readers, I started hitting a few camera shops and getting my hands on the different models I was considering. I found immediately that my left-handed self felt much more comfortable with the weight and balance of the Nikon D70 in my hands than I did with the Canon Digital Rebels, which felt like they were missing a left side. Of course, for my purposes, the camera I chose would most likely be on a tripod 90% of the time, so not much need for hand balance.
My next concern became simply, which camera had better image-quality and better available macro lenses. For this, I started asking everyone in the camera shops and different people I know in photography. Some people said Canon was better, while others swore by the D70. I heard that the Nikon was better for macro work, but that they were really more or less equal if I were able to save money on the Canon to buy a much better macro lens than I could afford with the added expense of the Nikon.
Fortunately, I work in a University so I was able to get in touch with someone who teaches photography and knows a number of people in the industry. David's recommendation (Thanks, David!) made the final decision for me: "I, as well as most of my friends who are pros use the Nikon digital cameras. They just hold up and retain their value better. The only ones who use the Canon cameras are sports and fashion shooters who need the Canon lenses that can focus faster. Side by side, however, the Nikon lenses are sharper for studio-type shooting which it sounds like you'll mostly be doing, and the images from the Nikons are a little nicer." I won't be doing anything close to approximating sports and fashion shooting. Speed of focus is not of vital importance to me.
So, I am going to wait about a month till the D70s starts flooding the market and then try to grab a D70 on the cheap. Once I get it in my hands and tinker with it a bit, I'll post some about using it with my Mac if that interests any TUAW readers. Let me know in the comments. Now to find a good macro lens...
My next concern became simply, which camera had better image-quality and better available macro lenses. For this, I started asking everyone in the camera shops and different people I know in photography. Some people said Canon was better, while others swore by the D70. I heard that the Nikon was better for macro work, but that they were really more or less equal if I were able to save money on the Canon to buy a much better macro lens than I could afford with the added expense of the Nikon.
Fortunately, I work in a University so I was able to get in touch with someone who teaches photography and knows a number of people in the industry. David's recommendation (Thanks, David!) made the final decision for me: "I, as well as most of my friends who are pros use the Nikon digital cameras. They just hold up and retain their value better. The only ones who use the Canon cameras are sports and fashion shooters who need the Canon lenses that can focus faster. Side by side, however, the Nikon lenses are sharper for studio-type shooting which it sounds like you'll mostly be doing, and the images from the Nikons are a little nicer." I won't be doing anything close to approximating sports and fashion shooting. Speed of focus is not of vital importance to me.
So, I am going to wait about a month till the D70s starts flooding the market and then try to grab a D70 on the cheap. Once I get it in my hands and tinker with it a bit, I'll post some about using it with my Mac if that interests any TUAW readers. Let me know in the comments. Now to find a good macro lens...
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Mitch Wiebell said 11:12AM on 12-09-2005
I am the director of photography for a very large catalog company. I have used all kinds of equipment over the years...all formats, different manufacturers, film, digital etc. I have learned that nearly every piece of equipment is better than the user. This means use a tripod for sharp images, understand exposure, lighting, contrast and color. Learn your software or film. Make sure whatever you buy will physically endure the way you shoot. Don't spend more time thinking about what to buy than you would shooting. The more you shoot the better you will be no matter which camera is in your hands.
Reply
Blair Robinson said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
I've always viewed the Nikons as a little bit more money for a little bit nicer camera, It really just depends on how much you want to spend. Luckily for me there isn't a huge diffrence between the cameras, so I could pick up the 300D (I allready had Canon glass). BTW when Dell has all of its coupon sales, the 300D is under 600 bucks with the kit lens.
Reply
Piers Morgan said 9:25AM on 8-21-2005
WooHoo! I am in roughly the same spot, deciding between those two cameras. This article has helped me make a decision. I'm not a photographer, but I do value speed of focus, which I didn't know Canon had the advantage. If the two models are really that close, then I'm more likely to go with the Canon so I can afford a nice external flash. But I agree, the best way to decide is to play with both of them and talk to professionals who aren't salesmen.
Reply
Photo Tim said 3:06PM on 8-18-2005
You are basing your decision on this?
I, as well as most of my friends who are pros use the Nikon digital cameras. They just hold up and retain their value better. The only ones who use the Canon cameras are sports and fashion shooters who need the Canon lenses that can focus faster.
Look at this statement. His friends are pros, yet the he differs between sports/fashion and them. What type of "pros" are these? Are they doing product shots? Becuase I can't think of how else they are getting paid to support their "pro" status.
That being said, and as a former Nikon and Kodak Pro camera user, all I can say is you're making a mistake. True, Nikon lenses are wonderful. However, a Canon 28-70L or the newer 24-80L is as good or better than anything Nikon has ever made. Nikon is a small company that simply does not have the engineering resources to keep up. You might notice Kodak is now supporting Canon lenses in it's pro line. Why is that? Because so many actualy "pro" photographers are moving away from Nikon to Canon.
It depends on your uses. A Canon Digital Rebel is a fine camera for 90% of what most people need a digital SLR for. For the price it can't be beat.
Reply
Michael Katz said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
Your doing exactly what I plan to do with the camera, wait for the D70S to saturate, then pick up the D70 for cheaper, I wanna know where you get it from and around what price so I can know what to expect to spend.
Reply
Adam said 5:36PM on 6-22-2005
If you ask 100 photographers and 100 salesmen, you'll likely get a 50/50 split in opinions between Nikon and Canon. Camera review sites don't recommend one camera over another primarily because the things are so damn close in build and image quality. I'd suggest going to a store and trying out a few cameras. Which controls feel more natural to you, which menus make more sense, etc... Then buy something. Don't fret, don't worry, buy it and enjoy it. 95% of photography is the photographer, not the equipment.
Reply
kg said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
Nice blog entry! I agree that the digi photo sites do not put the differences in results into terms an ameteur can necessarily translate into usable information for deciding on a purchase.
I shoot with a D70 and love it. Ive also shot my friends 20D and loved it. Its nice that you had the resources (David, etc) available to you to summarize the market segments that each brand tends to focus on. Hes absolutely right, although his comments about images from Nikon being sharper may stir the pot a little.
Im also a macro shooter and havent picked up a macro lens for my D70 yet (did all my macro work in 35mm). A couple of really good resources for macro lenses are Ron Reznick and Ken Rockwell. I know there are more I'm forgetting. Also, I haven't read them yet, but the highly recommended John Shaw books, Nature Photography Field Guide, and John Shaw's Closeups in Nature are supposed to be excellent reads.
For deciding which memory card to buy, Rob Galbraith's site is fantastic. He compares memory card speeds on a per camera basis. The link above is for the D70 (duh).
Thom Hogan's site has some good lens reviews as well, but his how-tos on digital black and white, digital infrared, and sharpening in Photoshop are wonderful resources.
A couple last resources, Fred Miranda's forums are usually some of the better forums around for quality feedback. And, Pixel Critic is supposed to be a good place to get quality feedback on your photos.
Reply
C.K. Sample, III said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
Photo Tim,
His comments aren't the sole basis of my decision, but my gut impulse when I handled the two cameras was that the Nikon was nicer for me. His advice clarified for me the disparate advice I was receiving from different pro-photogs I spoke with. Everyone was saying that the cameras were more or less equal, but the professionals who did more action shots were saying Canon wins and the studio people were saying that all the images are equal but there was just something slightly better about the Nikon.
Reply
teece said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
I just bought a D70s. It is great, and works nicely with my multi-thousand dollar investment in lenses. It works fine with the Mac, but iPhoto can read the NEF files that the D70s generates. For that, I have to use the dog-slow Nikon tools provided with the camera or dcraw. The same goes for Photoshop.
The reason the photo review sites only get you in the ball park is simple: once you're in the arena the cameras are not any different, and the only one that can choose among them is you.
Canon vs. Nikon is just like vi vs. emacs, Mac vs. Windows, Republicans vs. Democrats. In other words, it's not about rationality, it's about justifying a heavy personal investment.
You'll like your D70. You would've loved a Canon.
Reply
carpeicthus said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
So many people are waiting for the d70s to saturate to pick up a d70 (including me) that I doubt you're going to see tremendous savings.
Reply
Daniel Madsen said 5:05PM on 11-19-2005
to Photo Tim:
Do you really think that sports and fashion are the only kinds of pro photography? Come on.. Have you ever heard of t, Toyo, Sinar? Are these brands less "pro" because they are not suited for sports/fashion? Aren't advertising photographers pros? I think should think better before you write this things.
I agree with something though.. I am a nikon user, but if I was starting now I'd go to Canon just because it is a bigger company and is clearly investing more in research than any other.
Reply
Chris K said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
A few thoughts:
1) Most pros and high-end amateurs are jumping ship from Nikon to Canon. This is mostly due to Canon's telephotos (Nikon offers VR in very few lenses compared to Canon's IS) and the perception that Canon is ahead in body design. In truth Canon might have a bit of an edge with the 1Ds Mk2 (unless you count Kodak's full frame DSLR, which many don't due to its poor performance) and the 1D Mk2, but the advantage is not huge (unless you NEED to shoot full frame, in which case Canon is the best choice), and won't affect anyone looking at the low end of the segment, so the argument is a non starter for you.
2) Nikon hardware really doesn't maintain its value any better than Canon. Check out used lens prices for Canon on eBay; they're almost the same as new prices, and in some cases MORE expensive. The only lenses that usually drop significantly after purchase are third party lenses like Tamron and Sigma.
3) Nikon and Canon are VERY, VERY close in all areas. I challenge you to take normal, everyday shots with both systems and find an area where one is even slightly deficient. You likely wouldn't even be able to tell the difference, unless you look at high ISO shots, where you might be able to tell the difference between noise grain patterns.
3) Nikon lenses aren't any sharper than Canon. There are certainly some lenses that are sharper than others from any maker, but Canon makes lenses every bit as good as Nikon. Canon has the crown right now in overall lens design in most peoples eyes because they put IS in more lenses than Nikon, and USM motors in more lenses than Nikon. But if you aren't in the market for a 300mm or longer prime lens (trust me, you're not), that doesn't matter so much to you, because the two are much closer when you get to more "normal" lenses. You'll get more lenses with IS from Canon, and compatibility with old manual focus lenses with Nikon.
4) Glad to hear you went and tried both cameras out. I know many people prefer Nikon ergonomics, and you are wise to have chosen based on how the camera feels in your hand. In the end usability is key. Both cameras can take the shots you want, so choose the one that makes you happier to use.
5) I'm a Canon guy, so I don't know anything about Nikkor macro lenses, but consider the Tamron 90/2.8 macro when you go shopping. It rivals the first-party macro lenses in sharpness, and has a trick AF clutch. It's also about $100 cheaper than the Nikkor 105/2.8. You can save even more by getting the Sigma 105/2.8, but its AF is not as good, which might irritate you if you use the lens in non-macro situations.
6) On a more general note, don't ignore ANY of the third-party lenses. There are some great lenses out there from Sigma and Tamron. Some of the gems are the Sigma 20/1.8, 18-125, 18-200, 18-50/2.8, 70-300APO, 70-200/2.8, 100-300/4, 120-300/2.8, and 50-500, and the Tamron 90/2.8, 180/3.5, 28-75/2.8, and 18-200. They're all good lenses, and some have no direct competitor from Nikon.
7) Visit the dpreview.com forums for info. There are a ton of knowledgable and helpful people there. There's a lot of noise on the forum, especially from brand loyalists, but it's pretty easy to filter out.
8) Buy both of Bryan Peterson's books: Understanding Exposure and Learning to See Creatively. Both are excellent, and even if you know the basics they are excellent reads, if only for the pictures alone.
9) How do you feel about Nikon's white balance scandal? It is very close to DRM, you know....
Have fun with your new camera!
Reply
teece said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
Chris K said ***"How do you feel about Nikon's white balance scandal? It is very >>close to DRM, you know...."***
You weren't asking me, but I'll chime in anyway.
I don't like it one bit, and I hope Nikon comes around and changes their stance.
At the same time, it's not unique, damn near every camera maker obfuscates their raw format in some way, including Canon. Read what the maker of dcraw has written, as he is probably the most knowledgeable person out their right now when it comes to camera raw.
This whole tempest in a teapot is really about Adobe fighting with Nikon, not the particular encryption on the newer NEF files. The encryption was trivial and has been broken. Considering that Adobe uses dcraw, and that they have supported previously encrypted file formats before, I think there is something more here than worries about a closed format.
But it is long since past time for camera makes to quit screwing around, and make their raw format's 100% transparent, and completely open. If they don't, they are consigning millions of digital photos to the dustbin of obfuscation. As far as I know, not a single camera maker does that, so it is really a minor issue at best when making a camera choice. It really only matters at all if you choose Linux, which isn't germane here.
Reply
Phil said 1:49PM on 12-02-2005
I'm not going to go into an indepth technical discussion on why one is better than the other, I have no competency in this area, but I will say this. I have used both the Rebel XT and the D70. I suspect that you will most likely be doing "every day" photography. Meaning, you will take this camera on vacation, you will carry it around on a family outing, you may walk around your neighbourhood and capture scenes you find interesting. Perhaps you may even venture into some semi-pro work. I did both with those two models during a two-week period recently to take advantage of the local retailer's return policy. I returned the D70 for several reasons.
1. The Rebel XT takes much better high ISO (low light) shots than the Nikon. This is important as most of "every-day" photography is taken either indoors or outdoors with poor lighting. Think vacations, churches, other buildings or situations were you can't or don't want to use the flash. The Rebel XT has a very useable ISO 1600 mode, the Nikon does not.
2. The Canon has an intuitive, well thoughout menu system. Sure, once you get used to the Nikon, its ok, but still clunky. Besides, using a MAC made me take certain user interface requirements for granted. Why should I use a clunky UI?
3. The Canon is fast. I mean, turn on and take a picture immediately fast. All the settings are readily accessible and you will learn to adjust most of the critical ones without taking your eyes off the viewfinder.
4. I can get the Canon with the amazing 18-75 IS USM lens. This lens enables me to take night time shots without the use of a tripod. I have yet to take a blurry shot at night without using the flash. It's great range means that it is the only lens I will ever need to use.
The bottom line is this. Consider useabilty and picture quality. The Canon, in l33t speak, OWNZ the Nikon in these categories. Most of the people that you solicited for opinions are biased with expensive investment in lenses and accessories that you are not burdened with. Take advantage of the fact that you are starting fresh and don't get locked in to an inferior system.
Finally, I strongly suggest that you do the same thing I did. Not only look at both units, but take both home and return the one you don't like. I can bet it will be the Nikon. This is an expensive investment and you don't buy a car without test driving it and its competitors first.
Reply
teece said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
Phil said: "The Rebel XT has a very useable ISO 1600 mode, the Nikon does not."
This is flat-out wrong, unless there have been vast improvements in the D70s. I have several extremely useful shots taken at 1600 ISO with the D70s, and I would bet none except the trained eye would even realize they were at high ISO. The D70s is most certainly not a noisy camera, and from what I understand the D70 is the same in that regard.
I realize that you are saying that you have done actual experimentation, and the XT may have really good noise-less performance. But you vastly overstate the case.
I have a lot of money invested in lenses, so there is no choice about brand for me: I'm buying Nikon. I don't know which model I would buy today, if I had no investment. I know what I would have bought a couple years ago: a Canon, for the simple fact that they were filling the niche I wanted (pro-am) and Nikon wasn't. That advantage to Canon is gone today, so who knows. (That advantage is also where a lot of the talk about Canon being ahead comes from, too, to a large degree).
But the best advice is, don't tell people what camera to buy, it's fruitless. Moreover, don't ask someone what camera to buy, as they can only answer for themselves, not you. You have to actually use that thing between your ears and decide for yourself ;-p
What counts at the end of the day is the *pictures* not the nameplate on the tool you use.
Reply
adam said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
Something else to remember, if they haven't changed it already, is that nikon's auto-focus motor is housed in the camera and canons in the lens. It does reduce AF capapbility with some older canon lenses, but if your AF goes out with nikon, you're stuck using manual till you can get new camera, while with canon you can simply pop a similar lens on and get back to work.
Reply
chet said 7:03AM on 7-24-2005
The Nikon d70 is better than the 300d. The Rebel XT is about the same level. I have a Nikon and really think they are amazing cameras. The Nikon's menus and buttons are laid out in a better manner too.
Reply
John Stone said 3:42PM on 8-17-2005
If you go to http://www.dpreview.com/ you can do a side by side comparaswon of the cameras you are interested in and also their reviews of individual cameras compare them against their rivals.
Reply
Chris K said 4:19PM on 6-16-2005
I'm a Canon 350D (formerly 300D) user, so keep that in mind, but:
1) The 350D DOES have very good noise characteristics. Better than the 300D, certainly. It's not so much the AMOUNT of noise (which is only slightly reduced) but the LOOK of the noise. The grain is much finer, like film grain, whereas the 300D had much more coarse and blotchy grain, which looked very ugly in dark areas of each shot. One negative with the 350D is that images look a little softer at ISO1600 than ISO800, but that's much easier to fix with USM than the noise in the 300D is. I hesitated to use ISO1600 unless I really needed it on my 300D. With my 350D I flip to ISO1600 without thinking.
2) Being that the concensus between the 300D and D70 was that they had roughly the same noise levels, and the 350D is better than the 300D, I'd give the edge to Canon AT THE MOMENT for high ISO noise. And that's not even considering the inability of the D70 to set ISO100, which can be a problem on bright days.
3) Sorry, I was being facetious about the white balance thing. My sarcasm doesn't come across too well. :)
4) Nikon also has "IS" lenses, in the 24-120VR, 200/2VR (wow!), 70-200/2.8VR, 80-400VR, and 200-400VR. Nikon is catching up, finally, although they still need a match for the 17-85IS, 28-300IS, 75-300IS, and they need to retrofit their big primes with IS. But IS is not such a huge Canon advantage as it was in the past.
5) The Nikon D70 is fast, too. Instant-on, and less shutter lag than the 350D. Both are past the point of where it really matters how fast... kinda like a 210MPH Ferrari versus a 202MPH Porsche.
6) Nikon has arguably a better UI, as it has two mode dials, where the Canon has one. The software UI is arguable. I own a 350D, and I'm neutral on it. It takes too much effort to toggle MLU, set custom WB, and adjust FEC.
In the end, this is a holy war topic. Feature-wise and system-wise I believe Canon is the better choice these days, but the two are so close that it only matters if you're splitting hairs. Both systems can take better pictures than any of us are capable of, and people who say one system is incapable have an agenda. Just look at what people did with old MF SLRs, rangefinders, and box cameras. The hardware is much less important than the photographer and the subject.
Reply
Chad V said 1:06AM on 6-19-2005
The only way to decide is to get into the store and try them out for yourself. I did just that. I was VERY close to buying the Digital Rebel XT online. Glad I didn't. Went and held the camera at the local camera shot and used it.
What a really small, cheap feeling camera. Just mypersonal opinion. Half of my hand hung off the bottom of the grip. Many responses to this is "just go and get the battery grip". Yeah right. I'm going to spend another $150 bucks to get the camera to fit in my hand...no thanks. If you squeeze that camera a bit too hard next to the battery or input doors, and the camera squeaks. Not what I'd call solid engineering.
The lens that comes with the Digital Rebel XT is a complete joke compared to what you get with the Nikon. The cheap, plastic ringed 18-55mm lense with the Canon can be had for less than $100 bucks retail. Sad thing is, they include this doorstop of a lense with the $1400 20D. How sad for a first impression of that expensive of a camera. The kit 18-70mm lense for the Nikon is $500 bucks retail at Ritz camera. Now that's a lense. When it gets down to it, the glass decides the picture more than anything.
So when you are comparing prices, the Rebel XT and D70 are neck and neck with kit prices, but not really as you have to go and get another lense for the Canon anyway, which makes it not so much of a great buy after all.
Try em out. if you like a camera built for a woman's hand, then the Digital Rebel XT should be perfect for you.
Reply