Cnet Reviews Nikon D80 and Canon DR XTi

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by measekite, Sep 27, 2006.

  1. measekite

    measekite Guest

    I just completed reading reviews of the Nikon D80 and Canon XTi in
    Cnet. The conclusion was that if you are building a system of scratch
    the D80 is a better choice.

    In many ways I do agree. However at first glance Nikon lenses
    (excluding Canon L series) appear to be more expensive. But the big
    thing (at least I think it is big) is the Dust Removal System that Nikon
    did not include.

    If the Canon Dust system works as advertised and one (while taking care)
    changes their lenses at least 2 to 3 times on an outing; I would like to
    know just how serious this dust issue is. Is it enough of a problem to
    favor Canon for this feature or is a composition grid and a spot meter
    to favor the Nikon.

    From what I have read it is extremely difficult to clean the sensor and
    the factory wants over $100 to do the job. And many times it does not
    come back perfect.

    Basically, even though most people find it difficult to see much
    difference between the two as far as results, I have read that Nikon has
    better exposures in difficult lighting situations and has more appealing
    color.

    Comments Welcome!
    measekite, Sep 27, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. measekite

    tomm42 Guest

    measekite wrote:
    > I just completed reading reviews of the Nikon D80 and Canon XTi in
    > Cnet. The conclusion was that if you are building a system of scratch
    > the D80 is a better choice.
    >
    > In many ways I do agree. However at first glance Nikon lenses
    > (excluding Canon L series) appear to be more expensive. But the big
    > thing (at least I think it is big) is the Dust Removal System that Nikon
    > did not include.
    >
    > If the Canon Dust system works as advertised and one (while taking care)
    > changes their lenses at least 2 to 3 times on an outing; I would like to
    > know just how serious this dust issue is. Is it enough of a problem to
    > favor Canon for this feature or is a composition grid and a spot meter
    > to favor the Nikon.
    >
    > From what I have read it is extremely difficult to clean the sensor and
    > the factory wants over $100 to do the job. And many times it does not
    > come back perfect.
    >
    > Basically, even though most people find it difficult to see much
    > difference between the two as far as results, I have read that Nikon has
    > better exposures in difficult lighting situations and has more appealing
    > color.
    >
    > Comments Welcome!


    Dust isn't really a big problem, I have had a Nikon D200 for 8 months
    and haven't had to go near the sensor (actually the glass sealing the
    sensor). I switch lenses often as I have mostly primes. I have a 4 year
    old Fuji S1 in my office and it hasn't needed a sensor cleaning either,
    we photograph eyes so there is a lot of white in the picture. Friends
    who have cleaned their sensors have used a Giotto Rocket Blower or some
    obscenely expensive sensor pads. They look at the sensor cleaning as a
    chore and not a difficult one.
    Don't let rumors of sensor cleaning keep you from getting a DSLR. It is
    not as big a deal as some would have you think. Have you ever had a
    strait scatch accross your film, that is from dust on the pressure
    plate.

    Tom
    tomm42, Sep 27, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. measekite

    George K Guest

    Nikon provides a software solution to removing dust from Nikon RAW,
    NEF, files and there are other photo editing programs that can remove
    dust from other formats including Jpegs.

    Even Point and Shoot cameras can get dust on their sensors but you can
    not remove it.

    measekite wrote:
    > I just completed reading reviews of the Nikon D80 and Canon XTi in
    > Cnet. The conclusion was that if you are building a system of scratch
    > the D80 is a better choice.
    >
    > In many ways I do agree. However at first glance Nikon lenses
    > (excluding Canon L series) appear to be more expensive. But the big
    > thing (at least I think it is big) is the Dust Removal System that Nikon
    > did not include.
    >
    > If the Canon Dust system works as advertised and one (while taking care)
    > changes their lenses at least 2 to 3 times on an outing; I would like to
    > know just how serious this dust issue is. Is it enough of a problem to
    > favor Canon for this feature or is a composition grid and a spot meter
    > to favor the Nikon.
    >
    > From what I have read it is extremely difficult to clean the sensor and
    > the factory wants over $100 to do the job. And many times it does not
    > come back perfect.
    >
    > Basically, even though most people find it difficult to see much
    > difference between the two as far as results, I have read that Nikon has
    > better exposures in difficult lighting situations and has more appealing
    > color.
    >
    > Comments Welcome!
    George K, Sep 27, 2006
    #3
  4. measekite

    Guest

    measekite wrote:
    > I just completed reading reviews of the Nikon D80 and Canon XTi in
    > Cnet. The conclusion was that if you are building a system of scratch
    > the D80 is a better choice.
    >



    The people at dpreview forums are having fun with this particular
    review, The CNN reviewer claims that Canon had to trim back the XTi
    (400d) sensitivity a full stop from ISO 3200 to ISO 1600 because the
    new sensor was noisier than the previous sensor. The question is:
    Since when did the Digital Rebel ever have 3200 ISO?

    A quote from the review lamenting the XTi's new sensor: "the XTi's
    measured and visible image noise was significantly worse than that of
    the CCD-based Nikon D80 for any given ISO speed." Again, it has been
    shown conclusively by several reputable websites (with 100% crops) that
    the XTi had far, FAR more details than the D80 on high ISO. The reason
    being that the D80 uses aggressive software noise reduction (hiss!
    boo!) at high ISO --- blurring out the noise and the details at the
    same time. The effects of the D80's noise reduction is shown
    conclusively on various charts and graphs in the otherwise-glowing D80
    review at dpreview.

    Final quote complaining about the XTi's lack of spot metering: "Simply
    metering on the subject's face should have solved this shot's exposure
    problem, but the partial metering didn't work. A spot meter probably
    would have been able to handle it. Instead, I had to boost the exposure
    value of the entire scene by jumping to ISO 400."

    Honestly, reading that last quote, you can tell the reviewer was not
    only an amateur, but was a clueless one at that. What kind of moron
    tries to use ISO settings in lieu of proper metering? What do ISO
    settings have to do with proper metering at all? It's a disgrace the
    way CNN lets unqualified people do reviews these days.
    , Sep 27, 2006
    #4
  5. measekite

    Bill Crocker Guest

    "measekite" <> wrote in message
    news:2_xSg.16831$...
    >

    [clipped]
    > In many ways I do agree. However at first glance Nikon lenses (excluding
    > Canon L series) appear to be more expensive.

    [clipped]
    > Comments Welcome!


    I think Canon's whole lens thing is a marketing ploy. To how many people do
    they sell a set of lenses twice? Most consumers, and hobbyist will
    initially go for the non "L" glass, as it is less expensive, but a large
    percentage upgrade to "L" glass soon after. Why sell a line of lenses that
    don't live up to the capability of the manufacture, and their cameras? My
    recommendation, if you're going to buy Canon quality, do it across the
    board.

    Nikon does it right the first time!

    Bill Crocker
    Bill Crocker, Sep 27, 2006
    #5
  6. measekite

    measekite Guest

    tomm42 wrote:

    >measekite wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I just completed reading reviews of the Nikon D80 and Canon XTi in
    >>Cnet. The conclusion was that if you are building a system of scratch
    >>the D80 is a better choice.
    >>
    >>In many ways I do agree. However at first glance Nikon lenses
    >>(excluding Canon L series) appear to be more expensive. But the big
    >>thing (at least I think it is big) is the Dust Removal System that Nikon
    >>did not include.
    >>
    >>If the Canon Dust system works as advertised and one (while taking care)
    >>changes their lenses at least 2 to 3 times on an outing; I would like to
    >>know just how serious this dust issue is. Is it enough of a problem to
    >>favor Canon for this feature or is a composition grid and a spot meter
    >>to favor the Nikon.
    >>
    >> From what I have read it is extremely difficult to clean the sensor and
    >>the factory wants over $100 to do the job. And many times it does not
    >>come back perfect.
    >>
    >>Basically, even though most people find it difficult to see much
    >>difference between the two as far as results, I have read that Nikon has
    >>better exposures in difficult lighting situations and has more appealing
    >>color.
    >>
    >>Comments Welcome!
    >>
    >>

    >
    >Dust isn't really a big problem, I have had a Nikon D200 for 8 months
    >and haven't had to go near the sensor (actually the glass sealing the
    >sensor). I switch lenses often as I have mostly primes. I have a 4 year
    >old Fuji S1 in my office and it hasn't needed a sensor cleaning either,
    >we photograph eyes so there is a lot of white in the picture. Friends
    >who have cleaned their sensors have used a Giotto Rocket Blower or some
    >obscenely expensive sensor pads. They look at the sensor cleaning as a
    >chore and not a difficult one.
    >Don't let rumors of sensor cleaning keep you from getting a DSLR. It is
    >not as big a deal as some would have you think. Have you ever had a
    >strait scatch accross your film, that is from dust on the pressure
    >plate.
    >
    >Tom
    >
    >


    I saw the Canon XTi today and other than a nice menu system I was not
    impressed with the look and feel in my hands. I have not seen the D80 yet.

    Once thing is certain I found the D70 having a much better balance and
    feel than the Canon DR XT and expect the D80 to be better than the
    XTi.. Like I said, other than the Dust Removal system it apperars that
    the Nikon D80 had more favorable reviews.

    The other thing is the cost of the lenses when compared to Canon
    (excluding the expensive Canon L: series. I only want to consider VR vs
    IS lens comparisons.

    One last thing. Currently Nikon does not make a full frame sensor
    camera but I expect them to. People have said that one should not buy
    the fine, smaller, lighter, and better balanced DX lenses because you
    will not be able to upgrade your system to full frame. They tell me to
    go with the non DX lenses. The same decision applies to the D200 as
    well. What do you think?
    measekite, Sep 28, 2006
    #6
  7. measekite

    measekite Guest

    George K wrote:

    >Nikon provides a software solution to removing dust from Nikon RAW,
    >NEF, files and there are other photo editing programs that can remove
    >dust from other formats including Jpegs.
    >
    >

    I know PS can do it but you first have to scour the photo for it and you
    may miss some.

    >Even Point and Shoot cameras can get dust on their sensors but you can
    >not remove it.
    >
    >measekite wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I just completed reading reviews of the Nikon D80 and Canon XTi in
    >>Cnet. The conclusion was that if you are building a system of scratch
    >>the D80 is a better choice.
    >>
    >>In many ways I do agree. However at first glance Nikon lenses
    >>(excluding Canon L series) appear to be more expensive. But the big
    >>thing (at least I think it is big) is the Dust Removal System that Nikon
    >>did not include.
    >>
    >>If the Canon Dust system works as advertised and one (while taking care)
    >>changes their lenses at least 2 to 3 times on an outing; I would like to
    >>know just how serious this dust issue is. Is it enough of a problem to
    >>favor Canon for this feature or is a composition grid and a spot meter
    >>to favor the Nikon.
    >>
    >> From what I have read it is extremely difficult to clean the sensor and
    >>the factory wants over $100 to do the job. And many times it does not
    >>come back perfect.
    >>
    >>Basically, even though most people find it difficult to see much
    >>difference between the two as far as results, I have read that Nikon has
    >>better exposures in difficult lighting situations and has more appealing
    >>color.
    >>
    >>Comments Welcome!
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    >
    measekite, Sep 28, 2006
    #7
  8. measekite

    measekite Guest

    wrote:

    >measekite wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I just completed reading reviews of the Nikon D80 and Canon XTi in
    >>Cnet. The conclusion was that if you are building a system of scratch
    >>the D80 is a better choice.
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    >The people at dpreview forums are having fun with this particular
    >review, The CNN reviewer claims that Canon had to trim back the XTi
    >(400d) sensitivity a full stop from ISO 3200 to ISO 1600 because the
    >new sensor was noisier than the previous sensor. The question is:
    >Since when did the Digital Rebel ever have 3200 ISO?
    >
    >A quote from the review lamenting the XTi's new sensor: "the XTi's
    >measured and visible image noise was significantly worse than that of
    >the CCD-based Nikon D80 for any given ISO speed." Again, it has been
    >shown conclusively by several reputable websites (with 100% crops) that
    >the XTi had far, FAR more details than the D80 on high ISO.
    >


    Can you provide the links to these websites?


    > The reason
    >being that the D80 uses aggressive software noise reduction (hiss!
    >boo!) at high ISO --- blurring out the noise and the details at the
    >same time.
    >


    I thought there was a menu option to regulate this.

    And is it no true that if you shoot RAW then there is no processing of
    any kind?

    > The effects of the D80's noise reduction is shown
    >conclusively on various charts and graphs in the otherwise-glowing D80
    >review at dpreview.
    >
    >Final quote complaining about the XTi's lack of spot metering: "Simply
    >metering on the subject's face should have solved this shot's exposure
    >problem, but the partial metering didn't work. A spot meter probably
    >would have been able to handle it. Instead, I had to boost the exposure
    >value of the entire scene by jumping to ISO 400."
    >
    >Honestly, reading that last quote, you can tell the reviewer was not
    >only an amateur, but was a clueless one at that. What kind of moron
    >tries to use ISO settings in lieu of proper metering? What do ISO
    >settings have to do with proper metering at all? It's a disgrace the
    >way CNN lets unqualified people do reviews these days.
    >
    >


    AND WHICH SYSTEM DO YOU THINK IS BETTER AND WHY? Assuming you have no
    lenses and will build a system.
    measekite, Sep 28, 2006
    #8
  9. measekite

    Paul Rubin Guest

    measekite <> writes:
    > The other thing is the cost of the lenses when compared to Canon
    > (excluding the expensive Canon L: series. I only want to consider VR
    > vs IS lens comparisons.


    I don't think there's a big difference. Do you have specific examples?

    > One last thing. Currently Nikon does not make a full frame sensor
    > camera but I expect them to. People have said that one should not buy
    > the fine, smaller, lighter, and better balanced DX lenses because you
    > will not be able to upgrade your system to full frame. They tell me
    > to go with the non DX lenses. The same decision applies to the D200
    > as well. What do you think?


    I'm not sure which lenses you're considering. You said you weren't
    considering Canon L lenses, so you're presumably also not trying to
    decide between, say, the 17-55 DX and the 17-35 non-DX. That leaves
    longer lenses, for which you should go full frame; and the "kit" 18-70
    DX (etc.) lenses. The kit lenses go with the D200 quite nicely and
    are not that expensive, so you might as well get one. And if you're
    into wideangles, the 12-24 DX is probably indispensible, with no full
    frame substitute possible.

    I'd be resistant to the D200 given that the next price jump puts you
    in EOS-5D territory. The full frame sensor really is a big deal. I
    was hoping Nikon would announce something at Photokina (happening
    now), but no such luck.

    Right now you are somewhat out of luck for copy photography with
    Nikon. They have no flat-field macro lens shorter than 55mm, which on
    a DX is like 90mm on a full frame camera, so you end up with
    inconveniently large distance between the camera and the subject.
    Canon doesn't have a shorter lens either, but at least you can use a
    5D and get the same working distance you'd get with a film SLR.
    Paul Rubin, Sep 28, 2006
    #9
  10. measekite

    Paul Rubin Guest

    measekite <> writes:
    > AND WHICH SYSTEM DO YOU THINK IS BETTER AND WHY? Assuming you have no
    > lenses and will build a system.


    If there was a simple answer that worked for everyone, then there'd
    be no way for both brands to keep existing.

    It seems to me that Nikon has better ergonomics and UI than Canon.
    But Canon is somewhat ahead of Nikon in technology. Low-end Canons
    have more features per dollar than the comparable Nikons, and high end
    Canons (5D, 1DS) have no Nikon counterparts.

    If I were starting from scratch with $10,000, it would be a no
    brainer, I'd go with Canon because of the 5D. With a lesser budget,
    it's not so clear. I've been using Nikon for ages so I can't be
    really neutral, but if I were starting over, there's a pretty good
    chance that I'd switch to Canon based on my own shooting agendas and
    technology preferences. Those are likely to be different from your
    agendas and preferences. So you have to say more precisely what
    you're hoping to accomplish and so forth.

    You could possibly rent these cameras for a few days and see how you
    like them.
    Paul Rubin, Sep 28, 2006
    #10
  11. measekite

    Bill Guest

    "tomm42" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > measekite wrote:
    >> I just completed reading reviews of the Nikon D80 and Canon XTi in
    >> Cnet. The conclusion was that if you are building a system of
    >> scratch
    >> the D80 is a better choice.


    I agree with that, but not necessarily for the reasons they say. If I
    was buying a new system from scratch, I would choose the Nikon D80.
    But that's just what I prefer, while others will prefer Canon.

    My reasoning is based on a few things I prefer in the Nikon. The D80
    has a better viewfinder, better handling and ergonomic layout, and
    better flash system. So I'd get the Nikon.

    And I can say that even though I own and use a Canon Rebel XT. I also
    happen to use a Nikon D70s and D200 (when I get the chance) because a
    friend uses them and lets me borrow his camera and lenses, so I've had
    the opportunity to use both and compare.

    >> In many ways I do agree. However at first glance Nikon lenses
    >> (excluding Canon L series) appear to be more expensive. But the
    >> big
    >> thing (at least I think it is big) is the Dust Removal System that
    >> Nikon
    >> did not include.


    I think sensor cleaning is now the new big thing to hype. It was
    number of pixels, but since they all have 10mp sensors, it's now about
    dust removal.

    Sensor cleaning using vibration is just a gimmick, evidence has shown
    they don't really work as advertised (do a Google search). Sensor dust
    is being used as a scare tactic to promote sales of a product that
    doesn't really have a dust problem.

    Dust simply is not an issue in most situations, and I change lenses
    several times during a shooting session. If I was in the middle of the
    Serengetti with high winds blowing dust everywhere, I might be a bit
    more concerned.

    :)

    >> If the Canon Dust system works as advertised and one (while taking
    >> care)
    >> changes their lenses at least 2 to 3 times on an outing; I would
    >> like to
    >> know just how serious this dust issue is. Is it enough of a
    >> problem to
    >> favor Canon for this feature


    No.

    Ignore that feature and base your decision on features that work and
    are truly helpful in assisting the photographer get better photos.

    > or is a composition grid and a spot meter
    >> to favor the Nikon.


    Those are two features that are nice to have, but may not be essential
    depending on your personal needs. Others may not care about those
    features, while some require them for their shooting style.

    >> From what I have read it is extremely difficult to clean the
    >> sensor and
    >> the factory wants over $100 to do the job. And many times it does
    >> not
    >> come back perfect.


    I don't know what you've been reading, but that's not exactly
    accurate.

    The manufacturers state they don't want users to clean their sensors
    simply to avoid warranty claims and damage from clumsy users who don't
    know what they're doing. The same way car companies recommend using
    only branded parts, oil, etc. when maintaining your car.

    Cleaning the sensor yourself is easy and safe, for most people. Here,
    read through this site for some info:

    http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/

    By the way, when you send a camera in to have the sensor cleaned, the
    manufacturers generally do exactly what they tell users not to do.
    They don't have any specialized equipment for it. In other words, they
    clean the sensor using the same techniques mentioned in the website
    above.

    :)

    >> Basically, even though most people find it difficult to see much
    >> difference between the two as far as results, I have read that
    >> Nikon has
    >> better exposures in difficult lighting situations and has more
    >> appealing
    >> color.


    Forget about silly stuff like that since they are generally not
    relevant to capturing the image. The in-camera adjustments can alter
    the image results causing more or less colour, better lighting
    results, depth of field, etc.

    Many basic reviews of cameras, like some of the ones at CNet, are
    often done using default camera settings in basic situations. The
    default settings and resulting images vary from camera to camera,
    which is why cameras have the ability to change these settings to get
    the results YOU want, not what the manufacturer set as default.

    Remember that in all situations, one camera will be better than the
    other using the basic or default settings. But which one will depend
    on the situation. A good photographer can get the same results using
    either camera by simply adjusting the camera to get the results they
    want.

    Between Canon and Nikon, the performance differences are usually
    subtle. There are some features that you may need for your specific
    shooting style, such as small size and low weight for hiking, or spot
    meter, or low noise at high ISO, or rear LCD cover, or whatever.

    The same applies to their lenses. Canon has the tilt-shift that Nikon
    lacks, while Nikon has the wide range 18-200 that has good optics that
    Canon lacks. If you need the tilt-shift, get Canon. If you need a walk
    around lense, the 18-200 VR is hard to beat so buy Nikon.

    If you don't have any specific needs, then either camera system will
    work equally well.

    > Dust isn't really a big problem, I have had a Nikon D200 for 8
    > months
    > and haven't had to go near the sensor (actually the glass sealing
    > the
    > sensor). I switch lenses often as I have mostly primes. I have a 4
    > year
    > old Fuji S1 in my office and it hasn't needed a sensor cleaning
    > either,


    That's generally been my experience too. Dust just isn't an issue for
    most people.

    In the end, practical features will determine which camera body is the
    better one for you. Which camera feels better in your hands, and has
    better ergonomic layout of its controls, is usually the one that will
    help you take better pictures.
    Bill, Sep 28, 2006
    #11
  12. measekite

    SimonLW Guest

    "Bill Crocker" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "measekite" <> wrote in message
    > news:2_xSg.16831$...
    >>

    > [clipped]
    >> In many ways I do agree. However at first glance Nikon lenses (excluding
    >> Canon L series) appear to be more expensive.

    > [clipped]
    >> Comments Welcome!

    >
    > I think Canon's whole lens thing is a marketing ploy. To how many people
    > do they sell a set of lenses twice? Most consumers, and hobbyist will
    > initially go for the non "L" glass, as it is less expensive, but a large
    > percentage upgrade to "L" glass soon after. Why sell a line of lenses
    > that don't live up to the capability of the manufacture, and their
    > cameras? My recommendation, if you're going to buy Canon quality, do it
    > across the board.
    >
    > Nikon does it right the first time!
    >
    > Bill Crocker
    >

    Give me a break. I've seen some pretty horrific Nikon consumer lenses. In
    one example they had a cheap zoom the was so loose and wiggly in front, I
    thought it was defective. We got another one (at the store) and it was the
    same.
    SimonLW, Sep 28, 2006
    #12
  13. measekite

    SimonLW Guest

    "measekite" <> wrote in message
    news:2_xSg.16831$...
    >I just completed reading reviews of the Nikon D80 and Canon XTi in Cnet.
    >The conclusion was that if you are building a system of scratch the D80 is
    >a better choice.
    >
    > In many ways I do agree. However at first glance Nikon lenses (excluding
    > Canon L series) appear to be more expensive. But the big thing (at least
    > I think it is big) is the Dust Removal System that Nikon did not include.
    >
    > If the Canon Dust system works as advertised and one (while taking care)
    > changes their lenses at least 2 to 3 times on an outing; I would like to
    > know just how serious this dust issue is. Is it enough of a problem to
    > favor Canon for this feature or is a composition grid and a spot meter to
    > favor the Nikon.
    >
    > From what I have read it is extremely difficult to clean the sensor and
    > the factory wants over $100 to do the job. And many times it does not
    > come back perfect.
    >
    > Basically, even though most people find it difficult to see much
    > difference between the two as far as results, I have read that Nikon has
    > better exposures in difficult lighting situations and has more appealing
    > color.
    >
    > Comments Welcome!


    I was looking at the Rebel. In DPreview's test, the image quality was pretty
    much the same as the D80. Now I hear Pentax has a 10mp camera in the works
    based on the same Sony sensor the Alpha and D80 use. The camera has in body
    image stabilization which Canon and Nikon don't have. I'm not sure if it
    would work with older Pentax glass as I would think the camera would have to
    know the FL of the lens to compensate properly for movement.
    -S
    SimonLW, Sep 28, 2006
    #13
  14. measekite

    measekite Guest

    Paul Rubin wrote:

    >measekite <> writes:
    >
    >
    >>AND WHICH SYSTEM DO YOU THINK IS BETTER AND WHY? Assuming you have no
    >>lenses and will build a system.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >If there was a simple answer that worked for everyone, then there'd
    >be no way for both brands to keep existing.
    >
    >It seems to me that Nikon has better ergonomics and UI than Canon.
    >But Canon is somewhat ahead of Nikon in technology. Low-end Canons
    >have more features per dollar than the comparable Nikons, and high end
    >Canons (5D, 1DS) have no Nikon counterparts.
    >
    >


    I agree with the above statement but I think that (other than the Dust
    Removal System - DRS) the Nikon D80 has more features than the Canon XTi
    but does cost a couple of hundred more. The Nikon lenses (forget L)
    also appear to feel more robust than Canon lenses.

    The Nikon full review in DPReview is impressive. I am looking forward
    to their take on the Canon XTi. I also would like to see comparitive
    reviews (especiall between competing Nikon and Canon) on a feature by
    feature basis to help determine an actual winner so to speak.

    >If I were starting from scratch with $10,000, it would be a no
    >brainer, I'd go with Canon because of the 5D.
    >


    In some ways I agree with you but the 5D is lacking a major feature for
    me. That is on-board flash. I do not care what the Pros say since it
    is nice and convenient for fill in flash. If you have lighting
    situations that call for fill in flash having low noice at high ISO will
    not help. Now these same Pros who Poo Poo the small on board flash also
    Poo Pood auto exposure and auto focus. Now they embrace it. And before
    than they even Poo Pood on board metering. It seems that the ego of
    some of the Pros keeps their head in a place where the sun don't shine.

    > With a lesser budget,
    >it's not so clear. I've been using Nikon for ages so I can't be
    >really neutral, but if I were starting over, there's a pretty good
    >chance that I'd switch to Canon based on my own shooting agendas and
    >technology preferences.
    >


    I also have Nikon for years and was thinking of going digital with the
    Canon XTi and the dust removal system appeared to be a deal breaker but
    I did see it yesterday (have not seen the Nikon D80 yet) but after
    reading D80 reviews and have seen the D50 and D70 I think that Nikon has
    caught up and surpassed Canon.

    Now Canon may be a little lower in noise between 800 and 1600 but how
    often will you shoot as those high ISOs and the differences from what I
    read are not that much.

    >Those are likely to be different from your
    >agendas and preferences. So you have to say more precisely what
    >you're hoping to accomplish and so forth.
    >
    >You could possibly rent these cameras for a few days and see how you
    >like them.
    >
    >
    measekite, Sep 28, 2006
    #14
  15. measekite

    measekite Guest

    Bill wrote:

    >"tomm42" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >
    >
    >>measekite wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>I just completed reading reviews of the Nikon D80 and Canon XTi in
    >>>Cnet. The conclusion was that if you are building a system of
    >>>scratch
    >>>the D80 is a better choice.
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >I agree with that, but not necessarily for the reasons they say. If I
    >was buying a new system from scratch, I would choose the Nikon D80.
    >But that's just what I prefer, while others will prefer Canon.
    >
    >My reasoning is based on a few things I prefer in the Nikon. The D80
    >has a better viewfinder, better handling and ergonomic layout, and
    >better flash system. So I'd get the Nikon.
    >
    >And I can say that even though I own and use a Canon Rebel XT. I also
    >happen to use a Nikon D70s and D200 (when I get the chance) because a
    >friend uses them and lets me borrow his camera and lenses, so I've had
    >the opportunity to use both and compare.
    >
    >


    Including results like resolution, noise, and color what differences do
    you see between the systems? And why did you prefer your friends Nikon
    system over your Canon system other than ergonomics. I do feel that
    Nikon has better handling but most say that Canon is ahead
    technologically but maybe Nikon caught up.

    >
    >
    >>>In many ways I do agree. However at first glance Nikon lenses
    >>>(excluding Canon L series) appear to be more expensive. But the
    >>>big
    >>>thing (at least I think it is big) is the Dust Removal System that
    >>>Nikon
    >>>did not include.
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >I think sensor cleaning is now the new big thing to hype. It was
    >number of pixels, but since they all have 10mp sensors, it's now about
    >dust removal.
    >
    >Sensor cleaning using vibration is just a gimmick, evidence has shown
    >they don't really work as advertised (do a Google search). Sensor dust
    >is being used as a scare tactic to promote sales of a product that
    >doesn't really have a dust problem.
    >
    >Dust simply is not an issue in most situations, and I change lenses
    >several times during a shooting session. If I was in the middle of the
    >Serengetti with high winds blowing dust everywhere, I might be a bit
    >more concerned.
    >
    >:)
    >
    >
    >
    >>>If the Canon Dust system works as advertised and one (while taking
    >>>care)
    >>>changes their lenses at least 2 to 3 times on an outing; I would
    >>>like to
    >>>know just how serious this dust issue is. Is it enough of a
    >>>problem to
    >>>favor Canon for this feature
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >No.
    >
    >Ignore that feature and base your decision on features that work and
    >are truly helpful in assisting the photographer get better photos.
    >
    >
    >
    >>or is a composition grid and a spot meter
    >>
    >>
    >>>to favor the Nikon.
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >Those are two features that are nice to have, but may not be essential
    >depending on your personal needs. Others may not care about those
    >features, while some require them for their shooting style.
    >
    >
    >
    >>> From what I have read it is extremely difficult to clean the
    >>>sensor and
    >>>the factory wants over $100 to do the job. And many times it does
    >>>not
    >>>come back perfect.
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >I don't know what you've been reading, but that's not exactly
    >accurate.
    >
    >The manufacturers state they don't want users to clean their sensors
    >simply to avoid warranty claims and damage from clumsy users who don't
    >know what they're doing. The same way car companies recommend using
    >only branded parts, oil, etc. when maintaining your car.
    >
    >Cleaning the sensor yourself is easy and safe, for most people. Here,
    >read through this site for some info:
    >
    >http://www.cleaningdigitalcameras.com/
    >
    >By the way, when you send a camera in to have the sensor cleaned, the
    >manufacturers generally do exactly what they tell users not to do.
    >They don't have any specialized equipment for it. In other words, they
    >clean the sensor using the same techniques mentioned in the website
    >above.
    >
    >:)
    >
    >
    >
    >>>Basically, even though most people find it difficult to see much
    >>>difference between the two as far as results, I have read that
    >>>Nikon has
    >>>better exposures in difficult lighting situations and has more
    >>>appealing
    >>>color.
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >Forget about silly stuff like that since they are generally not
    >relevant to capturing the image. The in-camera adjustments can alter
    >the image results causing more or less colour, better lighting
    >results, depth of field, etc.
    >
    >Many basic reviews of cameras, like some of the ones at CNet, are
    >often done using default camera settings in basic situations. The
    >default settings and resulting images vary from camera to camera,
    >which is why cameras have the ability to change these settings to get
    >the results YOU want, not what the manufacturer set as default.
    >
    >Remember that in all situations, one camera will be better than the
    >other using the basic or default settings. But which one will depend
    >on the situation. A good photographer can get the same results using
    >either camera by simply adjusting the camera to get the results they
    >want.
    >
    >Between Canon and Nikon, the performance differences are usually
    >subtle. There are some features that you may need for your specific
    >shooting style, such as small size and low weight for hiking, or spot
    >meter, or low noise at high ISO, or rear LCD cover, or whatever.
    >
    >The same applies to their lenses. Canon has the tilt-shift that Nikon
    >lacks, while Nikon has the wide range 18-200 that has good optics that
    >Canon lacks. If you need the tilt-shift, get Canon. If you need a walk
    >around lense, the 18-200 VR is hard to beat so buy Nikon.
    >
    >If you don't have any specific needs, then either camera system will
    >work equally well.
    >
    >
    >
    >>Dust isn't really a big problem, I have had a Nikon D200 for 8
    >>months
    >>and haven't had to go near the sensor (actually the glass sealing
    >>the
    >>sensor). I switch lenses often as I have mostly primes. I have a 4
    >>year
    >>old Fuji S1 in my office and it hasn't needed a sensor cleaning
    >>either,
    >>
    >>

    >
    >That's generally been my experience too. Dust just isn't an issue for
    >most people.
    >
    >In the end, practical features will determine which camera body is the
    >better one for you. Which camera feels better in your hands, and has
    >better ergonomic layout of its controls, is usually the one that will
    >help you take better pictures.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    measekite, Sep 28, 2006
    #15
  16. measekite

    Bill Guest

    "measekite" <> wrote in message
    news:bdSSg.6783$...
    >
    > Including results like resolution, noise, and color what differences
    > do you see between the systems?


    None worth mentioning. I thought I already covered that in my previous
    post.

    The cameras are close enough in image quality to be called the same,
    within reason. The subtle differences can be adjusted using the
    in-camera settings or in post-processing.

    > And why did you prefer your friends Nikon system over your Canon
    > system other than ergonomics. I do feel that Nikon has better
    > handling but most say that Canon is ahead technologically but maybe
    > Nikon caught up.


    Other than ergonomics...you mean like the bigger viewfinder, better
    handling, etc. in the Nikon D80 that I mentioned in my previous post
    as well?

    If you mean why do I like to use my friends Nikon gear, then that's
    easy - glass. He has some sweet glass that I would never pay for
    myself, but are nice to borrow once in a while.
    Bill, Sep 28, 2006
    #16
  17. measekite

    measekite Guest

    Bill wrote:

    >"measekite" <> wrote in message
    >news:bdSSg.6783$...
    >
    >
    >>Including results like resolution, noise, and color what differences
    >>do you see between the systems?
    >>
    >>

    >
    >None worth mentioning. I thought I already covered that in my previous
    >post.
    >
    >The cameras are close enough in image quality to be called the same,
    >within reason. The subtle differences can be adjusted using the
    >in-camera settings or in post-processing.
    >
    >
    >
    >> And why did you prefer your friends Nikon system over your Canon
    >>system other than ergonomics. I do feel that Nikon has better
    >>handling but most say that Canon is ahead technologically but maybe
    >>Nikon caught up.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >Other than ergonomics...you mean like the bigger viewfinder, better
    >handling, etc. in the Nikon D80 that I mentioned in my previous post
    >as well?
    >
    >If you mean why do I like to use my friends Nikon gear, then that's
    >easy - glass. He has some sweet glass that I would never pay for
    >myself, but are nice to borrow once in a while.
    >
    >


    From what you said and what I am reading, with the exception of the
    Canon 5D that Nikon has no answer for, I agree with you. But I still
    would like to know why the majority of users that express opinions say
    that Canon's technology is ahead. I also get the same thing from sales
    people in professional photography store. These are the same people
    that used to say the same about Nikon in years past many of whom sold
    their Nikon systems and repurchased Canon systems.

    Maybe Nikon caught up and few realize that at this point.

    >
    >
    >
    measekite, Sep 28, 2006
    #17
  18. measekite

    Bill Guest

    "measekite" <> wrote in message
    news:wSVSg.6331$...
    >
    >>>Including results like resolution, noise, and color what
    >>>differences do you see between the systems?

    >>
    >>None worth mentioning. I thought I already covered that in my
    >>previous post.
    >>
    >>The cameras are close enough in image quality to be called the same,
    >>within reason. The subtle differences can be adjusted using the
    >>in-camera settings or in post-processing.
    >>
    >>> And why did you prefer your friends Nikon system over your Canon
    >>> system other than ergonomics. I do feel that Nikon has better
    >>> handling but most say that Canon is ahead technologically but
    >>> maybe Nikon caught up.

    >>
    >>Other than ergonomics...you mean like the bigger viewfinder, better
    >>handling, etc. in the Nikon D80 that I mentioned in my previous post
    >>as well?
    >>
    >>If you mean why do I like to use my friends Nikon gear, then that's
    >>easy - glass. He has some sweet glass that I would never pay for
    >>myself, but are nice to borrow once in a while.

    >
    > From what you said and what I am reading, with the exception of the
    > Canon 5D that Nikon has no answer for, I agree with you. But I
    > still would like to know why the majority of users that express
    > opinions say that Canon's technology is ahead.


    Because on a technical note, it is.

    Canon has the FF sensor. Canon also moved up to 8mp sensors long
    before Nikon giving them a clear pixel count lead. And for a given
    sensor size and pixel number, their CMOS fabrication produces a sensor
    with slightly lower noise.

    In practical terms, the only difference today is FF sensor.
    Bill, Sep 28, 2006
    #18
  19. measekite

    measekite Guest

    Bill wrote:

    >"measekite" <> wrote in message
    >news:wSVSg.6331$...
    >
    >
    >>>>Including results like resolution, noise, and color what
    >>>>differences do you see between the systems?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>None worth mentioning. I thought I already covered that in my
    >>>previous post.
    >>>
    >>>The cameras are close enough in image quality to be called the same,
    >>>within reason. The subtle differences can be adjusted using the
    >>>in-camera settings or in post-processing.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>And why did you prefer your friends Nikon system over your Canon
    >>>>system other than ergonomics. I do feel that Nikon has better
    >>>>handling but most say that Canon is ahead technologically but
    >>>>maybe Nikon caught up.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>Other than ergonomics...you mean like the bigger viewfinder, better
    >>>handling, etc. in the Nikon D80 that I mentioned in my previous post
    >>>as well?
    >>>
    >>>If you mean why do I like to use my friends Nikon gear, then that's
    >>>easy - glass. He has some sweet glass that I would never pay for
    >>>myself, but are nice to borrow once in a while.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>From what you said and what I am reading, with the exception of the
    >>Canon 5D that Nikon has no answer for, I agree with you. But I
    >>still would like to know why the majority of users that express
    >>opinions say that Canon's technology is ahead.
    >>
    >>

    >
    >Because on a technical note, it is.
    >
    >Canon has the FF sensor. Canon also moved up to 8mp sensors long
    >before Nikon giving them a clear pixel count lead. And for a given
    >sensor size and pixel number, their CMOS fabrication produces a sensor
    >with slightly lower noise.
    >
    >In practical terms, the only difference today is FF sensor.
    >
    >


    The big guess now is does Nikon intend or think it is necessary to come
    out with a FF sensor.

    Unless I do not undertand things most photographers using either sensor
    will crop their photos and when using a nice lens you can produce 13x19
    and not be able to tell the difference. It seems that the noise issue
    where the Canon 5D is superior is at and over 800 ISO.

    >
    >
    >
    measekite, Sep 30, 2006
    #19
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. William Regan

    Canon S410 better than S500 according to CNET?

    William Regan, Dec 3, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    246
    Bob the Printer
    Dec 4, 2004
  2. measekite

    Nikon D80 vs Canon XTI

    measekite, Sep 11, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    534
    Bill Funk
    Sep 18, 2006
  3. Rick Roof

    Nikon D80, Canon 20D, Canon XTi

    Rick Roof, Nov 26, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    511
    Bill Hilton
    Nov 27, 2006
  4. Joseph Miller
    Replies:
    29
    Views:
    692
    Amamba
    Feb 22, 2007
  5. On the fence..Nikon D80 vs. Canon XTI

    , Mar 21, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    592
    JakeC
    Mar 24, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page