Nikon D50 versus Canon Rebel XT

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by sgtdisturbed, May 13, 2006.

  1. sgtdisturbed

    sgtdisturbed Guest

    Ok, I have been looking online for some decent side-by-side picture
    quality comparisons, but I cant find any sites that have done such a
    comparison, just sites giving technical info, but no actual pictures
    taken with both cameras. Oh, and the D50 uses a CCD sensor and the
    Canon uses a CMOS, what's the difference and which one produces better
    quality? Thanks for any help you could give on this matter.
    sgtdisturbed, May 13, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. sgtdisturbed wrote:
    > Ok, I have been looking online for some decent side-by-side picture
    > quality comparisons, but I cant find any sites that have done such a
    > comparison, just sites giving technical info, but no actual pictures
    > taken with both cameras. Oh, and the D50 uses a CCD sensor and the
    > Canon uses a CMOS, what's the difference and which one produces better
    > quality? Thanks for any help you could give on this matter.


    http://www.dpreview.com/

    --
    Joseph Meehan

    Dia duit
    Joseph Meehan, May 13, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. "sgtdisturbed" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    > Ok, I have been looking online for some decent side-by-side picture
    > quality comparisons, but I cant find any sites that have done such a
    > comparison, just sites giving technical info, but no actual pictures
    > taken with both cameras. Oh, and the D50 uses a CCD sensor and the
    > Canon uses a CMOS, what's the difference and which one produces better
    > quality? Thanks for any help you could give on this matter.


    86000 samples from the D50:
    http://www.pbase.com/cameras/nikon/d50

    370000 samples from the rebel xt:
    http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/eos_350d
    Adrian Boliston, May 13, 2006
    #3
  4. sgtdisturbed

    Celcius Guest

    "Adrian Boliston" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "sgtdisturbed" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    > > Ok, I have been looking online for some decent side-by-side picture
    > > quality comparisons, but I cant find any sites that have done such a
    > > comparison, just sites giving technical info, but no actual pictures
    > > taken with both cameras. Oh, and the D50 uses a CCD sensor and the
    > > Canon uses a CMOS, what's the difference and which one produces better
    > > quality? Thanks for any help you could give on this matter.

    >
    > 86000 samples from the D50:
    > http://www.pbase.com/cameras/nikon/d50
    >
    > 370000 samples from the rebel xt:
    > http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon/eos_350d
    >
    >
    >

    Adrian,
    I looked at both samples, comparing one to another (through tabs in
    Firefox).
    First, I find the types of photos are not quite the same, therefore,
    difficult to compare.
    Secondly, it struck me that even if these were comparable, I'm not sure one
    could get anything out of it.
    I suspect that even though the same scene were photographed with the D50 and
    the Rebel XT, it might be difficult to compare seeing that the lenses are
    different (ie the type of lens you would choose for both cameras).
    Regards,
    Marcel
    Celcius, May 13, 2006
    #4
  5. "Celcius" <> wrote in message
    news:e44n9b$3s3$...

    > Adrian,
    > I looked at both samples, comparing one to another (through tabs in
    > Firefox).
    > First, I find the types of photos are not quite the same, therefore,
    > difficult to compare.
    > Secondly, it struck me that even if these were comparable, I'm not sure
    > one
    > could get anything out of it.
    > I suspect that even though the same scene were photographed with the D50
    > and
    > the Rebel XT, it might be difficult to compare seeing that the lenses are
    > different (ie the type of lens you would choose for both cameras).
    > Regards,
    > Marcel


    I think these galleries are of limited use when making buying decisions, as
    the quality of a photo is probably 90% down to the skill of the photographer
    and 10% down to the equipment.

    The best thing is to get down to a photo store and handle the kit to see
    what you get on with. I brought my first dslr 2 months ago and was looking
    at these same 2 cameras, but the rebel just seemed too similar to a high end
    P&S camera and preferred the D50, but in the end went with the D70s which
    came with a slightly better lens although I hear the d50 lens 18-55mm nikkor
    is not a bad kit lens.

    The 18-55 is reviewed here:

    http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1855.htm
    Adrian Boliston, May 13, 2006
    #5
  6. sgtdisturbed

    Bill Guest

    Adrian Boliston wrote:

    >> I suspect that even though the same scene were photographed with the D50
    >> and
    >> the Rebel XT, it might be difficult to compare seeing that the lenses are
    >> different (ie the type of lens you would choose for both cameras).

    >
    >I think these galleries are of limited use when making buying decisions, as
    >the quality of a photo is probably 90% down to the skill of the photographer
    >and 10% down to the equipment.


    Yes, avoid those galleries as a comparison site since you can't compare
    identical images.

    >The best thing is to get down to a photo store and handle the kit to see
    >what you get on with. I brought my first dslr 2 months ago and was looking
    >at these same 2 cameras, but the rebel just seemed too similar to a high end
    >P&S camera and preferred the D50,


    Good advice...handle them first.

    > but in the end went with the D70s which
    >came with a slightly better lens although I hear the d50 lens 18-55mm nikkor
    >is not a bad kit lens.


    It's not a great one either.

    In the Canon camp, the 18-55 kit lense is not much better, and the 17-85
    IS lense isn't all that great either.

    I've compared them all side by side, and the 18-70mm is substantially
    better than any of them, with higher resolution, better colour and
    contrast, faster focusing than the 18-55 models, non-rotating front
    element, and a wide zoom range that works well as a walk around lense.

    It's well worth the extra cost and a great performer for the price.

    >The 18-55 is reviewed here:
    >http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1855.htm


    Unfortunately I feel that Ken's site tends to cater to the newer users
    who might consider the 18-55 due more to cost reasons than performance.
    It works well enough for 4x6 snapshots, but I wouldn't consider it for
    more serious shots without having to make sure it's used in its sweet
    spot.

    Anyone who wants high quality and good performance will not be too
    pleased with the 18-55.

    The Nikon 18-200 VR lense Ken reviews is pretty good for a super zoom,
    although it has several issues that makes me want to cross it off the
    preferred list.

    Again, if you're serious about image quality you'll buy a pair of higher
    quality lenses that cover a similar range. That's what DSLR cameras are
    for - interchangeable lenses.
    Bill, May 13, 2006
    #6
  7. sgtdisturbed

    SMS Guest

    sgtdisturbed wrote:
    > Ok, I have been looking online for some decent side-by-side picture
    > quality comparisons, but I cant find any sites that have done such a
    > comparison, just sites giving technical info, but no actual pictures
    > taken with both cameras. Oh, and the D50 uses a CCD sensor and the
    > Canon uses a CMOS, what's the difference and which one produces better
    > quality? Thanks for any help you could give on this matter.


    The lens makes all the difference. The kit lenses with the D50 and Rebel
    XT (both are 18-55mm) are adequate, but not great. The Nikon 18-70mm
    lens (offered as a kit with the D70s but available separately as well)
    is a very good lens, and the Canon 17-85 IS lens is outstanding (and
    expensive). Unfortunately, Canon doesn't offer a less expensive non-IS
    lens in this zoom range.

    When you pair the body with a good lens, the prices diverge considerably.

    For entry level, I'd go with the D50 plus the Nikon 18-70mm lens, which
    will cost you $850. For a better body and lens, go with the Canon Rebel
    XT and the Canon 17-85IS lens, which will cost you $1250. That's a big
    difference in price, but with the Canon, you get higher resolution,
    lower noise, and several features that are lacking on the Nikon D50
    (though there are after-market workarounds in some cases).
    SMS, May 13, 2006
    #7
  8. sgtdisturbed

    Freedom55 Guest

    Adrian Boliston wrote:
    > "Celcius" <> wrote in message
    > news:e44n9b$3s3$...
    >
    >> Adrian,
    >> I looked at both samples, comparing one to another (through tabs in
    >> Firefox).
    >> First, I find the types of photos are not quite the same, therefore,
    >> difficult to compare.
    >> Secondly, it struck me that even if these were comparable, I'm not sure
    >> one
    >> could get anything out of it.
    >> I suspect that even though the same scene were photographed with the D50
    >> and
    >> the Rebel XT, it might be difficult to compare seeing that the lenses are
    >> different (ie the type of lens you would choose for both cameras).
    >> Regards,
    >> Marcel

    >
    > I think these galleries are of limited use when making buying decisions, as
    > the quality of a photo is probably 90% down to the skill of the photographer
    > and 10% down to the equipment.
    >
    > The best thing is to get down to a photo store and handle the kit to see
    > what you get on with. I brought my first dslr 2 months ago and was looking
    > at these same 2 cameras, but the rebel just seemed too similar to a high end
    > P&S camera and preferred the D50, but in the end went with the D70s which
    > came with a slightly better lens although I hear the d50 lens 18-55mm nikkor
    > is not a bad kit lens.
    >
    > The 18-55 is reviewed here:
    >
    > http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1855.htm
    >
    >

    I seriously considered both and went for the Oly E-500 instead (2 lens kit)

    Ron

    --
    And it really doesn't matter if
    I'm wrong I'm right
    Where I belong I'm right
    Where I belong.

    Lennon & McCartney
    Freedom55, May 13, 2006
    #8
  9. sgtdisturbed

    Roy G Guest

    "sgtdisturbed" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Ok, I have been looking online for some decent side-by-side picture
    > quality comparisons, but I cant find any sites that have done such a
    > comparison, just sites giving technical info, but no actual pictures
    > taken with both cameras. Oh, and the D50 uses a CCD sensor and the
    > Canon uses a CMOS, what's the difference and which one produces better
    > quality? Thanks for any help you could give on this matter.
    >


    Hi.

    There are some differences in these Camera's specs, but those differences
    are fairly slight, and they are both very good cameras.

    Do not put a lot of emphasis on the difference between 6Mp and 8Mp. In terms
    of printing, it is only an extra 400 Pixels ( less than 10%) on the long
    side

    What is very different between the 2 is the size and the handling.
    Therefore you really do need to handle both before deciding upon which to
    buy.

    Roy G
    Roy G, May 14, 2006
    #9
  10. sgtdisturbed

    Bill Guest

    SMS wrote:

    >sgtdisturbed wrote:
    >> Ok, I have been looking online for some decent side-by-side picture
    >> quality comparisons, but I cant find any sites that have done such a
    >> comparison, just sites giving technical info, but no actual pictures
    >> taken with both cameras. Oh, and the D50 uses a CCD sensor and the
    >> Canon uses a CMOS, what's the difference and which one produces better
    >> quality? Thanks for any help you could give on this matter.

    >
    >The lens makes all the difference. The kit lenses with the D50 and Rebel
    >XT (both are 18-55mm) are adequate, but not great. The Nikon 18-70mm
    >lens (offered as a kit with the D70s but available separately as well)
    >is a very good lens, and the Canon 17-85 IS lens is outstanding (and
    >expensive).


    I can't agree with that.

    Since I've used the Canon 17-85 IS and Nikon 18-70 lenses, and compared
    them side by side with several others, I have to say I'm not all that
    impressed with the 17-85.

    While the IS feature is a handy option, the optical quality of the 17-85
    isn't all that great. The lense suffers from CA and lack of sharpness.
    You need to stop down to f/8 at most focal lengths to get decent
    sharpness out of the lense.

    > Unfortunately, Canon doesn't offer a less expensive non-IS
    >lens in this zoom range.


    If they did, perhaps it would have better optical quality. I have a
    feeling the IS feature is holding it back.

    >For entry level, I'd go with the D50 plus the Nikon 18-70mm lens, which
    >will cost you $850. For a better body and lens, go with the Canon Rebel
    >XT and the Canon 17-85IS lens, which will cost you $1250. That's a big
    >difference in price, but with the Canon, you get higher resolution,


    Unfortunately some of that higher resolution is lost with the 17-85
    lense unless you shoot at f/8.

    Right now I'd say the Nikon D50 with 18-70mm lense is the best option.
    The features and sensor differences are minor for most people, and the
    price difference is large enough that the differences become even less
    important.

    But as always, I suggest handling the cameras before making a decision.

    >lower noise, and several features that are lacking on the Nikon D50


    The Canon XT/350D doesn't really have lower noise levels. In fact, the
    D50 is slightly better at high ISO than the Canon. However the Canon has
    slightly better contrast, which some can mistake for better image
    quality.

    In practical terms, they are both fine cameras.
    Bill, May 14, 2006
    #10
  11. sgtdisturbed

    Rich Guest

    On 13 May 2006 02:07:33 -0700, "sgtdisturbed" <>
    wrote:

    >Ok, I have been looking online for some decent side-by-side picture
    >quality comparisons, but I cant find any sites that have done such a
    >comparison, just sites giving technical info, but no actual pictures
    >taken with both cameras. Oh, and the D50 uses a CCD sensor and the
    >Canon uses a CMOS, what's the difference and which one produces better
    >quality? Thanks for any help you could give on this matter.


    Welcome to the "beat the dead horse thread." Part 79.
    Rich, May 14, 2006
    #11
  12. sgtdisturbed

    keith Guest

    "Bill" <> wrote in message news:...
    > Adrian Boliston wrote:
    >


    >snip>


    > The Nikon 18-200 VR lense Ken reviews is pretty good for a super zoom,
    > although it has several issues that makes me want to cross it off the
    > preferred list.
    >
    > Again, if you're serious about image quality you'll buy a pair of higher
    > quality lenses that cover a similar range. That's what DSLR cameras are
    > for - interchangeable lenses.


    Hi Bill,

    Can you elaborate on the problems with the Nikon 18-200 VR. Or direct to
    relevant reviews.
    I have ordered one to replace the 18-70 on my D50. Should I be keeping both?
    Most of my shots (75%) are of my children and friends. The rest are
    outside nature shots.
    I chose this lens as I prefer candid shots not posed portraits.

    Regards Keith. (3 months with DSLR)
    keith, May 14, 2006
    #12
  13. sgtdisturbed

    Joan Guest

    Keith as soon as you get used to the VR, a task which should take you
    about 5 minutes, you'll love it.

    --
    Joan
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/joan-in-manly

    "keith" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    :
    : "Bill" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    : > Adrian Boliston wrote:
    : >
    :
    : >snip>
    :
    : > The Nikon 18-200 VR lense Ken reviews is pretty good for a super
    zoom,
    : > although it has several issues that makes me want to cross it off
    the
    : > preferred list.
    : >
    : > Again, if you're serious about image quality you'll buy a pair of
    higher
    : > quality lenses that cover a similar range. That's what DSLR
    cameras are
    : > for - interchangeable lenses.
    :
    : Hi Bill,
    :
    : Can you elaborate on the problems with the Nikon 18-200 VR. Or
    direct to
    : relevant reviews.
    : I have ordered one to replace the 18-70 on my D50. Should I be
    keeping both?
    : Most of my shots (75%) are of my children and friends. The rest
    are
    : outside nature shots.
    : I chose this lens as I prefer candid shots not posed portraits.
    :
    : Regards Keith. (3 months with DSLR)
    :
    :
    Joan, May 14, 2006
    #13
  14. sgtdisturbed

    SMS Guest

    SMS, May 14, 2006
    #14
  15. sgtdisturbed

    Bill Guest

    keith wrote:

    >> The Nikon 18-200 VR lense Ken reviews is pretty good for a super zoom,
    >> although it has several issues that makes me want to cross it off the
    >> preferred list.
    >>
    >> Again, if you're serious about image quality you'll buy a pair of higher
    >> quality lenses that cover a similar range. That's what DSLR cameras are
    >> for - interchangeable lenses.

    >
    >Can you elaborate on the problems with the Nikon 18-200 VR. Or direct to
    >relevant reviews.


    Just Google "nikon 18-200 review" and you'll find info about the barrel
    and wave distortion, and softness at the long end.

    The lense isn't terribly bad, it's just not as wonderful as some reviews
    suggest. If you want a single lense to put on your camera and never have
    to worry about swapping glass, then it's a good choice.

    But if high quality optics is what you're after, you're a bit stuck
    since you will need to move up to at least the 80-200 to get better
    optical performance.

    That may be why the 18-200 is getting rave reviews - there is no middle
    ground with Nikon lenses. Canon has the 70-200 f/4 L which has great
    optics and costs half as much as their f/2.8 version. Nikon doesn't have
    a medium priced lense that performs as well - their 70-300 consumer
    models kind of suck just like Canons models.

    This 18-200 is the closest thing they have to a medium priced 200mm zoom
    lense, so all the Nikon users are raving about it. Up here in Canada,
    the 18-200 retails for $900 (haven't found one yet). I think that may be
    a bit pricey for what you get...

    >I have ordered one to replace the 18-70 on my D50. Should I be keeping both?
    >Most of my shots (75%) are of my children and friends. The rest are
    >outside nature shots.
    >I chose this lens as I prefer candid shots not posed portraits.


    Only you can decide if you want to keep the 18-70 or not. For the uses
    you mention, the 18-200 may suffice.
    Bill, May 14, 2006
    #15
  16. sgtdisturbed

    keith Guest

    "Bill" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > keith wrote:
    >
    >>> The Nikon 18-200 VR lense Ken reviews is pretty good for a super zoom,
    >>> although it has several issues that makes me want to cross it off the
    >>> preferred list.
    >>>
    >>> Again, if you're serious about image quality you'll buy a pair of higher
    >>> quality lenses that cover a similar range. That's what DSLR cameras are
    >>> for - interchangeable lenses.

    >>
    >>Can you elaborate on the problems with the Nikon 18-200 VR. Or direct to
    >>relevant reviews.

    >
    > Just Google "nikon 18-200 review" and you'll find info about the barrel
    > and wave distortion, and softness at the long end.
    >
    > The lense isn't terribly bad, it's just not as wonderful as some reviews
    > suggest. If you want a single lense to put on your camera and never have
    > to worry about swapping glass, then it's a good choice.
    >
    > But if high quality optics is what you're after, you're a bit stuck
    > since you will need to move up to at least the 80-200 to get better
    > optical performance.
    >
    > That may be why the 18-200 is getting rave reviews - there is no middle
    > ground with Nikon lenses. Canon has the 70-200 f/4 L which has great
    > optics and costs half as much as their f/2.8 version. Nikon doesn't have
    > a medium priced lense that performs as well - their 70-300 consumer
    > models kind of suck just like Canons models.
    >
    > This 18-200 is the closest thing they have to a medium priced 200mm zoom
    > lense, so all the Nikon users are raving about it. Up here in Canada,
    > the 18-200 retails for $900 (haven't found one yet). I think that may be
    > a bit pricey for what you get...
    >
    >>I have ordered one to replace the 18-70 on my D50. Should I be keeping
    >>both?
    >>Most of my shots (75%) are of my children and friends. The rest are
    >>outside nature shots.
    >>I chose this lens as I prefer candid shots not posed portraits.

    >
    > Only you can decide if you want to keep the 18-70 or not. For the uses
    > you mention, the 18-200 may suffice.


    Thanks for the info, much obliged.

    Like you say, only I can decide. I am pleased with the results using the
    18-70, really looking for the extra zoom without carrying the extra lenses.

    Keith.
    keith, May 14, 2006
    #16
  17. sgtdisturbed

    keith Guest

    "Joan" <> wrote in message
    news:4466f4f1$0$16038$...

    > Keith as soon as you get used to the VR, a task which should take you
    > about 5 minutes, you'll love it.
    >
    > --


    Can't wait to try it..........;-))

    Keith.
    keith, May 14, 2006
    #17
  18. "SMS" <> wrote in message
    news:446625a4$0$96934$...
    [ . . . ]
    >
    > For entry level, I'd go with the D50 plus the Nikon 18-70mm lens, which
    > will cost you $850.


    Just a few weeks ago I bought a Nikon D70s with the 18-70mm lens for $855,
    with free shipping, from Buydig.com. Checked their site a week or so later
    and the same kit was $844. No point even thinking about buying the
    entry-level D50 when you can get a D70s for prices like that.

    Prices can be very fluid though, on near-discontinued models. Checking
    Buydig.com just now it looks like the same kit is back up to $949, and the
    same at Beachcamera.com, their parent company. But I'd still rather have a
    D70s with that lens for $949 than a D50 with the same lens for $850.
    John Falstaff, May 14, 2006
    #18
  19. sgtdisturbed

    sgtdisturbed Guest

    Ok, you guys have been very helpful, but what's the difference between
    a CCD and a CMOS, which I asked in first post. The Canon has a CMOS and
    the Nikon has a CCD sensor. What is the difference and which is more
    reliable?
    sgtdisturbed, May 16, 2006
    #19
  20. sgtdisturbed

    J. Clarke Guest

    sgtdisturbed wrote:

    > Ok, you guys have been very helpful, but what's the difference between
    > a CCD and a CMOS, which I asked in first post. The Canon has a CMOS and
    > the Nikon has a CCD sensor. What is the difference and which is more
    > reliable?


    If you google "cmos ccd sensor" you'll find a great deal of information. I
    don't think you'll find much on relative reliability--both will likely
    still be working fine long after the mechanical parts have worn out.

    --
    --John
    to email, dial "usenet" and validate
    (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
    J. Clarke, May 16, 2006
    #20
    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. Nikon D50 vs. Canon Digital Rebel XT

    , Apr 26, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    502
    Bob B.
    May 15, 2005
  2. Dave Addison

    Canon 350D versus Nikon D50

    Dave Addison, Nov 16, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    310
  3. Moi
    Replies:
    39
    Views:
    932
    k-man
    Dec 31, 2005
  4. Sandy Bloom, Ph.D.

    Nikon D50 versus Lumix FZ30

    Sandy Bloom, Ph.D., Feb 5, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    738
  5. Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo

    Re: Mozilla versus IE versus Opera versus Safari

    Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo, May 8, 2008, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    719
    Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
    May 8, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page