50d or d90 ?

Snaggle

Snaggle

Snaggle

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
3,376
Location
Northants
Ok after having various bridge cameras it will soon be time to get a dslr .

Money was always an issue so i never bought one of the cheaper ones and i have been offered a few deals but hopefully in the next few months i should have the spare cash to buy summit decent .

So the desicion is 50d or D90?

50d is faster and higher mp . Im guessing better choice of lenses but more expensive than the D90 . I have spent a fair bit of time using the D80/90 but i feel the 50d is the better camera .

Use will be a mix of sports/landscape/general use .

Planning on kit lense/nifty fifty and some sorta decent 300mm but nothing silly expensive .

So if you could share yer opinions and maybe recomend a lense or 2 covering what i need (no L glass :p ) .

Ty

Persil
 
i have a d90 and love it to bits.

have you considered the 40D and with the money saved spend it on decent glass?
the improvments over the 40d arn't massive and most people would agree that better glass out weighs the body, so this might be an option for you, especially if you find a mint second hand 40d?


If you want new and have settled for either the d90 or 50d, i think there much the same, it will come down to what you shoot and what lenses you want?

I was once in the same situation and its a hard decision to make, once you've bought into a brand your stuck with it. Tho i've never been dissapointed with the d90, i long for the canon mpe65. but this lens is the only reason i would ever sell up and move to canon. like i said it all depends what lenses you want and what you want to take pictures of.
 
Last edited:
Neither system is inherently better than the other any longer - they're just punching and counter-punching.

Canon possibly have a slightly larger selection of lenses - Nikon have the better flash-lighting set up. All the way through the spec sheets you've got them swapping these sort of stats.

Six and two threes really.

Just go with what feels better in your hand.

Though if you have used a D80 and D90, does that mean you've got a mate who you could borrow glass from? If so, unless something on the Canon side really draws you, you've got your answer there.
 
famas said:
have you considered the 40D and with the money saved spend it on decent glass?
the improvments over the 40d arn't massive and most people would agree that better glass out weighs the body, so this might be an option for you, especially if you find a mint second hand 40d?
Click to expand...

+1 totally agree, unles you specifically want video recording function. 40D can be had for around £400-500 s/h from what I've seen (happy to be corrected), which leaves a good chunk of cash to get some nice lenses :)
 
Some good advice here. Have a play and see which system you find the most natural. for me it was clearly Nikon - when I was in your shoes canons bodies felt cheap plasticy, too small despite my average, unergonomic, buttons in unsual places and the zoom and focus of lenses went the wrong way. When I picked up a Nikon it sat nicely in my hand, fingers got to all the controls easily, menu system was smooth.

I'm guessing there must be people out there that find things the other way round.
 
Me for Canon, got smaller hands....
As D.P. said, my fingers fall into place with Canon, find them easy to get round and much happier than Nikons buttons I can reach. Try a few bodies out and see what you prefer, it will make sense long term!
 
If you think of the D90 as a baby D300, but with video capability, then it makes even more sense, especially at the prices they can be found at the moment.
 
Ok looks like the d90 then :P ok other than the nifty 50 what lenses do you recomend ? better to go body only or get kit lense? . nikon lenses o sigma? as mentioned in my opening post will be looking at a medium range and a 200/300 ish but no silly priced stuff :)

TY

Persil
 
The D90 kit lens is the 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 VR which is a very nice lens...it's just the usual caveat of once you get into primes/fast glass it'll never be used again.
 
I went for a D90 body plus a 16-85mm Nikkor. That plus a used 70-300mm VR Nikkor from the MM does nearly everything I need.
 
Whether or not the 50D is better than the D90 is largely irrelevant as they will both take superb quality photos. At this level it is mostly about which system you want to buy into which is annoying because you won't really understand which you would prefer until you've had a camera a while.

Nikon has the better flash system, the CLS system is better than Canon's and sync speed is quicker. But aside from that I much prefer Canon. Canon's range of lenses trumps Nikon. There are key areas in Canon's range lineup that Nikon just don't have an answer for, wide fast primes for a start, the 24mm and 35mm f/1.4 L. Also affordable, high quality constant F/4 such as the 17-40mm, 24-105mm and 70-200mm F/4 L lenses. 200mm f/2.8 L another example.

Yes they both do the expensive fast F/2.8 24-70, 70-200mm zooms that are comparable and even more expensive long, fast primes but in the high quality, affordable range of lenses I think Canon just makes the most sense.
 
Nikon may not have lenses like a 70-200 f/4, but they give you the 70-200 2.8 Vr, the 80-200 2.8 AF-D at a lo price, the 80-200 2.8 AF-S is easy enough to find 2nd hand, there is the Sigma and Tamron 70-200 2.8 which are pretty good, And with a new 70-200 2.8 VR announced the old one will get cheaper. As a lightweight alternative then you can't beat the 70-300 VR. Over the 70-200 range the lens is pretty much the same as the Canon 70-200 f/4 but 1/3rd to 2/3ds of stop slower.

I agree, Canons lens line up is better undoubtedly, but the F/4 lenses are not where the advantage is. I mean, the 24-105 on full frame is actually pretty poor for distortion etc and gets plenty of mediocre reviews. Up to date fast wide primes are the most likely area where zou would want Canon over Nikon.

But its horses for Courses. Where is Canon's answer to the 14-24 2.8 which is pretty much the most perfect wide zoom ever made?

You have to see which line up you are most happy with.

But its horses for courses
 
The 40D is a great option at the moment. The only reason I would buy a 50d is if I wanted the HD audio/video option.

The noise performance of the 50D indicates that Canon may have sacrificed performance for a headline grabbing pixel count.
 
robertgilbert86 said:
...but it can be hacked to do video no?
Click to expand...

Any camera that doesn't do HD can do video via the cable and software that records the live view feed.

Google 40d video for example

Also it will only do around 5 minutes before the sensor starts to get hotter.

So in sort it will do it, but theres no point unless you want to bring a laptop everywhere.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom