Another "what should I get" thread

[Tibbz2]

Sorry, but I'm a bit stuck!

I'm currently borrowing a Canon 1000D from a friend to have a go at some photography, as I am thinking of getting a camera of my own soon. I was looking for some advice. I haven't got a concrete budget yet, but it's likely to be in the £200 range, maybe around £250 max I would think...

I will be using the camera for a bit of everything really, normal daytime use and also for some astrophotography (widefield, not on a guided mount or scope yet, for now anyway). Nikon cameras in the entry price range seem to offer better image quality for the money, but I've also heard they are a bit rubbish compared to Canon when it comes to astro?

So does anyone know what I should go for please?

Cheers

Edit: and yes I will probably be looking at used gear because of my budget

 

[Tibbz2]

I don't really do astro photography but I would be astounded if Nikon cameras are worse than here. Atro photography is mostly about getting the lowest noise and thus best signal to noise ratio. So basically the sensor with the best IQ wins.

Perhaps it is due to mount conversions but again I would be shocked if getting a Nikon f-mount adapter was considerably harder than for Canon considering the Nikon F-mount has been maintained for nearly 60 years, so all the adapters for telescopes from the 70s/80s/90setc will still work perfectly. The opposite is true for canon who have changed their mount a few times.


If astro is gong to be your thing then you are probably better off going to a dedicated astro forum and asking there.

Ascribe Nikon vs canon, with the older cameras there is less difference in IQ at the low end (the earliest canon entry level camera were softly ahead of Nikon in fact). What you might find more noticeable is the Nikons back then tended to have better build quality, ergonomics, focusing etc. than the same class Canon, canon's had fancier live view and other features on some models.

Well everyone in the astro side of things I know have Canons and are very partial to them, I have been told that Canon cameras are much better at picking up stars, but I have no experience. I probably need some more research on the matter...

If it changes anything I also have a Canon lens someone is willing to let me have, so I could probably use all my budget for a Canon body, but if I went Nikon I would need a lens too

 

[Tibbz2]

Sounds like utter Rubbish tbh. The ability to pick up a star is going to depend on the resolution of the sensor, optical filters, sensor dynamic range, noise, ADC and the lens in from of the sensor. Some of those things are measurably worse on canon sensors, e.g. ADC readout noise.

If you are buying older camera then I doubt you will notice any difference. If ou can get a canon lens for free then that seems a goo idea IF that lens would be useful to you.

I don't think it was about picking up the stars, sorry. Remembered it was something about the Nikon's thinking the pin*****s of the stars were dodgey pixels or something and getting rid of them??