Opinions Nikon D90 v Canon 40D v 450D

waspy88

waspy88

waspy88

Associate
Joined
9 Sep 2008
Posts
1,576
Location
United Pingdom
Hello all,

I have read the reviews on Dpreview, and other sites etc, but cannot arrive at a conclusion as to which camera I should buy. Christmas bonus is just around the corner, and I really need a good camera to take some pictures of my first child around that magical time.

For my history of photography, I was always analogue until hitting the Canon EOS 300D in 2004. I felt very limited at times with certain things on the 300D. One of the major problems I had with it was the ISO perfomance. Since I am not a sports / general interests photography person, the most fun thing i'll be doing is taking pictures of the baby and parties / events etc.

My current crappy small camera A620 is making well up in tears and want the good old days of SLR photography, as I had to sell it :(

So, now I am faced with some purchasing decisions. I am really tempted by the D90, the only thing that is putting me off it really is the video function. I hate gimmicks in technology, and it seems to me it might be "one" of those. If anyone knows of its perfomance in dark situations I might be fully swayed to getting this. From the samples on DP review it has a gorgeous colour, far more punchier than the canons.

I have a pretty powerful PC, as such shooting in raw is not an issue for me. I am not after a point and shoot camera. When I had the Canon I always shot in RAW. Now, this leads me to my other question is Nikon software a bit crap? I loved the canon software working with photoshop so well. I would hate to lose that fluidity opting for Nikon.

I am really impressed by the 40D, because the reviews of the 50D all state how much of a better camera it is. I assume it is a very customizeable / useable camera. I am used to metering and apetures etc, so I would rather like to control more of all of those things, so this leads me to my other question; whether the control of the 40D is far better than than that of the 450D. I am not bothered about pixel count in the slightest.

My main needs are:-

Good ISO perfomance
Good speed in continuous shooting (Since babies don't have much of an attention span)
Good level of control, I am not a point and shooter
Good software


I want to spend around £400-600 on the camera and about £500 on lenses. If any of you are reccomending any specific camera from the short list, please free to make suggestions of companies I might not have come across. Also a link to the cheapest deals would be much appreciated.

Thanks for your help :)
 
What's wrong with the D90 having a video feature? If you don't want it, don't use it! It's not like they're compromising in other areas just to give it video capabilities.
 
Why wouldnt you buy something because it was a feature you wont use?

Do you use that logic with everything you buy?
 
40D imo. D90 is a great camera but it is imo still not on par with the 40D, the body of the 40D is MUCH better (mag alloy with weather seals vs plastic, 4.5fps vs 6.5fps etc)
 
I have just bought a Canon 450d, but im only just beginning ( at college) I got it for £297 , with lens. It was too good to turn down. But the 40d is a better camera, i knew this but didn't want to spend the £150 or so on a bit better body, and then funding a lens. It was too much. But if i decided to sell the camera in a years time, i wouldn't loose much money and when it is time to upgrade this will come in handy i feel. Just my two peneth.
 
The Nikon D90 has much better high ISO performance than the Canon 40D.

The vdeo mode can be ignored or used if you want. It is a feature. It is also not gimmick as it produces stunning quality video (from what I can tell, just as good as the Canon 5Dmk2). It has limitations but I would think it could be used quite a lot.

The bodies are pretty similar. Nikon always have the better feel and more solid construction.

I think the Canon is faster but not sure it would make much difference.
 
skeeny said:
I have just bought a Canon 450d, but im only just beginning ( at college) I got it for £297 , with lens.
Click to expand...
I think you missed me asking this in another thread, but how did you pull this off? At Boots right? I can't see how it was done unless you're an employee or something?
 
I think the answers to this little poser will split down Canon or Nikon user lines!

I'll say up front, I have no experience of Canon cameras worth writing about, although I was tempted to switch to Canon from Pentax recently after handling a 40d in a shop. A 'happy accident' had me buying Nikon though (a D200) which led me to a further purchase of a D90.

I tell you that because at first I was totally uninterested in the D90's HD video feature too, but having given it a go (well, it was on there so why not!) I'm a convert. It's actually quite a useful feature in my opinion, and if you're looking at capturing your little ones Christmas moments it's just the job.

The quality of the video is quite something, as a quick search for D90 vids on Youtube will testify, and I'm having a bit of fun trying to cut short film sections together into something watchable. The video performance in poor light is as good as your lenses to be honest, and it's manual focus anyway which actually is easier to do than it sounds!

It goes without saying that it is capable of taking stunning still pictures too. I no longer have the D200, having since purchased a D300, but there isn't a lot between the D90 and D300 image quality/noise performance wise, and I actually prefer some aspects of the D90 handling, and of course it has the video.

The D90 live view is another feature I'm using more than I thought I would, certainly more than on the Pentax K20d that I had previously, and it works differently to the D300 and is arguably more intuitive.

So yes, I'm a Nikon and especially D90 fan, I make no apologies for that, but thought you'd be interested in my views as a recent changer who had reservations about the D90 video feature too. It takes nothing away from the camera, and actually adds a great deal.
 
** Curve ball warning **

For your price range, and it takes nikon lenses, is very good at skin tones ect and its easy to use, cost about £450 if you can find one they sell that fast, how about a Fuji S5 Camera.

ColiN
 
Can someone summarise what is better about the 40D than the 450D?
I bought a 450D a while back but always see people talking about the 40D, yet looking at the specs of the 40D there is nothing massively different? Less MP, same processer, same sensor size etc. Is it just a case of a huge leap up in quality when you are using higher ISO?
 
The D90 has greater resolution than the Canon 40D (2380lphh), (for that matter the old D80 had greater jpeg resolution too) it is also vastly better at iso 1600 and up, it is essentially 3/4 of a D300 for 2/3 of the price and on pure image quality terms it's closer than that even.

I've owned the Nikon D70 and the Canon 30D (similar build quality) and now have a Nikon D300 so I can talk with some qualification.

If I didn't have a legacy of lenses I'd go for either the Nikon D90 or quite possibly the Sony A700.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom