[dcstep]

Originally Posted by golfinz

LOL...I didn't even check the post date...it was awhile ago

The way he was going back and forth, I'm curious to see the answer.

Dave

[golfinz]

Same here!

[scorcherjf]

Originally Posted by golfinz

Well go hold both and see what feels best in your hands then...there really isn't a "bad" choice between Nikon or Canon, just preference.

I do like the fact that the D90 has the AF built-in, where the d5000 does not.

edit: Here are a few comparisons:

http://www.digitalreview.ca/content/...ikon-D90.shtml

http://www.digitalreview.ca/content/...T1i-500D.shtml

Yea I was reading that article before. It seems pretty Nikon biased... heh. Plus, the kit lens that comes with the T1i is a piece of crap so I would just get the body and my own lenses.

I went to best buy today and held the T1i, D90, D5000, and also the EOS 50d for good measure. The T1i and D5000 just feel too small... and this is coming from someone with pretty small hands. The D90 felt pretty nice, but the viewfinder wasn't as big and bright as the EOS 50d's. If only the 50d had video recording that would be the one I'd get. For now I think I'll just get the T1i, get some good glass, and then upgrade the body to the EOS 60d when Canon releases it.

[TurboFan]

Remember, when evaluating a camera, determine how easy it is to adjust f-stop, shutter speed, ISO and white balance. A good interface should have buttons for ISO and shutter speed on the camera (you shouldn't have to go into a menu to get these) and there should be 2 dials (thumb and index finger) - one for shutter and one for aperture (f-stop).

[frankzlin79]

I had a D60 for about two days and took it back and got a D5000. The D5000's lowlight indoor shooting abilitites were far superior to the D60. Also the live viewfinder and swivel screen are nifty features of the D5000.

[PNF]

Originally Posted by scorcherjf

Yea I was reading that article before. It seems pretty Nikon biased... heh. Plus, the kit lens that comes with the T1i is a piece of crap so I would just get the body and my own lenses.

I went to best buy today and held the T1i, D90, D5000, and also the EOS 50d for good measure. The T1i and D5000 just feel too small... and this is coming from someone with pretty small hands. The D90 felt pretty nice, but the viewfinder wasn't as big and bright as the EOS 50d's. If only the 50d had video recording that would be the one I'd get. For now I think I'll just get the T1i, get some good glass, and then upgrade the body to the EOS 60d when Canon releases it.

+1

If video recording is a major feature you want, you should just get the 5D MK II , as it has everything you want + its a FF!

Personally, IMO video recording is just marketing gimmick to get those who are on the borderline to buy a DSLR.

Photographers dont need video recording and you dont ned that to take good picture. I think it is a great mistake for taking T1i over 50D just for the video recording function.

You should be concerned with the feel of the body, the user interface, comfort, algorithm/sensor capabilities of the body, not "video recording capability".


But T1i is a great camera still and I'd still highly recommend T1i for those who just started photography.


PS. Photography is about lighting, which is about the lens you use, not camera body.

[dcstep]

Originally Posted by PNF

PS. Photography is about lighting, which is about the lens you use, not camera body.

Not exactly.

The new, full frame bodies, like the 5D MkII make much better use of light than DSLRs from only a year or two ago and much better than most films of old. The paradyme is shifting. Do you really need a 200mm f2.8 when the body function at ISO 1200 and even 3200, equals the performance of lesser cameras at 400 or 800 ISO??? Maybe, maybe not. I've been very, very happy with an f4 instead, saving weight, bulk and, perhaps, getting a superior lens.

There's no one pat answer. The answer will depend on how the camera is used.

Dave

[ChrisK]

Nikon D90 FTW

[TurboFan]

Originally Posted by dcstep

Not exactly.

The new, full frame bodies, like the 5D MkII make much better use of light than DSLRs from only a year or two ago and much better than most films of old. The paradyme is shifting. Do you really need a 200mm f2.8 when the body function at ISO 1200 and even 3200, equals the performance of lesser cameras at 400 or 800 ISO??? Maybe, maybe not. I've been very, very happy with an f4 instead, saving weight, bulk and, perhaps, getting a superior lens.

There's no one pat answer. The answer will depend on how the camera is used.

Dave

Quoted for truth.

Glass is still usually more important, but the advancements in sensor technology makes a huge difference. In a film camera you swapped in a new "sensor" with every roll of film. With the sensor being part of the camera now, bodies do matter more.