S
SNC1923
Guest
i had a ford truck and it was the world's biggest POS ever. my camper is based on an F450... ditto. that said, i see plenty of old fords on the road, so no doubt it is just my dumb luck.
and... i have had nikon since the days of F2AS, and bought the first automatic (shutter speed) FE. i sold the F2AS (big mistake) and kept the FE).
i have some nice nikkor lenses, and i have been holding out, waiting for the day when nikon came out with a full-size image sensor that i could afford.
still waiting...........
so now, i have a dilemma, and i wonder if the assembled experts can help me.
i am looking at two options:
1) Canon EOS XSi (aka 450D)... just announced and available soon.... where i would have to buy new lenses.
2) Nikon D300... where i could use my lenses, even though they don't have autofocus. Cost is higher than the Canon, but I would not have to buy lenses (I think)
both have smaller-than-full-size chips. other than the cutoff (i like wide angle photos) how important of a shortcoming is this? i remember reading/hearing somewhere that the lenses for digital cameras are different than the film cameras... is this true?
both have 3" displays and live view function (important feature to me)
The Canon uses CD cards, the Nikon CF... and i lean toward the SD.
and when did lenses get so *freakin expensive???* (my old nikkor AI lenses are going for, like, $35 on eBay... )
which way should i go?
ian
(ps=> sorry to be a little OT here, but i didn't think this merited its own thread, and this thread looked to be the best place to ask.)
I must have missed this post earlier. . . .
The F2AS kicked ass--what a camera. Always wanted one, never got one.
Nikon has a full-sized image sensor now. OH, one that you can afford. . . .
The 450D is an excellent camera to consider. You'll have an opportunity to get some really cool lenses, particularly ones with IS.
You can't go wrong with a Nikon D300. Great camera.
I think the two cameras that you are comparing are somewhat dissimilar, though. I think the D300 compares more fairly with the Canon 40D. Now there's a camera. Not better than a 300D, but a decided step above the yet-to-be-released 450D.
Don't fret about lens compatibility. You're going to buy new lenses anyway. I promise. IS (or VR), ultra-sonic motors, autofocusing, coupling with the camera's advanced metering system. . . . With an AI-S lens, you'll be missing a lot more than autofocus. Think about having the flash zoom automatically with your lens, for example. Old lens compatibility is really a non-issue. Sure, it's nice, but you won't use most of them most of the time. Possible exception would be a micro lens.
The APS-C sensor is not a handicap in anyway. Until recently, Nikon said they would never produce a full-size sensor camera. Those who know point to advantages in both APS-C and full-size sensors. The full-size sensor probably has the edge on image quality (definitely at high ISOs) but the APS-C sensors take GREAT pictures. You have to do a bit of math to figure your focal lengths (X1.6 for Canon, X 1.5 for Nikon, I think). Just buy a new wide angle zoom like the 17-55 f/2.8 for canon (28-80mm equivalent).
I can't tell you about digital lenses being different than film lenses. I don't think so. . . . Lenses made specifically for APS-C cameras (Canon EF-S lenses, for example) cannot be used on full-frame or film cameras. All lenses can be used on APS-C cameras. I have six lenses; two are APS-C the other are standard. All are great.
CF cards are thought to be better than SD, not sure why. I use both all the time and can see/tell know difference. Another non-consideration IMHO.
I shot Nikon for years. Still have an FE-2, 24mm 2.8, 35-105, 55 micro, and 80-200 4.0, all AI-S. Never touch them, look at them, or use them. I caprisously switched to Canon on a whim and have never looked back. Both are great systems. If you look at the stats on Dgrin, about 60% own Canon, about 30% own Nikon, and 10% everything else. Pentax and Olympus owners, though fewer in number, seem very happy with their brands, too. Also, if you watch the Flea Market, you regularly see Nikon guys dump their whole system to go to Canon and Canon guys do the same to go to Nikon. A lot of back and forth if you ask me.
I don't think lenses have gotten expensive. I think that the value of the dollar has changed since last you went shopping. I felt very similarly when I started down this road. A lens that cost $300 in 1995 is $450 now. Stuff is more expensive. My grocery store wants $9.00 for a sixer of Samuel Adams. . . .
Go to a nearby retailer (an independent shop if you have one) and handle both cameras. Buy the one the feels best and has, for you, the most comfortable user interface. You'll never look back. Neither of the cameras you're looking at could ever be considered a Ford.