Stutopia Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Judging by some of the epic Zed shots on here, there must be a few people who know their way around a DSLR, and I'm hoping to pick your brains. Since I borrowed a DSLR for my trip to Switzerland, I've been coveting the awesome images it produced in comparison to my current (great for a point and shoot) Lumix DMC-LX5. I have narrowed it down to the Canon EOS 700D and the Nikon D5300, I'd love to hear from anyone who owns either (or close relatives) about how well they rate them and also about the annoying things you don't necessarily notice until you've lived with something for a while. I believe both manufacturers have proprietary lens fitment, so I'm going to have to live with that company for a long time after I make this decision. Also, I notice they have a 18-135mm and 18-140mm, respectively, lens option over the kit 18-55mm. Will these be abit too jack of all trades? Or a great place to start off as a manual controls noob (I do have a little bit of experience). I intend to use it for vanity shots of my Zed, big landscapes and the occasional portrait. Thanks in advance. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dblock Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 Not much help but most kit lens are pap IMO. Spend some moolah on a good lens and then both cameras will shine. I got a tamron 18-55mm f2.8 from 18-55. Sharp as a pin. The kit lens I was always a little disappointed with as I take pictures indoor with not great lighting. Canon also has the cheapy 50mm f1.8 which is a star IMO. The thing that swayed me to canon was that lens where easier to come by and generally seemed a little cheaper and the nikon ones harder second hand that is. Nikon cameras seem a little better specs wise though IMO. I have a 500d and it does all that I ask in manual or program but changing the lens made all the difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I found the Nikon menus on my D90 easier to navigate than the Canon equivalent. May not sound like much, but I do believe that when it comes down to it (much like I guess you've found) you're picking over the tiny details as both manufacturers make awesome bodies. My kit lens was an 18-105mm, which I find very good for most things except even at 105mm the zoom isn't great. I had to buy a 70-300 lens as well for the motorsport stuff I enjoy shooting, but really I could do with a good wide angle to complement them. I've been looking at the 10-24 lens Nikon do, but haven't taken the plunge yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ioneabee Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I've just bought a Nikon D5100 after advice from 2 separate photographers - both said that the Nikons were better quality Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
350zedd Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 The 18-140mm lens is a good versatile lens for everyday use. However for big landscapes you will need a wide-angle. I use a Sigma 10-20mm on my Nikon D80. Brilliant lens and good value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dblock Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I've just bought a Nikon D5100 after advice from 2 separate photographers - both said that the Nikons were better quality I found people who like canon hate nikon and vice versa. Both the same but different to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoogyRev Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 I have just got a D3200, not that much different from the 5200 unless you really want the WiFi module and a flip out screen. Really pleased with it. Bundle came with a 18-55mm and a 55-300mm lenses. When you compare the two http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D3200-vs-Nikon-D5200 Unless your a geeky photographer there is not much in it. . . the 70% off also did it for me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stutopia Posted January 15, 2014 Author Share Posted January 15, 2014 Dblock, the 50mm f1.8 has been recommended to me before, as you suggest it's rated as delivering excellent bang for buck. It's one of the reasons I started thinking about canon as I kind of leaned toward Nikon previously. As you say, it seems to be one of those Mac v Windows, Apple v Android, Sega v Nintendo type rivalries that polarises groups of people. I don't take many indoor shots so I'm hopeful low light won't be an issue, at least initially. Dan, I do believe these will both be decent entryish level camera body's, as you rightly say, I have indeed been agonising over the detail. The Nikon's pixel count and onboard GPS are attractive. I often jump out the car on a road trip, take a snap and then don't know where it was! Just somewhere between A and B. I try and take a quick iPhone pic now as well, so I get the geo tag from there later. However, 99% of all my photos are viewed on iPad or iMac so the pixel count of the Nikon isn't a massive factor, unless it gets to hardcore cropping down. I have a little experience with the D3100 and I found the menus a bit tricky, some stuff just seems to be hidden away sometimes. The touchscreen on the canon might be a factor. I'll bear that in mind ioneabee and 350zedd it's good to hear some love for the 18-140mm. Cheers all, you've confirmed I'm at least on the right track and not about to drop an expensive nut. Plus no one has said, they're not happy with the manufacturer they've chosen, which is also good to hear. I've also ot a bit of guerrilla movie bug to scratch too, I know you can't beat a dedicated video camera but I can't justify that expense so I'm hopeful I can accessorise whichever DSLR I go for, to shoot some nice looking HD footage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stutopia Posted January 15, 2014 Author Share Posted January 15, 2014 Funny you should mention the flip out screen DoogyRev, it's actual quite an attraction, I like a low shot so it'd be a big help for that, as well as shooting movies. The wifi doesn't float my boat really, an SDHC will go straight into my iMac. Not sure if that'll be quicker or slower transfer rates than wifi, but it's not a massive factor unless I'm shifting hundreds of photos. Beaming them directly to a tablet or phone might be kinda cool though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dblock Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Are you buying new or second hand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stutopia Posted January 16, 2014 Author Share Posted January 16, 2014 Are you buying new or second hand? New. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fraktion Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Wedding photographer here You cant go too far wrong with either. Bare in mind they are entry level SLR's. Even so, the quality will be much higher than your average cam, even with the kit lens. But you should ditch the kit lens. As stated above, either manufacturer makes a 50mm f1.8. BUY THIS LENS. Learn to use it at f1.8 and it'll prove to you why DSLR's are so amazing. You can get them for around £100. For that kind of quality from other lenses, you'll be paying loads more. Remember, camera bodies come and go, lenses should stay with you for life. Ultimately though, the camera is just a tool. See which one fits better in your hand. I shoot Nikon and struggle when I pick up a Canon. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KyleR Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 I shoot Sony, so I have no bias towards either Nikon or Canon. I chose the Sony because of the internal stabilization, rather than it being in the lens, which in theory means all lenses are stabilized and therefore cheaper. I really need a new one as I have the a350 (see a theme going on here ) which has a flip out screen and has proved its worth many times. Sony's big thing ATM is their SLT cameras which don't have a flipping mirror, instead it has a semi translucent one which reflects a small amount to the eyepiece sensor. In return for this you lose about 0.3 stops of light, which my mean you have to take a slightly slower image or up the ISO a little, but since there is more mirror flipping about, the images are crisper due to less camera shake. So thats something worth thinking about Anyway, in my limited experience with the other two. (Girlfriend used Nikon, mate is Canon) I find the Nikons colours to be out of this world compared to Canon and Sony, but the Canon has significantly more lenses available to choose from, and possibly more users in the past. This equates to cheaper lenses second hand on eBay compared to Nikkor versions. Don't be afraid to buy second hand lenses, some cost a small fortune and it's simply not feasible to buy brand new. As was previously mentioned, lenses are for life. Unless they've been mistreated, they'll last forever, or well over 1,000,000 shutters anyway. So it's really up to you as to whats more important. I only have the 2 kit lenses for the Sony and a 200-400 F4 Tamron, but I'm thinking of jumping @*!# and going for a Nikon, simply because of the amazing colour that they produce. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilp Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 The kit lenses are fine for a newbie. The canon cameras are now touch screen also and very easy to work. The guy on here called Clown has done some beautiful photos on his kit lenses. I have also done the same with mines. I have the 18-55mm f4-5.6, 55-250mm and the 50mm f1.8 prime lense. I'm currently saving for the tamron 17-50mm f2.8 lens and a canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS lens as i'm looking for something a bit more versatile. I wouldnt go spanking 600 quid on a lens when the camera doesn't cost this much at the start. Learn to utilise the kit lenses and camera body then once you feel ready go and buy a fixed aperture lens as dblock suggested. Dblock have you put any images up before? I'd love to have a swatch at them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dblock Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 The kit lenses are fine for a newbie. The canon cameras are now touch screen also and very easy to work. The guy on here called Clown has done some beautiful photos on his kit lenses. I have also done the same with mines. I have the 18-55mm f4-5.6, 55-250mm and the 50mm f1.8 prime lense. I'm currently saving for the tamron 17-50mm f2.8 lens and a canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS lens as i'm looking for something a bit more versatile. I wouldnt go spanking 600 quid on a lens when the camera doesn't cost this much at the start. Learn to utilise the kit lenses and camera body then once you feel ready go and buy a fixed aperture lens as dblock suggested. Dblock have you put any images up before? I'd love to have a swatch at them. Not really a a photographer of cars or at all really. TBH I only ended up with an DSLR because I thought those small digi camera with 20megapixels where crap and seemed to be getting worse! Had a cousins wedding coming up so got a 500d second hand with less than 10k actuations for £250! That was like 3-4 years ago. Got a shot of a kit lens of a friend. Thought the camera was duff. He then give me a shot of a 85mm f2.8 lens and that was much much better. I tend to take photo's of people indoors and the lighting is generally pants. Got a 50mm f1.8 and a sigma 17-70mm. It was f2.8 at 17mm but went to about 4.5 soon after. Again rubbish for indoors. Didn't get on with it that well although colours where really nice. I only got that one since people say oh f4.5 is fine blah blah, Not for me even with the iso jacked up still having trouble getting a good image. So finally got the tammy 17-50mm f2.8 non stabilizing. Got it for about £150 second hand. Honestly its pin sharp, gives lovely detail and f2.8 throughout is great for indoor night shooting. It means my family can take pictures with no camera shake and so on which is handy too. I pretty much shot everything on the 50mm f1.8 for ages. I don't do composed images, I don't bother with photoshopping etc. I kwow its better but I quite like the raw feel. At my cousins wedding the photographer took the photos that where expected but everyone said my photo's captured the mood and what was happening better which I was happy about. Things I have learned but are probably wrong though, learn to shoot on a fixed lens. It will take a little guess work out and make you work the shot more IMO. Never ever buy brand new. If you buy a camera body for £1000. Its worth £500 next week. If you buy a second hand body for £500 its worth £475 next week. I also disagree with spending money on the lens. It makes all the difference. A guy I work with has a 50d and he bangs on about how good it is and blah blah. Everyone says my picture quality was better and better lit. Why? Better lens. Also coming back to the 2nd hand thing you buy a new lens for £600 its worth £400 tomorrow so if you don't like it reasons change etc your £200 down. But a second hand lens for £400 it will be worth that all day long if you keep it nice. All IMO of course and I should say the kit lens isn't pap. But for what I need my camera for it isn't the most suitable. Also I'm terrible at taking photos. Like really bad my brother is actually better but I quite enjoy it so I do it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bounty Bar Kid Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Not much help but most kit lens are pap IMO. Spend some moolah on a good lens and then both cameras will shine. I got a tamron 18-55mm f2.8 from 18-55. Sharp as a pin. The kit lens I was always a little disappointed with as I take pictures indoor with not great lighting. Canon also has the cheapy 50mm f1.8 which is a star IMO. The thing that swayed me to canon was that lens where easier to come by and generally seemed a little cheaper and the nikon ones harder second hand that is. Nikon cameras seem a little better specs wise though IMO. I have a 500d and it does all that I ask in manual or program but changing the lens made all the difference. For once I agree with him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bounty Bar Kid Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Canon 450d with a 15-85mm lens. Love it. Easy to use and great shots. As Neilp mentioned, check out clown's work. Kit lens and amazing! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dblock Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Not much help but most kit lens are pap IMO. Spend some moolah on a good lens and then both cameras will shine. I got a tamron 18-55mm f2.8 from 18-55. Sharp as a pin. The kit lens I was always a little disappointed with as I take pictures indoor with not great lighting. Canon also has the cheapy 50mm f1.8 which is a star IMO. The thing that swayed me to canon was that lens where easier to come by and generally seemed a little cheaper and the nikon ones harder second hand that is. Nikon cameras seem a little better specs wise though IMO. I have a 500d and it does all that I ask in manual or program but changing the lens made all the difference. For once I agree with him Not my fault your infrequently wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJRFulton Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 (edited) Better to buy an entry level camera and a good lens, than a mid range camera with a kit lens. I'd only ever advise to buy a Nikon or a Canon, not that other manufacturers make particularly worse camera bodies (these days there are only very small %'s between the best and worst in terms of image quality), but simply there are a far better choice of lens and accessories available for both. Whatever you choose you probably will end up sticking to Edited January 16, 2014 by AJRFulton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stutopia Posted January 16, 2014 Author Share Posted January 16, 2014 Better to buy an entry level camera and a good lens, than a mid range camera with a kit lens. I'd only ever advise to buy a Nikon or a Canon, not that other manufacturers make particularly worse camera bodies (these days there are only very small %'s between the best and worst in terms of image quality), but simply there are a far better choice of lens and accessories available for both. Whatever you choose you probably will end up sticking to I'm happy enough to buy the "good lens" straight off the bat, it's an option to go body only and pick up a lens of choice at the initial purchase, but I was expecting to be told to get used to the camera with the kit lens before changing. Which some have also said in fairness. Dblock I understand your solid reasoning on going second hand but I'll be buying the body new, simply because of my relative inexperience and if I went second and picked a lemon, I'd kick myself for having no comeback at the store/manufacturer. I can see myself considering second hand lenses in future though, once I've found my feet. Generally speaking, it seems to be a topic which is even more subjective than cars and just as emotive! I browsed some photography forums first, but I wasn't massively enthralled, bit too much detail for my level and a lot of Team Nikon v Team Canon stuff. Thanks for your comments, I've got some things to think about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ioneabee Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 (edited) the second guy i spoke to was also a retailer and repairer (used to work for Jessops) - it was his points I took on board more as his would have been more unbiased (plus he sold all types - canon, nikon, samsung ec etc) and he knew he wasn't getting a sale as I was going 2nd hand Edited January 16, 2014 by ioneabee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilp Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 (edited) I have a 600d but about to upgrade to a 5d mk3. My buddy has the mark 2 and both cameras with the same lens, his blows mine out the water. I wish I went full frame at the start. Dblock I agree a good lens is a wise investment but a good photographer with a kit lens will smoke an amateur with a 2grand lens I'm afraid. The 50f1.8 had too short a field of view for normal photos-it's fine for portrait though. I have some stunning raw photos on the kit lens. A good e-ttl flash will help also. Camera flash is pants. What's that old saying again? Learn to walk the walk before you talk the talk. Edited January 16, 2014 by Neilp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveM Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 if you think Zeditis is bad you wait till you start getting into photography... slippery slope!!!! i have a Nikon D7000 and about half a dozen lenses in prime and zoom. for my kind of work i found the 50mm lens to restrictive as you tend to need a lot of space to frame the shot due to the crop factor on non full frame cameras so i ended up with a prime 35mm and a range of zoom and wide angle lenses. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neilp Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 Beautiful photos mate! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveM Posted January 16, 2014 Share Posted January 16, 2014 (edited) some of the more technical shots i have taken dont end up looking 'great' if you know what i mean but the difficulty in taking them makes me smile when i look at them..... the few below for example... not great as pictures go and slightly out of focus but with the kit i have they were very difficult to achieve.... you try taking a pic of a bat in mid flight in the middle of the night! lol Edited January 16, 2014 by SteveM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.