If buying dslr

[Bob]

I am right in thinking that if someone is just starting out into digital photography and they had decided that they like the canon and nikon they would be better off with a nikon as all future lens appear to be cheaper for the nikon than the canon equivilent lens :shrug:
Bob

 

[hypnotic]

In my opinion that is not true! But no doubt someone could prove me wrong!! ...

Canon and Nikon tend to price their equivalent lenses at about the same price point.

You can get third party lenses for both makes (Sigma & Tamron etc) which are normally cheaper than the original make. These tend to be the same price for both Nikon and Canon threads.

 

[Slapo]

You can also explore other options, like Olympus, Sony and Pentax.

Of course, if you want to have the best options for 'expansion', Nikon and Canon are still the way to go.

Prices on both of their systems are pretty close.

 

[mole2k]

I've never looked myself but I have heard it quoted before that the normal nikon lenses are a bit cheaper but their pro like of stuff is more expensive than the equivilant canon L glass.

Only repeating something i've already heard, you would be best checking it out yourself. Personally I went for canon because of the noise handling as I shoot a lot indoors.

 

[apodo]

Decide what sort of ranges you would be interested in then you can compare prices for yourself on here:
http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/

One thing I have noticed is that Sigma lenses in some stores are cheaper for Canon than other mounts. I specifically remember the ever popular Sigma 10-20mm used to be something like £40 less for Canon than Nikon from Jessops which really surprised me.

Also if you want auto focus then the Nikon D40x is effectively more expensive. It will not function on older Nikkor lenses that do not have a silent wave motor, and of the third party manufacturers can only AF with Sigma HSM ones, which rules out most budget lens choices. If going Nikon AF on a budget the D50 would be better for the greater range of compatible lenses.

Michael.

 

[SimonTALM]

Nikon do tend to have slightly lower prices performance on direct equivalent lenses e.g. 70-200 f2.8 with optical stabilisation, the Nikon is between £100 and £200 cheaper than the Canon depending where you buy it. Incidentally both are much cheaper than the Sony (Pentax & Samsung don't have a direct equivalent).

However, Canon do have a bigger range of lenses than Nikon so for some Canon lenses there is no direct Nikon equivalent e.g. Canon 70-200 f4 L, so if you are a prosumer the Canon system may be a better option than Nikon. Additionally Canon have introduced image stabilisation to more lenses than Nikon especially on the lower focal lengths.

In reality comparing prices between the the two is difficult as there are very few direct matches. My personal opinion is that provided that you go for Canon or Nikon I doubt you'll go far wrong.