Nikon D300 or Canon 50D??

jeniveeev

jeniveeev

Messages
1,407
Name
Mac
Edit My Images
No
Hi - i know you have probably been asked this question lots of times and possibly fed up replying over and over! sorry but im really indicisive of late, i was ready to go and upgrade my faithful D70 of 4 years to the slick new D300......then, i went into Jessops to make the purchase but for some reason asked to handle the canon D50! now im really confused! i felt the canon focus was quicker (is this true or maybe its because im so used to my nikon?). the camera felt lighter and the images looked really nice and sharp on the lcd! i mostly shoot portraits, kids outdoors and water landscapes. my one concern would be the nikon lenses i have would then incurr extra costs to replace them with canon! also the canon came with a great lens all for the same price as the body only price for Nikon! can anyone give me some user advice on the D300 and 50D? also, is the 50D user friendly (i.e. easy to work your way around like the Nikon?). thanks:)
 
jeniveeev said:
.............. also, is the 50D user friendly (i.e. easy to work your way around like the Nikon?). thanks:)
Click to expand...

Personally (and others agree) I don't think so, but all that matters is that you are comfortable with the camera. Nikon owners will tell you to get the D300 and Canon owners will recommend the 50D. Both will take excellent pictures, both have pluses and minuses. If you like the way the 50D handles then that's the one to buy.

Simple really ;)
 
I had the 50D and now I have the D300.

Coming from the Canon world (300D->30D->50D) I can say that the Nikon was a real handful to get to grips with but I believe I'm more proficient with my D300 now than I ever was with my 50D.

As far as ticking boxes goes, they're both great cameras. :shrug:
 
being familiar already with nikon and its easy to work my way around, together with having lenses then i think il stick with my initial first choice and go for the 300! so glad i asked! having read other reviews there doesnt appear to be much difference but off course the 50d as more pixels but then 12 is plenty.
 
And remember the images may have looked better on the LCD because the LCD is better...
 
yes, the lcd appeared to be bigger but i was also impressed with the d300 screen. i would be gutted if i bought the 50d and regretted it. ive enjoyed my D70 and im sure the D300 will not disappoint from what i have read and heard. thank you again.
 
RichardtheSane said:
And remember the images may have looked better on the LCD because the LCD is better...
Click to expand...

Funny you should say that, the images on the screen of my Canon G10 look far better than they do when I download them to my computer, although there does seem to be an issue with the G10 in this respect.

I've got both a D70 and a D300 and whilst the D300 is obviously newer and of a higher spec I still quite like the quality of images the D70 can produce.
 
the d70 has been great for me and il keep it as a 2nd camera for backup. im now looking to upgrade and am now photographing for others. the only thing ive found inconvenient is the dust marks on sensor which has been professionally cleaned but have returned and multiplied!! i believe this is quite common with d70's!
 
Whilst the D300 and 50D are both great cameras, what have you got in your lens collection? if you get a 50D, you'll need to rebuy a whole bunch of lenses. Also if you're gonna keep the D70 as a backup camera, then it would seem to make sense to stick with nikon as you'll only need to keep one set of lenses to share with both.

as for autofocus, the D300 will probably have been in 'magic' auto area mode which is great but not the fastest of AF modes and not always what the doctor ordered. But then that's why there is a handy external AF mode switch. try it in dynamic and see what you think in that mode.

dave
 
jeniveeev said:
being familiar already with nikon and its easy to work my way around, together with having lenses then i think il stick with my initial first choice and go for the 300! so glad i asked! having read other reviews there doesnt appear to be much difference but off course the 50d as more pixels but then 12 is plenty.
Click to expand...


:clap: Coming from the D70 which you are totally familiar with, you will find the D300 controls a breeze within a minute. OK, it will get more complicated as you explore your way through the menus but you will know where you are at, not to mention the Nikon glass that you have and are familiar with. If you get the D300, I think you are going to be very happy with your decision! :D
 
I personally have the 50d, and can happily say that the IQ of my shots is up a reasonable amount from my 400d. Everything seems so much sharper.
 
I went from the D70s to a D300 and the transition was quick and easy. As others have said, it's how the camera handles that really counts, if you get on with Nikon that's a good steer towards the D300. I for one find Canons awkward, others love em. Either way neither camera will let you down.
 
i have the 18-70mm, 50mm 1.8 and a tamrom macro/zoom. i also have a nikon speedlight and other little accessories. to replace all of this would set me back much more than my budget for a new camera! i did feel the canon focused quicker but then the 300 is sharp too, im so excited about stepping up to a semi pro and wouldnt want to make a wrong decision as im parting with lots of money! i was surprised at how large and heavy the d300 is but it feels like a great sturdy camera that will last me many years.
 
if you alreayd have the lenses, and are comfortable with the nikon setup, then keep with nikon, if you have lots of spare cash and WANT to change, then do.
 
jeniveeev said:
i have the 18-70mm, 50mm 1.8 and a tamrom macro/zoom. i also have a nikon speedlight and other little accessories. to replace all of this would set me back much more than my budget for a new camera! i did feel the canon focused quicker but then the 300 is sharp too, im so excited about stepping up to a semi pro and wouldnt want to make a wrong decision as im parting with lots of money! i was surprised at how large and heavy the d300 is but it feels like a great sturdy camera that will last me many years.
Click to expand...

I'd say that if you have lenses, then the decision is almost made for you. as you say, getting a 50D would require double the budget (or more) to change the lenses over.

the D300 is a great camera and as long as you feel comfortable with it, you'll be fine.

the semi-pro body and features are a nice step up and I like the fact that several things which were button and dial changes now have their own little level or knob. also the screen is great. It is a sturdy bit of kit, but hey, it can double up as a makeshift club is required :)

dave
 
As you already have lens for the Nikon it makes a lot more sense to go for the d300, in all honesty I doubt you'll see any real difference image wise. Wayne
 
Forget the body - Doesn't matter enough, reviews (and users!) like to talk up specifications, but in reality both will take good pictures in the right hands. And both will take bad ones in the wrong hand too :)

How it fits in the hand is very important - you could have the best image quality in the world, but if it doesn't feel right, chances are you won't use it much!

Then look at the lens choice - what do you want to shoot? Do it have the lenses you need. What is your budget for lenses? Nikon glass is generally more expensive than Canon glass.

IMHO the body choice should be the last one you make after considering lens choice and handling.
 
i mostly shoot kids outdoors and portraits. ideally i would have invested in glass over a new body but the dust marks on the sensor are getting worse, particularly on prints! i would also like more pixels and the 300 would double what i have. being familiar with the nikon and already having lenses sways me towards nikon and i also felt it was a sturdier camera to hold, ***' considerably larger than the d70. over time i will invest in much better lenses and build up a good quality kit, in the meantime i need to get away from continually photoshopping the dust marks on every single image!
 
never been really bothered about the 50D, already having a 40D
I like my canon by I've seen the D200 and really liked it. the D300 is a step up.
the focus speed might depend upon the lens....also just because the screen on the 50D is top notch, it doesn't mean that the images full screen will be.
 
Only a small thing but having only owned Canon, i wish they would copy the rear screen cover.

Stops all the smudges
 
dcash29 said:
Only a small thing but having only owned Canon, i wish they would copy the rear screen cover.

Stops all the smudges
Click to expand...


Stick a GGS screen protector on there - the Nikon ones are a pain anyway and reduce the quality of the screen.
 
Stick a GGS screen protector on there
Click to expand...
got one... just as bad

why is the nikon cover a pain? i looked at the 50d and d300 yesterday and thought the d300 was ok
 
I've used Canons for the past several years and at first, moving from a 30D and 40D to a D200 seemed odd at first – no mode dial on the top, dedicated ISO/quality/FPS button, a lever to open the CF compartment door – but looking back on it, after 18 months of use there's little, if anything, that would make me switch back to Canon. The Nikon optics are equally good and the AF on the D200 is good. I expect the D300 is even better.

I have large hands and the slight size difference of the DXXX series over the XXD bodies means a lot. I also think the build quality is better on the Nikons, although i've heard the 50D is better than the 40D.

I'm currently looking at a D300 as my works kit but seeing as we traditionally use Canon at my company, they initially waned to keep with EOS. I showed the boss my D200 and he couldn't believe the difference in handling and build quality over the 40D.

I say stick with the brand you obviously already trust, keep your lenses and invest - a full-scale change of brands is very, very costly.
 
Like i said i looked at the the 50d and d300 yesterday and the focussing time on the d300 seemed a lot slower than the canon, my 30d is quicker

no mode dial on the top
Click to expand...
yes very strange, plus so is the adjustment for the focussing points.
 
dcash29 said:
Youve posted exactly the same in another thread, ive asked why.

Have you an answer????????????
Click to expand...


cheaper with no difference in IQ at lower ISO's, better at higher ISO's.


one think the D300 has is the better focusing system but it does cost significanlty more.

50D not really an upgrade over the 40D and as a cannoite I#'m not going to recomend a nikon lol
 
dcash29 said:
Like i said i looked at the the 50d and d300 yesterday and the focussing time on the d300 seemed a lot slower than the canon, my 30d is quicker.
Click to expand...

You are having a laugh aren't you? I have the 30D and the D300, used both a lot for motorsport and the D300 has the best, fastest AF system on the market, bar maybe the Canon 1D MkII or III or perhaps Nikon's own D3 which I am told is even more refined. Canon's xxD's don't get anywhere near, not even the 50D and certainly not the 30D!

Assuming you have worked out how to drive it that is :thinking:

And thats before you start to look at shutter lag figures.

If you want to reliably shoot moving stuff using AF your choices are the top end systems from Canon or Nikon, which is the 1D or the D300/D700/D3 (delete according to taste/wallet)
 
It does make me laugh when people harp on about AF speeds being so slow that it impedes their photography. Granted, if you're photographing Button razzing around Silverstone or taking shots of Jets at Corris then yep, it matters a lot, but for everyday stuff I doubt a millionth of a millisecond makes a massive difference - the human brain doesn't work that quick and certainly not your trigger finger. I'd rather the AF be slower but accurate than fast and innaccurate.

I dug out my EOS 650 the other day and compared to me D200 it's slow as hell but if I was to do some general sooting it would be more than adequate. Don't put all your trust in what the tech spec sheet says... ;)
 
specialman said:
It does make me laugh when people harp on about AF speeds being so slow that it impedes their photography. Granted, if you're photographing Button razzing around Silverstone or taking shots of Jets at Corris then yep, it matters a lot, but for everyday stuff I doubt a millionth of a millisecond makes a massive difference - the human brain doesn't work that quick and certainly not your trigger finger.
Click to expand...

Well, when you track a moving object that varies in distance between you and the subject then that is where the speed problem occurs. As you hold down the AF button as it moves you need the system to accurately track the changes in distance. Once you release the shutter, then lag comes into play. Work out how far something going a modest 60mph towards you travels in a second and then work out whether that distance would be significant in your photography and mess up your picture. Don't forget lag is on top of your programmed shutter speed and possibly waaaaay more than the shutter speed you are trying to use... Add in that the problem becomes more accentuated the closer you are to the subject (which of course you will be, because you are waiting for that beautifully framed shot with the car/bike/bird/dog filling the frame).

Oh and don't think I am just talking about head on shots either, even shooting a completely side on panning shot with the subject passing exactly at 90 degrees to you, the distance changes between you and the subject as it goes past you. The rate of change is less than head on, but still there.

I appreciate that if you aren't someone who spends a lot of time shooting action, you might not get it, but its very real and very much not the case of the skill of the photographer that matters - well, maybe if you count hit or miss, but consistency wise, its purely the kit!
 
None taken, I was just explaining that the hardware speed can and does matter in action shots :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top