I just joined today and I don't know if this is the best forum to ask my question or not.
I am thinking to buy my first SLR camera this shopping season. I'm thinking of buying either Canon T1i or a Nikon D90. Both seem that have good reviews. I am aware of the fact that D90 is more expensive and probably the Nikon lens have higher price. If you exclude that factor, what would be your recommendation? and Why?
Thank you for your help and sorry for spamming your forum.
I would go to the store and hold one. egronomics are a big deal.
also, fps could be a deciding factor if you want to try to shoot sports.
What you really should do is go into the B/S forum and buy a used 20d for around $300 and use that extra cash to buy higher grade lenses. The 20d also has much better egronomics than a t1i.. (cant speak for d90) and faster fps.
The better lenses will make a MUCH larger difference than a newer body.
let me repeat that for emphasis.
The better lenses will make a MUCH larger difference than a newer body.
hold one in a shop...
I have big hands and when I got my first dslr the nikon d50/canon 350D were current. I ended up getting an Olympus E-500, which I hadn't even considered, because it fit in my hands more comfortably.
Keep in mind too, whatever you start with most likely won't be what you finish with (I now shoot a canon 30D and 5D mark ii)
dont buy entry level stuff if you think you want to do it seriously. dont buy anything then nikon or canon.
resell value holds good on bodies and it is cheaper to pay now then upgrade. mindblown is example of that.
buy used one or two gens older advanced body. D80, D200 or canons equivalent, invest in glass and then when you will see you going serious, buy new pro body and use actual one as backup.
mdude85 wrote:
I disagree, I don't think the value holds well at all on bodies. Most bodies have huge depreciation levels. Lenses hold their value a lot better.
+1
Bodies don't hold value at all. Lenses do. Good lenses hold value even better yet.
I'm with the other posters on getting a used body to begin with... heck, get a used lens as well! The 20D has been recommended, but I say go for the 30D instead. It has a s-l-i-g-h-t upgrade from the 20D, but it's the small upgrades that was (in my opinion) supposed to have been part of the 20D in the first place. I've used the 20D for years and know that the small upgrade to the 30D is definitely worth... that is if I were to do it from scratch again. I ain't losing money on the 20D to get me a 30D, that's for sure!
Yea, bodies lose value at lighting speed. But if you buy a used body you negate a decent portion of that.
Try this for a starting kit. It is cheap and will produce great images. Mind you some of my professional portfolio was taken with a rebel xti and 50 1.8
20d ($310) or 30d ($450)
50 1.4 ($300) or 50 1.8 ($100)
18-55 is ($100) a cheap kit lens but is actually pretty good. Will give you IS and a zoom for flexibilty
The old misconception of Nikon lenses being more expensive than Canon. When I worked in a camera shop, one day (when it was slow) we made a "dream kit" of both Nikon and Canon lenses. This ended up being about $10,000 US worth of glass for each system. Who was most expensive? NIKON. By how much? ?About $100 US. That was it.
Short version: You will likely not notice a difference in price. Choose the system based on the body layout and if one system as a particular lens that you like and the other system doesn't offer it.
If you do go to a camera store to check them out, reward that dealer with your business since they took the time and effort to help you.
FSJ_Guy wrote:
If you do go to a camera store to check them out, reward that dealer with your business since they took the time and effort to help you.
this is good karma, I still buy from the same shop that let me use their cameras to help me decide. The staff know me by name and I can play with all the canon lenses while I wait for my regular guy to be free, I quite like it and don't mind paying the premium over importing for the personal service. Nothing beats face to face advice from someone you have dealt with for a few years
bodies hold value good, not as good as lenses but still better then PC components or so. here in europe you can sell last gen for few hundret less then actual gen and when buying used, it holds value very good. ebay is a bit sick here in EU.
anyway my point stands, it is still cheaper then selling it and buying better few months later
20D new = $2200 CAD. now, $300 CAD.
1D new = $5000 CAD. now, $400 CAD.
1D mark II new = $5000 CAD. now, $800 CAD.
1Ds mark II new = $8500 CAD. now, $2350 CAD.
5D new = $2800 CAD. now, $1000.
40D new = $1700 CAD. now, $600 CAD.
Camera bodies don't hold their value.
Unless there is a feature you *really* need like video in one of the new bodies, you'de be best picking up a used camera body, a used 20D would do, a used 40D would be excellent. Then put your money towards lenses - they are more important than the camera body. I would rather have an old body with a good lens than a new body with a kit lens...
FSJ_Guy wrote:
The old misconception of Nikon lenses being more expensive than Canon. When I worked in a camera shop, one day (when it was slow) we made a "dream kit" of both Nikon and Canon lenses. This ended up being about $10,000 US worth of glass for each system. Who was most expensive? NIKON. By how much? ?About $100 US. That was it.
Short version: You will likely not notice a difference in price. Choose the system based on the body layout and if one system as a particular lens that you like and the other system doesn't offer it.
If you do go to a camera store to check them out, reward that dealer with your business since they took the time and effort to help you. ...Show more →
+1
And don't forget that Nikon lenses have a FIVE year warranty, Canon only one.
