thinking of converting to the darkside

[dxrocnxj]

so ive been using my nikon d40 for the past year or so and now im thinking canon could possibly be a better fit for me.

looking to either buy a 20/30/40d
im looking for advice, whats the best bang for my buck?



i shoot low light concerts.
i shoot outside, walking around new york city, 15 minutes away.
im trying to become a well rounded photographer.
shoot everything and anything.

any help would be appreciated. :)

[GaryS]

I thought you were already on the darkside.... :)

Why the thinking about switching? I'm thinking that Nikon's upcoming D90 is probably going to be killer.... If I had Nikon gear right now, I'd be waiting to see.

On the Canon side though, I think you will find that the 20/30/40D are all good and similar cameras. I would argue that the 20D is getting kind of old now (all the used ones have lots of miles on them). In most ways, the 30D is just as good a camera as the 40D. But the 40 does have more features, so if they are important to you, then the extra cost can be worth it.

Are you looking at fast prime lenses for concert photos?

[dxrocnxj]

well im not a canon know it all by any means
but im sure itll be a while til i look into "L" series lenses
but i am indeed looking at solid f2.8 lenses.

[PhotoMaster]

I suggest the Canon xsi.. Your nikon D40 is a great camera.. But when it comes to 1600 ISO shooting in low light the xsi kills the D40... The menu system is also great and easy to use. I would look away from the 20/30D cameras.. The 40D is great, if you don't mind the weight and size.. I had the Nikon D40 for a few days and did some tests... you'll love the 1600 ISO performance for your night shooting on the xsi.. The D40 just can't keep up.. but it sure does feel great when holding it... Canon xsi with 17-55 f2.8 lens.. I hope this helps..

[dxrocnxj]

im a rather tall guy, 6'4'', so i have rather big hands. im looking for a body of magnesium this time around instead of plastic. i like the feel of a "real" camera. if you know what im saying. just the size and weight help me out, the d40 is rather small for my hands.

[FLiPMaRC]

Why do you think Canon is a "better fit"? :)

[dxrocnxj]

Why do you think Canon is a "better fit"? :)

from what ive been hearing and reading; the glass is very very good.
and with anything other than a d40 i can finally autofocus any lens.
thats been a real pet peeve of mine lately.

also, i feel the canon flashes give better light than the nikon flashes.
just from what ive seen other shoot, id try to do with my nikon and cant get the results i see with canon.

[PhotoMaster]

My advice to you is to try out both the xsi and 40D... the xsi feels bigger than the nikon D40... that's for sure.. With the price pretty close between the 40D and xsi.. the 40D may suit you better if you want the bigger camera.. I have smaller hands so the 40D was too big for me.. and of course I wanted the wider angle lens the xsi comes with vs. the longer telephoto of the 40D

[griptape]

The 30D is a steal right now if you don't need the live view or extra fps of the 40D. Just the fact that it extends to ISO 3200 (which will come in handy if you're shooting concerts and don't need to make large prints), which the XT(x) bodies don't. Having said that, even though glass is generally a little less expensive than Nikon's, saying Canon glass is better would be too much of a generalization.

[Rooz]

just from what ive seen other shoot, id try to do with my nikon and cant get the results i see with canon.

hmmm...reread what you wrote. when you reread it consider that the results don't depend on the C or the N. they depend on the I. if you cant get the results...perhaps its because YOU can't get the results. do you think a photographer like CW is getting his results becasue of the gear he uses ? do you think chris ross is getting his results cos of the gear he uses ? its almost insulting to the abilities and talents of those individuals.

while you're at it and to really drive the point home...check out this thread to see what a talented photographer can do with any tool. http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38765

dont take this the wrong way dylan. i'm a huge fan of your work and have enormous respect for what you've achieved in your work in a short space of time. but if you think changing brands will somehow miraculously improve your photography or somehow get you the results that you';ve been unable to get...you are sadly mistaken and you're already behind in your quest to be a better well rounded photographer.

there are many reasons to love what canon produce but i gotta say, saying things like one brand of flash gives "better light" than the other...well sorry to say bro...it's a bit of a copout and an excuse and well...it's kinda lame.

sorry man, just calling it like i see it. :(

[Gintaras]

Rooz, I would disagree with you. I am not saying great camera can automatically improve photographer’s skills, but… a proper camera and a good photographer can make a very nice blend, do not you think so.

Dylan mentioned low light at concert, for which one needs good high ISO performance plus fast yet affordable lens, most probably a prime like 30mm 1.4L. Speaking of which CCD sensor found on Nikons before D300 came to light sucks at high ISO as far as I know. Sorry, but 1600ISO or higher and Canon kills Nikon hands down, except for superb D300 which costs a ton more.

So the only Nikon known for low light high ISO is D300 and fast lens only adds to the already hefty price while Canon has cheaper cameras with CMOS sensor to offer plus some of faster Canon lenses are relatively cheaper than Nikons while Canon has the best selection of primes. Remember you yourself complained about Nikon not having VR on its 17-55 2.8 lens, unlike Canon.

PS: Sorry for disagreeing pal.

[GaryS]

I'm with Rooz. Switching camera brands because you aren't getting the results you want is not going to work out, the camera just isn't going to make that much of a difference.

Dylan, do you have a flickr or smugmug or some other kind of account where we can see your photos?

[adam75south]

out of the 3 you mentioned i'd have to go with the 30d for best deal. i've owned my 30d for a couple of years and i've never once thought negative thoughts about it. i'm currently looking for a new camera, but my decision is between the 30d and xsi. new thread coming shortly.

[Gintaras]

Gary, for sure one cannot gain skills by swapping brands, but there are special situations in which one must look for the best solution. Dylan told about his priority for low light concert shooting, which means you cannot stay ISO100 with fast lens as you would do for stills. So the obvious answer would be CMOS sensor which beats CCD sensor at high ISO. Canon has a range of cheaper DLSR all with CMOS while Nikon has only D300 and D3 CMOS which cost in excess of normal enthusiast budget. So for low light high ISO images I would surely look for CMOS sensor DSLR and not for CCD or alike. Then there comes cost issue where Canon offers XSi or XTi or 30D all under a $1000 while Nikon has only D300 for around $2000… so cost quality wise Canon is obvious choice when one needs high ISO plus fast lens which also cost a lot.

[Gintaras]

Dylan, if your budget allows take 40D, if cost is an issue then 30D is your choice.

Or you can think about D300 Nikon if money is enough.

[dxrocnxj]

well i appreciate all teh feedback i got, even rooz's :P
i appreciate the honesty and see where everyone is coming from.
i like to think alot, always find myself going back and forth through
everything.


anyways, i think i might stay nikon ultimately BUT
i would like to own a canon to see which i do like better.

[griptape]

Have you considered renting?

[Gintaras]

it is very difficult to decide between Nikon and Canon... but since you mentioned high ISO i believe CMOS sensor is a tad better. that said D40 does well at high ISO too and if i am not mistaken high ISO on D40 was rated above D80 not mention D50 or else, before D300 with CMOS came. so may be you think what you need this jump for before you do and i believe this is a great idea to rent camera before you buy provided this is not expensive.

btw, you must also think which FAST lens you pick since your priority is low light concert images.

AND, forgot to add, i am not sure i got it right but since reading forums i get a feeling that normally THIRD PARTY lenses perform better on Nikon... which if true is worth considering. since a year ago i had Sigma and was not happy with it on Canon but many Nikonians use same lens and happy. and you do not get Sigma with HSM for Canon, only Nikon.

[michaelb]

You can pick up a used 30D for about $600 now; incredible deal, IMO. Most seem to feel that the 30D is very close the the 40D in terms of high ISO performance and some even think the 30D is better.

[Visual Reality]

If high ISO performance is all you're after, as well as using any great lens out there today, then I'd wait for the D90. It will be very solidly built and larger than the D40. I'd try out a D80 and see how it feels, it will likely be similar. It's the only thing you'd need to upgrade, rather than jumping ship entirely along with lenses and accessories.

[Gintaras]

Visual, i notice Dylan does not have plenty of Nikon glass, so selling Nikon kit would not hurt. question is IF he wants to sell it or not, i, honestly speaking would not do, i heard great feedback about D40 and selling this means selling cheap anyway.

[cdifoto]

Wouldn't it be easier and more logical to upgrade the D40 to a D80? That takes care of your limited lens issue. Even Nikons are capable for concert photography provided you get a lens with a fast enough aperture and focus motor. The D80 is quite good even at ISO1600, in my opinion. Here's a full resolution sample from dpreview.com:

http://dpreview-img.fotki.com/gallery/nikond80_samples/originals/dsc_1287.jpg

Here's an ISO3200:

http://dpreview-img.fotki.com/gallery/nikond80_samples/originals/dsc_1295.jpg

Nothing unusable about that to my eyes.

[T06]

If high ISO performance is all you're after, as well as using any great lens out there today, then I'd wait for the D90. It will be very solidly built and larger than the D40. I'd try out a D80 and see how it feels, it will likely be similar. It's the only thing you'd need to upgrade, rather than jumping ship entirely along with lenses and accessories.

Very smart answer VR.;)

[michaelb]

Sell your furniture, appliances, whatever you have to and get a D300. :D

[JTL]

LOL! If I were buying a camera today, it would probably be the D300. But, if I were buying one early next year, it would be the 5D replacement! ;)

The hospitals are filling up with people reporting D300 fever...:D