Canon 300D vs 350D vs Nikons D50 vs D70

[slitman]

After alot of research and deciding on what kind of new digital camera to go with, I am thinking of making the jump into Digital SLR.

Now the big question is how to decide between the following:

Canon 300D
Canon 350D
Nikon D50
Nikon D70

The biggest thing is I don't want to go overboard and spend on more features and all than is necessary, but then again, get the best value on the market.

Any and all suggestions/comments are welcome! :)

[timmciglobal]

Well...

#1 question I'd ask myself first is which do I like the feel of more "bigger" stockier cameras or smaller cameras. The D70 is a "big" camera, the D50 from pics is slightly samller but still "stocky" the XT is deffinitly 'Small' which can pose as many problems as 'big' Have to like the feel of camera.

#2 question is will you be doing high ISO shooting. If so forget the nikon's. Sure they are great cameras but they don't have the ISO and image noise performance of the canon line.

#3 question is what do you intend on shooting and as such what lens would you buy? If your not going to get another lens but the "kit" and don't need high ISO the D70 is great camera (though I'd caution you about moire issues, it really turned me off but I'm a big "people" photography person) if your going to go and spend more then the lens choices are pretty = among the two.

Outside of that pretty much which you like. I'm a canon person but thats because ISO 100 on canons is amazing and I can't stand "image noise" in my pictures.

Tim

[slitman]

Hi Tim,

I don't want something "too" bulky which I consider the 300D to almost be on the border line. I went yesterday evening to look at the 300D, 350D, and Nikon D70. Of all of them, my favorite was the Canon 350D. Although I have owned both Canon and Nikon cameras, the Canon just seems to be someone simpler and better layed out.

However, I have been reading alot about the upcoming D50 and it sounds very promising and might have a slight edge over Canon.

I am not planning on doing primarily higher ISO photography, but definitely want the capability to cover everything that might be of interest. So I imagine that even going with the ISO would serve my purposes fine.

Can you elaborate on the "more issues" you mentioned with regards to the D70? As for the D50 or either Canon, I will likely go with the "kit" lens for now.

Overall, the Canon line impressed me the most, but would still like to consider the D50 once it is released. Any suggestions on which lens to go with?

[timmciglobal]

Moire, it's a "rainbow" effect on patterns that is caused by the camera's low pass filter. It's nearly impossible to remove though there are filters out there to help with it.

I don't know if the D50 lowered the occurance of it but I took a sample picture at a local shop using D70 of salesman thatched shirt and the entire bottom portion which was sort of wavy had a rainbow hue going threw it.

Tim

[timmciglobal]

http://img2.dpreview.com/gallery/nikond70_samples/originals/dsc_0153.jpg

Check out that picture.

Look at all the windows, see the rainbow? = moire.

(well not same shot, but same building with 350d)

http://img2.dpreview.com/gallery/canoneos350d_samples1/originals/img_3961.jpg


Tim

[MatH]

I'm also deciding but betwen Rebel XT and Pentax *Ist DS wich has the same sensor as Nikon D70 and its brothers. I'll do high ISO shooting most of the time so at first glance XT would be a logical choice. On the other hand DS has biger and brighter viewfinder (uses pentaprism instead of pentamiror) wich is also very desirable in low light conditions.
High ISO can't help if you can't really see what you're shooting.

[Rhys]

I'm also deciding but betwen Rebel XT and Pentax *Ist DS wich has the same sensor as Nikon D70 and its brothers. I'll do high ISO shooting most of the time so at first glance XT would be a logical choice. On the other hand DS has biger and brighter viewfinder (uses pentaprism instead of pentamiror) wich is also very desirable in low light conditions.
High ISO can't help if you can't really see what you're shooting.

The XT/D350 has a max ISO of 1600 and - like the *ist can be used with AA batteries if you buy the optional handgrip.

Thus far I have had no problem seeing through the viewfinder in low light with my XT. I love the fact my XT is so light. I just wish the kit lens was a little better.

[slitman]

That is very interesting with the D70 as I had not noticed that; any idea if that has been corrected with the D70s or D50?


http://img2.dpreview.com/gallery/nikond70_samples/originals/dsc_0153.jpg

Check out that picture.

Look at all the windows, see the rainbow? = moire.

(well not same shot, but same building with 350d)

http://img2.dpreview.com/gallery/canoneos350d_samples1/originals/img_3961.jpg


Tim

[slitman]

Did you even consider the Nikon D70 or upcoming D50?

How would you compare the Canon to the Pentax?


The XT/D350 has a max ISO of 1600 and - like the *ist can be used with AA batteries if you buy the optional handgrip.

Thus far I have had no problem seeing through the viewfinder in low light with my XT. I love the fact my XT is so light. I just wish the kit lens was a little better.

[George Riehm]

After alot of research and deciding on what kind of new digital camera to go with, I am thinking of making the jump into Digital SLR.

Now the big question is how to decide between the following:

Canon 300D
Canon 350D
Nikon D50
Nikon D70

The biggest thing is I don't want to go overboard and spend on more features and all than is necessary, but then again, get the best value on the market.

Any and all suggestions/comments are welcome! :)

If you come to the Canon thread, for advice, then you will likely be advised on the one potential negative point of the Nikons...moire'. And ISO performance differences are very small. It's called "subtle poisoning". I have been using a D70 since it was introduced in March 2004 and have absolutely no complaints. In 8000+ photos have seen moire' only twice (easily removed in both cases).

The bottom line is: Would I buy another D70 (or D70s)? Absolutely. Would I consider a Canon instead? Only the 20D.

[slitman]

Good to know :)

So if you were to do it over again and didn't need all that the D70 has to offer, would you go with the D50 instead?

QUOTE=George Riehm]If you come to the Canon thread, for advice, then you will likely be advised on the one potential negative point of the Nikons...moire'. And ISO performance differences are very small. It's called "subtle poisoning". I have been using a D70 since it was introduced in March 2004 and have absolutely no complaints. In 8000+ photos have seen moire' only twice (easily removed in both cases).

The bottom line is: Would I buy another D70 (or D70s)? Absolutely. Would I consider a Canon instead? Only the 20D.[/QUOTE]

[Rhys]

Did you even consider the Nikon D70 or upcoming D50?

How would you compare the Canon to the Pentax?

I handled a Nikon D70 and wasn't impressed. I have not touched the Pentax - none of my local stores will stock them.

[Ray Schnoor]

Good to know :)

So if you were to do it over again and didn't need all that the D70 has to offer, would you go with the D50 instead?
I also bought a D70 over a year ago after trying the digital Rebel, 10D, D100, and the D70 and have been very happy with my selection. I much prefered the D70 over the digital Rebel and I believe at the time that I slightly prefered the 10D over the D70, but wasn't willing to spend the extra money. If I were to do it over again, I might go with the 20D over the D70s(that money thing might keep me from doing that, though), but I don't think that I would go with the D50, if only because of the different memory type. I have several digital cameras which all use CF, so I don't see any reason to have to keep multiple types of memory. On the other hand, I suppose I could go with an adapter.
Ray.

[minc3d]

Im someone who just moved from a Sony DSC-F828 digital prosumer cam to a Digital Rebel XT 350D and have to say that I like the layout of the 350D a lot. Its easy to use and takes great photos on full auto. I fully suggest you get this camera along with a Sigma 18-125mm lens like i did, you won't regret it.

[Rhys]

I also bought a D70 over a year ago after trying the digital Rebel, 10D, D100, and the D70 and have been very happy with my selection. I much prefered the D70 over the digital Rebel and I believe at the time that I slightly prefered the 10D over the D70, but wasn't willing to spend the extra money. If I were to do it over again, I might go with the 20D over the D70s(that money thing might keep me from doing that, though), but I don't think that I would go with the D50, if only because of the different memory type. I have several digital cameras which all use CF, so I don't see any reason to have to keep multiple types of memory. On the other hand, I suppose I could go with an adapter.
Ray.
For me the choices were simpler...

The available dSLRs were
Nikon D70, D100, D1, D2
Fuji S2/S3
Olympus E-300
Pentax *ist Ds
Canon Rebel, XT, D10, D20, D1

Of these, the Nikon D1, D2 were discounted on price alone as were the Fuji S2/S3 and Canon D20, D1.

The Pentax *ist Ds was discounted as I couldn't find anybody that actually stocked one.

The Olympus E-300 was discounted because of its funky styling and poor high-ISO performance (basically, I didn't like the camera all that much).

That left the Nikon D100, D70 and Canon D10, XT and Rebel.

The D100 was discounted as soon as I tried the D70 because although the D70 felt good in my hands, it was too heavy. I have to carry a camera and lenses, goodness knows how far so lightness is better than weight.

That left the D10, XT and Rebel. The D10 was elderly and had been replaced by the D20 so I didn't pursue that. The Rebel was interesting but the XT was a lot better for not much extra money.

My only gripes about the XT are really minor niggles - the funny way one controls camera aperture and the battery isn't the same as on the D10, D20, D1 etc.

Essentially, I bought the XT because of its weight, what it can do and because it's small. Would I buy it again? Unless Nikon had a better offering than the D70 which cost the same as my XT and took Nikon MF lenses as well as AF then I sure would. Nikon by not supporting my MF lenses ensured I had complete freedom to choose between all the digital autofocus cameras so I chose the best - Canon.

The bonus is - all my CF cards work in the XT.

[slitman]

Can you elaborate on your comment below:
but I don't think that I would go with the D50, if only because of the different memory type.
Ray.

Was this simply cause you wanted to have all the same memory type for all your cameras?

[slitman]

Sounds like for me it is coming down to either the Canon Rebel XT or the Nikon D50....how would you compare those two? Haven't seen any many reviews yet on the D50.

[Rhys]

Sounds like for me it is coming down to either the Canon Rebel XT or the Nikon D50....how would you compare those two? Haven't seen any many reviews yet on the D50.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D50/D50A3.HTM

There's a pre production review as well as comparison specs. Personally, I think the XT is a better bargain.

[aparmley]

Ill let Ray explain this comment - but I don't think that I would go with the D50, if only because of the different memory type. I have several digital cameras which all use CF, so I don't see any reason to have to keep multiple types of memory.

But my intrepretation of his comment is this: I am pretty sure that second sentence explains it nicely! if Ray has a supply of CF cards, why go with a camera that uses SD cards and render his CF cards useless in it.

[slitman]

Can you elaborate on why you think the XT is a better bargain?

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D50/D50A3.HTM

There's a pre production review as well as comparison specs. Personally, I think the XT is a better bargain.

[Ray Schnoor]

Can you elaborate on your comment below:

Originally Posted by Ray Schnoor
but I don't think that I would go with the D50, if only because of the different memory type.
Ray.

Was this simply cause you wanted to have all the same memory type for all your cameras?

If I bought the D50, I would probably need to buy at least 2GB of SD memory, but if I bought a D70s, I already have between 4 and 5 GB of CF memory. Therefore, the D50 would cost me about the same as a D70s, and I would go with the D70s.
Ray.

[slitman]

So if you didn't have any memory cards and basically were starting from the beginning, would you go with the Rebel XT or D50?


If I bought the D50, I would probably need to buy at least 2GB of SD memory, but if I bought a D70s, I already have between 4 and 5 GB of CF memory. Therefore, the D50 would cost me about the same as a D70s, and I would go with the D70s.
Ray.

[Ray Schnoor]

So if you didn't have any memory cards and basically were starting from the beginning, would you go with the Rebel XT or D50?
If I was starting from scratch, I couldn't really say, since I have not held either camera in my hands. They are both smaller than the D70, though, so I'm not sure that I would like either one. They both look as though they take excellent photos, so I don't think that you could go wrong with either one.
Ray.

[timmciglobal]

Just for some comparison, here is an ISO 1600 XT image, crop at 100% and smaller view. ISO 1600 on 8x10 prints from XT still look VERY good without any noise reduction, simply isn't true with the D70.

http://pictures.divergentservices.com/iso1600.jpg

http://pictures.divergentservices.com/iso1600crop.jpg

FYI 4/10 sec shot @ F 3.5 on kit lens @ 28 mm (counting crop not actual focal length)

Tim

[Ray Schnoor]

I just can't stand by and let people say that ISO 1600 D70 photos just aren't VERY good, simply isn't true. Here is a shot taken with available light this morning at ISO 1600 with no noise reduction. 1/100 second @ F 3.5 28mm with a Sigma 28-90mm D lens. This still looks VERY good printed at 8x10, straight out of the camera. Sorry I couldn't get the speed down to 4/10 sec, but there were no lights on in the room. The only lighting was from the window and it was overcast with rain outside.

http://rschnoor.smugmug.com/photos/25794879-L.jpg

and a crop

http://rschnoor.smugmug.com/photos/25795127-L.jpg

Ray.

Edit:
Here is a link to the photos.

http://rschnoor.smugmug.com/gallery/610267

[jeisner]

Touché ;-)

I just can't stand by and let people say that ISO 1600 D70 photos just aren't VERY good, simply isn't true. Here is a shot taken with available light this morning at ISO 1600 with no noise reduction. 1/100 second @ F 3.5 28mm with a Sigma 28-90mm D lens. This still looks VERY good printed at 8x10, straight out of the camera. Sorry I couldn't get the speed down to 4/10 sec, but there were no lights on in the room. The only lighting was from the window and it was overcast with rain outside.

and a crop

Ray.

Edit:
Here is a link to the photos.

[Rhys]

Can you elaborate on why you think the XT is a better bargain?

Ok. The XT is more modern. It has more megapixels. It has better colour rendition and better noise control. It's also pretty well guaranteed that all Canon EOS lenses will fit and will work. Try that with Nikon's messed-up system!

Also CF cards are avaiklable in larger sizes and are cheaper than SD cards. Believe me, you'll need quite a few.

[Ray Schnoor]

Ok. The XT is more modern. It has more megapixels. It has better colour rendition and better noise control. It's also pretty well guaranteed that all Canon EOS lenses will fit and will work. Try that with Nikon's messed-up system!

Also CF cards are avaiklable in larger sizes and are cheaper than SD cards. Believe me, you'll need quite a few.
I agree with Rhys on some of these statements. The XT has more megapixels and CF comes in larger sizes and is cheaper than SD. I also think that the SD may be a bit too small for my tastes. My daughters MP3 player uses one, and I seem to fumble with it more than with a CF card.

This is from the Nikon website: "The new D50 offers seamless compatibility with Nikon's extensive family of high-performance AF Nikkor lenses, as well as the expanding family of DX Nikkor lenses". That leads me to believe that it is pretty much guaranteed that all AF Nikkor lenses will fit and will work. So much for lens compatibility. As to color rendition and noise control, I would have to try both cameras before I could make any judgement on that. More modern??? Who's to say?

As to the XT, I have nothing bad to say about it. I have never tried it, so I am not going to make judgements on it. It looks like a fine camera.

Ray.

[Rhys]

Sure but not all functions are available with the lenses. Nikon hide a lot in their claims. They claim backward compatibility but in reality you only get full backward compatibility with the D1 and D2. The rest are semi-compatible.

[Ray Schnoor]

Sure but not all functions are available with the lenses. Nikon hide a lot in their claims. They claim backward compatibility but in reality you only get full backward compatibility with the D1 and D2. The rest are semi-compatible.
That is not quite right. Not all functions are available with MF lenses, but they will work. All camera functions are available with all AF Nikkor lenses, as well as the expanding family of DX Nikkor lenses just as I said previously.
Ray.

Edit: I have been to B&H photo which has quite a large selection of AF Nikkor lenses, and I couldn't find one that wouldn't work. Same for Sigma and Tamron lenses.

[Rhys]

I think you'll find no functions are available with MF lenses - not even metering - unless you buy a D1/D2.

As for the others, it's a mixed bag with 3d colour matrix metering being the first casualty.

[George Riehm]

I think you'll find no functions are available with MF lenses - not even metering - unless you buy a D1/D2.

As for the others, it's a mixed bag with 3d colour matrix metering being the first casualty.

OK... How many of you out there own 30-40 year old manual lenses? I have 2 for my old FE. Was this a factor in my $1200 camera buying decision? No.

OK... How many of you working pros are using 30-40 year old, manual, non-AF lenses in your day-to-day work? Is this a factor in your buying decision?

[jeisner]

OK... How many of you out there own 30-40 year old manual lenses? I have 2 for my old FE. Was this a factor in my $1200 camera buying decision? No.

Just to be difficult LOL, I have a Pentax-M 135 f3.5 manual lens (aperture and focus) it is was released the year I was born (1977) and I have a Pentax-M 200 f4 from the same era... Yes I enjoy using them from time to time (especially the 135/3.5 as the quality is outstanding) but 98% of DSLR buyers I would imagine understandably wouldn't care less if they can use lenses that old or not, and nor should they...

[Rhys]

OK... How many of you out there own 30-40 year old manual lenses? I have 2 for my old FE. Was this a factor in my $1200 camera buying decision? No.

OK... How many of you working pros are using 30-40 year old, manual, non-AF lenses in your day-to-day work? Is this a factor in your buying decision?

I used to use my MF lenses daily until about 15 years ago when I started working in the former USSR. Most of my lenses and probably my camera bodies were 20 or 30 years old by then. I remember buying my FM2s and MD12s from old newspaper hacks, secondhand. I took thousands of photos with them and they still work just as well as they did new.

Given the choice of MF or AF, I'd probably use MF in low-light situations more than AF. Actually, I've already done that with my XT. I like the low power consumtion of MF lenses :D

[Ray Schnoor]

OK... How many of you out there own 30-40 year old manual lenses? I have 2 for my old FE. Was this a factor in my $1200 camera buying decision? No.

OK... How many of you working pros are using 30-40 year old, manual, non-AF lenses in your day-to-day work? Is this a factor in your buying decision?
I also have 3 circa 1970 MF Nikon lenses, and yes, I do use them on my D70. I would not even consider buying a non-auto focus lens now, even if I owned a Canon.

Rhys, the 3D color matrix metering is a function of information the camera gets from the lens. If the lens doesn't offer that information, of course it won't work. The D70 will still work in center weighted matrix metering, which by the way, is all that the XT offers. It doesn't have 3D color matrix metering.

The MF lenses you use on the XT, are those auto focus lenses with the auto focus turned off? The D70 works just fine with that setup.
Ray.

[Rhys]

I also have 3 circa 1970 MF Nikon lenses, and yes, I do use them on my D70. I would not even consider buying a non-auto focus lens now, even if I owned a Canon.

Rhys, the 3D color matrix metering is a function of information the camera gets from the lens. If the lens doesn't offer that information, of course it won't work. The D70 will still work in center weighted matrix metering, which by the way, is all that the XT offers. It doesn't have 3D color matrix metering.

The MF lenses you use on the XT, are those auto focus lenses with the auto focus turned off? The D70 works just fine with that setup.
Ray.

For MF, I use AF lenses and switch the AF out. I looked at the metering and from the manual it says Evaluative, partial (spot) and centre-weighted average metering modes are available. Personally, I prefer centre-weighted average for most situations. AF has 7 focus points or all 7 combined :D

One day I'll get the Novoflex adaptor and use my Nikon MF lenses.

[Ray Schnoor]

For MF, I use AF lenses and switch the AF out. I looked at the metering and from the manual it says Evaluative, partial (spot) and centre-weighted average metering modes are available. Personally, I prefer centre-weighted average for most situations. AF has 7 focus points or all 7 combined :D

One day I'll get the Novoflex adaptor and use my Nikon MF lenses.
Sorry, I should have been more specific. The XT doesn't offer 3D color matrix metering with any lens.

The D70 offers 3D color matrix metering with D/G-type lenses just like the D1/D2. Other lenses do not offer 3D color matrix metering on the D70/D1/D2.
Ray.

Edit: I wasn't insinuating by my post that the XT doesn't offer evaluative, partial (spot) and centre-weighted average metering modes, just as I wasn't insinuating that the D70 doesn't offer color matrix, center weighted and spot metering modes when 3D color matrix metering isn't available.:D

[AllanMarcus]

I'm also deciding but betwen Rebel XT and Pentax *Ist DS wich has the same sensor as Nikon D70 and its brothers. I'll do high ISO shooting most of the time so at first glance XT would be a logical choice. On the other hand DS has biger and brighter viewfinder (uses pentaprism instead of pentamiror) wich is also very desirable in low light conditions.
High ISO can't help if you can't really see what you're shooting.

Don't discount the fact that the pentax feels much better to hold. Of course you have to weigh that against more MP on the XT and IS lens availability.

Ritz Camera sometimes stocks the Pentax, so you might want to check there.

-Allan

[Rhys]

Don't discount the fact that the pentax feels much better to hold. Of course you have to weigh that against more MP on the XT and IS lens availability.

Ritz Camera sometimes stocks the Pentax, so you might want to check there.

-Allan

I like the fact the XT is very light to hold and that you can use AA batterries if pushed by buying the battery grip.

[jeisner]

.... and IS lens availability.

I am patiently waiting the ist D replacement, it will have a similar (in concept) image stabilisation in camera like the Konica Minolta. Pentax waited to releasse this hopefully to learn from KMs mistakes for a better implementation. I like the idea of all my lenses being IS, without the $200-$300 premium per lens for inbuilt IS..

[slitman]

Thanks for the response, however as indicated in the title of this topic, I am interested in feedback in the Canon 300D vs 350D vs Nikons D50 vs D70 and I have narrowed it to the Rebel XT or D50?

Given the reviews of the Pentax, it doesn't appear to be on the same level as the other cameras discussed here and therefore is why I am not considering it or looking for feedback on it.

At this point I feel I will be going with the Rebel XT. Additional comments/suggestions? How about what type of lens to go with on the Rebel XT?

How about going with just the body instead of the kit and getting either the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras or the Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM Standard Zoom Lens?

[Rhys]

I am patiently waiting the ist D replacement, it will have a similar (in concept) image stabilisation in camera like the Konica Minolta. Pentax waited to releasse this hopefully to learn from KMs mistakes for a better implementation. I like the idea of all my lenses being IS, without the $200-$300 premium per lens for inbuilt IS..

Now that really would be neat. Maybe it'll start a trend - dust-removing, stabilised sensors across the board?

[Rhys]

Thanks for the response, however as indicated in the title of this topic, I am interested in feedback in the Canon 300D vs 350D vs Nikons D50 vs D70 and I have narrowed it to the Rebel XT or D50?

Given the reviews of the Pentax, it doesn't appear to be on the same level as the other cameras discussed here and therefore is why I am not considering it or looking for feedback on it.

At this point I feel I will be going with the Rebel XT. Additional comments/suggestions? How about what type of lens to go with on the Rebel XT?

How about going with just the body instead of the kit and getting either the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras or the Canon EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM Standard Zoom Lens?


I'd say the 28 isn't wide enough. Remember there's a 1.6 times crop factor so 28mm is actually 44.8mm which doesn't give you a wide-angle lens. What I'd suggest is getting the kit lens for the 18 - 28 portion and something else for longer ranges. Personally, I'm getting the 28 f2.8 and 50 f1.8 asap and maybe something else later.

[Tyger]

thanx all, i found this thread very helpful!

[24Peter]

Here's a full review of the D50. For me, reading it - esp. comparing the photos between the different cameras - confirms the Canon is a better deal.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/

[slitman]

Wow, really?

Don't settle just on READING the review, actually go to the store and compare the cameras, that is where there was no question the D50 was far superior for me.

Good luck and enjoy!

Here's a full review of the D50. For me, reading it - esp. comparing the photos between the different cameras - confirms the Canon is a better deal.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/

[24Peter]

Well its tough to compare actual photos produced by both cameras side by side in a store. That's most important to me. Ergomics (size, weight, etc.) are also important to me but less so than the actual pictures I can take.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page20.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page21.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page22.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page23.asp

Glad you found the camera that was right for you! :)

[slitman]

I always like to do my research online; compare specs, photos, etc. and then go into the store. Then by having both cameras next to each other, I can determine which is best for me; I have always found that taking a picture of a scene with the same camera, by two different people, sure can produce two totally different pictures based on the design, size, and weight of the camera.

For example, for me, I was sold on the Rebel XT when I read the reviews on here, but when I actually put it in my hands at the store, found it to be too small, didn't care for the controls, and overall was not something comfortable enough for me wanting to use all of the time. On the contrary, after picking up the Nikon D50, everything fell into place and immediately knew I wanted to use this camera as much as possible.

Well its tough to compare actual photos produced by both cameras side by side in a store. That's most important to me. Ergomics (size, weight, etc.) are also important to me but less so than the actual pictures I can take.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page20.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page21.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page22.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond50/page23.asp

Glad you found the camera that was right for you! :)

[larrytucaz]

Well, welcome to all of you. I post at dpreview.com under this same handle, but am trying out the dcresource.com forum for awhile. I shoot with the 300D, but if I may be so blunt, frankly, the 300/350 forum there--lately, if you try and have a reasonable debate of the 350D merits vs D50, it gets nasty.

I shot Nikon for quite a while but went with the 300D last year when I got a good deal on one, and I don't regret it--although of course "wanderlust" gets the better of me sometimes & I like to see what Nikon is up to. I have to be honest--when the 350D came out I was excited initially but quickly was disappointed. On the other hand, the D50 impresses me a lot.

I like the layout & feel of the D50 MUCH better. I agree with Jeff here at DcResource.com--I think the 350D is too small, the D50 feels just right, like a "baby D70." I also was disappointed that Canon with the 350D designed its WB/ISO/FEC etc to work through the color LCD instead of the "classic SLR" way through the control-panel LCD. That just seems SO point & shoot-ish to me.

That said, I do prefer the 350D's usage of CF instead of SD--I think camera makers treat CF like the plague nowadays when it's a great media esp. for D-SLRs, I do prefer wired remotes to wireless ones so Canon got that right, they didn't leave off the control-panel LCD backlight like Nikon did w/D50 (though, really, if it's that dark you often need a flashlight for the buttons anyway--illuminated button-labels anyone?), then there's the depth-of-field preview and mirror lockup.

I don't know if the D50 is the camera for me to return back to Nikon as I sometimes have considered doing (it's hard not to be loyal when you've shot with them for some 20 years as I had), for not much more I could just about get a used 20D and that camera rocks. But if I were buying first-time between the 300/350/D50 etc and had no lenses stock-piled (I had few Nikon-ones, by the way, when I went 300D last year), I would totally go for the D50.

But of course, the main thing is--the pictures are what matter, and all 4 cameras listed take great photos. I have taken great ones with my 300D so that helps keep things in perspective somewhat.

[jkingston]

Guess I will weigh in here.

Just what is the size issue with the 350D? People criticize it because it is too small. Huh????

I bought it because of its size. When I travel with a camera, I prize compactness. The 350 is amazing in the features and image quality it offers in a compact form factor. Size is not a negative here. It is a positive.

I have no trouble holding the camera. I do use two hands, but I was taught to do that with every camera. I guess for some, if you are going to hang a honking huge lens on it, the smaller size might not matter much. After all the huge lens will insure that the rig is big. But even with the significantly sized 17-85, I find the smaller size compared to the 20D to be a plus.

So the way I see it, I get image quality comparable to the 20D, which leads the pack in this segment, in a smaller size for less money. What's not to like?

[slitman]

For me, the size was the deciding factor of going with the Nikon D50 over the Canon Rebel XT. After previously owning the Panasonic FZ20, I found the Rebel XT too small when hold it. Maybe if you have small hands it would work, but seems most people prefer a slightly larger camera when it comes to a DSLR for the feel of a more traditional SLR. For me, it was just a more stable and solid feel in the D50 which make it much easier to takes pictures.

Guess I will weigh in here.

Just what is the size issue with the 350D? People criticize it because it is too small. Huh????

I bought it because of its size. When I travel with a camera, I prize compactness. The 350 is amazing in the features and image quality it offers in a compact form factor. Size is not a negative here. It is a positive.

I have no trouble holding the camera. I do use two hands, but I was taught to do that with every camera. I guess for some, if you are going to hang a honking huge lens on it, the smaller size might not matter much. After all the huge lens will insure that the rig is big. But even with the significantly sized 17-85, I find the smaller size compared to the 20D to be a plus.

So the way I see it, I get image quality comparable to the 20D, which leads the pack in this segment, in a smaller size for less money. What's not to like?

[Bluedog]

Well its to each his own and I tend to agree with jkingston ... ;)

[aparmley]

I agree too! I think worst thing about the XT's size is that so many people find it too small! :D But, then again, what do I know, its only my first DSLR/SLR so maybe it is too small, I mean I know I wouldn't complain if it were bigger. But it takes fantastic photos and all the controls are very intuitive. It makes shooting fun and easy, isn't that the point?

[TheObiJuan]

If the 20D successor gets 7 cross-type AF sensors then I'll get it. Else, I will sell some gear and get a 1DMKII and a 350D. Sadly, I will need two cameras where a single 'perfect' camera would suffice. Canon sure knows how to squeeze every dime out of their customers.

The tiny size, small weight, and nimbleness of the camera make it so attractive. I could leave the camera with a body cap in one of my domke f2's side pockets and I probably wouldn't even notice it.

[Ray Schnoor]

Well its to each his own ... ;)
Absolutely. If the XT does not feel comfortable in your hands, why would you buy it just because someone else says it is not too small. If the XT does feel comfortable in your hands, who cares what anyone else says.
Ray.

[cmoore23]

I've been working hard on my camera choice, looking at everything from an S2 IS through to the big boys (dSLR). I finally bought my camera.

Ultimately, I decided dSLR for the quality and narrowed it down (from samples, reviews and so forth) to four cameras - istDS, 350d, D70, D70S.

I bought the 350d. Just in case it helps anyone, here's my reasons.

The Nikons suffered from too much moire for my liking. I don't need to spend the time fixing it up (with varying success).

The istDS picture quality didn't seem quite up to the 350d. That's my opinion based on the shots I've seen - you don't have to agree.

The 350d was a little small (true) but fits my hands ok. So I'm happy. Either camera was going to be good - I just felt that the 350d was just that bit ahead in picture quality.

[Bluedog]

cmoore23 ... good choice for sure as the 350D/XT is a excellent camera no matter what the nay sayers say ... :rolleyes: ... now get some good glass to go with it and you'll be set.

[George Riehm]

I love to watch a good brain-washing. ;)

[TheObiJuan]

I love to watch a good brain-washing. ;)

LOL, George!
It's true though, the overhyped moire. It does exist, but will hardly come up.
It is only visible in a few of the standard test pics from this site and dpreview.

I would rather have sharper pictures out of camera than no moire, really.
Because now, I usually have to sharpen 'em up, as canon recommends, to adjust for the anti-aliasing filter.
It sure seams easier to fix moire occasionaly, than sharpness always.
Canon users end up buying uber sharp lenses to get sharp results where normal 'good' lenses should do it.

The 1D mark II has a weaker AA filter than the 20D, just another reason to upgrade. :p