DSLR's... which one do I choose?

After Christmas, I am considering buying an SLR. I love my Kodak Zoom right now, but I'd also love an SLR.

The three I am considering are:

- OLYMPUS E-410 w. 14-42mm LENS ($549.99)
- NIKON D40 w. DX 18-55mm LENS ($559.99)
- CANON DIGITAL REBEL XT w. 18-55mm LENS ($619.99)

The Olympus has the highest MPs (10) with the Canon having 8 and the Nikon 6.1.

The only main difference between the Olympus from the Nikon and Canon is that it has lower optical zoom. Other than that, it sounds like the better deal of the three. Higher resolution, filter size and 35mm equiv... but I dunno!

Any advice?

research them all some. For me it is Nikon all the way but we have several members that swear by Canon. Have you compared them on Dpreview?

Here is the link for the 3 your are thinking of compared side by side. There are in depth reviews, sample galleries, and owner opinions.

I don't think you can go wrong with either of them. It is just a matter of what serves you best. And remember Mpx is not the most important thing. All 3 of these cameras are on the same level but the Mpx varies from as you said 10-6.1.

Good luck on whichever you choose and let us know. :)

Michelle

They all sound like great cameras. I wouldn't worry too much about MP unless you require a high mp camera for developing pictures.

You know Sheena who runs Border Collie rescue in BC (TDBCR)? She's mentioned that any of those DSLRs are fine.. it's the lens that play a big role. They can cost as much as the camera itself!

Go with the Nikon D40. It's one of the best digitals on the market. Clear, concise, crisp pictures. Worth the $$. And that is according to my photographer friend, Mike Kodas.

How much is the XTi up there? I would definitely stick with the Canon but if you can, get the XTi. Canons are incredibly user friendly. I was able to learn mine completely by myself.

Quality photos and well worth the money. :)

Canon Canon Canon Canon Canon Canon Canon
... or maybe Nikon, if you really want it.




I wouldn't even consider the Olympus, but that's just because I know nothing about it ... but I almost never hear people talking about that brand.

Why not go to the store and see which one feels best in your hands. That will make a huge difference.

I agree with .sarah. I just finished a digital beginner's photography class, and the teacher swears by Canons. I have the rebel xt, and I love it. I'm getting my third lens for Christmas. :D I have only Canon brand lenses so that makes a difference too I think. I also don't hear much about Olympus. The bid debate is Canon or Nikon, so I would think they're better cameras. If you can get the Xti, go for it. It's got more mp than the Xt (which is why you were leaning toward the Olympus, right?).

Oh, and CANON!! :D

I used to be stuck on Canon. But I got the Olympus a few months ago. It is by far my favorite. I just love the 18x zoom.

I have the D40. I use it as my back-up camera to my D80. The only time you'll notice the lower mp is if you want to print poster size images. You can't tell the difference in regular prints, even up to 10x13. It's light, easy to carry, easy to use and takes great pictures. Nikon has a very good Canadian warrenty too.

Camera bodies come and go. Glass is forever. You will eventually spend far more on glass than your camera body cost. You need to look at what lens system you want to lock yourself into. The D40 lacks an internal focusing motor so to use autofocus you need a lens with a built in motor(the entire Nikkor DX line and some third party for Nikon lens). Older Nikon lens won't work on the D40. Olympus has their own attachment system, which limits the number of non-Olympus lens you can use, although Sigma and Tamron are both making lenses for the Olympus system now.

D40x here as well.

I've found out the whole Nikon v. Canon debate is pretty moot. After speaking with my photography instructor, several professional photographers, and just observing on the 'Net, it runs down 50/50.

I'll agree, however, that the lens make a HUUUUGE difference.

Several of the suggestions here are really good ones....

Stick with either the Canon or Nikon (both are old reliable companies and both are top choice brands of professionals). They also both have a wide choice of lenses and accessories available.

Go to the store and actually handle the cameras. What good is a bargain DSLR with all the bells and whistles if it's a pain to hold or use for any length of time?

Megapixels only mean how large you can print and enlargement, nothing more. If you are only going to send pix by email or print in only 4x6 size then MP don't matter much.

Here is a chart on MP vs print sizes for a rough guideline.
http://www.design215.com/toolbox/megapixels.php


As for my own vote:

I'm a proud owner of 6 Canon cameras, most recently the XTi (which I recommend over the XT because of size of LCD among other things). I also just bought my hubby an XTi for Christmas. I don't know what the XTi's are selling for in your area but here we got ours for around $690+tax with kit lens at a camera store in our area.

My Canon Rebel XTI has 10 megapixils. You may have been looking at an older model? I love my camera, but I haven't used the others so I won't be too much help to you.

You guys are mistaken, she is talking about the XT, not the XTi. The XTi is newer than the XT, and the XT does have 8MP. :)

I have the XTi, and swear by it. Though I don't use it every day (kinda hard to carry it in my purse everywhere for those spur-of-the-moment snapshots) but when I do get to use it, wow! I haven't had time lately, but now that I'm off work... watch out!

I do swear by Canon, but its all in what you're used to. I recommend Canon. You will pay more, but you won't regret it, and the quality by far surpasses the others, in my opinion. I can give you technical details, but some of them I'm not even sure I understand or that they even make a difference :)

I won't get into the "which one to choose" because it really depends on price and feature set you want more than anything. The top brands all have pretty equivocal image abilities and quality.

comment on Canon brand:

Quote:

---

the quality by far surpasses the others

---

I would have to disagree with that. Even pro photographers and any of the major review sites say the quality between the top name brands are very close and one does not "far surpass" another in image quality between comparable models of each brand. I think quality depends far more on the photographer: I've seen breathtaking photos from all the top brand names.

I would most agree with Giselle's post. I use a Nikon D80 and greatly enjoy it but I have not used a D40 or the other models so I could not objectively give an opinion on the differences. I would go to a review site (link given above I think) and look at them side by side and decide which features you want most .

Well as I said, I was not stating it as a fact, I was simply stating my opinion.

Also, if you'd like some nice examples of what Nikon and Canon can produce in the hands of talented photographers, visit www.weeklyshot.org. If you search around each person's website or flickr, you can usually tell which brand they have. I took a gander at it and visited about 4 people's websites. It was, once again, split 50/50. Two were Canon diehards and two were Nikon fans (specifically Nikon D50 I noticed!).

Your choice :)

So here are two photographers, each shoot with Canon v. Nikon respectively:

Craig Brewer uses Nikon if I'm not mistaken:
http://craigbrewer.com/
He posts on the greyhound forum and, wow, it's really amazing.

Aaand, here's a Canon fan:
http://www.mendonphoto.com/

Thanks everyone! I understand that the Nikon D40 doesn't have AF, which wouldn't be a good thing to go without when my main subjects are Border Collies. I was looking at the Canon XT at the store the other day, and it seems nice. Only, I do crop a lot and know someone who has a Rebel (a photographer) and when she crops, quality is lost.

I love canons everyone in my family has them, they are so easy to figure out how to use.

I'm looking for a new camera too since my flash doesn't work and I'll deffinatly be going with a canon again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BC_MoM

Thanks everyone! I understand that the Nikon D40 doesn't have AF, which wouldn't be a good thing to go without when my main subjects are Border Collies. I was looking at the Canon XT at the store the other day, and it seems nice. Only, I do crop a lot and know someone who has a Rebel (a photographer) and when she crops, quality is lost.

---

I don't know who told you the Nikon D40 doesn't have autofocus but they are dead wrong. Here's a link to a site with a review on it and it's plainly obvious from the pix also that there is an Auto/Manual switch on the lens. I can't imagine ANY camera in this day and age NOT having autofocus, although a very few lenses don't have that option but they aren't common.

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2007_...nikon_d40.html
"The D40’s 3-area autofocus system also adds to the camera's overall speed, delivering fast and precise focus under varying shooting conditions. Incorporating Nikon's advanced Multi-CAM 530 AF Sensor Module, the three-area AF system, with central cross-type sensor operation, adds effective new focusing options and ensures greater ability to capture that perfect shot."



As for the photographer friend with the Rebel..

If you have to crop a MAJOR amount (like the dog is the size of a thimble in the pix) and you didn't have a sharp pix to start with, or were using a low resolution setting, then yes there would be a loss of quality. However some people get way too hung up on the RAW vs high quality JPEG format thing and it's possible that's what your friend is talking about. For average users any perceived loss of quality is mostly unnoticed unless you are enlarging by great amounts for printing or web use. This would apply to any DSLR not just a Rebel.

If all you want is a decent pix of your dog you aren't planning on enlarging bigger than a 8x10 or needing to crop to make up for a thimble sized dog in a pix, either the XT, XTi, or the D40 will do just fine. Pick whichever one suits your tastes, budget, and hands.

Incidentally if you aren having problems getting your subjects to fill the frame, a DSLR has interchangeable lenses that you can buy one later that will zoom in closer. Most of the DSLR's kit lenses seem to have a wide angle lens with them, which honestly is great for tight rooms, group shots, and landscapes. Usually if you buy a DSLR with 'body only' it's about $100 cheaper then you can buy whichever lens suits your preference rather than being stuck with a $100 lens you won't use.

Thanks for all that info. I really am considering the Rebel now, as I did like how it felt.

Just Re: the Nikon for a second, the Nikon D40 does not come with the AF. I know someone who has one, and had to buy something to go along with it.

AF as in auto-focus or the assist-beam?

Sorry, misread.

Quote:

---

However, I am looking more at the D80 or D40x as my current lenses will not work with a D40 with the autofocus feature as they do not have a motor on the lens. To me that is a huge downfall with the D40.

---

Quote:

---

Yeah, whenever people ask about the D40 I try to always remind them that it does not have an AF body so the lens HAS to be AF or you will be manually focusing which is no fun for moving subjects!

---

Quote:

---

I found that out with the autofocus and am a bit upset.

---

I have a d40. It has autofocus. What it doesn't have is an focus motor built into the camera. The autofocus motor is in the lens. What that basically means is with an old lens you have to focus manual. With a current model lens, the autofocus works exceptionally well. The entire line of Nikkor DX lens will autofocus and do it quickly on a D40.