Less expensive DSLR's, Nikon or Canon

I looked at the Nikon D50 with it's kit lens and liked it, but I wonder if
the Canon Rebel XT is better. The prices are about the same. The Nikon is
a 6MP while the Canon is 8, but the results look about the same. What do
you people think? Nikon or Canon?

"Jack" wrote in message
...
I looked at the Nikon D50 with it's kit lens and liked it, but I wonder if
the Canon Rebel XT is better. The prices are about the same. The Nikon
is
a 6MP while the Canon is 8, but the results look about the same. What do
you people think? Nikon or Canon?

Both are good. Don't worry too much about MPs.

Jack wrote:
I looked at the Nikon D50 with it's kit lens and liked it, but I
wonder if the Canon Rebel XT is better. The prices are about the
same. The Nikon is a 6MP while the Canon is 8, but the results look
about the same. What do you people think? Nikon or Canon?

Right. They are too close to call. I have the Canon and I have been
very happy with it. I had several Canon lens and was a little more use to
the current Canon way of doing things so for me Canon was the best choice.

Had I not had those lenses, I would have been equally happy with the
Nikon.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

"Jack" wrote in message
...
I looked at the Nikon D50 with it's kit lens and liked it, but I wonder if
the Canon Rebel XT is better. The prices are about the same. The Nikon
is
a 6MP while the Canon is 8, but the results look about the same. What do
you people think? Nikon or Canon?

I don't know the Nikon. Nikon have an excellent rep.

I have an XT - it's excellent. If you buy an XT you won't be buying a pup.
The advantage of 8Mp over 6Mp lies in cropping - probably. I produced an A3
B&W yesterday from 65% of the pixels of myXT (5.2Mp) and it's technical
quality is rather good. I won't vouch for the artistic qualiity.

Canon make a very large range of lenses and their L lenses are very very
good. If you buy into Canon and buy good lenses you can upgrade the body in
a few years and take advantage od technical advances. I imagine the same is
true of Nikon lenses.

I don't think you will go wrong with either brand.

John

Nikon kit lens better than Canon kit lens by far.
Cameras about equal.

bmoag wrote:
Nikon kit lens better than Canon kit lens by far.
Cameras about equal.

Interesting view. I found that the Canon kit lens looked and felt very
cheap, but it performs quite well.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

Not the D50 18-55 kit lens and also the non USM Canon 350D 18-55 kit
lens.
Both are quite bad.

"bmoag" wrote in message
et...
Nikon kit lens better than Canon kit lens by far.
Cameras about equal.

bmoag wrote:
Nikon kit lens better than Canon kit lens by far.

The Nikon D50 18-55 kit lens, and the Canon Rebel XT 18-55 kit lens, are
about equal, but actually the Canon is a bit better.

You may be confusing the kit lenses. On the D70s, the kit lens is the
18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED, which is indeed much better than the 18-55.

Cameras about equal.

In fact, the XT is a much better camera than the D50, and about equal to
the D70s. Canon has no entry level D-SLR like the Nikon D50 yet.

"SMS" wrote in message
...
bmoag wrote:
Nikon kit lens better than Canon kit lens by far.

The Nikon D50 18-55 kit lens, and the Canon Rebel XT 18-55 kit lens, are
about equal, but actually the Canon is a bit better.

You may be confusing the kit lenses. On the D70s, the kit lens is the
18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED, which is indeed much better than the 18-55.

Cameras about equal.

In fact, the XT is a much better camera than the D50, and about equal to
the D70s. Canon has no entry level D-SLR like the Nikon D50 yet.

Defin, much better? Personally I really hate the ergonomics of the 350D,
most others I could live with.

You may be confusing the kit lenses. On the D70s, the kit lens is the
18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED, which is indeed much better than the 18-55.

Not necessarily. In Europe, at least in Greece, we have 3 options. The
18-55, the 18-55 plus the 55-200 and the 18-70. The last is the most sold
combination

In fact, the XT is a much better camera than the D50, and about equal to
the D70s. Canon has no entry level D-SLR like the Nikon D50 yet.

No is not. It is just your opinion. I have the opposite opinion.

Especially for the noise myth. I had the opportunity to compare side by side
for a week a Nikon D70 and a Canon 20D. The first impression was that Nikon
photo's even more vivid than Canon's, they had much more noise at high ISO.
That makes me decide to buy the Canon in first. But - surprise - when try to
remove the remaining noise with a good plugin as Noiseware pro, in Canon's
photo no more noise reduction was possible before bad damage the picture
sharpness. In contrary, Noiseware pro removed tons of noise from Nikon
pictures. The result after this post process was that Nikon photos have
about the same or better noise as Canon's but.

..the bad thing that in Canon photo's remained was a cast, like if was waxed.
This slightly waxed look is common in most Canon photos and I don't feel
comfortable with that.

My opinion is that both companies had made different decisions. Canon has
chosen to reduce noise internally, with hard coded software. On the other
hand, Nikon has decide to leave noise reduction to post process, as the
computing power of a normal computer can not compared with the internal
processor and the noise reduction algorithms are continuously developed, so
we can benefit from the latest, more sophisticated software. I prefer this
last approach, but I understand that others prefer to have the photo ready
out of the camera.

The above is correct for the comparison of D70 and 20D. In D50, Nikon have
included some noise reduction algorithms as Canon does. From the photo
samples I have seen, both D50 and 350D are good and comparable. I just
prefer the Nikon slightly.

--
Dimitris M