So, we have all seen and heard about them, the Canon XTi and the Nikon D80. In your opinion which beats the other and why?
Printable View
So, we have all seen and heard about them, the Canon XTi and the Nikon D80. In your opinion which beats the other and why?
I believe the Nikon D80 is better, first off, instead of just increasing Mega pixels, they also increased sensor size, whereas Canon just increased mega pixels, and that will result in more noise. Overall I just think the Nikon D80 is a better camera
I vote for the Rebel XTi, 100%. Canon has the "self-cleaning sensor" which I see as a HUGE perk. The LCD is also 2.5" which is the same size as the D200 and the 30D. Also, it has a "cheekbone sensor" that automatically switches off the LCD when you put your eye to the viewfinder to conserve battery.
All that, plus the fact that Canon is just better. ;)
I like the self cleaning sensor, that is something that the Nikon is missing.
As for the cheekbone sensor, when I tried out the camera, the cheekbone sensor was actually quite annoying, the turning off of the screen diverts your attention from the viewfinder.
I am usually a Canon person, but from what I have read and seen the D80 is just a better camera
I say go with the Canon but not for the self cleaning sensor. I haven't heard to many positive things about the self cleaning sensor. Some guys on JP.net got the Xti and were bitching that they still have dust. I'd go with Canon for their award winning CMOS sensor vs Nikon's CCD sensor and the lineup of lens Canon has available. Just go to any sporting event and look at all the white lenses.
What info do you have that I do not on this? The Canon's always had lower noise due to the CMOS as Tom mentioned earlier...it normally does not matter unless you shoot lots of night shots. :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by nwafan20
I believe it's in the video:
http://reviews.cnet.com/Canon_EOS_Rebel ... 34086.html
First off, I think she is full of ****! I do not mind if it was true that it did
have more noise.....the truth is that both cameras are soo close with
noise that you need to sit there and go pixel by pixel and from the test
shots that I saw with both images....
In direct light....there seemed to be NO DIFFERENCE
In slow shutter speeds under 1/2 second... Canon was better
With long exposure >30 seconds.... Canon was way better
(thus she is full of ****) she should know what she is talking about but I do
not see it.
The part about the reduced sensor size giving more nose is true but to an
extent... Look at a 300D and an XT in noise levels and you will be
amazed at how different these two cameras are....has nothing to do with
the size of the CMOS but the technology to create it.... If when the 300D
came out they made a full sized sensor...it would be way nosier than the
current CMOS and Nikon CCD's.... Technology of 2 year will out way any
sensor size noise issue...... I would rather a 1.6 crop with a tad more
noise any day because of the type of shooting I do. If you are an Aviation
Photographer.... That 1.6 crop will be 10X better than the tiny bit of noise
that you can never see anyway unless you are looking at pixel level zoom
in Photoshop.
I do not want to go into all the details, but the fact is....the Photographer
makes the camera.....if you are shooting LOTS of night shots and
astrophotography, you want to lean towards Canon.... I also like the fact
that there are many more Len's available for the Canons and they are
generally from what I have seen Cheaper. I would gladly pick up a Nikon
any day without any issues because what we are talking about here is a
very minimal difference and we are doing some major nitpicking here.
The Ever long debate too Canon or not to Canon, that is the question!
I see we have a philosopher on these boards ;)Quote:
The Ever long debate too Canon or not to Canon, that is the question!
I haven't had any experience with picture quality comparison between the 2 models, just holding them at my local camera store and reading reviews online.
I myself am a Canon person like I have stated. I just find they usually have better cameras, but from what I have seen between the 2 the Nikon beats the XTi, but with my lack of photography knowledge, I'm probably wrong. 8)
I like cnet, but while they know a lot about all sorts of gadgets, they're not experts on much of anything. They're a great source of info on entry to mid-level products, but for stuff like higher end cameras or audio/video equipment I would take their opinions with a grain of salt. In their reviews of some MP3 players, for example, they'll talk about every aspect of the thing, the buttons, the build quality, the file-types supported, the user interface...and not mention one word about the sound quality!Quote:
Originally Posted by Derf
It sounds like your limiting yourself to just reviewing the camera. Besides looking at only reviews for the camera go look at reviews for the lenses that work with the camera that are in your budget. You may very well decide on one and then put some glass on it that takes a crappy picture. Figure out how much you plan on spending on a lens and then go review what both Canon and Nikon put out. Either way both cameras are going to do a good job but its what's attached to the front of the body that really counts. You have to take this into consideration.
That being said I’d still go with Canon, L glass IMO is second to none, even many of Canon’s non L products are amazing to. For $560 Canon’s 70-300mm IS EF lens is wild, its been compared to Canon’s 70-200mm 2.8 L lens that cost over $1500.
Also don't get hung up on mega pixels and not look at the 20D, the price of the 20D is well under a grand now and picture quality and build quality of the 20D cannot be disputed.
The D2X has a CMOS and its plenty noisy too, I think the processor is more important.Quote:
Originally Posted by Derf
From what I read, a CCD is more expensive.
I may be wrong, but from what I see is the D80 has the same 1.5 focal magnification factor, same as all Nikon DSLRs.Quote:
Originally Posted by nwafan20
What Nikon has done is they made the pixels smaller, to the same size sensor.
Its a paradox on how this affects certain image qualities. Strange but in some cases I prefer my D100 to my D200.
Has something to do with the "light sensitivity per pixel" "photosensitive"
More is not always better in every case.
IMO Canon was very wise not to change the sensor size in the 30D, an excellent size for aviation pics.
Just got an email on the Pentax K10D. Thought someone may be interested.
http://www.pentaxslr.com/bodies/k10
With only 15 lenses I would be cautious about it.
The pentax? 15 lens isn't enough?Quote:
Originally Posted by nwafan20
That thing is a train wreck!!! Stay far far away from it! I looked at it a few weeks ago just for ****s, OMG what junk.Quote:
Originally Posted by emshighway
IMO 15 lenses isn't adequate if you want to have a flexible camera.
But I could be wrong, I'm not really the guy to ask, just my $.02