Home Forums Gear Photography Camera Question, NIKON D80 or D300 vs Canon 40D

Ok, lurk in here often and look at folks photos and have a question about digital SLR's and proper choice. FYI I got one few days ago and am considering swapping out or upgrading with the store which is my option.

As for me, most of my history was film related. Was a photography major in college in the early 90's until I changed since it appeared digital would take over--at the time the dark room was one of my favorite places and the idea of no prints was simply sad. I have had and used/abused a couple Nikon F3HP's and a Nikon F100, but ultimately got rid of all my gear (except my enlarger and other darkroom stuff I have stashed in my folk's shed) and since have used a couple Canon Elph powershots and loved them. The older of the two has a couple hundred dives on it many below 100' using a canon factory housing. The second is my current camera I use for hunting and fishing.

So I am finally at a place where I want to take art quality photo's again and wanted to decide on a digital SLR. I love my canon point-n-shoots, and enjoyed beating the hell out of my dad's AE1 back in the day. But all my SLR experience has been with NIKON--and therein lies my comfort. So, when I picked up my recent camera, I got a D80. Now looking back, I am considering upgrading to the D300, but there seems to be a ton of Canon folks pushing the 40D. I will admit I like the controls on the Nikon's back more, but am open and know I will accustom to whatever I use.

So whats the deal these days? Which way to go.

Thanks,

Will

The Canon guys will tell you Canon, the Nikon guys will tell you Nikon. As neither, I may be able to make a point (or two).

Nowadays (not sure how this went with 35mm) you will choose a body to go with your lens collection, not the other way around. If you are going to buy OEM lenses (Canon or Nikon), then choose a body accordingly. If you are going to buy aftermarket lenses (like the Sigma EX line I'm partial to), then choose a body via secondary characteristics.

Nikon is widely rumored to use Sony sensors. To wit, studio tests like This one show virtually no difference between the Sony A700 and the Nikon D300. They probably have the same sensor. If the lenses are not going to be branded, it boils down to camera ergonomics (more or less).

The Canon 40D is the other in this class that is popular and compares similarly to the Sony A700, Nikon D300. (And I would recommend a body in this class from your stated goals).

"Stetson" and "VTi" are the Canon dudes. I have an Elan II 35mm but I'll let them dazzle you with the Canon and why you should own one -- which I'm gonna bet is heavily glass oriented (no offense guys, but we non Canon dudes gotta have our fun while we can)

Well, I like Canon and would never again shoot Nikon or invest in their system.

When it comes down to it, the proof is in the image pudding. Picture quality speaks for itself. Great images can be had with both systems, but starting fresh with a new system there is not a single good reason to stray from Canon.

Just my $.02

I know a couple of guys that ran out and bought the D300 based on the multi point AF etc. They have since switched back to Canon. Don't get sucked into measurebating statistics. Try to compare actual images. Remember the D300 is still a crop camera and runs $700 more than the 40D. In that price range I'll be expecting nothing less than full frame. I personally don't think you can make a poor choice between the two except for the drain on your wallet. You want to buy into a line of lenses. Not brand loyalty or bodies. Bodies will continue to update. Nikon and Canon will always be Ford Vs Chevy, Remington Vs Winchester. Personally I just love it when theese two compete for my $$$. Competition for consumers is a beautifull thing!

According to the specs on both cameras, (40D and D300), the Nikon has a larger area sensor.

There are those who will buy one, and revert to the other from both sides.. On Fredmiranda.com, I read just yesterday about two guys who had had very negative experiences with their Canon bodies and switched to Nikon.

You're right though, it's the same debate on Ford/Chevy type of thing.. Also agree that the lens is everything re: pix quality. With crap glass, no body from any manufacturer is going to make any better shots..

The EOS 5D seems to be roughly equivalent to the D300 but it's $600 higher in cost (according to the website)..

Still, it boils down to lenses, lenses, lenses....

Forgot to add: National Camera has the D300 on sale this weekend for $1649.. Happened upon the ad this morning...

Canon...

Please do not get confused. The 5D is a full frame sensor, with much larger photosites than the D300. They are nowhere near the same camera. The image quality that can be had from the D300 is not in the ballpark of the 5D.

That's not to say the D300 isn't a great camera, it is... but it's no 5D in the sensor dept. Plus, the 5D is Canon's 3 year old technology, and people are still comparing it to the (current) D300 LOL. The 5D will be replaced/upgraded soon too.

is the 1D their flagship and the 5D a step below ?? (don't know the line very well). I was under the impression their full frame camera were in the $5-7K range*


*trying to guesstimate the Sony full frame target price range...

The 1Ds Mark III is their flagship Full Frame camera. All the pro features included. It's an $8500.00 SLR

The 5D is basically similar to the 30D, but with a full frame sensor. It's a killer bargain in the Canon line, and many professional photographers use this camera instead of the 1D series if they do not need high fps, or weather sealing.

thanks for the clarification

Oh, but I am, and thoroughly... LOL Define 'full-frame sensor vs. the D300's sensor. But, on-screen, they seem to be actually quite close. Why, other than lenses?? Are the Canon lenses that much better in optics than the Nikon?

But if it's still being offered, isn't it a valid comparison?

Ok, I'll attempt to address some of these questions. LOL about the confused comment

A "full frame" sensor is basically just a term used that means it's full size relative to the older "35mm" film cameras. The full frame sensors are 36mm x 24mm in size. The D300 sensor is 24mm x 16mm, that's where the 1.5x crop factor comes in. So the 5D sensor is 2.25x larger than the D300 sensor (1.5 x 1.5), and much more expensive to produce, along with a bigger mirror and mirror box, and a different prism system needed. So with a 12mp 1.5x crop versus a 12mp "full frame", the photosites of the full frame sensor will be MUCH larger, and all things being equal will be of higher quality, and less noisy. They'll also have greater dynamic range. That's the reason the 12mp point & shoot cameras look like absolute [bleep] compared to any 12mp slr. The P&S sensor is about the size of your pinky fingernail, so the photosites are tiny. So pixel size is a major factor, that's why when stepping up to higher mp sensors, going full frame will yield a better looking image (again, all other things being equal).

The new Nikon D3 is a 12mp full frame (their first)... that's a better comparison to the 5D, but it's $5000.00.

Sure you could make a valid comparison, D300 to 5D, and yes it is still a current camera. My point was just that that's old technology for Canon (3yrs in dSLR's is a lifetime), if you compared the 5D to Nikon's slr's from 3 years ago it would be a joke, literally. Plus, Canon is due to upgrade that model before the end of the year.

I think I touched on most of it, but if you need any further clarification please let me know.

Rob

Ok, some understanding is beginning to sink in. The whole concept can be a bit overwhelming to someone who still remembers the 'Brownie'..

Hmmm, ok then, since a $5,000 camera's NOT gonna happen, and the 5D is 'old', is it still a good body for someone who's intent on this being the very LAST danged camera he's ever going to buy? Someone stated the 5D is a huge bargain for the bux, but it's still $2,300 alone and THEN the glass goes on the front..

I guess the bottom line is I really want to be in the $3,000 - $3,750 ballpark, and want the best I can get for that range which must include a great lens (ala 70-200 VR), bag, flash, chip, filter etc...

Ditto! I am going to step up this weekend, and am looking at the diff in glass now. As for glass quality, I always leaned towards Nikon, but I mostly used their older manual focus lenses.

In the hunt as well, after losing my 20D (don't ask!). Looking hard at the 40D, the 5D being very tempting, but too pricey at the moment (had to replace my laptop and a L lens as well ).

I'm sticking with Canon.

rb

There's no way you can go wrong with the 40D, 70-200/4L IS, 24-70/2.8L. This would run you about the same as the D300 and 70-200VR combo. WAYYYY more bank for the buck with the Canon system. You absolutely can't go wrong with this gear. Plus, you've got you friends here (me and others) that can be much more helpful getting you started with a Canon platform.

The 5D's are such a great camera for the money right now, but if a fellow's trying to build up a lens collection at the same time the money difference might be better spent on lenses.

In Rick case, the 5D might be the way to go since you already have some nice glass.

I guess what I gotta do is get to a camera shop tomorrow and lay my hands and eyeballs on each and compare.. Online comparisons of the 40D vs the D300 still show the Nikon to, IMHO, have the edge while fairly similar in price...

And I'm very aware of user bias as I'm guilty of it myself when comparing other rifles to Win. M70s... I own 'em, I build 'em and I just love that rifle.. Even though there's no doubt other rifles can perform just as well, if not better in some cases, there's just nothing like a M70... You Canon boys can appreciate this in your area, I know...

I will give honest consideration to both lines. I just have to get off the paper comparisons and do the hands-on tests..

I came into this without a clue or a bias a month ago. I bought the 30D and have absolutely no regrets. The controls on this camera are very well laid out and the design seems as user friendly as possible for human manipulation.

I've got no bias, just that I'm quite pleased with this pretty big expense, and have never second guessed it or had any buyers remorse.

You made the correct choice JJH, no question about it.

You need to handle theese in a camera shop if you have any confusion. There is a world of difference between a cropper and FF. The 5D should not be $600 more than the D300. Find a different dealer. I'm in Chicago right now but I'm sure I can find a 5D from a reputable dealer for $2-300 less than that. The D300 is nice but I think you really need to know EAXACTLY what you are after before you invest $1800 in a body. IMO this is where Canon shines. The 40D can be had for $1100 + freight. $700 is a major price difference for a couple of features and a lick and a promise that Nikon is going to bring out some new glass.