help me to select which one to be selected, T2i or D5000?

Hai all, i am confused to select my first DSLR, either to be Canon T2i or to be Nikon D5000 (waving sometimes to D90 but its out of my budget so it left it). but dilema remains the same when i go through the reviews and results on net because my mind moving towards T2i as it is brand new but Nikon got varying angle LCD display which make me to stick on to that; its really confusing to select from these two. comparing D5000 and canon T2i the pixel pitch of Nikon (12MP) is 5.5 whereas T2i (18MP) is only 4.3; will this make nikon to bring with quality pictures? Here in Qatar T2i and D5000 the price difference is only 100 QAR (appxm. 25 USD)with the standard kit thats my another temptation to go with T2i. Can anyone help me to select the best one out of these two? thanks to all in advance.

I was in your same situation. For 3 key elements now I'm photographig with my Canon. I made my decision when I went to a shop and tried them in my hands. The Canon fells soo much more comfortable and also the menus are a way more intuitive. I have the Canon Kiss X4, that is exacly the same as the 550D; the only difference is the price: I spent for mine 500£ at ebay.co.uk brand new. This was the second element Third Canon's lenses are much better than Nikon's. What you saved in the camera you can spend in a lens to see the power of the 18's mp sensor. Altought you have to import it because it only sells in Japan. Just have a look at digitalrev.com & co. if they also delivers to Quatar Hope it helped Luca

hrockh wrote: Third Canon's lenses are much better than Nikon's. What you saved in the camera you can spend in a lens to see the power of the 18's mp sensor.
Sorry, but that's simply wrong. Nikon's lenses are just as good as Canon's at all levels (bar maybe pro superteles, but that's only because Canon completely overhauled their line of those today ). Aside from that, Nikon's lenses are just as good as Canon's, with some particular lenses being much better than Canon equivalents (24-70, and the 14-24, which Canon has no equivalent to. And I believe the 16-35 is also better than Canon's).

domk275 wrote:
hrockh wrote: Third Canon's lenses are much better than Nikon's. What you saved in the camera you can spend in a lens to see the power of the 18's mp sensor.
Sorry, but that's simply wrong. Nikon's lenses are just as good as Canon's at all levels (bar maybe pro superteles, but that's only because Canon completely overhauled their line of those today ). Aside from that, Nikon's lenses are just as good as Canon's, with some particular lenses being much better than Canon equivalents (24-70, and the 14-24, which Canon has no equivalent to. And I believe the 16-35 is also better than Canon's).
I can see your point, domk. But Nikon doesn't offer a decent zoom in the 70-200mm range without having you to sell one of your kidney :D. The 2 canon's f/4, IS and not, are really a bargain if you want the quality that you missing. Or probably because I am just a Canon fan XD Hope this will be help

domk275 wrote: ... than Canon equivalents (24-70, and the 14-24, which Canon has no equivalent to. And I believe the 16-35 is also better than Canon's).
Canon has f/2.8, a stop less than Nikon. Nikon has VR/IS. About quality I can't tell personally but reading around in internet you discover that they are both really good. So IS or f/2.8 aperture? I will go for f/2.8 [better bokeh, fast shutter speed] and bring a tripod with me http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_16_35mm_f_2_8l_ii_usm Canon has no equivalent to what? 24-70mm http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_24_70mm_f_2_8l_usm 14-24mm you mean extra-wide lens.. so the new 8-15mm, or 10-20mm. The last one is EF-S, but we are talking here of 1.6x crop-cameras. http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_s_10_22mm_f_3_5_4_5_usm http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_8_15mm_f_4l_fisheye_usm

hrockh wrote:
domk275 wrote: ... than Canon equivalents (24-70, and the 14-24, which Canon has no equivalent to. And I believe the 16-35 is also better than Canon's).
Canon has f/2.8, a stop less than Nikon. Nikon has VR/IS. About quality I can't tell personally but reading around in internet you discover that they are both really good. So IS or f/2.8 aperture? I will go for f/2.8 [better bokeh, fast shutter speed] and bring a tripod with me http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_16_35mm_f_2_8l_ii_usm Canon has no equivalent to what? 24-70mm http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_24_70mm_f_2_8l_usm
The Tamron 28-75 is better than the Canon, you didn't know? And I am not gonna go through the entire list, you do that. Your statement "The best" is dearly flawed.....
14-24mm you mean extra-wide lens.. so the new 8-15mm, or 10-20mm. The last one is EF-S, but we are talking here of 1.6x crop-cameras. http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_s_10_22mm_f_3_5_4_5_usm http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/ef_lens_lineup/ef_8_15mm_f_4l_fisheye_usm

I will advise Canon but your reasons are obscured and ungrounded.
hrockh wrote: I was in your same situation. For 3 key elements now I'm photographig with my Canon. I made my decision when I went to a shop and tried them in my hands. The Canon fells soo much more comfortable and also the menus are a way more intuitive. I have the Canon Kiss X4, that is exacly the same as the 550D; the only difference is the price: I spent for mine 500£ at ebay.co.uk brand new. This was the second element Third Canon's lenses are much better than Nikon's. What you saved in the camera you can spend in a lens to see the power of the 18's mp sensor.
Who said this? Both produce very good lenses.
Altought you have to import it because it only sells in Japan. Just have a look at digitalrev.com & co. if they also delivers to Quatar Hope it helped Luca

vptinqatar wrote: Hai all, i am confused to select my first DSLR, either to be Canon T2i or to be Nikon D5000 (waving sometimes to D90 but its out of my budget so it left it). but dilema remains the same when i go through the reviews and results on net because my mind moving towards T2i as it is brand new but Nikon got varying angle LCD display which make me to stick on to that; its really confusing to select from these two. comparing D5000 and canon T2i the pixel pitch of Nikon (12MP) is 5.5 whereas T2i (18MP) is only 4.3; will this make nikon to bring with quality pictures? Here in Qatar T2i and D5000 the price difference is only 100 QAR (appxm. 25 USD)with the standard kit thats my another temptation to go with T2i. Can anyone help me to select the best one out of these two? thanks to all in advance.
You need to go to a shop and try them out. Take the one that feels/handles best. You won't be able to tell the difference from a picture between the 2 of them. If you like doing landscapes and movies, I would go for the Canon (more MP and better video). If you're more into moving subjects or flash , the Nikon for the more accurate AF and better flashsystem. I never heard of Canon having better lenses than Nikon. They're on par as far as I know. Nikon has sharp, light and affordable starter lenses: 18-105VR / 70-300VR and 35 1.8. Are you aware there is a new D3100 just announced? More upgrades are coming, maybe there is a bargain left or right

I would go for Canon, but you can't go wrong with Nikon either. They are not so different in entry level.

This is the one that swung me once and for all. Now for the NEW D7000! WooHoo! http://www.digitalreview.ca/content/Canon-Rebel-T2i-EOS-550D-Compared-to-Nikon-D90.shtml

It's not easy, but why not Sony ?

goetz48 wrote: It's not easy, but why not Sony ?
When considering a DSRL, the lens choise is also a factor to keep in mind. Well, Sony doen't have a wide range of lens compare to Nikon/Canon. But if that is enough for you, why not? Also Sigma makes lenses with the a-mount. P.S. Canon has slightly better lenses than Nikon.

hrockh wrote:
goetz48 wrote: It's not easy, but why not Sony ?
When considering a DSRL, the lens choise is also a factor to keep in mind. Well, Sony doen't have a wide range of lens compare to Nikon/Canon. But if that is enough for you, why not? Also Sigma makes lenses with the a-mount.
Only if you have a strong aversion to used lenses. If you don't, there's a total of almost 350(!) different lenses available for the A-mount.

P.S. Canon has slightly better lenses than Nikon.
No, you ambitious slight troll... Canon doesn't have a good 24-70, 18-105 70-300. Some third-party lenses are even better... -- ------------------------------------------------ http://s259.photobucket.com/albums/hh315/alex_837/ Just trying to get better.....

One thing to consider: Canon has not updated it's non/macro non/L primes since last milenium. I read that in a DP review forum so it must be true. If "L" gass is out of your range I'd go with either Nikon or Sony. Both have modern fast primes with a "normal" field of view that mortals can actually afford. There is nothing (modern) that canon has that can compare to the $200 (USD) Nikon 35mm/F1.8 and the kit lens with the D5000. You've got wide/slightly tele for sight seeing with the kit and a "normal" field of view fast prime for available/low light photography. For the same kit on the Canon you drop down to F2, add $120 (USD) and in return you get a 20 year old lens to put on your fancy new camera.....

Canon has a very good 70-300mm

yeah, but it's slightly less than the Nikon. -- ------------------------------------------------ http://s259.photobucket.com/albums/hh315/alex_837/ Just trying to get better.....

Add new comment

Attachment
More information
  • Files must be less than 2 MB.
  • Allowed file types: txt.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.