Canon or Nikon...Which is a better brand?

Question

Lets say I am looking for a new DSLR, I have little to no experience in photography, but I have a bunch of money to burn. I am very interested in photography and will pick it up very fast. I have zero old equipment. what do you think?

Answer 1

To start with, while Digital are nice, if you want really good photo's, go with a film based camera. Nikon and Cannon are both very good brands for general purpose photography. For specialty photos, you can look at others such as the Hasselblad brand which is very versitile. By the way, they also have a supurb, (I think the best), DSLR. The reason is that it uses the same body and lens's as the film camera, and you just take off the back, and snap on a digital back.
To check it out, go to http://www.hasselblad.se/.
I like the H2 series

Answer 2

Im going to have to say if given the choice between only Canon or Nikon I would have to go with Canon. I have had some experience with both and the canon seems to fit my had somewhat better ( if comfort is a big thing for you) and in my experience there is a ton more gear available for the Canon cameras. Nikons produce very good pictures, as do the Canons as well but I will have to go with the far longer tried and true Canon. Now to decide on your model, for that I would visit a retailer and feel them all out, and THEN shop online for a better deal than you can get from a local retailer!!

Answer 3

1. Canon makes FAR better cameras than Nikon, across the board, particularly the dSLR. Although Nikon makes a 10 megapixel entry level dSLR (as does Sony, btw) and Canon does not, these cameras use a crappy CCD sensor (the type found in most cheap fixed lens digital cameras) as opposed to a high quality CMOS sensor. This is completely inappropriate in a dSLR and pretty much means you should not even consider Nikon or Sony (Sony actually makes the CCD sensor for Nikon) entry level dSLR. Canon is the only way to go here.

2. If you have no experience in photography, do you even want a dSLR? Shooting with a dSLR is not like shooting with a fixed lens digital camera. Although you will see the result, you have little to tell you how the picture will come out as you are taking it. This can be quite frustrating for someone with an untrained eye. An alternative is the Sony DSC-R1 camera. Unlike the above cameras, this camera DOES have a CMOS sensor and takes professional quality, 10 megapixel pictures. It is VERY nice (this is the camera I use). Being a fixed lens camera, it has all the bells and whistles that help you take a great picture as you are taking it. It also sells for roughly $800 (after rebate)....far cheaper than an entry level dSLR. Quite frankly, Sony is smoking crack for not modeling their A100 camera on the R1.

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/sony/dsc_r1-review/index.shtml
http://dcresource.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php?masterid=13088802

Of course, if the whole point of your hobby is to develop the technical and shooting skills of a professional, then you definitely want an SLR and probably want to invest in more than one lens, eventually.

The first thing to understand is the kit lens is crap. Never buy the camera as a kit....only as the body. The second is what do you mean by "a bunch of money to burn". Or put another way, how serious a hobby is this for you? If you just want to goof around a few months and then leave your camera on the shelf except when you go on vacation, then what you want is an entry level dSLR. Buy a Canon Digital Rebel XT:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/digital_rebel_xt-review/index.shtml
http://dcresource.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php/masterid=7139451

Buy this lens for it:
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=149&modelid=7443

It has a good standard focal length for most shots and a respectable amount of zoom in a HIGH quality lens (should cost about $360). You will be VERY happy with this setup, once you develop some skill at taking pictures with an SLR.

However. If you are serious about this and have money, buy a better camera. The camera you want is the Canon EOS-5D:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/eos_5d-review/
http://dcresource.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php/masterid=11259024

This is a professional camera and will give you superior performance by any standard, under almost any condition you can think of. Canon makes higher end professional cameras, but, unless you work for National Geographic, you are just throwing your money away on those.

Instead, spend your money on a variety of lenses depending on your needs. Start out with the general lens I suggested above and then, as you gain more experience, invest in lenses you want, as needed (you will still use the above lens like 90% of the time.....it really is a nice lens):

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ProductCatIndexAct&fcategoryid=149

Answer 4

Man, this is like asking which is better; Chevy or Ford. BMW or Mercedes. Honda or Toyota.

BOTH are excellent cameras. I have a house full of Nikon's, but if I started with Canon, I'm sure I would have gone in that direction and been just as happy. Just go with a Nikon or Canon DSLR and you will be happy for years to come. If you have a friend or a helpful camera sales person who likes one better than the other, buy that one, because you will be able to get help learning how to use it.

The perception of which is better has more to do with successful marketing than technological advantage most of the time. In the 60's, they practically dropped Nikon's out of helicopters just to get the pro's to use them. Canon went overboard in the 90's to accomplish the same loyal following.

I like the way Panacea ACTUALLY tells you why he likes Canon instead of just saying, "Duh, it's better because I like it and I like it because it's better." He makes a sound argument for why Canon suits his needs better than Nikon would. Others could probably do the same for Nikon if they took the time.

I can't wait until Popular Photography announces their camera of the year. The Nikon D200 was the clear winner until Canon came out with the EOS 30D.

By the way, I chose Pentax film cameras in the 60's when Nikon and Canon were both trying to break into the world market previously dominated by German cameras at the time. I would have probably stayed with Pentax if they took digital more seriously a bit earlier in the game. Now they are playing catch up and seem to always be a couple of years behind the leaders.

Answer 5

Canon, no question about it.

The only reason to pick any other brand DSLR now is that you already own a good set of lenses for that brand.

Nikon has been struggling to catch Canon since the late 80's when Canon toppled Nikon as the choice of sports photographers.

Right now Canon's optics are as good as Nikons with much more options and better telephotos, plus Canon's sensors are way ahead of Nikon.

By the way, Nikon does not manufacture sensors; most of their high end DSLR's use sensors made by Sony.

Ignacio

Answer 6

Was shopping for a DSLR ( have a very old Miranda 35 with all the bells and whistles ) so looked at Canon. Nikon and Olympus.
Wound up getting a Pentax. Far and away as much camera as the other three, in some ways better constructed, and for nearly half the price. Canon has a rep of spending a lot of time in the repair shop ( flat does not get along with sand at the beach, for example) ( and for cripes sake, don't ever drop one). Nikon is priced more for the name than the features. Olympus is sort of in the middle but is too proprietary for my blood. Konika is another good one that doesn't get half the price just for the name. So far I am very pleased with my Pentax. (It also can use many of my Miranda lenses.) Love the hot shoe feature for macro work as well as the two remote options. (wired and IR). So... what ever.

Answer 7

Both brands are outstanding camera systems. I am a biased Nikon-Jedi and love my Nikons. if you have used a Canon before and are comfortable with it go Canon, if you used Nikon beforea nd are comfy with that then go Nikon. If you don't have any existing gear you can flip a coin. Depending on what kind of shooting you do, I am a USAF Combat Photog, and while I have been here in Iraq they sent me a few canon to play with and they have been destroyed. They can't take a hit and have all failed on me but my Nikons are still shooting even with all the scratches and dings on them. I you are going to be shooting for fun or weddings a such either will do, if you are looking at Photojournalism work where your gear may have to take a little abuse I suggest Nikon. A little more expseive but I feel it's worth the ducks!

Answer 8

Take your pick, both are excellent companies. Digital SLR from either manufacturers have automatic modes in which all you have to do is point and shoot, or when you get more advanced, set your own lens openings and shutter speeds. I have used Canon products in the past, but not Nikon. Before you buy the camera, have a talk with one of your friend who is camera /photography wise, and then make a choice of what to buy.

Answer 9

Canon

Answer 10

As one can see by most of the answers Canon is the outright winner. I am a subscriber of many camera magazines and 90% of the professional photographers are shown using Canon products. When the professionals whom can afford any brand choose Canon that means alot!! I have owned many different brands and my Canon cameras have earned me many awards, praises, and $$$.