Help with digital SLR choices

[Skimmin]

I'm trying to decide on a good middle of the road digital SLR camera. Does anyone have some knowledge to lend? I've been looking at the Canon 50D with a 18-200 lens for the time being a good versatile lens. I've also been looking at the Canon D5 with the same lens. On the Nikon side of things I've been looking at the 90D, D300, and D3(all with the Nikon 18-200 lens). Eventually I will add more lenses no madder which camera I buy, but I believe a 18-200 is sort of a good mix for close up and the entrance to telephoto. They are all in, or below the price range I was expecting but I'm not a professional photographer so I'm not sure if some of the models are overkill for me. I have taken a photoghaphy course so I have a good understanding on how to use them but I also want something I can set to automatic, hand to my girlfriend and know she'll be able to take a good picture too. Does a full frame camera tend to help with quality of enlarging pics? I think these cameras are some decent ones to be looking at, but if you have any other suggestions please feel free to let me know.

Thanks

[OceanicCorals-Ian-]

If you can, pick up the Nikon D700. It is a full frame sensor, meaning that there is no conversion factor on 35mm format lenses. Larger sensors equals better light gathering and higher resolutions photos to allow bigger enlargements or crops.

For great macro shots, go with either the Nikon 60mm or 105mm. The 105 is image stabilized which will help greatly in macro photography especially when shooting at smaller apertures to get DOF.

HTH.

Cheers,

OC.

[subman]

if you do get a Canon pick up a 50 f/1.8 they are only about $150 and are perfect for tank shots as they are great for low light and are super cheap!

[Ron99]

I think either the Canon or the Nikon will give you great results. I am Canon guy (currently have a 30D but very tempted by the 50D) and have stuck with them as I had several excellent SLR lenses from my film days. Canon used to have the edge with their quiet ultrasonic lenses and with image stabilization but patents have run out and everybody is offering those features now. If you have no lenses yet it's really just a matter of looking at the individual features and seeing if one or the other has something you really want. IMO, Nikon metering seems to be a bit better than Canon but the Canon sensors perform a bit better at higher ISO settings (i.e. less noise in lower light). Either will give you great images.

Full frame may give you a slight edge in image quality if you want to make really large enlargements. I have made great 17" x 22" enlargements from 8 MP APS sized sensor on the 30D. It's really the lens quality that will determine how much you can enlarge rather then the sensor. However, if you want to do more telephoto work than wide angle work the APS sized sensor gives your lens an effectively longer reach for less money. Compare the costs of a 600mm lens to use on a full frame camera to a 400mm for the smaller sensor. If you want to do primarily wide angle scenics etc. then a full frame camera is better. If you want to do more telephoto work (sports, racing, wildlife) then the smaller sensor is better. If it's a bit of everything then there probably isn't a great advantage to spending alot more on the full frame camera.

[fkshiu]

You'll be happy with either a Canon or Nikon - remember, it's less about the body than the lenses when it comes to SLRs.

What I would recommend is to try out the cameras before you buy as they can feel quite different in your hands. Make sure the particular model you buy is comfortable.

[jus68]

I went thru all the same q's myself. I ended up with the d90 w 18-200 lense and I love it... If I was to get Canon I would've waited to get the 60d which won't be until dec or early 2010. I really enjoy the video capabilities too since I have kids, its a great all arounder.

[blacknife]

I have a d-200 with that 18-200 lens, It is a good all around lens but i wish i had a few others to go with it. when taking pictures of my tank and other things i wish i had an actual macro lens. I find sometimes when taking downward shots the weight of lens trys to pull the zoom out, i am not sure if it is just my lens in paticular or all of the 18-200's that do this, i have been forgetting to call nikkon or a camera shop to ask about it. There are not to many times where this bothers me but it is just that little bit of annoyance. If i knew the new gen of slr's was going to have video capabilities i would have waited a year, oh well i will have to upgrade or buy a camcorder instead

[sphelps]

I went with Nikon over Canon because the body just felt better, I think this is probably most important, the feel. Canon's are supposed to have a little faster focusing ability while Nikon is better at color rendering, this is why you see mostly Canons at sporting events and Nikons with the nature guys. Also most professional photographers will use Canon and most normal hobbyists use Nikon.

You're looking at some pretty nice bodies, so if it's in your budget definitely check out the D700 as it's basically the D3 but smaller. Next I would say the D300 and then D90. The D90 is really nice if you want the video feature otherwise go with the D300 which has the aluminum body and extra shortcut keys.

Since you're looking at good bodies I would skip the 18-200, this is a good lens for those who do not want to switch out lenses but you sacrifice quite a bit by using it, things like sharpness and speed. The focusing is also kind of sluggish. You'd be better off spending the same money on a couple lenses instead like a 18-70mm and the 70-300mm VR. If you've got extra money you could go with an even better combo like the 16-85mm and 80-200mm. Next you can get yourself a couple prime lenses like the 50mm for portraits and aquarium, and the 105mm for macro.