Nikon D90 or Canon EOS 50D?
- Thread starter Muadib
- Start date
50D is more of a "professional" grade camera; it competes more with the D300 than the D90. If they were priced the same, I would go for the 50D.
As far as IQ goes, both will be similar; the 50D is faster and has a better-built, weather-sealed magnesium alloy body compared to the D90's plastic body.
The D90 has 720p video, although you will need to manually focus and there's a 5 minute limit on the length of each continuous video clip. It's also a more compact camera.
As far as kit lenses go...the D90's 18-105mm VR lens is pretty decent, and so is the 50D's 17-85mm IS kit lens. The 50D is also available with a 28-135mm IS lens, which is a pretty good lens but not as useful on digital due to the lack of wide angle coverage.
If you get a 50D body, ideal lenses to pair with it would be the 50mm f/1.4, 17-85mm IS, 17-55mm f/2.8, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, or Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 Macro. For telephoto shooting, the 55-250mm IS is a good budget lens, while the 70-200mm f/4 and f/2.8 are more high-end telephoto zooms.
As far as IQ goes, both will be similar; the 50D is faster and has a better-built, weather-sealed magnesium alloy body compared to the D90's plastic body.
The D90 has 720p video, although you will need to manually focus and there's a 5 minute limit on the length of each continuous video clip. It's also a more compact camera.
As far as kit lenses go...the D90's 18-105mm VR lens is pretty decent, and so is the 50D's 17-85mm IS kit lens. The 50D is also available with a 28-135mm IS lens, which is a pretty good lens but not as useful on digital due to the lack of wide angle coverage.
If you get a 50D body, ideal lenses to pair with it would be the 50mm f/1.4, 17-85mm IS, 17-55mm f/2.8, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, or Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 Macro. For telephoto shooting, the 55-250mm IS is a good budget lens, while the 70-200mm f/4 and f/2.8 are more high-end telephoto zooms.
- Aug 23, 2003
- 25,375
- 142
- 116
Not really priced "about the same" at all. B&H/Adorama have the 50D body at $410 more than the D90 body ($889 vs $1299)...that's 46% more. I'd rather get the D90 plus a good lens for the price of a 50D body. You won't see a difference between them regarding IQ; 12MP vs. 15MP is a wash, both have 3" VGA LCDs and Live View, both have great high ISO performance up to ISO 3200.
The Canon 28-135mm IS kit lens isn't worth getting; the 18-105mm VR with the D90 kit is good. But I'd rather spend the kit lens money on a great standard zoom instead, like a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8.
Compare sample images and decide for yourself:
From Imaging-Resource.com
D90 ISO 200
50D ISO 200
D90 ISO 1600
50D ISO 1600
D90 ISO 3200
50D ISO 3200
D90 ISO 6400
50D ISO 6400
The Canon 28-135mm IS kit lens isn't worth getting; the 18-105mm VR with the D90 kit is good. But I'd rather spend the kit lens money on a great standard zoom instead, like a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8.
Compare sample images and decide for yourself:
From Imaging-Resource.com
D90 ISO 200
50D ISO 200
D90 ISO 1600
50D ISO 1600
D90 ISO 3200
50D ISO 3200
D90 ISO 6400
50D ISO 6400
I was about to say, about the same price? no way.. D90 I've seen cheaper than the 50D by a long shot.
I'm more biased toward canon, but I'd get a 40D, 50D isn't worth it IMO. Throw a D300 in there, I might go that route if I were to start over at this point. I've been very impressed w/ Nikon playing catch up and subsequently catching canon sleeping and on par/better than now (depending on what you're doing and who you ask... but it's all moot IMO, both good).
If you really want to play with video, then get the D90. And yes, no matter who you go with, get your own lens, screw the kit lens =) But that also really depends on what kind of budget you're looking at
I'm more biased toward canon, but I'd get a 40D, 50D isn't worth it IMO. Throw a D300 in there, I might go that route if I were to start over at this point. I've been very impressed w/ Nikon playing catch up and subsequently catching canon sleeping and on par/better than now (depending on what you're doing and who you ask... but it's all moot IMO, both good).
If you really want to play with video, then get the D90. And yes, no matter who you go with, get your own lens, screw the kit lens =) But that also really depends on what kind of budget you're looking at
Get a 40d or a rebel xsi imho. XSI and 40d are going to have identical image quality to the 50d. If you really need the extra stuff in the 50d then its worth it (better screen and micro focus adjust). Get the d90 if you need video.
$1100 for the kit is very reasonable. I would get the 50D kit in this case. You can easily sell the 28-135 IS kit lens for $250 or so, and use the money to buy a Tamron 17-50 or Sigma 18-50 f/2.8.
If you're ok getting a used camera, you might be able to find a used 5D body for as low as $1200. However, if you need speed and using very high ISOs is not that essential, the 50D will serve you better.
When I had someone go to get it today, it was gone. I should have gone with my gut, and got it, but I listened to a friend. Oh well.
- Aug 23, 2003
- 25,375
- 142
- 116
Fate is telling you to get another camera.
The 50D was obsolete before it launched. Canon didn't anticipate video making it into the sub-$2000 DSLR market so soon, and the 50D will fall victim to Canon's 12 month product cycle (which is already halfway through...expect a 50D replacement by fall).
Lots of rumors about a D300 and a D40 replacement next month, as well as an XSi replacement.
Problem is that he's a DSLR 1st timer. As much of a value the used 5D is, he'll have no warranty on a used body + he'll pay through the nose for good full frame glass. The 28-135mm to me isn't the most impressive piece of kit. The 17-40 /F4 is great but limited range. The 24-105L is a good piece of glass but it's also about a grand.
I'd get the D90 body and pair it up with the 16-85VR that's an awesome sharp stabilized lens with a great range, Lens + Body still less than 50D body only. (Or tamron 17-50 2.8 for a fast 3rd party lens)
I'd get the 40D on the canon side and pair it up with the Tamron 17-50 2.8, or if you can swing it, the 17-55 2.8 IS. That's one sweet cropped lens that there is no full frame equivalent (a mid range 2.8 zoom with IS!)
EDIT: Oh NM, I didn't realize the price went up on the 16-85 and 50D is selling cheap lol.
I thought Canon's xxD cycle was 18 months? (I know the 50D broke this; but previously it was 18 months, right?)
- Aug 23, 2003
- 25,375
- 142
- 116
Nikon has been going 18 months; Canon usually did 18 months as well, but competition since August 2007 from Nikon has accelerated things.
The 40D was vastly outspec'd by the D300, but was popular because Canon cut the price so aggressively in response. The 50D bridged the gap, but again received a lukewarm response from the press and the market.
Not all the criticisms the 50D received were based in reality, but perception is a huge thing in the camera market. When Nikon had their August 2007 double-launch of the D300/D3, the D300 was received exceptionally well for its excellent high ISO performance (for an APS-C camera) and the amount of shared features it had with the D3. It felt more like a revolutionary change over the D200. Canon's upgrades to the XXD line feel more evolutionary.
The 5D2, OTOH, feels more revolutionary, and thus is being greeted with long wait lists and wild popularity.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter