Nikon D7000, D300s, or wait for D400?

[dtstangl]

Hello all,

I would like some input from the disney photo buffs here. I would like to step up from my entry-level canon dslr, and am really digging the Nikon lineup, but would like input as to which direction to travel.

I really enjoy low-light and long exposure photography. For the most part I don't usually photograph fast paced activities (sports), of course I trust any of the above to be adequate for most scenarios.

So, what is the consensus? Coming out of Canon, I would need all new glass, which I could purchase over time as long as I had something versatile (i.e. 16-85), and a good prime. Looking to not jump over $2k initially.

Cheers!

pic for clicks

 

[E P C O T]

Void.

 

[dtstangl]

Brief?

Hah thats one of those things that I have no idea why I typed. Edited first post, type away!

 

[wdwmagic]

What lens do you currently have? There is so little between Nikon and Canon that if you have stuff worth keeping, your best bet may be to stay with Canon.

 

[dtstangl]

Nothing too extravagant...

- 18-55 f/3.5 kit lens
- 55-250 f/4.0 telephoto
- 28-135 f/3.5 USM

 

[E P C O T]

Void.

 

[DVC Mike]

I have the Nikon D7000 and love it.

However, both Nikon and Canon make great cameras and have fine sets of lenses.

What kind of Canon do you have now?

 

[dtstangl]

I'm curious to know what you think Nikon has that Canon doesn't, so that I can figure out your best choice of gear.

I saw this post last night, and have been trying to figure that one out since...

I don't really have an answer other than spending a fair amount of time researching Nikon recently and seeing a lot of really positive reviews, and not knowing what direction to move to in Canon (7D?). That being said, none of that really should determine getting out of Canon because I have never had a negative experience with my current and previous cameras (eos 1000D and powershot s3 IS).

So, all that babble is just to say I have no reason to rule out Canon, so I am open to any and all recommendations! Cheers!

 

[WDWFigment]

Upgrade your lenses first.

 

[dtstangl]

Upgrade your lenses first.

Well, you're part of my inspiration to switch to Nikon!! I've spent multiple hours at work secretly reading you TR's when I should be selling cars haha.

So, with a $2k budget, should I go for one "L" level lens and a decent prime? I really dig wide angle shots but currently don't have the glass to do such. I have also done some reading up on ND filters (per your instructions), and would like to pick one up as well.

Thanks for everyone's help!

 

[E P C O T]

Void.

 

[CP_alum08]

Upgrade your lenses first.

Absolutely. Good glass on a lower-end body will give you much better results than lower-end glass on a good body.

But to answer your question; why don't you at least wait until the D400 comes out (if you can wait that long) then you will be able to read reviews, maybe even rent it before you make your decision.

If you cant wait, then I say the D300s. I've heard mixed reviews of the 7000, basically people saying it's not as good as they expected/hoped.

 

[dtstangl]

Sounds like I should at least stick with Canon for now and get some better glass, and then make a decision on if I should upgrade my Canon body or use the equipment as a good "down payment" on Nikon equipment

 

[WDWFigment]

Well, you're part of my inspiration to switch to Nikon!! I've spent multiple hours at work secretly reading you TR's when I should be selling cars haha.

So, with a $2k budget, should I go for one "L" level lens and a decent prime? I really dig wide angle shots but currently don't have the glass to do such. I have also done some reading up on ND filters (per your instructions), and would like to pick one up as well.

Thanks for everyone's help!

The quality (or lack thereof, depending on one's perspective, I guess) of my photos has absolutely nothing to do with the "Nikon" name on the camera I use. My shots would look 99% the same with a comparable Canon. I would not base your decision on that.

Sounds like I should at least stick with Canon for now and get some better glass, and then make a decision on if I should upgrade my Canon body or use the equipment as a good "down payment" on Nikon equipment

Well...that's probably an even worse idea. Go to the store now, pick up a Canon and pick up a Nikon of the same level. See how they feel in your hands. Buy whatever you like more. Then buy glass accordingly. Just save a good portion of that $2k budget (so don't get a D400) for glass. If you upgrade glass first, you're going to lose some money (not a ton, since glass holds its value decently) if/when you switch brands.

 

[dtstangl]

Well, let me rework my initial question, and broaden it out somewhat....

I'd like to upgrade my current equipment, and have roughly $2,000 I'd like to spend. I have a 2 year old Canon Rebel XS, a kit lens, entry level telephoto, and a halfway decent 28-135mm f/3.5.

I don't have much hands-on experience with Nikon, but the limited time I've spent at stores with them has been positive.

My question boils down to this...if you were in my shoes, which direction would you go? I can probably get another $500 or so for my current equipment if I went with Nikon, but I would most likely keep my 28-135 if I stayed with Canon.

I can play the waiting game for the "latest and greatest," but there will always be something new coming out. I know that the end result (the image) relies heavily on the user, not just the equipment, but its always nice to have quality gear to help out.

So, thats that in a nutshell. A body and one versatile lens would work for me initially, I can invest in glass over time. I just want opinions on whats really working for people now.

 

[CP_alum08]

I've heard, on more than one occasion, that a general rule of thumb is to take your budget and split it into thirds. Spend one third on a body and the other two on lenses.

So if that is the case for your $2000 budget, you'd better hope you can find a good deal on a USED D300s.

Again I say wait. Go to a store that sells a good selection of both Nikons and Canons. Try out different ones that are similar and see which you like better. Or if you want a longer time to check them out, spend a few hundred $$ and rent a couple bodies with lenses you would actually buy.

 

[dtstangl]

That sounds reasonable. I'm not in any sort of rush to jump into anything, so I'll spend some time trying out as many different bodies as I can, and keeping an eye out on different boards for any can't-pass-up deals. Possibly when/if they announce the d400, people will be itching to sell their d300s, or even d7000 owners who are looking to move up.

I haven't seen much on here about the Canon 7D...then again I haven't searched, which I will do after this. Seems to be getting decent reviews on a few websites, but I don't anyone personally with experience. I would benefit from already having the "kit" lens to that body, so I could purchase just the body and something a little more wide-angle.

Thanks for all the input, I know most of this is just babble and me thinking out-loud, but it is always good to get input on unknown territory. Cheers!

 

[ddbowdoin]

Nothing too extravagant...

- 18-55 f/3.5 kit lens
- 55-250 f/4.0 telephoto
- 28-135 f/3.5 USM

You mentioned low light photography, you need something stronger and faster than a 3.5 app. 2.8 is considered strong, 1.8 nice for a prime lens, and 1.4 for an even better lens

 

[NowInc]

My choice of going Nikon over canon was they physical "feel" of the camera (button layout etc)..but by no means does that mean that one is better than the other. If you already have a Canon body and a few lenses, it may just be better to stick with that so you aren't "starting over". Also, I COULD be mistaken, but I think there are adapters that allow you to use Nikon lenses on Canon bodies (but not the other way around..sadly).

Someone above mentioned the new T3i series canon announced, but from what I see there aren't many advantages over the T2i unless you are planning on shooting video..so If you were to stick with canon, I'd look into the T2i as opposed to a more expensive body that you really won't get any extended use out of.

Nikon hasn't done much as far as announcing any new DSLR bodies this year..everything we hear at this point are just "rumors" (a d400 and a "D5100" are the strongest ones I've heard). The D7000 isn't bad, but again you are looking into a lot more cost than just the body by switching camps (good glass isn't cheap).

So let me ask this...what level photography are you looking at here? As in..what do you expect to be using this camera for. There are tons of things that can factor into your decision (for example if you are doing occasional shoots, it may pay to rent a lens instead of buying etc).

 

[dtstangl]

So let me ask this...what level photography are you looking at here? As in..what do you expect to be using this camera for. There are tons of things that can factor into your decision (for example if you are doing occasional shoots, it may pay to rent a lens instead of buying etc).

Great question...For me this is obviously more of a hobby than a profession of course. That being said, I have done light work as the "resident photographer" at the Audi store I work at for events, etc. Other than that, I shoot cars/car shows, sporting events, holidays, of course WDW, and anything else I want to remember. Renting may work for WDW, but for the most part its a lot more casual shooting.