More lenses or better body?

iriejp1

iriejp1

New member
Just bought the Canon EOS XS. With it I got the base lens (EF-S 18-55 IS) and then bought the EF 75-300mm lens.

Then I got some Christmas cash and am thinking about either getting a 105mm macro lens for this camera or take it all back and get the Nikon D90 kit with the 18-105mm lens.

What would you do? Keep it all and have 3 different lenses or trade it all in for a better body and only 1 lens?

I know what I SHOULD do as everyone keeps telling me the lenses are more important. But the D90 looks SO nice! AARGH!!

What would you do?
 
What kind of photos do you want to take? Contrary to popular opinion, you _can_ take macro photos without a macro lens, given some tube extensions. Once you make the decision on a body, you're kind of stuck with it because it becomes a huge investment (at least after the return period ;) ), so tell us what you want to shoot. Most of the lens lineup is mainly a wash between Canon and Nikon. What about the D90 is important to you?
 
The prospect of being able to do video as well was the initial draw. Then as I was checking it out it seemd to just be an overall improvement over the less expensive Canons. Build quality seemed better, had more bells and whistles, and overall gave me the impression that it would be a better camera in the long run for me as I grew into it.

As for what I would be shooting...I've got a baby on the way so lots of toddler shots are on my horizon. I also would like to take some nice pics of my tank (thus the macro desire) and eventaully if I could scrape enough cash together for a case...underwater photography would also be done with it.

But of course now as I'm looking closer I'm starting to talk myself out of the D90. The video feature does not include any auto focusing. So any time I was shooting video I would have to manually keep focusing any time I was zooming in and out. That would be a pain. The live view mode only uses the contrast type auto focus which appears kind of janky. At least with the Canon you can still do a quick auto focus by moving the mirror back and forth. And a quick (extremely) glance at lens costs between Nikon and Canon shows Canon a tad cheaper. So future lens purchases would be more expensive....

So...I dunno. I'm so wishy-washy when it comes to big purchases. I'm always afraid I'm going to regret my decision later. I'm sure I'll be back on the D90 bandwagon by morning!
 
My personal opinion, I just bought the Canon 50D a couple weeks ago and I love it. I too looked at the Nikon D90 but settled on the 50D and am really glad I did. The pictures I've gotten are amazing.

My biggest deciding factor came down to price. Two cameras, both with about the same features, and one costs $3-400 more than the other. There is nothing the 50D does that made it really stand out over the D90 and there was nothing the D90 did except video that made it stand out over the 50D. As you already said, there are some issues that make the video not so desirable, so I didnt even care about that.

Then start looking at lenses... the same type of lens in a Nikon brand costs like 20-30% more than the same Nikon lens, both of which will take the same quality pictures.

I just looked at it like this... I had about $2300 to spend and I'll probably end up blowing $1000 or so a year on photography, maybe more, maybe less just depending on how much I get into it. For $2300 I got an amazing camera and probably one of the most amazing lenses out there, the canon f2.8 24-70mm and a fast 8GB memory card. For the same price, I could have gotten the D90 and just a decent lens, I would have had to shell out about $2900 for the comparable Nikon lens and the D90. In the future when I want to get my macro lens, it's about $450 for the canon 2.8 and it's over $700 for the Nikon.

To me it's a no brainer, if both produce basically the same pictures, go with the one that allows you to purchase more products for the same amount of cash, you'll have more options open to you and in the end be happier.

That's my thoughts on it though ;) I've gotten some amazing pictures of my brother's like 4 month old with mine and I've only been taking pictures 2 weeks. And I've got some awesome awesome awesome tank shots, it's just crazy, you'll never regret getting a nice dSLR, especially with a kid on the way.
 
Recty, I don't fully follow your pricing argument. At B&H, the 50D body (no lens) is about $1,050 while the D90 body (no lens) is only $850. The 24-70mm Canon lens is about the same price as the body ($1050). The 'exact' same Nikon lens is more money ($1,400) but, if you don't need f2.8, the 16-85mm lens is only $520 and gives more wide-angle capability and very good photographic performance. The memory card is the same cost for both cameras. So, even if you get the more expensive of the Nikon lens, the price difference is only about $200 (under 10% of the purchase price). And, since the 16-85mm will be excellent for most people, it might be up to $700 cheaper to get the D90/lens. For a macro lens, you don't have to buy Nikon - the Sigma. Tamron and Tonkina versions are are excellent and cost similar to the Canon. If you can 'live with' the 16-85, for the price of the 50D and 24-70 lens, you could get the D90, 16-85 lens and a Sigma 105 macro.

I'm not saying the D90 is a 'better' buy since both cameras are excellent and can take superb pictures. Just, that the difference in price is less than clear. I got a D90 because I like of its features (not the video, which I think is out of place on a dSRL). Things like: being able to use AF assist without having the internal flash raised, better AF capacity, 'feel' in use, compatibility with existing lenses I have, more flexible flash system.

In terms of the OP's original question, if you like the Xs, I'd get the lens (the Canon 100mm macro would be the 'obvious' choice). Personally, I found the XS (and XSi) to be uncomfortable to hold - another reason I opted for Nikon. As for liveview, it has limited use on any dSLR - the Nikon version is OK for those uses.
 
The way I would approach this problem is to look at the type of photography you want to do and see which system of lenses provides that. Earlier this month I was debating between the Canon 5D II and the Nikon D700. I chose the Canon because Canon has faster prime lenses. I do a lot of low light photography without a flash and I really would buy f/1.2 lenses. If I was more interested in having possibly the best f/2.8 zooms I would take a hard look at the Nikon. From what I hear the Nikon 12-24mm f/2.8 is unrivaled. For macro work, it's pretty much a tossup.
 
Camera bodies will always come and go in 6 months there will be talk of new models and next year new releases. Lenses are what make your images, good glass is essential if your serious about photography and thats where your going to spend most of your money in this profession or hobby all depends on your level. Its not about more lenses but the quality of lenses that you have. Just my opinion of course.
 
Honestly, I agree with all the above except,

For macro work, it's pretty much a tossup.
Click to expand...

That's just not true. Canon has a macro lens out there (this one: http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=155&modelid=7325) that make high-magnification macro _much_ easier. Sure, Nikon users can get this much magnification (up to 5x lifesize from the lens alone) but with nowhere near the ease of just connecting a lens. Especially if you need to take handheld macro (such as with insect photography), this lens can't be beat.

But, for most photography Canon and Nikon are pretty darn close. For toddler shots either system will take care of you. Personally, I would go for the flexibility of having more and better lenses.

Good luck!
 
That's a great lens but it's a different breed. It's manual focus only and by the time you get to 5x magnification it gets very dark. I don't know of anyone that would recommend that for handheld macro work.
 
It's a technique I picked up on Fred Miranda. These guys shoot almost exclusively handheld, though one does use a cane staff to help steady his shots.

http://lordv.smugmug.com/

LordV actually takes amazing stacked shots handheld. Pretty crazy.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dalantech/

And some more of Dalentech's work:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=6899193

It is very dark at 5x, but flash modeling lights help a lot, and the darkness issue is certainly true of any method you use to get to 5x, Canon or Nikon.

But, the point is that the Canon and Nikon lines are very similar in most areas of photography. Easier high-magnification macro is one area where Canon sets itself apart, so if that is something that someone wants to pursue then I would certainly recommend the Canon system on that basis.
 
Good stuff...those responses were exactly what I was looking for. Thanks guys!

Incidentally...I think I'm going to take my XS back...get the XSi and buy a macro lens.

In the end I had to be honest with myself and came to the conclusion that I really was wanting the D90 because of the video feature. But after reading about all of it's limitations (namely the focus issue) I've decided spending all that extra coin just for that is silly.

Thanks for all the advice!
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14018040#post14018040 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by "Umm, fish?"
It's a technique I picked up on Fred Miranda. These guys shoot almost exclusively handheld, though one does use a cane staff to help steady his shots.

http://lordv.smugmug.com/

LordV actually takes amazing stacked shots handheld. Pretty crazy.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dalantech/

And some more of Dalentech's work:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=6899193

It is very dark at 5x, but flash modeling lights help a lot, and the darkness issue is certainly true of any method you use to get to 5x, Canon or Nikon.

But, the point is that the Canon and Nikon lines are very similar in most areas of photography. Easier high-magnification macro is one area where Canon sets itself apart, so if that is something that someone wants to pursue then I would certainly recommend the Canon system on that basis.
Click to expand...


Just because it's possible doesn't mean that most folks will have good luck doing it that way. That's really the point that I was trying to make.

Cheers
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14016865#post14016865 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by nickb
Recty, I don't fully follow your pricing argument.
Click to expand...
I agree, I mentioned the wrong cameras, I was thinking of the 50D and the D300, not the D90, I dont think the D90 is in the same league as the 50D.
 
Having the 5x macro capability is really nice, but from everything I've read, it is a very difficult lens to use. I see the point you are trying to make, however I think the vast majority of macro shooters are going to get a 100-180mm macro with autofocus.
 
Fair enough, Doug. And, I don't use it handheld when I have a subject that'll stay still. :) But, with a little practice and a decent flash mounted at the end of the lens, it's really not too difficult, especially at 3x or less.

I honestly can't imagine needing autofocus for macro shooting. I haven't turned it on on the 100mm macro in years. It literally never autofocused on what I wanted to be in focus unless I was using the lens for snapshots or something.

I do wish the 65MPE was in the 100mm range so I could have a little more distance from my subjects. But, it would be huge at the 5x end of the scale.
 
You've got a point with autofocus being a vastly overrated feature on a macro lens. In my other thread I just got done raving about the live view feature on my new 5D mk II that allows me to zoom in 10x and get spot on manual focus. I don't see myself using AF on my 100mm again.
 
Oh, sigh.... I'm in envy mode. I _really_ want to upgrade to that body for exactly that reason. How do you like the other features?
 
I'm still playing with all the different features. I'm upgrading from a Canon 300D (Digital Rebel) so there is a ton to play with. Besides the macro work, I'm really impressed with the low light performance. I can take a picture of christmas lights at night from a moving car without a flash. There is still a lot that I haven't messed with such as the movie function. /end hijack
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E
Ben’s back at it 20G long
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
5K
ExitTrauma
E
B
Getting back into reefs after a decade away.. Questions
Replies
3
Views
1K
Dustin07
D
S
Nutrient Export
Replies
0
Views
1K
SantaMonica
S
650-IS350
Brand New SERA X-Feeder ($50) "Negotiable"
Replies
4
Views
1K
650-IS350
650-IS350
OrionN
Anemone Show-off
Replies
14
Views
798
Uncle99
Uncle99
Back
Top