| || ||Thread Tools||Search this Thread|
|16th August 2009, 14:31||#1381|
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New Delhi
Thanked: 68 Times
The snow clad Alps (Mt. Titlis) is taken through a cable car . Though would have loved to take snaps from a helicopter too
|18th August 2009, 09:55||#1382|
Senior - BHPian
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Mostly Mumbai
Thanked: 1,143 Times
Hi. I am considering buying a dslr. I have shortlisted the Canon eos 500D & the Nikon D90. There is an approximate 20k difference in price between the two which works in favor of Canon. However I would appreciate if someone can tell me why the Nikon is overpriced. The specs in comparision do not have much difference, yet the price difference is huge. Dpreview rates both the cameras equally. Following are the deals available. Please guide me through this.
Canon eos 500D with twin lens kit(Canon) = 61500/-
with Canon EF-SS 18-55mm IS lens & Canon EF-S 55-250mm IS Lens
Nikon D90 twin lens(Nikon) kit = 82000/-
with 18-105mm ED VR lens & 55-200mm DX VR lens.
I need to know 2 things.
1. Which is superior between the two and what features justify the higher cost of the Nikon?
2. On a cost by feature comparision which camera is a better buy?
Both are offering a 2year warranty.
Thanks in advance.
Last edited by jaysmokesleaves : 18th August 2009 at 09:57.
|18th August 2009, 10:53||#1383|
Join Date: Mar 2004
Thanked: 3,642 Times
2. I'd take the D90 kit but with the 16-85 and 70-300 lens kit instead. the current combo gives you too much overlap between the 18-105 and 55-200.
In that sense the Canon kit is better balanced and for the 20K extra you could get yourself a 270EX flash, battery pack + extra batteries, or a nice fast prime like the 28/1.8 (which will work out to a 42mm on the 1.6 crop canon). 42mm is about what the human eye sees au naturel.
Lastly Nikon and Canon camera work very differently and have a very different touch and feel. I myself prefered a Nikon's feel (having used the 1Ds) but bought a Canon because it would let me have access to my niece's pro lens collection. So use both bodies and see what feels better. Also compare the Nikon D90 to the Canon 50D body and the Canon 500D to the Nikon D5000.
|18th August 2009, 12:32||#1384|
Senior - BHPian
Presented the D300 to self yesterday. Picked the body with bill as the difference between a non-billed one was 4K. Also registered the D300 on the Nikon site.
D300 body only - Rs. 71000/-
Less D80 body - Rs. 31000/-
Difference paid - Rs. 40000/-
First thing I did was to charge the battery fully and update the firmware to the latest 1.10
|18th August 2009, 12:46||#1385|
Join Date: Apr 2004
Thanked: 3,832 Times
|18th August 2009, 12:56||#1387|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Thanked: 57 Times
Any tips or a small write up on your workflow for printing would help all of us. I went to get a print done and was disappointed. The print came out pretty dark :(. Am I missing something? I did check the calibration of my laptop monitor and it looked fine. Also, I ain't sure if Print eXpress would give out the ICC profile of the printer used for me to soft proof before going. And it would be great if you could let me know where you get your prints done. Thanks in advance.
|18th August 2009, 13:00||#1388|
Senior - BHPian
Join Date: Jul 2008
Thanked: 1,029 Times
Your photo album is pretty nice, except that IMO the saturation is a bit on a higher side.
|18th August 2009, 13:19||#1389|
Senior - BHPian
Thanks man. I didn't check the official price for D90, but the grey price for the same with kit lens is 59K. I can't hazard a guess since it is different for different models.
For e.g. the D300 body in grey is for 67K while with bill it is for 71K. Since the difference was 4k I opted for with the bill. But on the contrary when I enquired for D700, the body in grey was for 1.10-1.15K while the billed one was for 1.30K.
|18th August 2009, 14:29||#1394|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Thanked: 161 Times
Awesome buy! Have fun!
@Reign of Chaos
I too had checked out the camera.
I am not too impressed with its low light performance and speed(fps), keep in mind that the more pixels there are - the less light there is to fall on each photo receptor, since there is a finite number of photons that can expose an image on the sensor. Unless you are shooting for huge billboards that need huge images, the extra pixels are just an opportunity to introduce more noise accumulation on the sensor. The HD video is awesome on a camera, but i believe a movie cam and still cam at the pro level ought to do their separate tasks to the best.
But don’t get me wrong, I think the 5D Mark 2 is fantastic camera for the money, my best buddy uses one and I fiddle around with it a lot.. It's just that I think the high ISO is not quite there yet as well as the frame rate. Many a time speed is the difference between a great try, and a great shot.
Last edited by Torqueguru : 18th August 2009 at 14:36.
|18th August 2009, 14:53||#1395|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kollam, Kerala
Thanked: 2 Times
|Thread Tools||Search this Thread|
|Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|DSLR Video Discussion||Sankar||Gadgets, Computers & Software||129||18th August 2017 19:07|
|On a Temple Visiting Spree! Returned with only 1 wish. Need a DSLR!||mclaren1885||Travelogues||23||27th July 2007 11:21|