Switch to Nikon??

[CT Disney]

I have always been a Canon user. Right now I shoot with a really old Rebel (probably the first digital rebel!) and I actually still manage to get pretty good pics from it. My Dad was a photographer so I grew up around the lingo...I'd consider myself an intermediate in terms of skill.

It's time for a new camera!

I am a mom and shoot a lot of pictures of my kids...and Disney of course. I always loved photography as a hobby, but find I don't have a lot of time these days. (In the thick of the high school and middle school years!). I originally thought I'd go out and get the T5i. But, before I do that, I want to make sure that I'm giving Nikon a fair shake. I know nothing about Nikon cameras. My dad was a Canon junkie so that's what I grew up using. Switching to a Nikon feels like trading in my Yankees jersey for a Red Sox one!

I checked out the Nikon D5300 today. I like the size and weight. The menu and controls are different than the Canon but I think I could adjust.

In the short term I need a camera for family vacations and pictures of the kids, and for indulging my hobby in the very limited time I have. When the kids are done with high school I will probably upgrade to the better camera in whatever brand I've chosen....by then I should have more free time to really get back into the hobby.

I have a few Canon lenses, but they are old so I'm not committed to them.

Priorities to me now are crisp, clear shots and a camera that will do a great job with the kids (skin tones, etc). I try to shoot RAW images when I can and process them after, but I'm not gonna lie: a lot of times I shoot auto as the kids are running out the door dressed up for a band concert, etc.

In the long term I see myself traveling more and taking more landscapes.

So, Nikon or Canon? I'd like to select a brand that will work for now, and later, and start investing in some better lenses. I'm just so confused!

 

[havoc315]

Honestly, for generic family needs and general shooting, you'd be equally well served by either. 99% of the time, you would never be able to tell the differences in the results. Not like one brand give consistently sharper images than another brand. Especially when looking at entry level and mid-level APS-C cameras, the differences are pretty minor.

Some of the small differences that might be a consideration:

Upgrade path: Both brands offer more advanced APS-C and full frame cameras. But as things currently stand, December 2014 (subject to change), Canon has been more active in providing high level APS-C cameras (the recently 7Dii), while Nikon is trying to push more upgraders to full frame (For regular consumers, Canon offers the 5diii and 6d.. In a comparable price range, Nikon offers the D610, D750, D810, and DF).

The slight differences in sensor performance: You won't be able to tell the difference most of the time, but the Nikon sensor (or actually Sony sensor) is quite a bit more highly rated than the Canon. You will get better low noise performance with the Nikon. Comparing the t5i with the Nikon D5300, you will get about 1-stop better noise performance from the Nikon, with higher resolution, and much better dynamic range at low ISO. (very helpful for landscapes). And slightly more resolution out of the Nikon.

Lens offerings are very similar between the brands, but you should check out the lenses you are most likely to want to buy, see their availability and price in each mount. In general terms, you might find Canon lenses a bit cheaper.

Differences in bodies -- Very subjective, in terms of which body people prefer.
The Canon has a well regarded touch screen, which you may find to be a useful feature. And there are some people who prefer the feeling of one camera or the other in their hand.

All these differences are really minor, when it comes down to it. Especially in terms of the end results: It would be like doing a blind taste test of 10 different types of apples... How much difference in flavors would you really be able to notice? How many apple types would you really guess right? In the end, "tastes like apple."

 

[boBQuincy]

Go for the one that feels the best in your hands, that is probably a much greater differentiation than anything else between those two brands.

 

[CT Disney]

Honestly, for generic family needs and general shooting, you'd be equally well served by either. 99% of the time, you would never be able to tell the differences in the results. Not like one brand give consistently sharper images than another brand. Especially when looking at entry level and mid-level APS-C cameras, the differences are pretty minor.

Some of the small differences that might be a consideration:

Upgrade path: Both brands offer more advanced APS-C and full frame cameras. But as things currently stand, December 2014 (subject to change), Canon has been more active in providing high level APS-C cameras (the recently 7Dii), while Nikon is trying to push more upgraders to full frame (For regular consumers, Canon offers the 5diii and 6d.. In a comparable price range, Nikon offers the D610, D750, D810, and DF).

The slight differences in sensor performance: You won't be able to tell the difference most of the time, but the Nikon sensor (or actually Sony sensor) is quite a bit more highly rated than the Canon. You will get better low noise performance with the Nikon. Comparing the t5i with the Nikon D5300, you will get about 1-stop better noise performance from the Nikon, with higher resolution, and much better dynamic range at low ISO. (very helpful for landscapes). And slightly more resolution out of the Nikon.

Lens offerings are very similar between the brands, but you should check out the lenses you are most likely to want to buy, see their availability and price in each mount. In general terms, you might find Canon lenses a bit cheaper.

Differences in bodies -- Very subjective, in terms of which body people prefer.
The Canon has a well regarded touch screen, which you may find to be a useful feature. And there are some people who prefer the feeling of one camera or the other in their hand.

All these differences are really minor, when it comes down to it. Especially in terms of the end results: It would be like doing a blind taste test of 10 different types of apples... How much difference in flavors would you really be able to notice? How many apple types would you really guess right? In the end, "tastes like apple."

Thank you so much for taking the time to write this!

I was browsing through the Photo Sharing threads for both Canon and Nikon and noticed some things:
1. Holy Cow...you guys are awesome photographers! The photos inspire me to make more time to learn the craft.

2. On the Nikon thread I noticed some unbelievable landscapes. Many seem to have an almost unreal, dreamlike quality. You can see every single detail with amazing sharpness.

3. The Canon thread seemed to showcase softer images with gentler edges and details. To me they had a more "realistic" look to them.

I'm not sure if these observations have more to do with the camera or the person behind the camera and the way they process the image. But, like I said, I am amazed at the level of talent on these boards!

 

[havoc315]

2. On the Nikon thread I noticed some unbelievable landscapes. Many seem to have an almost unreal, dreamlike quality. You can see every single detail with amazing sharpness.

3. The Canon thread seemed to showcase softer images with gentler edges and details. To me they had a more "realistic" look to them.

I'm not sure if these observations have more to do with the camera or the person behind the camera and the way they process the image. But, like I said, I am amazed at the level of talent on these boards!

It's mostly the latter. I would say that Nikon has a very very slight edge for landscape shooters, due to greater dynamic range. Plus for APS-C, Nikon has a lesser crop factor, so that can make wide angles, a bit wider. But we are talking about mild differences in the end results.

The "dreamlike" photos may be HDR shots -- Post processing, can be done with any camera brand. This board may just have a some more Nikon shooters that also use HDR post processing.

Take a Canon shot and Nikon shot, side by side, you won't be able to tell the difference generally speaking.

Differences between cameras become more significant among the higher end cameras, and if you have very specific needs. (If you need the best possible low light shooter, if you want to shoot high burst rate action, etc).

You won't make a mistake with either brand. If you can, try to get a hold of both cameras. At a minimum, hold them in the store. Ideally, shoot with each for a bit, and see which feels better in your grip, which seems more responsive.

 

[jamez2014]

To play devils advocate in all honesty if I was to switch to more fun shooting and personal stuff pretty much any Fuji stuff is were I would be heading and I'm a canon devote, have a look at them just to have a another option I do think mirrorless is best if your wanting a 'new' system, canon and Nikon are playing catch up here imo.

 

[bob100]

Thank you so much for taking the time to write this!

I was browsing through the Photo Sharing threads for both Canon and Nikon and noticed some things:
1. Holy Cow...you guys are awesome photographers! The photos inspire me to make more time to learn the craft.

2. On the Nikon thread I noticed some unbelievable landscapes. Many seem to have an almost unreal, dreamlike quality. You can see every single detail with amazing sharpness.

3. The Canon thread seemed to showcase softer images with gentler edges and details. To me they had a more "realistic" look to them.

I'm not sure if these observations have more to do with the camera or the person behind the camera and the way they process the image. But, like I said, I am amazed at the level of talent on these boards!

a "realistic" or "dreamlike" image is due to the lens used, processing, camera, photographer, light, and many other factors. And it's true some camera sensors are rated differently (noise reduction on the RAW file !!)

here's a suggestion:
Join a local photo club and then you will be able to share equipment and and compare photos when you are shooting the same subject at the same time. Shoot in RAW and use software conversion like rawtherapee to process the files. That will help you to make a better decision on which camera is more "realistic" and which camera is more "dream like".

 

[SkaGoat]

You mentioned you don't have as much time as you'd like to have to spend on your hobby.

Maybe trying to learn a new camera system is not the best use of your limited time. Especially when you take into consideration there isn't a huge gap between the entry level cameras. Personally if it were me, I'd get the T5i and invest in a good prime lens (something like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 Art).

 

[HPS3]

I agree with getting the one that feels best in your hands.

I would definitely give the mirrorless market a look. Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung and Fuji have some great offerings.

I'm a Fuji shooter and can say that the cameras are wonderful. They make the best Jpegs if you don't have time to process raw files. Don't let the dials discourage you, they can still be shot in auto mode.

 

[CT Disney]

You mentioned you don't have as much time as you'd like to have to spend on your hobby.

Maybe trying to learn a new camera system is not the best use of your limited time. Especially when you take into consideration there isn't a huge gap between the entry level cameras. Personally if it were me, I'd get the T5i and invest in a good prime lens (something like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 Art).

Thank you all so much for your input!

I hadn't even considered the mirrorless cameras...I'll need to look into those.

You have a very good point about learning a new system at this point. It does feel a little daunting. I am leaning towards sticking with Canon as it doesn't seem like there's a huge difference in the end-results between the Nikon and Canon. I'm going to head to the store this weekend and hold them both again...see what feels more comfortable.

Can you tell me...what are the benefits of getting a prime lens over the lens that the T5i is typically packaged with (either the 18 - 55 STM or the 18-135 STM lens)? Are the prime lenses superior in some way?

 

[Tigerlulu]

Prime lenses are generally sharper and better for low light. Definitely look at a 50 mm.

I'm a Nikon shooter but I also own a Sony and my boss (studio owner) shoots canon. So I have some experience with all 3 brands.
(D700, A77 and 5dmk3)

I don't enjoy switching between canon and Nikon. They are very different. My Sony has excellent color and better technology but not superior lenses by any means. If you eventually want superior lenses then Nikon is the best. Not that canon isn't sharp--just Nikon is very well know for their quality lenses. Nikon has good color but canon has slightly better color. Nikons sensors perform better in low light. I appreciate that don't blink to raise my ISO to 5000 to shoot. My boss hates his camera at 3000. And with kids I find myself appreciating not having to use flash as often. Band concert the other night I was able to shoot across the gym with no flash and high ISO. One of the biggest reasons I love Nikon.

But that's not to say you can't get clear sharp crisp images with a canon lens or shoot with high ISO. Overall you'll be happy with either one.

I've used a few rebels for friends here and there and hated the feel of them.

If you plan to jump back in one day you definitely need to consider the long term!

 

[xlxo]

Some thoughts...

• old film lenses may not have the sharpness of modern digital lenses
• Canon offer sharper JPG's by default, Nikon under.... can be adjusted
• Nikon offers sharper RAW
• How long is the Canon warranty for the T5i? How long is the Nikon warranty? Is there savings?
• How long is the Canon warranty for Canon lenses? How long is the Nikon warranty for lenses (5yrs via authorized retailer?)? Is there savings on not getting an extended warranty?
• Canon offers better video options.... do you like to use auto-focus? Check out this video with the computer volume turned up! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9r3VcFueYw4&t=4s
• premium Nikon camera bodies offer a built-in flash.... Canon forces to buy an external flash or you need to shoot flashless.
• Nikon offers an auto-focus light to help with low light focussing.... Canon likes to strobe its flash to guess the focus.
• With pictures of young children... pay attention to the number of autofocus points and how many are cross-type.
• I disagree with the comment about Canon lenses being cheaper. Big reason I went Nikon....
  http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/319784-GREY/Canon_9322A002AA_28_300mm_f_3_5_5_6L_IS_USM.html
  http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/729950-USA/Nikon_2191_AF_S_NIKKOR_28_300mm_f_3_5_5_6G.html
• do you like optical zoom? Nikon offers an 18-300mm for the D5300 (16.7 times). Canon offers nothing.
  http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/872407-REG/Nikon_AF_S_DX_18_300mm_f_3_5_5_6G.html
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8ghz3KuQ-w

I agree with photo clubs or classes. I like cost effective night school classes where students and teachers give feedback on each others pictures.

Canon has been more active in providing high level APS-C cameras (the recently 7Dii), while Nikon is trying to push more upgraders to full frame (For regular consumers, Canon offers the 5diii and 6d.. In a comparable price range, Nikon offers the D610, D750, D810, and DF).

I remember when Canon offered the original 5D and Canon had everyone drooling over full frame at $8000, while everyone else only had cropped sensors! Canon threw a challenge to competitors to make a better full frame camera.

A few years later... 5Dm3 vs D800? Nikon offered nearly 50% more megapixels for sharpness, Nikon had a built-in flash, but charged me $700 LESS! And yes what that 28-300mm price savings sealed the deal. Then this story came out where a Nikon photographer saw his reflection in a bird's eye. Love the resolution and detail!
http://petapixel.com/2012/03/28/nikon-d800-resolution-compared-to-the-canon-5d-mark-iii/
Canon says to wait, while Nikon ships their second gen D810 in 2014.

 

[CT Disney]

Well, I went to the local big box today so that I could hold both the Canon and the Nikon cameras. (Gotta love those big security coils they have attached to the cameras...I think they double the weight of the darn thing making it tough to tell how heavy the cameras really are)

Anyway, the gentleman that helped me was nice enough to take some out of the box so that I could get an idea of the true weight. It was funny because he was a Canon user and he seemed to be trying to steer me in that direction. But then another sales guy joined us and chimed in with "Nikon all the way...every day."

I have to say...the Nikon cameras felt really comfortable to me. I enjoyed the smaller grip size in my hand and I was able to turn the camera on a get a general feel for the location of the settings and the controls. After today, I am very tempted to switch it up and try out the Nikon. Only thing holding me back is the better video functionality of the Canons. STM lenses and touch screen seem to be the way to go in this area. To be honest, I love still photography WAY more than videos, but being realistic I know we have a lot of kid-centric performances and graduations in our future.

And now...my DH is saying I should just get the D7100 instead of the D5300. He knows that I tend to hold onto my electronics for forever and a day (just gave up my iphone 3) and he thinks that the 7100 will keep me happy for a long while.

Decisions, decisions....but it's exciting!

 

[photo_chick]

Go for the one that feels the best in your hands, that is probably a much greater differentiation than anything else between those two brands.

Yep. You can nit pick specs but it really comes down to what feels best when you're looking between these two brands.

 

[SkaGoat]

Where do I even start?

Some thoughts...

• premium Nikon camera bodies offer a built-in flash.... Canon forces to buy an external flash or you need to shoot flashless.
• Nikon offers an auto-focus light to help with low light focussing.... Canon likes to strobe its flash to guess the focus.
• I disagree with the comment about Canon lenses being cheaper. Big reason I went Nikon....
  http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/319784-GREY/Canon_9322A002AA_28_300mm_f_3_5_5_6L_IS_USM.html
  http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/729950-USA/Nikon_2191_AF_S_NIKKOR_28_300mm_f_3_5_5_6G.html
• do you like optical zoom? Nikon offers an 18-300mm for the D5300 (16.7 times). Canon offers nothing.
  http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/872407-REG/Nikon_AF_S_DX_18_300mm_f_3_5_5_6G.html
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8ghz3KuQ-w

I remember when Canon offered the original 5D and Canon had everyone drooling over full frame at $8000, while everyone else only had cropped sensors! Canon threw a challenge to competitors to make a better full frame camera.

A few years later... 5Dm3 vs D800? Nikon offered nearly 50% more megapixels for sharpness, Nikon had a built-in flash, but charged me $700 LESS! And yes what that 28-300mm price savings sealed the deal. Then this story came out where a Nikon photographer saw his reflection in a bird's eye. Love the resolution and detail!
http://petapixel.com/2012/03/28/nikon-d800-resolution-compared-to-the-canon-5d-mark-iii/
Canon says to wait, while Nikon ships their second gen D810 in 2014.

Canon's top of the line APS-C camera the 7D Mk II has a built in flash, only their full frame cameras don't have a built in flash, and that's because Canon felt anyone spending $2000 or more on a DSLR isn't going to use the built in flash.

With the two lenses you mention for your price comparison, the Canon lens is much, much sharper. But there are better comparisons.

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8- $125 Nikon 50mm f/1.8G $216
Canon EF-S 10-18mm =$299 Nikon- doesn't have one
Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 =$879 Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 DX $1399

Just a few examples, and lenses the OP may actually purchase, not to mention Canon's 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II is sharper, and a has almost no focus breathing (unlike the Nikon version).

Canon doesn't have a super zoom because they're garbage.

Also, that video of focus noise was $100 50mm f/1.8, not a STM lens, and Canon is making many great, inexpensive STM lenses (24mm, 40mm, 17-55mm, 55-200mm), they are almost silent while focusing.

The Canon 5D was $3200 on launch, it was never $8000.

The D810 is a $3200 camera, I don't feel like that is the price range the OP is looking in.

 

[xlxo]

And now...my DH is saying I should just get the D7100 instead of the D5300. He knows that I tend to hold onto my electronics for forever and a day (just gave up my iphone 3) and he thinks that the 7100 will keep me happy for a long while.

Decisions, decisions....but it's exciting!

I'm going to say to think about the prosumer D7100 too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXTD-1EHW7c

• bonus AF-D focussing motor to autofocus cheaper lenses
• optional vertical grip (better handling for bigger hands, AA battery adapter)
• enhanced features over the D5300
  http://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/nikon/d7100/vs/nikon/d5300/

 

[SplashMo]

I have Canon. My next camera will be a Nikon D5300 or D750. Nikon is currently that much better than canon in the APS-C range and in the FF range there is more preference but I still give the edge to Nikon.

 

[SkaGoat]

I have Canon. My next camera will be a Nikon D5300 or D750. Nikon is currently that much better than canon in the APS-C range.

That's debatable, it depends on what you want to do with it, again they're pretty much neck, and neck at this point in the APS-C range, with one outlier, (the 7D MkII) which is the best APS-C camera out there right now, but it's pricey.

The only spot that Nikon is better is at the entry level. 70D is better than the Nikon equivalent, and 7D mkII doesn't have a Nikon equivalent.

 

[havoc315]

That's debatable, it depends on what you want to do with it, again they're pretty much neck, and neck at this point in the APS-C range, with one outlier, (the 7D MkII) which is the best APS-C camera out there right now, but it's pricey.

The only spot that Nikon is better is at the entry level. 70D is better than the Nikon equivalent, and 7D mkII doesn't have a Nikon equivalent.

You can go crazy debating minor differences. A Sony fan might say the a77ii is nearly as good as the 7dii -- possibly even better, at half the price.
(IMHO, overall the 7dii has an edge over the a77ii but it's very close, and the Sony is much cheaper, so in Aps-c, I'd go for the a77ii. In full frame, I think the best overall dslr, price point included, is the d750. Though the Canon 5diii is close especially with recent price drops).

 

[SkaGoat]

You can go crazy debating minor differences. A Sony fan might say the a77ii is nearly as good as the 7dii -- possibly even better, at half the price.
(IMHO, overall the 7dii has an edge over the a77ii but it's very close, and the Sony is much cheaper, so in Aps-c, I'd go for the a77ii. In full frame, I think the best overall dslr, price point included, is the d750. Though the Canon 5diii is close especially with recent price drops).

A new full frame from Canon is coming, whether it's a 5D Mk IV, or a new line 2D, 3D or 4D, I'm not sure, but the price drop tells me they're going to fill the hole between the 5D, and 1DX with something.

IQ is a was between the Sony, and the Canon, the Canon has much better AF, Optical Viewfinder, no semi-translucent mirror, and a better lens line-up (although the A mount line isn't bad, it's not on par with CaNikon), but the Sony is cheaper, but the Canon will come down in price as well.