Hi all. I'm new to the group. I wanted to share the comparison 40D and
D300 with you all. I was looking to buy a D300. But then I read about
the comparison and thought D300 is not so necessary for me. What do
you think about that? I'm afraid of buying wrong cam for me
so...Should I give 500$ more and buy D300 or 40D is enough? By the way
you can find the comparison in this site;
"MokiDuck" <volkanbeykoz@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1189664561.181433.26470@w3g2000hsg.googlegrou ps.com...
> Hi all. I'm new to the group. I wanted to share the comparison 40D and
> D300 with you all. I was looking to buy a D300. But then I read about
> the comparison and thought D300 is not so necessary for me. What do
> you think about that? I'm afraid of buying wrong cam for me
> so...Should I give 500$ more and buy D300 or 40D is enough? By the way
> you can find the comparison in this site;
>
> http://photolectic.com/reviews/dslr/...ikon-d300.html
>
>
This comparison is worthless. Read the real specs and see what else the
Nikon has to offer, like two liveview modes... I´m waiting for mine
already...
> This comparison is worthless. Read the real specs and see what else
> the Nikon has to offer, like two liveview modes... I´m waiting for
> mine already...
I think Nikon and Canon made a fatal mistake by not offering a Dead View
mode that would be more beneficial for forensics. Maybe on following models
they will get it right?
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 06:21:58 -0400, Rita Ä Berkowitz, Dead Head
wrote:
>> This comparison is worthless. Read the real specs and see what else
>> the Nikon has to offer, like two liveview modes... I´m waiting for
>> mine already...
>
> I think Nikon and Canon made a fatal mistake by not offering a Dead View
> mode that would be more beneficial for forensics. Maybe on following models
> they will get it right?
Thanks for the heads up. I'll wait for Nikon to release their D400
which will have Live/Dead View modes. For this, I too am Grateful.
MokiDuck <volkanbeykoz@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi all. I'm new to the group. I wanted to share the comparison 40D and
>D300 with you all. I was looking to buy a D300. But then I read about
>the comparison and thought D300 is not so necessary for me. What do
>you think about that? I'm afraid of buying wrong cam for me
>so...Should I give 500$ more and buy D300 or 40D is enough? By the way
>you can find the comparison in this site;
Rita Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:
> Sosumi wrote:
>
>> This comparison is worthless. Read the real specs and see what else
>> the Nikon has to offer, like two liveview modes... I'm waiting for
>> mine already...
>
> I think Nikon and Canon made a fatal mistake by not offering a Dead View
> mode that would be more beneficial for forensics. Maybe on following models
> they will get it right?
>
CSI has always preferred Nikon ... it has the best dead view of them all ...
they don't even need to advertise it.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the
machinations of the wicked.
Basically, you won't go wrong with either Nikon or Canon as they are both
great products. Remember you are just comparing bodies. If you are not
already committed to certain brand accessories, before committing to a body
also look at the other items such as lenses, etc.
Me personally, I would go for the 40D, but that's because I shoot on a 20D
and absolutely love the results I get (which I guess is probably the same
for Nikon users). I also love the UI/simplicity of the controls and dials
on the Canon because I can quickly/easily get the body to do what I want it
to.
I also like the Canon lens range, and for me personally lenses are more
important than the body, as long as the body is capable of getting the shots
I want.
Looking at the specs, there is only one Nikon item that I would like on the
40D and that is ISO 6400. Although, I would be interested to see the noise
levels of shots taken at ISO 6400.
Remember, some specs are biased, for example comparing a 10MP compact P&S to
a 10MP DSLR. 10 MP maybe, but there's a lot more to take into
consideration.
"MokiDuck" <volkanbeykoz@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1189664561.181433.26470@w3g2000hsg.googlegrou ps.com...
> Hi all. I'm new to the group. I wanted to share the comparison 40D and
> D300 with you all. I was looking to buy a D300. But then I read about
> the comparison and thought D300 is not so necessary for me. What do
> you think about that? I'm afraid of buying wrong cam for me
> so...Should I give 500$ more and buy D300 or 40D is enough? By the way
> you can find the comparison in this site;
>
> http://photolectic.com/reviews/dslr/...ikon-d300.html
>
> Regards
>
> Looking at the specs, there is only one Nikon item that I would like on
> the 40D and that is ISO 6400. Although, I would be interested to see the
> noise levels of shots taken at ISO 6400.
On 13 Eylül, 23:04, "Gino" <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> Basically, you won't go wrong with either Nikon or Canon as they are both
> great products. Remember you are just comparing bodies. If you are not
> already committed to certain brand accessories, before committing to a body
> also look at the other items such as lenses, etc.
>
> Me personally, I would go for the 40D, but that's because I shoot on a 20D
> and absolutely love the results I get (which I guess is probably the same
> for Nikon users). I also love the UI/simplicity of the controls and dials
> on the Canon because I can quickly/easily get the body to do what I want it
> to.
>
> I also like the Canon lens range, and for me personally lenses are more
> important than the body, as long as the body is capable of getting the shots
> I want.
>
> Looking at the specs, there is only one Nikon item that I would like on the
> 40D and that is ISO 6400. Although, I would be interested to see the noise
> levels of shots taken at ISO 6400.
>
> Remember, some specs are biased, for example comparing a 10MP compact P&S to
> a 10MP DSLR. 10 MP maybe, but there's a lot more to take into
> consideration.
Yes you are right I think. So I'm gonna buy a 40D and a compatible
good quality lens with it. Thank you all very much... By the way have
you got any suggestions about the lens??
MokiDuck <volkanbeykoz@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 13 Eylül, 23:04, "Gino" <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
....
>> I also like the Canon lens range, and for me personally lenses are more
>> important than the body, as long as the body is capable of getting the shots
>> I want.
....
>Yes you are right I think. So I'm gonna buy a 40D and a compatible
>good quality lens with it. Thank you all very much... By the way have
>you got any suggestions about the lens??
How can you decide on a camera make until you have a
very very *very* clear idea what kinds of lenses
(plural, not singular) you'll want to use?
Or, at least how can you decide on an expensive
camera... I would agree that if you are just starting
out, and really have no idea what kinds of work (and
therefore which lenses), it might be hard to choose.
But I wouldn't recommend a $1000+ camera that locks
you into a line of lenses that you might not want...
To me, "compatible good quality lens" means you will
eventually spend more money on glass than you will on
the body. That is typical, unless you have a very
narrow interest in only one specific type of
photography.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@apaflo.com
Canon 40D vs Nikon D300 Comparison 
Linear Mode
