I am a photography student and I am ready to buy a good digital SLR. My photography interest include: landscape, action and portraiture. My instructor has recommended the Cannon. My sister who is in the business says Nikon is industry standard. Price is not really an issue, but I want to be sure I don't regret my purchase. Any advice

Ok what do you mean by price is no factor ?

I would go with Canon. Perhaps because I own three of their cameras, but I really would consider the Canon 5D. Fantastic, and I think gives you most for your money. 1Ds series is to unknoen, sorry wouldn't spent so much money know there we know, that something new is coming this fall.

I don't know why your sister is saying Nikon is standard. As much as I know Canon rules pretty much.


If you go for a cheaper Model you really should think about Nikon, because the D200 is nice, too. But I really prefer FF.

That about covers the whole scope. I'd say look around to see what the pros use. Most sports events are dominated by Canons. In my business, architectural photography, Canons overwhelmingly dominate DSLR usage because of the full chip and availability of perspective control lenses. Look at what people are using in the fields that interest you.



This was certainly true about 20 years ago. Since the digital revolution though it has swayed back and forth in DSLR between Canon and Nikon with an overall edge to Canon IMO. Next year anything is possible as the technology and competition escalates.

Frankly I don't think you could go wrong with either system for your stated purposes. More than anything else your results will depend on your budget for high end camera bodies and good lenses and doing your homework for quality purchases. There are dogs in each system. Beyond that how you use your equipment will matter enormously and perhaps more than the differences in the two excellent systems.

FWIW, I own a ton of Canon equipment, all of which I have bought in the last year. I could do my work with Nikons, but there would be some compromises. For the foreseeable future it looks like I made the right choice for my work.

Go to a well stocked camera-store and 'try them on'. Even if you have to travel a bit to do that, it will be worth your while. You will spend a lot of time with the camera in your hand and whatever feels more comfortable, more intuitive and 'fits' better to you personally will be the one. Both brands have an excellent line up of different models and lenses. And there are other brands as well.
Even if money is not an issue, it might be thought to go for a less expensive outfit and see which of the three topics interest you more (or most). Maybe, you would prefer a Hasselblad with a digital back? Just kidding.
The best advice would be: Take your time and actually handle the cameras you are interested in and some you have not thought about.

Angela

Looking at what the pros use will not be very useful to you as a student. In cameras that cost anywhere from $500.00 to $1500.00 Nikon is a very clear leader if you are buying new. The ergonomics and features on a camera like a D80 are better than the digital Rebel.

The advantages that Canon gives you are: it's selection of sports lenses in the $2-10K range, it's ability to use exotic 3rd party wide angle lenses for architecture (costing $2-3K each), and that it is full frame (if you spend $3k or more on the body). None of these is an actual advantage for a student.

What about some extra lenses for the portraits (some of those fast, fixed ones)....

Nikon 50mm 1.4 $250.00
Canon 50mm 1.2 $1600.00

Nikon 85mm 1.4 1000.00
Canon 85mm 1.2 1700.00

My main point here is that the Pros are using a different set of criteria to make decisions on these cameras. The budget is very different. I know you say price is not an issue, but the quality of images from a D200 will be so similar to a 5d at half the cost that price should be an issue. The D200 will also squash the ergonomics and features of the Rebel series.

This is all IMHO of course. I see a lot of photography students using Nikons.

Hi
If you look at a canon 50 mm 1.4 oit goes for 275 or there abouts . It depends on the work you do. If you shoot in low light at all canon is a no brainer. It simpky has less noise then anything else out there. If low light means nbothing to you and do not shoot above 400 iso then there are pros and cons both ways . Nikon has the best mid level camera in terms oi weather seal the d200 . If you want fsat wide angle lenses go with canon and a full frame sensor. When I started shooting sports Sports Illustrated was 50- 50 nikon or canon Now Only one left shoots nothing but nikon most Shoot Canon .
Good luck

Of the advice you've seen here so far, I think Angela's is the most important. "Ergonomics" isn't just a theoretical concept, it's what feels right to you, in your own hands. Both Nikon and Canon make excellent cameras and lenses (and both make some dogs.) If you spend some time at a camera store trying several models from each, you should pretty soon get a sense of what feels comfortable in your own hands.

I personally like full-frame, and I love my Canon 5D. I previously had a 10D which did very well, too. So I am personally solidly in the Canon camp, but that doesn't mean it's the best for you. My brother uses (and swears by) Nikons.

Good luck with your selection, and please let us know what you end up with.

"Ergonomics" are on part of a camera, but certainly not the biggest one or why else do so many of us still use something like 1D(s) Mk2 ;-)

The truth is that it is a very bad time to ask the question.

Although I am, among other things, a Nikon user, I'd say that the most universal answer today is probably to get a Canon 5D.

I am saying that now is a bad timing because there are very insistent rumours that Nikon is about to annouce their own full frame (or nearly so) based camera. My recommendation would then instantly switch to Nikon.

Cheers,
Bernard

Funny that I am working with a 5D and think that for outdoor use the Nikon D2x would be the better camera (weather sealed, faster, much better viewfinder, better display,..) General I find the picture quality of the 5D very good, but only with the best lenses (24-70 2,8 for example) and only if you dont get a lemon which happens in both camps frequently I fear. My new purchased 17-40 L never made it up to the optical performance of the 24-70 so I sold it. Waiting for that 16-35 II for 1700.-€, I am not sure if I will buy it for that price. (for super wide angle I do lot of stiching with really right stuff panorama plate, and that works very well).
If Nikon brings an almost full frame camera I predict that all Nikon users will start to find out the hard way, that Nikon is nothing better in wide angle performance than Canon. All optics of both companies were never designed for digital use, so unpleasant surprises will happen mainly below 28/24 mm optics. The main feature of a full frame sensor is ISO performance, which I needed when I purchased the 5D (weddings at candlelight for example - hard to do that with a Nikon). As I am now able to go back to more "outdoor" stuff again (never enjoyed the press/wedding stuff very much), I would say Nikon would suit me more. As mentioned ergonomics are important, I can work with Canon very well, but I had a D2X for testing a few days and liked it better (and actually I came from the Nikon D-100 camp, so I am used to Nikon too). Than there is the question of which optics you think you need, the more you go the wide angle the more you are better suited with Canon, but only with the expensive new 16-35 lens (look at threads about Canon users which adapt old olympus, leica or zeiss lenses to their cameras, they dont do it for fun, but because wide angle is a tough area with digital cameras). The more you go the Tele end, you will find advantages of the cropped sensor.
And also the Raw converter will have a very high impact on the quality of your files. DXO is amazing with landscape, architecture, but ACR is good with portrait, as it makes easier for a softer look (which is hard to get in DXO)

It is a hard decision, and the bad thing is, you might feel in a year that it was the wrong one, no matter what you did this time.

Good Luck !

Christian

The debate on weather seal can be quite subjective. A weather seal camera needs to work with a weather seal lens and a weather sealed flash system so far only Canon offer such solution. The typical weather sealed option also depends on how far the user willing to push their equipment to go, and under not-so-harsh condition, perhpas 5D works as good as cameras so called weather sealed. But if one push the camera to go beyond normal, then the weather seal issue has to address to all the compobets - lens, flash and so on, then just the body won't work.
I think we should not doubt the Canon 5D as of today offer the top image in a common package. The nice thing about Canon is that if offer a logical range of cameras from the very low bottom to the very top end on 135mm type DSLR, with not just shooting rate, body build, pixel count, resolution, but also sensor size. Every camera brans has their loyalty customers, but it is no wonder Canon has the biggest pie.

Christian,

That's my opinion too if landscape is the main application, but the OP also mentioned portrait.

The main value of the D2x for landscape is IMHO its APS sensor delivering both more DoF and a more uniform image quality with wide angle lenses.

Cheers,
Bernard

One more option??

The Fuji S5

The Fuji DSLRs are know for extended dynamic range and very natural skin tones. The new S5 is also a big improvement in the body itself, which I believe is a D200. About $1800.00. It's worth considering.

I couldn't disagree more. looking at what the pros use for a particular kind of photography teaches you allot about what features are optimum for a particular use and why. What is a better place to look? Some of the pros choices may be outside your budget but at least you have a sense of what you ultimately may need. Also, he did say that price was not a factor.

I teach at two universities and numerous workshops. Most students walk into entry level classes with (budget aside) less than optimum choices of cameras. The last place I would look for recommendations are students unless they are upper level or graduate students with some experience under their belt.

I use nikon

Go for Canon 5d

Full frame view looks right with todays focal ranges


Buy only lenses that will cover full frame exept maybe an extreme wide zoom which will go in the bin in time

You can get great value with prime lenses

---

One advantage of Nikon however is that you can get ancient lenses very cheap

50 1.4 etc - if only there was a cheap old wide (there isnt)

The fact that they dont meter and dont have AF will help you progress from student to master very quickly

Id go Canon 5d and a 20 2.8 and a 50 1.8 and maybe a 135 or 180(?)

Or a nikon and an 18 and a 35 1.4 mF

What you need to be evaluatiing is the difference between the expensive 5d and cheap wide lenses and a cheaper nikon but expensive (or crappy) wide lenses

I dont think zooms help you learn and I dont think lenses with apertures smaller than 2.8 help you learn focus control either

You only need three lenses a wide a normal and a tele - get the tele last and learn to get up close and personal

My recomend

canon 5d 20mm or 24mm and 50mm

or on a real budget nikon (D100?) and 12-24 and 50 1.8 manual

With canon you wont ever need to upgrade from those lenses so could be cheaper in the long run

SMM

I was a Nikon user up until I shifted to FF Canons. Ergonomics are different, but you can learn to use a camera but can't change the camera's format so your decision will key you in to a specific system for some time to come - unless your budget really is unlimited. Although there are subtleties of the Nikons that I miss, one thing that I do like is not having to 'relearn' lenses - I much prefer to use '35mm' focal lengths on FF - something which is akin to 'mental ergonomics' in a way. As already stated, I'd stick to fixed focal lengths and keep things simple - 24/50/135 or 20/35/85, etc will cover an awful lot at not a hideous outlay. Lastly, if you are so minded, various adapters allow you to use Nikon lenses on the Canon FFs so you can hedge your bets (not G or DX lenses) and have access to loads of cheaper, older lenses (and find out whether Nikon w/as are as good/equal/better than Canon's at the same time) albeit at the expense of metering and focus automation. As has been already stated, this is not a bad way to learn.

What amazingly dogmatic suggestions you have received!

My dogmatic suggestions?

- Set a price range

- Study the options for body and lens combinations in that price range and see how they work for you. Read online reviews, study sample photos, including downloading and printing some if possible, try gear out in a camera store, and so on. Maybe borrow cameras from fellow students.

- Consider even other brands: many very good photographers are getting good results, with Fuji, Olympus, Pentax, and Konica-Minolta/Sony DSLR's.

- Focus on gear in your price range and maybe a bit beyond, not far more expensive gear of the same brand. Brand choice is not "till death do us part" so it is better to run a small chance of having to change brand later if you move to far higher price level than to hamper yourself with gear that is not a good fit now. (I have been through Pentax, Canon and Olympus so far in three decades of SLR usage.)

In the 70's and 80's Nikon was way ahead of canon, it probably outsold canon 3 to 1, today is the other way around. For how long? Funny that back then, the camera that made most money for me was a Pentax, (a 6x7)....

These things are changing quick.

The sales figures of DSLR in Japan for early 2007 give Nikon 49% market share while Canon is at 35%. Granted, this figure is probably strongly influenced by the success of the D40 and might not be representative of the overall levels of both companies.

The figures are probably different also in other geos, but it is pretty obvious that the clear lead Canon had 2 years ago has overall been reversed.

This shows that it is important to distinguish a possible technological lead in the high end and the way volume cameras are preceived by consumers and selling. Canon releasing tomorrow a 40MP 2ds with perfect corner sharpness and ISO 12800 would probably not impact their market share much until they implement the new technologies in bodies most people can afford.

The bottomline being that, for someone looking for pro grade cameras, the market share of the company producing the camera is IMHO irrelevant. The 5D would still be a great camera even if Nikon were to outsell Canon 2 to 1 like in the old days.

Regards,
Bernard

Two more things for the original poster to consider:

You said you were a student. Are you considering working for a school publication such as newspaper or yearbook, or might you in the future? If so, what sort of gear pool does your school have? Being able to borrow is always a good thing and can really help you out when you are saving your money at first.

I second BJL's advice about setting a budget, but don't just budget for a camera/lens. Remember all the little (or not so little) pieces of gear you might need/want: tripod, monopod, flash, bags, belts, vests, batteries, pocket wizards, another flash, some softboxes, memory cards, an extra charger, vertical grip, gaff tape, ramen to eat because you spent all your money on gear......the list goes on and on!

...fast computer, screen, calibration software and hardware, Raid 5 storage unit, DVD for backup, software,...

Regards,
Bernard

"What amazingly dogmatic suggestions you have received! ..... Consider even other brands: many very good photographers are getting good results, with Fuji, Olympus, Pentax, and Konica-Minolta/Sony DSLR's."

Speaking personally, the camera system I bought when I was a student (Nikon) keyed me into their system until Canon lured me away with FF digital 25 years later. I heard a UK statistic recently which was that we are more likely to get divorced than change our bank! I'd hazzard a guess that the camera system you go for as a student is likely to be the one you use for many years to come.

For what it is worth (and I know there will be objections), I personally know of no pros using anything other than Nikon or Canon dSLRs (ok perhaps one or two own a Leica M but I'm talking using not owning). I also know of none who have switched from Canon to Nikon but I do know a fair few who have switched from Nikon to Canon. Without wanting to be dogmatic, I see this as a trend for a reason - not that Canon are better than Nikon, but that the Canon FF probably fulfills more professional's requirements of a camera at this moment in time - in my own case this means fast wides and macros which remain physically the same size in use, together with the subtle differences in the final image. Other friends have other reasons for using Canon FF but my observations as to the shift from Nikon to Canon are not unique - I know this from talking to other photographers.

When selecting a camera/system do look at all available options, but also be aware of why photographers use the gear that they do.

I agree uterly with all of the above

I dont know any pros not N or C

I started with Nikon and am feeling very lured by Canon because of full frame

Trouble is I have endep up owning nikon lenses from 14-600

So it is an iportant desision right now to get right

And canon is where is is currenlty at !

SMM

And - I believe the new 1D III and it's sensible co-released items indicated that Canon isn't about to yield the pro market. That is the most profound professional camera design conceived yet.

With Canons announcement of the 1Ds Mark III, we can assume there will be a 1Ds Mark III with similar features but likely twice the megapixels or more.

To me this puts Canon in first by a long shot. Only a BIG surprise from Nikon would put them back in the running.

Firstly, what pros use is not necessarily the measure of what a student or amateur should choose. Even serious amateurs might have very different needs than the stereotypical sports/PJ "pro". For me, all the Canon and Nikon "pro" options lead to kits that are far too big and heavy for my purposes.

Secondly, pro SLR usage includes a lot of non C+N MF gear.

Thirdly: http://www.olympusamerica.com/e1/gallery.asp
And I imagine that Pentax and Sony could put together similar lists.

You are absolutly right!
cheers

Ok my first camera was practica but then I went to nikon very quickly

If one assumes one is a student - studying to become professional - there are two reasons to go with pro kit

- Sensible simple purchases like a fast fifty are affordable by students and will stay in thier kit for years even when they are pro so no losses on selling or trading in

- When one assists or gets a work experience on a paper or whatever you already have a basic working knowliedge of the kit

(just look at all the asisting adverts that require knowledge of Canon, Phase One and Capture One)

SMM

Anyone want statistical analysis how likely this is due to pure chance?

85% in MR's expedition shot Canon, and 6x1DsIII + 3x5D + 2xRebels
dead in light drizzle. Most of the rest were shooting Nikon with no
problems.

My 5D had problems in the drizzle while my D2x kept working well.

Thanks,
Leping Zha
Ph.D. in Physics

Nice one. Now take the whole statistic and you will see that it is totally normal. For example if just one Nikon would have failed the rate would have been much worse.

Congratulations valkyrie1965: new member, one single post guaranteed to start a brand vs brand bun fight, and then no further posts in response to anyone's advice and comments.

Ladies and gentlemen, I think that we have been trolled.

I wonder if valkyrie1965 will now at last make a follow-up post, telling us about having being busy (with spelling lessons?) and objecting to my insinuation.

I would prefer Canon 400 D. This is good enough, 5 D is four times more expencive; I didn't find four times more quality. 400 D has reasonable price plus nice opportunity to use old (but perfect) Leica R lenses with cheap adapter.
Whole my life I used to use Nikon(s) analogue instead of Canon. I preferred Nikkor lenses because of their sharpness (especialy in B/W photos). In digital world everything seems more similar. Only exception in this comparison I found is probably Nikon's nice zoom 18-200 or new Zeiss ZF series, but very expencive and without autofocus.

But what si the cost of

400d plus

14 2.8 or 16-35 (decent wide)

and

35 1.4 to get a (nice wide aperture lense portraits)

Versus

a 5d

20 2.8 (decent wide)

and

50 1.8 (nice wide aperture lense portraits)

Now the gap doesnt look so big especailly as the second set of primes are widely available used

SMM

The Sigma 12-24 is poor at the edges but just fine with a crop format like the 400D. That gets you as wide as 20mm FF equivalent. The 50/1.8 on the 400D becomes a reasonably high quality portrait lens like the 85/1.8 but cheaper.

As a beginner, I'd go with the 400D, but not necessarily if price is not an issue. If price is not an issue, then you simply get the best for your purposes. The disadvantage of a 1D3 might be the weight factor. The 1Ds2 and 5D are likely to be replaced before the end of the year, so if price is not a problem and weight is not a problem, I'd go for the 1D3 and later buy the FF 22mp successor to the 1Ds2.

Up to 10 frames per second and ISO 6400 capability make the 1D3 very appealing.

{Emphasis added}

To do a real "statistical analysis" for pure chance, doesn't one also need to know something about the populations of photographers and cameras? Were the photographers and their equipment really random choices. I don't know, but I doublt it. LL seems quite biased toward Canon for what ever reason - good or bad or neutral, just not apparently random. Was each camera user using the same caution to keep their equipment dry? Not know as far as I know. (Didn't someone mention only three or so photographers even thought to bring a rain coat for themselves.) If the Mamiya film camera failed, would that mean the rate was 100% and only a fool would take one out on less that a sunny 16 day?

I doubt simply looking at the reported failure rates acurately determines the failure rate of either Nikon or Canon.

What a pro uses may not be his photographic choice. Some pros are contracted by equipment makers to use their brand. So because Joe Pro uses Chuck's Fine Cameras doesn't necessarily mean Chuck's is where its happening, just Chuck made it worth Joe's time to promate his equipment.

Some pro staffers are simply provided with equipment and have bo choice.

The number of Nikons on Michael's trip, from what I've read, is too small a sample for drawing any reliable statistical inference. Likewise 1 5D versis 1 D2x is at best a symptomatic outcome from which no valid statistical inference can be made. Maybe the D2x is designed more water resistant than the 5D, maybe it isn't. One would need more information about the design specs or many more of each used with the same exposure to the identical rain conditions to draw any meaningful statistical inference.

"What a pro uses may not be his photographic choice." - ALL the Pros I personally know buy their own gear so the decision is theirs.

This whole thread seems to miss the point which originally was what gear a student should buy. Now assuming this to be a serious question and that the student is studying photography with the intention of becoming a professional photographer (I can't think that you would study photography for any other reason, it was certainly my intention) then there are hard facts to be considered and these lead down the road to Nikon or Canon (as '35mm type cameras) - as I said before I simply don't know any pro using anything else. Of these I see Canon as the more used because it fulfills more requirements (certainly of the Pros I know). Concerns about which make is better, more water resistant, etc, etc, etc, are pretty irrelevant. If the questioner wanted advice or observations as to which equipment is most used (rather than just to stir up a discussion!) then that's my two-pennorth. As I said before, many will not agree and some will even think I'm anti-Nikon (and they will be wrong, I miss various aspects of my Nikons) but I was, and am, trying to answer the question objectively.

Photography is now far to easily diverted into discussions about technical spec and half-truths concerning performance. In the real world cameras are tools and we have never had it so good. But a student needs to consider what is relevant for work and especially if intending to assist, it is essential to be familiar with the most likely to be encountered gear. Sorry to apply the common sense approach!

good digital SLR - either one

"[T]he fact that [Art Wolfe} lost all (or nearly all) of his Nikon stuffs in one shot gave him an opportunity to switch, and he went where the money was. I suppose he had to pay for his original Nikon stuffs, and when Canon offered him free stuffs, he took the opportunity." A pro who switched from Nikon to Canon.

"In a column in Outdoor Photographer about a year or so before he was killed, Galen Rowell expressed some irritation with Nikon and hinted that if they didn't come through with a better deal, that he was being courted by Canon and might jump ship. Later he said that all was well and he was staying with Nikon. Of course, he did not say what he asked for or what he got." A Nikon using pro.

"My instructor has recommended the Cannon." Why. Ask him.

"My sister who is in the business says Nikon is industry standard." Do you trust her (more than Paul Kay or Canon)? Would she lie to you? Could she be wrong? Why does she think that?

Paul Kay says he "simply [doesn't] know any pro using anything else." Certainly narrows the field. (I know a pro who used Leica until Konica paid him enough to love them.)

Seems at least a couple pros don't pay full price for their equipment.

Like the man says, "Sometimes you gotta make up your mind. Choose one and leave the other behind."

++++++++++++++++++++++

My point is, perhaps Canon is winning the advertising battle. If selecting a camera is a popularity contest (The envelope please. w/drum roll) Canon.

Wrong comparison, this should be what is the difference between a student and an academic?

The student has the crapest camera he can afford as all his (or her) money is spent on going out, drinking, sex, drugs and otherwise debaucherous behavouir. Whilst the pictures are technically inferior they are original, emotional and full of presence because the student is in the right place at the right time.

The academic has the technically best equipment that he can get. Having no money left over he (invariably it is a bloke) sits at home with no friends and serious case of acne. As a final act of desperation he takes a bunch of still life pictures (stiched pano to get 100Mpixel). The final pictures are technically perfect but boring as ditch water.

At the end of the day it doesn't matter two tugs whether the camera is any good, you have to learn to be in the right place at the right time and sneak every opportunity you can get to find a decent image - that is the most important thing to learn as a student. If you can do that with a tin can and wet paper then who cares that a Cakon is a better camera.

When I was studying photography (and I never had any intention of ever going pro), I had a "student" roommate who had the best equipment Mommy could afford (which was Swedish). He is selling used cars now. While I had friends and no acne, I was probably an "academic" (responsible?).

I think DiaAzul is dead wrong, except to say the kind of camera doesn't make the photographer. Most of the "students" didn't finish school, or become pros. Just dropouts. But there were plenty of people at school with both very good equipment and photos who are pros now.

The ones I really felt sorry for spent all their money and time on rent, tuition, parties and cameras, then couldn't afford or have time to make photos. Never learned to budget anything and then stick to it. I would call it a lack of discipline.

I had an instructor who started every class with "Most people can't tell good photos from bad, but they do know [fill in the blank]." It was usually late for appointments, late with assignments, over budget or simply did the wrong assignment. Most of the time you could sum it up with "nonprofessional."

David, this is so true and important. It's really hard to advise people on gear. SO much depends on budgets, intentions, taste, etc.

That said, I don't quite agree with the folks who assume that just because the purchaser is a student anything that makes images will do. It's not that simple. Even a student - having reached the stage of developing a view on these things - should buy intelligently and if serious about photography in a forward looking manner.

Let us revert to the original question:

<<I am a photography student and I am ready to buy a good digital SLR. My photography interest include: landscape, action and portraiture. My instructor has recommended the Cannon. My sister who is in the business says Nikon is industry standard. Price is not really an issue, but I want to be sure I don't regret my purchase. Any advice? >>

So, this is a person who already knows he/she wants a good DSLR, knows what kind of work he/she will be doing, says price isn't an issue and doesn't want to regret the purchase. That information in hand, I don't think this thread is of much assistance to him/her. Without being inappropriately prescriptive, we can guide him/her through a process of elimination with some questions and guidelines, such as (without pretending to be exhaustive):

1. Do you want a full-frame camera or a reduced size sensor? Check articles on L-L that describe the merits of each. This is THE FIRST question to address, because if the answer is "full-frame", that limits the choice to three cameras: Canon 1Ds, Canon 1DsMk11 and Canon D5. Kind of makes life simple®.

2. Do you want to have maximum choice of lenses, or will a more limited selection do? If you want maximum, Canon and Nikon have the largest line-up of matching lenses for their camera bodies. Sub-question: whose lens line-up do you think better responds to your needs now and down the road?

3. How robust does the build quality need to be? Does it need to work in very harsh climatic conditions almost without fail? Then the choice most likely comes down to Canon 1Ds, Canon 1DsMk11 and Nikon D2X. These are the models with the best weather sealing on the market - from what I read and hear. Maybe there are others, but I don't know them. If the answer is that the ultimate in rough handling is not necessary, a Canon 5D would be excellent quality period and all the more so for the money within the Canon line-up.

4. Most important, go to the camera shop and play with them, look through their viewfinders, try managing menus, try changing lenses, etc. Which do you relate best to ergonomically?

5. Post-capture software: which models give you the most flexibility for using common raw conversion programs such as Adobe Camera Raw? Are there still any advantages/disadvantages to one camera or another in this regard? Answering this would require a bit of web research for the latest turn-of-the-screw on that issue.

6. If you've narrowed down to a few models, think of which features and qualities are most important to you, and do some web-research, first through the professional reviews and then into the serious web-forums to get a feel for which ones are likely to respond best to what you consider most important.

7. Will your retailer let you "buy and try" for a couple of days, on the understanding that you will end-up with a final purchase? This is an important insurance policy especially for a first time buyer at the learning stage.

I'm sure there's more. Let's help this person by suggesting the tangible things that help make serious decisions.

I think you've all missed the point. The most important question here for the student is 'which format' do you prefer?' It's arse about face to start off with the question, 'which brand?' (Let's see if that brand I've selected has the format I want..... is a bit silly.)

If expense is not a major issue, the beginner should first decide which format and then look at the brand alternatives. With this in mind, Canon produces DSLR formats which are more than double the size (area) of any Nikon DSLR, as well as producing formats that are slightly smaller than Nikon.

If you want a format about double the size of the largest Canon DSLRs then you need something like a P45.

Ray LOOK ABOVE at Question #1 in my post.

I did not miss the point one iota!

Cheers,

Mark

I think Mark's list of questions is excellent.

I would add one point, from personal experience: Whatever camera you end up with, start with only one lens in the focal length that you think you will use most. Don't buy any second lens unless and until you have experienced a real need for it (i.e., missed shots because you didn't have the right lens.)

When I was starting out, with a fixed-lens camera, I got pretty good pretty quick (pats self on back.) As soon as I "graduated" to an SLR with more than one lens, my seeing got much weaker for a while, because I was so distracted by the possibilities of different lenses. A couple more times that I moved up to fancier (more versatile) equipment, I sort of lost my way for a while again.

Bottom line: Learning is much faster if you keep your equipment simple and push its limits before upgrading, IMHO.

Sorry! I'll rephrase that. You've all missed the point except Mark .

I would actually strongly disagree with that being the first question, and in fact doubt its relevancy at all in selecting a camera. Given the list of subject matter the more important aspects are frame rate, auto-focus capability, ability to work well with studio lighting, metering capabilities, possible file size for landscape and portraiture (dependent upon final output requirements), lens range, viewfinder, ergonomics, etc.... People get too hung up on whether a camera is full frame, cropped or any other dimension. There is far more to a camera than whether it is FF, 1.3x, 1.5x or 1.6x that it becomes one of a series of factors in choosing a camera and not THE deciding factor.

It is for each photographer to determine for themselves which is the most appropriate ranking of features - which is why there is always so much controversy over which is the best camera. You can't know the answer to this until you have been using an SLR for a number of years and even then you will realise there is no perfect camera for every situation (that is why photographers own so many bags).

Going back to my original theme it is more important to get the non-camera related fundamentals sorted out first. Find a cheap(ish) starter camera - doesn't matter what brand - and then get some experience. Only then can you make sensible decisions about what works and doesn't. By the time two or three years pass the camera market will haave moved on (everyone will be lusting after the lated Apple iCamera) so spending a lot of money today when you don't know where you want to be in three years time is crazy.

As an addendum, the two most important things to learn after where to stand are ROI and COS - Return on Investment and Cost of Sales. Until you have a good understanding on your business model excessive investment in camera equipment doesn't make business sense - buy someting second hand if needs be and its is cheap and value for money.

The student probably wanted pro advices, since she went to LL. I am talking as an amateur. In one sense, however, we are all more or less "amateurs", considering the digital revolution during the last few years. Nobody really knows if it is wise to buy gear from Canon, Nikon or some other, perhaps smaller brand in a 10-15 years perspective. We`ll all be surprised by developments in sensors, lenses, focus issues, post processing etc, since digital photography is still in its infancy.

For me money was an issue, and in October 2005 I got a Canon Digital Rebel (350D) and a Sigma 30 f/1.4 (like a "normal" 50 mm on "full frame" or film camera), and tried to learn photography with one prime lens. Six months later I got a small 24 & 50 mm (I like "street photography" and casual portraits). I didn´t regret this path. I think I learned the ABC of photography better then if I`d started with a wide zoom, a normal zoom and a tele zoom.

But if money wasn´t an issue, and I should buy a camera today, focusing on "landscape, action and portraits" (as the student says), this is what I would do:
I would get a Canon 5D (full frame for landscape), buy a 35 mm f/1.4 and focus on landscape for 4-6 months, learning to see with a moderate wide angle lens, learning the elementary but important secrets of depth of field/bokeh, and really get familiar with the perspective from this lens.
Then I would get a 85mm f/1,8 or 1,2 (money no issue?), try to learn portrait photography (and more about bokeh) and try to shoot some indoor and outdoor action with it.
Then, after 8-12 months, I would buy a 200 mm (or 300 mm) to learn the perspective of a tele lens (and for action/sport & landscape, birds, wildlife etc).
And then, if I was curious (and I probably would be very curious!), I would get a zoom lens, to see if it was of any advantage to me.
To make it really simple, I would consider using only ONE LENS FOR ONE YEAR, say a 50 mm f/1.4 or 1.2 (on the same Canon 5D) instead of the three mentioned above. But with those three lenses I imagine I could take most of the pictures worth taking, and learn most of the ways of seeing, in photography terms, worth learning.

If, however, weather sealing was an important issue, I would go for the high end Nikon, or Pentax K10D (perhaps not Canon right now, since they probably will come up with a new one quite soon), and lenses equivalent of moderate wide angle, moderate tele, and a more far reaching tele.
And if weather sealing and full frame wasn`t so important, but size was, I would go with anything smaller, from Canon or Nikon or Pentax, or the recently announced Olympus cameras. They all have excellent lenses, some stronger on the tele side (Canon), some better on wide angle (Nikon? Olympus? Pentax?), some more compact (Pentax) etc.
I think the biggest danger for someone with money to spend on gear, is to get too much too fast, and never really learning how to use it.

In any case, the "student" starting this thread (is she really a student, or just someone who wanted to see if she could trigger a fight at LL with her title "Nikon vs. Canon?"??) have got too many advices – and here I offer my two cents...!
But this thread is probably read by a few former film photographers who wants to buy his or her first DSLR, as well as people starting with a digital camera without former experience with film cameras. My advise for the latter is a camera that fits the bill and the purpose of your needs, and ONE to THREE prime lenses.
It could be a Pentax, or perhaps a Panasonic.
(Or should I go for a Sony, since MY sister says that Sony is THE INDUSTRY STANDARD?)

Paul

I don't see any reason why NOT to buy a decent zoom lens from the start. One learns alot about composition using a zoom lens and it is more versatile and convenient than a series of primes. I have only one prime which is reserved for situations where I need very wide aperture.

David, your point about sensor size not being important we'll have to agree to disagree about I guess. Your second paragraph begs the question - this person is asking for our advice - doesn't want to be told to spend a few years finding out. That will happen regardless. The remainder of your post is about being a photography student and doesn't answer the question asked.

Returning to your issue about the importance of sensor size, we're talking purely hardware here, not who should buy it when, and size does matter. It is a major differentiator of choice of cameras, making it efficient to start there; it has pixel quality implications; this, combined more importantly with the pixel count has implications for preservation of flexibility in cropping and print dimensions, it has ergonomic implications in respect of what you see through the viewfinder, and it has advantages for wide-angle photography and generally is a more consistent format relative to the broadest selection of lenses. So I don't dismiss this factor at all. It was very expensive to obtain until Canon put the 5D on the market at a much more reachable price point for many photographers - but it's still not cheap. The reason why most digital cameras aren't *full frame* has nothing to do with technical merit and everything to do with the cost of the sensor. Digital photography wouldn't have exploded commercially the way it has without the science of small sensor production, but that doesn't make the CHOICE of which to buy a trivial one.

Finally, let me say, I'm not interested in re-opening a tired debate about the merits of sensor size with all the pixel-peeping implied therein. Many people make excellent photographs with all kinds of sensors - but for reasons I've stated above that doesn't make it an inconsequential consideration when chosing equipment.

I can also reflect my own experience. At the time the Canon 20D first came out I was looking at a choice of buying that or a used 1Ds. I had the luxury of playing with both cameras before buying. I saw excellent prints made by a world-class professional from raw files shot with both cameras and I decided to buy the used 1Ds, heavier as it is. Sensor size was one important factor. Since then, both larger and smaller sensors and their firmware have improved in quality.

Given the same choice with today's equipment, personally I would buy a 5D hands-down. The ergonomics are good, the viewfinder and LCD screen really good, and the image quality with a good sample of an L lens simply superb. But that's me for myself - I wouldn't urge that choice on anyone else - each person needs to think through the criteria for the choice of hardware relative to their own means, needs and preferences as they perceive them at the time they want to buy a camera.

Hi Guys

What a really restrained and pleasent debate. This is my first post; it will not be my last but I am still going through the wealth of knowledge here. This particular debate really vindicates my decission to use this forum as my primary source of information. I note that the origional poster has not given any feedback yet. Pardon my suspicions but Norwegion beasties come to mind.

Regards - Brian