Nikon D70 vs. Canon300D(10D)..?

I am looking for opinions on which camera is the 'best'? Best being a vague description of course. I am also looking to use the camera for land photos too.

I received a quote from a retailer for ~$5000 for the Canon 300D, which includes an Aquiatica A300 housing, arms, and a lens (I forget which one).

I've read reviews about both the 300D and the D70, but I'm still on the fence about which one i should spring for. What are the advantages/disadvantages of each?

Also I have a family member that has a Nikon SLR with a few different lenses. Could I use those lenses on the 70D, and would they fit inside 'standard' housings? Or are UW lenses completely different than regular lenses?


Thanks,
Jessica

I would for for Nikon because they have better lenses. Canon has more functions to play with (i.e. birds chirping as xx effect and so on). Is a matetr of taste, what you're looking for, where you want to use the camera. If may also want to check for housings... http://www.digideep.com/ reviews http://www.dpreview.com/

Safe Diving

emmm ok

Rob i dont mean to start a war or anything, but thats a pretty bold claim to make about nikon glass, what make you say that?

i mean of the sporting events i have gone to in the past year and in watching the superbowl this year i saw a whole lot of big white lense with red bands,(which would be canon) and not alot of black lenses(nikon).


as for function they are equal as each has features the other doesnt, but technology wise canon seems to be ahead as they have everything from entry leve DSLR to there top of the line , Full Frame 1Ds at 11 MP

FWIW

tooth
the links are good

Wow a Nikon vs Canon topic here on a scuba board.


I’m new to scuba but not to photography. I have no experience with underwater photography or housings. With that said…. I do know some stuff about cameras. Nikon and Canon lens are about the same in image quality when comparing the Canon L lens and Nikon ED lens I do not know about the consumer lenses. I would not say that one is better then the others.

The 10D has a magnesium frame the D70 is Largely Plastic. 10D has a CMOS sensor D70 has a CCD sensor. CMOS sensors produce smoother pictures then CCD. The noise produced by a CMOS sensor is less random then a CCD sensor this makes it easier to remove the noise. CMOS cost less to manufacture too. One downside to CMOS cameras is that you cannot take infrared pictures.

There more specs here like Sensor type, ISO, Focus Points…

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D70/D70A.HTM

There's a side-by-side comparison on this website:

http://www.bythom.com/300D.htm

The reviewer is a long time Nikon user, so take the review with a grain of salt, but he's honest enough to admit any bias he may have. I've read many of his other reviews and haven't had any reason to question his views.

There's pretty good thread on wetpixel regarding Thom Hogan's article and the pros and cons of the two cameras.

http://www.wetpixel.com/PNphpBB2-viewtopic-t-5174.phtml

But as mentioned before, it boils down to your preference. If you've got Nikon glass already, it's probably an easier decision to stay with the Nikon body, although some of the older Nikon lenses aren't 100% compatible with the new Nikon digitals (which is also true of older Canon lenses with the new Canon digitals).

I own neither (although thinking about getting the D70) but right now the D70 should be better. The 300D is a 'crippled' 10D, while the D70 is almost an improved D100 (without just a few features). The D70 has more features and more control, closer to a pro-level camera than the 300D.

Of course, Canon will leapfrog Nikon next time with their budget DSLR, but right now Nikon is ahead on the sub $1000 DSLR.

As for lenses, they are pretty much equivalent. In the consumer range, Canon has USM for fast focusing in many lenses, so should be better. Nikon is slowly incorporating the equivalent AF-S into non-pro lenses.

If your relative's Nikon lenses are fairly new (within 15 years, D or G type) then they will work perfectly with the D70. If they are older, then they will negate some advanced features, but still work. (unless they are REALLY REALLY REALLY OLD lenses)

If you plan to build a large system and eventually upgrade to pro level DSLR's, I'd think about it a little more which system you want to enter. (See what choices you have further up; it will also change every year for both mfgs.)

Otherwise, I think it's a no brainer, especially since you may have access to some Nikon lenses. Get the D70!

Jessica, I will be the first to admit I have a bias towards Nikon, mostly from my experience as a press photographer before my current job. Nikons were durable, had awesome glass, and incredible support for professionals through NPS. I would guess you don't fall into this catagory, otherwise you wouldn't be asking the question...but I digress...

If you are starting from scratch, IMHO, it won't matter which way you go. The upper-end glass, which you won't be able to afford anyway, is comparable on both sides of the fence, and mid-range glass is about the same, too. Aquatica produces the A300 housing for the Canon, and will use the same castings for the D70 housing. Both will benefit from the Aquatica strobe circutry that allows true TTL. Every review I have read (haven't been able to lay hands on a D70 yet) places the D70 and 300 in a dead heat.

You are housing a camera to benefit from the wide-angle optics, so perhaps that might be the place to start shopping, a good look at the wide angle lenses available, then buy a camera to fit. The housings are available for both.

There has been a divergence in design philosophies between Nikon and Canon: image sensor size. Canon has produced the EOS 1Ds, which has a sensor the exact same size as 35mm film. So there is great resolution and the focal lengths don't "change", which for set-in-their-ways press photographers is a good thing. I "know" what a 180mm lens will capture, so it is nice not do mental gymnastics to make a lens selection. This is probabally the biggest reason ScubaTooth saw so many Canons...not because of the lens, but because of the body attached. Sticker shock for the 1Ds: $8000.

The big sensor has problems, though, which is color fringing and pixel shadowing at the corners. This of course can be fixed with software. Nikon saw this coming, and froze the size of the sensor at what is now their "DX" sensor. This is great for an optical standpoint, but for now, the resolution is not there. They are obviously counting on Moores' Law to bring the pixel count up. And then there is that focal length problem...learning a whole new batch of lens lengths.

Which will be the best path? We'll find out in a few years. Until then, if you allready have investment in a brand, you stick with that; if you're starting out, flip a coin.

BTW, welcome to underwater photography!

All the best, James

I don't know anything about Nikons, but I'll say this: I LOVE my Canon 300D!!! Love, love, love it. We can't wait to get a housing for it so we can take it underwater; I'm dying to see what it can do.

Some of my above-water pics with the Canon 300D (mostly at 1/3 full resolution) are posted here:

http://gallery.thelaitys.com/canon

And some from our trip to Hawaii here:

http://gallery.thelaitys.com/hawaii0304

Did I mention I love this camera? Really, I do. It's the best toy I've ever bought for myself.

We're hoping to be able to afford the housing/strobe setup sometime this fall or winter, so I'll have some underwater examples by then!

LOL, I was thinking to myslf while reading the question, "Jessica, that's like saying do you like Hondas or Toyotas... on steroids."

You will find - indeed, you have found - that the Canon vs. Nikon debate is much akin to Christians vs. Muslims, with all of the attendant emotion, .......

I believe with all my heart that I would not be able to tell the difference between an identical picture shot with Canon lenses or Nikon lenses. Maybe someone else can (and psst, I've heard rumors of a Canon 12-25)

Many choose the 300D or the D70 depending on what lenses they have available. The 10D is not a comparable comparison, it is not the same class of camera as a D70 or 300D. The 300D has been "crippled" to use someone else's terms,m but there are firmware updates available to restore some functions (albeit hacked, use your own judgment). I have also heard that the D70 is an improvement to the D100. So yes, Canon appears to have screwed up slightly.

prices - D70 is about $300 or so more, YMMV, give or take, etc. to get the kit lens.

Lenses - same lenses used for UW as topside, although there are less available lenses that can be used. Whether they fit in the housing depends on whether they fit in the port

DReb with lens - $1000
Ad'l lens - probably $300
Aquatica housing $1569 retail
ports - you don't say which/whether ports included, but you'll need them, so include both dome and flat - say $600
Arms - Even the best (IMHO) ULCS arms should run $500

$3900 or so. So $5K sounds like a lot to me, unless more is included

Chris

Disclaimer -0 I own a 300D, haven't used it much

fdog:

There has been a divergence in design philosophies between Nikon and Canon: image sensor size. Canon has produced the EOS 1Ds, which has a sensor the exact same size as 35mm film. So there is great resolution and the focal lengths don't "change", which for set-in-their-ways press photographers is a good thing. I "know" what a 180mm lens will capture, so it is nice not do mental gymnastics to make a lens selection. This is probabally the biggest reason ScubaTooth saw so many Canons...not because of the lens, but because of the body attached. Sticker shock for the 1Ds: $8000.

Click to expand...

that last line makes no sense at all i saw so many canon L series lenses because of the 1Ds, hmm dont know how to break it to you but PJs dont use the 1ds most are using the 1D or in the case of the superbowl SI was using the 1D Mk11 becausethe buffer could do 8.5 fps for 40 frames.

also why is figuring out the focal length crop mental gymastics ? because just like tax i can calculate it on the fly you know like a 70-200 L IS with my 35 mm its those length and then on a 10D its 112mm-340, on a 1D (or mkII) series its 91mm-260mm

the people who use the 1Ds are portrait studio photographers or people who do landscapes, where as PJs need rapid advance drives and fast AF. and personally its not the gear that makes the photograph its the person holding it.