KiwiNanday From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2329 times:
I currently have a Nikon N4004s, but I want to upgrade to a digital camera, and I hear these two are the best available for the money. The catch is, because I already have D70 lenses (the lenses of the two Nikons are interchangeable), I wouldn't have to buy any lenses, and could purchase the body only. Which camera should I get? If you have any, please post images! I would like to compare the quality!
Woody001 From United Kingdom (England), joined Feb 2004, 529 posts, RR: 34 Reply 1, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2294 times:
You have answered your own question, if you have lenses that will work on the Nikon then purchase one of those.
If you want to go the Canon route then you will have to budget in more funds to purchase lenses.
Alternatively think about buying a secondhand better spec body, maybe a Canon 10D and look out for used lenses?
Sulman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 1948 posts, RR: 46 Reply 4, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2241 times:
And the lenses have glass in them and that breaks easily too.
The 300D has a polycarbonate body. It won't withstand being chucked in the boot of you car or dropped from a great height, or perhaps being used to hammer nails into plywood.
However, if you treat your camera as you would any piece of complex, fragile equipment, you'll be absolutely fine.
If you must have something that could possibly survive being hit by a depleted uranium armour-piercing round, or something that could be used as an impromptu - yet small - bomb shelter, go for the 10D.
In your case I'd go Nikon, as you probably have some nice lenses you could use with it.
Interpaul From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 409 posts, RR: 5 Reply 5, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2229 times:
If you must have something that could possibly survive being hit by a depleted uranium armour-piercing round, or something that could be used as an impromptu - yet small - bomb shelter, go for the 10D.
JeffM From United States, joined May 2005, 3247 posts, RR: 58 Reply 6, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2218 times:
"However, if you treat your camera as you would any piece of complex, fragile equipment, you'll be absolutely fine."
Your camera is a tool. You should not have to 'baby it' in hopes that it will work for you. And on the other hand, don't wear the ball and chain of a few Nikon lenses when you can cut that chain easily. I'm sure you could dump those lenses.
Wietse From Netherlands, joined Oct 2001, 3808 posts, RR: 67 Reply 7, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2217 times:
Investigate in the strengths and weaknesses of the lenses Canon and Nikon offer, they should be the decisive factor in choosing which camera.
The 2 cameras are roughly the same, the lenses available for them are not. I personally think that Canon has a better lens offering, but you have to decide for yourself..
Continental From United States, joined Jun 2000, 5159 posts, RR: 27 Reply 8, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2200 times:
You could go with the D70, but then again if you use the lense you've been using on your old Nikons, they'll work with the D70, but you won't get optimum quality as if you were to have a lense built for a digital SLR. Also, sometimes you can lose the AF.
JeffM From United States, joined May 2005, 3247 posts, RR: 58 Reply 9, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2168 times:
There are not many lenses built specifically for digital SLR's at the moment. The majority of lenses people use on their digtial SLR's were built before we even had digital cameras, and they work very, very well indeed.
What lens are you talking about John? I'm curious about your statement on "optimum quality" as well. Fill us in.
Nudelhirsch From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 1437 posts, RR: 27 Reply 11, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2141 times:
You might even consider going for the D100 but if you already use Nikon, stay with it. You can still upgrade your lenses later.
And you can always use your analog camera as a backup, either for empty batteries or if you want to have a different lens setup ready, many people do that.
Also keep in mind, when you go for a DSLR, you will want to buy good photo-editing software (if you don't have it yet), CF-cards, extra batteries, maybe an imagetank, battery-grip (totally worth it!).
You can also wait for a good bargain, like that:
With my Nikon I got a nice mail-in rebate of €250 plus a €100 accessories coupon...
Since then I took most of my pics (mostly landscape) with my DSLR, and am absolutely with that...
Clickhappy From United States, joined Sep 2001, 8837 posts, RR: 79 Reply 12, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2128 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
but you won't get optimum quality as if you were to have a lense built for a digital SLR
Rubbish. The only lenses built for DSLR's are half-frame models that wont work in a film body, there is nothing special about them, other than marketing hype. It has allowed a company like Nikon to produce a plastic lens, with much smaller optics and no app settings on the lens, yet they still charge the same price as a traditional lens, which is also a load of crap.
Bronko From United States, joined Jul 2001, 801 posts, RR: 19 Reply 13, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2117 times:
Maybe you could post which Nikon lenses you own? They could be very old and antiquated, giving unacceptable results and performance on a D70. If that were the case, then you could look again at Canon vs. Nikon.
My father is at the same point right now. Since his old Nikon lenses are just too slow, he is now looking at Canon as well as the D70.
KiwiNanday From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (5 years 3 months 2 days ago) and read 2045 times:
Maybe you could post which Nikon lenses you own? They could be very old and antiquated, giving unacceptable results and performance on a D70. If that were the case, then you could look again at Canon vs. Nikon.
Wietse From Netherlands, joined Oct 2001, 3808 posts, RR: 67 Reply 18, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2028 times:
In the left corner we have: The nikon D70, a black minority fighting for sales, in the other corner: The triumphant EOS 300D! A plastic wondermachine, it still manages to steal the hearts of many photographers!
737doctor From United States, joined Mar 2001, 1332 posts, RR: 52 Reply 19, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2017 times:
In the left corner we have: The nikon D70, a black minority fighting for sales, in the other corner: The triumphant EOS 300D! A plastic wondermachine, it still manages to steal the hearts of many photographers!
I don't know about that... When I went to buy a new camera, I shopped around at several camera stores. Everyone had 300D's in stock, while lots of places were sold out of D70's.
From what I read on the Internet and heard from other photographers was that both cameras are comparable machines and come highly recommended. What sold me on the D70 was the way it felt in my hands. It feels much more sturdy and substantial than the 300D.
Wietse From Netherlands, joined Oct 2001, 3808 posts, RR: 67 Reply 20, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2015 times:
And that is the best advice I heard in this thread. Play with both of them, see what you like best, do you like the Canon layout, or do you like the Nikon? Both are pretty good cameras!
KiwiNanday From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2012 times:
I don't know about that... When I went to buy a new camera, I shopped around at several camera stores. Everyone had 300D's in stock, while lots of places were sold out of D70's.
From what I read on the Internet and heard from other photographers was that both cameras are comparable machines and come highly recommended. What sold me on the D70 was the way it felt in my hands. It feels much more sturdy and substantial than the 300D.
I probably should do that. Thank you for the advice!
~Jake
SA006 From South Africa, joined Sep 2003, 1869 posts, RR: 66 Reply 22, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1977 times:
Hi there Kiwi
I just bought a Canon 300D EOS.....and I'm happy with it
My uncle was here about 2 weeks ago ... he had a Nikon D70 with him...I found it a very good camera. But the fact that I live in South Africa and Nikon do NOT have great support services here , the fact that my dad is a professional photographer and has used Canon's all his life is why we opted for the 300D.
With it a Canon 18-55mm lense and a Sigma 70-300mm
MauriceB From Aruba, joined Aug 2004, 2142 posts, RR: 38 Reply 23, posted (5 years 3 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1979 times:
its just what you like, if you want a big asortiment of lenses , buy the canon 300D (same reason i bought it) , if you want a solid body and you prefer Nikon, just buy the D70
greetings maurice!
''A.net just like flying, but without the peanuts. doesn't bother me , i never eat peanuts on flights!
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
.gif){kind=small}
From United Kingdom (England), joined Feb 2004, 529 posts, 
From United States, joined Aug 2004, 110 posts, 
From Sweden, joined May 2004, 396 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 1948 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 409 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Oct 2001, 3808 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Aug 2004, 1 posts, 
From South Africa, joined Sep 2003, 1869 posts, 
From Aruba, joined Aug 2004, 2142 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
