CO777-200ER From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 330 posts, RR: 1 Posted (10 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 847 times:
Hello i was wondering what would be a better camera to get for taking pics of planes, the Nikon 35mm Autofocus SLR camera, Canon Rebel XS Camera, or the Canon Rebel 2000.
Iflycoach From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1015 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (10 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 733 times:
All take good photos, it's the person behind them who will make it a good or bad picture.
CO777-200ER From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 330 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (10 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 703 times:
Ok this is what it says "Nikon 35mm Autofocus SLR camera - N65"
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 25 Reply 4, posted (10 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 708 times:
N65 (F65 to the real world, meaning anything outside the USA) is a very nice camera.
I have an F80 myself that I am happy with. I do not like Canon (layout, shape and size of the controls and body does not suit me).
Choice of camera is very personal, Minolta Canon and Nikon are all of excellent quality so there is no need to pass one on for being bad.
You do of course get what you pay for, avoid the cheapest models of each as they are aimed at a different market (the vacation shooter who wants to look important, basically) and thus are of general lower buildquality (more plastic, especially plastic lensmounts which are bad news with long (heavy) lenses) and lack of features you may want (manual control for example).
Some say Canon has the better long teles, but I'm not so sure. They may have pioneered image stabalisation tech, but Nikon is now introducing that as well (one lens only so far) and has marginally better glass and coatings.
With most people choosing 3rd party lenses (an equivalent quality Canon or Nikon will cost several times as much which most people cannot afford) that are identical optically for all mounts, there is no more need to get one particular brand camera just because of optical quality of their glass.
Go to the store you will buy the camera from and try them all. See which you like best, remember that the body will spend a lot of time in your hands so it better be comfortable! Buy the body you like best as a combination of feel and features.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 324 posts, RR: 19 Reply 5, posted (10 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 686 times:
I agree with Jwenting for the most part - essentially the cameras you mention will do roughly the same job. Minor features will vary, but both are capable of 1st class results. Your ability to get good shots will depend more on how well the camera suits you. Personally I can't work with Nikons - being left eyed, I find I have to move my eye from the eye piece to access certain controls.
As to lenses. Currently I think Canon has the edge with affordable image stablisation. And while at the top end of the range, there is probably little to choose between Nikon and Canon, in the middle - budget end, the AF technology in Canon USM lenses does, I believe, result in faster auto-focus overall.
Against this, because the Canon approach to AF places more of the technology in the lens itself, some 3rd party lenses are reported to be less than ideal on a Canon body.
Take your time over your decision - once you've bought in to a system, you'll probably stay with it for life. Very few can afford, or would want to, ditch their Nikon outfit for a Canon or vice versa.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 330 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 324 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
