Canon D300/Rebel or Nikon D70 ?

[iphoto]

Your advice please on choosing the right camera between two

Canon D300/Rebel or Nikon D70

Criteria (assuming pic quality is neck to neck):

1. Features
2. Costs of general purpose Lenses ownership
3. Battery life

[DReb-MO]

20D! :o

[ijohnson]

A friend of mine has a 300d (black by the way, looks real nice). We ran in to a guy in the subway here in Seoul and I traded him a look at his D70 for a look at my 10d with the 70-200 f/2.8 (what a deal for him).

The D70 seems to be substantially lower quality than the 300d, it doesn't look nearly as nice, and the controls/interface seem bulky and difficult. Canon has always been an absolute master of user interface.

There was absolutely no comparison bettween the D70 and the 10d. I had to give the guy a tissue to wipe his drool.

That was a long story. Answer, 300d.

[dwc]

I picked the D70 over the Drebel and the 10D.
Go to a store and try them out. I think those who are saying the 300D is better, have no clue! The 300D's body is a thinner cheaper plastic.
The controls are laid out well enough on the D70.

Go see for yourself!
Scott W.

[BrandonSi]

For the money and what I use it for, the DR was the right price. I couldn't justify the extra $400 for a faster buffer/write speed (especially when I could pick up a 50mm 1.8 II, grip with batteries, and 1GB CF card, and a tripod with that extra $400.). That was really the only benefit I saw of getting the D70, besides the D70 looking more professional. I'll let my photos, rather than what my camera looks like, speak for my ability.

[GreenTea]

A friend of mine has a 300d (black by the way, looks real nice). We ran in to a guy in the subway here in Seoul and I traded him a look at his D70 for a look at my 10d with the 70-200 f/2.8 (what a deal for him).

The D70 seems to be substantially lower quality than the 300d, it doesn't look nearly as nice, and the controls/interface seem bulky and difficult. Canon has always been an absolute master of user interface.

There was absolutely no comparison bettween the D70 and the 10d. I had to give the guy a tissue to wipe his drool.

That was a long story. Answer, 300d.

Thats nice and all, but i fail to see how your comments helps the original starter of this thread. He is comparing a 300D to a d70, not a 10D . However, saying the d70 is lower in quality than the 300D is such a lie, i've tried both the 300D and d70 and can honestly say the d70 felt so much better in my hands. Not to mention in quality compared to the toy 300D. That camera felt like a fisher price toy in my hands not to mention it felt really cheap and besides for the obvious, it looks absolutely cheap. Controls and ease of use just made more sense with the d70. But then again, i've always felt nikon ergonomics is better than Canon's, and to their controls and lay outs makes more sense.
In the end its going to be up to you to decide which you like more, best advice anyone can give you is go out to your local camera store and test them both out.

Features: that will go to the d70 (well unless you factor in hacking the 300D, even then the d70 has more features)
lenses: both are expensive once you start lusting over their lenses
battery life: most will agree the d70 has a better battery life than the 300D

[iphoto]

Thanks all for the replies. I did visit the store and *felt* D70 better :) But financially I could get on more lens in that price diff at lest in europe

This confused me more :D does this difference in price worth going in for Nikon ?

[2new]

I think we are all a bit "biased" on this forum :lol:

I forget who posted the comment that "...we all tend to buy one brand over the other and later justify our purchases later..."

I think both cameras are going to be comperable, however givin the price you could pick up a used 300D/Rebel or 10D , I would go for a used 10D, and purchase some quality glass with the savings over the D70.

check out the Buy and sell forum on Fred Miranda & the Market Place forum here. There are some reputable sellers out there and with the introduction of the 20D the Used 10D prices have been dropping dramatically.


Best of Luck - either way you'll love the digital SLR world.

Michael

[JZaun]

Here is what I did. I was unhappy with my 10D's wake up / turn on speed. I went to Ritz can took a mem card with me and spent about 1 hour learning and testing the D70, then took another mem card and spent about 1 hour learning and testing the D100, both have instant on! I took the mem cards home and worked the pics over. Decided to stay with the 10D :). Then the 20d came out, Instant on, 8 mpx etc. Went to the store and tried one out the same way as above . You know the rest of the story. I now own the 20. It will take a couple extra months to pay off on the CR. Card but worth the diff!!!!!

You just gotta get on in your hands and try it out!!

Just my thoughts

JZ

[ijohnson]

A friend of mine has a 300d (black by the way, looks real nice). We ran in to a guy in the subway here in Seoul and I traded him a look at his D70 for a look at my 10d with the 70-200 f/2.8 (what a deal for him).

The D70 seems to be substantially lower quality than the 300d, it doesn't look nearly as nice, and the controls/interface seem bulky and difficult. Canon has always been an absolute master of user interface.

There was absolutely no comparison bettween the D70 and the 10d. I had to give the guy a tissue to wipe his drool.

That was a long story. Answer, 300d.

Thats nice and all, but i fail to see how your comments helps the original starter of this thread. He is comparing a 300D to a d70, not a 10D . However, saying the d70 is lower in quality than the 300D is such a lie, i've tried both the 300D and d70 and can honestly say the d70 felt so much better in my hands. Not to mention in quality compared to the toy 300D. That camera felt like a fisher price toy in my hands not to mention it felt really cheap and besides for the obvious, it looks absolutely cheap. Controls and ease of use just made more sense with the d70. But then again, i've always felt nikon ergonomics is better than Canon's, and to their controls and lay outs makes more sense.
In the end its going to be up to you to decide which you like more, best advice anyone can give you is go out to your local camera store and test them both out.

Features: that will go to the d70 (well unless you factor in hacking the 300D, even then the d70 has more features)
lenses: both are expensive once you start lusting over their lenses
battery life: most will agree the d70 has a better battery life than the 300D

That's nice and all but Maybe the part where I specifically mentioned the 300d and the D70 in comparison would have been helpful.

I like the used 10D idea. I think both cameras are laughable compared to the look and feel of the 10D.

[Mthorpe_Davies]

The D70 seems to be substantially lower quality than the 300d, it doesn't look nearly as nice, and the controls/interface seem bulky and difficult. Canon has always been an absolute master of user interface.


That was a long story. Answer, 300d.

You have got to be kidding. You must be one of the few people I have ever heard of with this opinion.

If I was making the choice between 300D and D70 I would go D70 without a doubt, I would probably take a D70 over a 10D too. I would take a 20D over them all if it was in the equation.

I would rate the Minolta user interface over any Canon I've ever laid hands on. Playing with a Dynax 7 or 9 is loads of fun.

[Doom1701e]

20D!

[ijohnson]

The D70 seems to be substantially lower quality than the 300d, it doesn't look nearly as nice, and the controls/interface seem bulky and difficult. Canon has always been an absolute master of user interface.


That was a long story. Answer, 300d.

You have got to be kidding. You must be one of the few people I have ever heard of with this opinion.

If I was making the choice between 300D and D70 I would go D70 without a doubt, I would probably take a D70 over a 10D too. I would take a 20D over them all if it was in the equation.

I would rate the Minolta user interface over any Canon I've ever laid hands on. Playing with a Dynax 7 or 9 is loads of fun.

If you were a former Nikon user you might find the Nikon easier to use. I am definitely not kidding when I say that the 300d looks better, especially in black. As for a comparison with the 10D, somebody has got to be kidding somebody about that.

For a low-end, first-use digital SLR, I believe the 300d is the perfect solution.

[davidwegs]

I have owned the 300D and the 10D and have the 20D and looked at the D70.

If you have no heavy investment in glass the d70 is a very good cam. It is better (IMO) than the 300D in nearly all respects of use. However, the 300D gave me better High ISO performance than I've seen from the d70.


So, if you are choosing for function the D70. If you are choosing for image quality (high ISO) the 300d.

If price is not the concern, the 20D by far.

[roanjohn]

Nikon vs. Canon..........

It's been said many times, its not the body but the lens.

Look at thier lens line-up. Nikon DX lenses will only fit cameras with 1.5x crop factor...........so if you decided to go full frame in the future, those lenses will not fit..............:-)

OTOH, Canon lenses will fit your film and digital camera, be it full frame, 1.6X or 1.3X crop factors..........COOL!!!

But it doesn't really matter in the end. The D70 will give you more bang for your bucks!!!

BUT WAIT!!!

In a few days, Canon will roll out thier triple rebate deal..............so you can actually get 300 USD off your Rebel if you pruchase two more lenses!!! WAY COOL!!!

Go for Canon.........you will not go wrong.

Ro1

[MrChad]

300D w/ kit lens vs. D70 w/ kit lens.

I'll take the Nikon kit hands down, if you aren't looking to invest in a huge collections of glass I don't see the point. of the D-Rebel The 300D kit lens is aweful. Given the choice get the 300D body only and buy any USM you want just don't get the EF-S kit lens.

I know a lot of folks that shoot Nikon and if you don't ever plan to shoot L glass I don't have any problem with the D70 kit it's nice.

Of course everyone points out the 10D and 20D, but $1000 can't get you a 10D with a nice lens. Don't even look at the 20D for that price The D70 with it's kit lens is a nice combo for the buck.

Hey I'm a Canon fan but I really like the D70 kit.

[rojo]

i don't know if i would buy a camera just for one len's. i agree that lenses are important, and what is most important is what you plan on doing with photography. if it's a hobby and you want to take cool pic's the rebel is beyond fine. if you are unsure what you want to do, the rebel is still beyond fine. when you make that descision you can alway's upgrade to a 10d, 20d, 1dmkII, whatever you want. do your homework look at lenses look at printers and most important look at your bank account. it's your descision in the end and your on the right track. good luck.

[ron chappel]

That's the first time i've ever heard someone say the 300D has better quality feel than the D70 :shock:

The D70 is definitely a better featured camera

BUT

Nikon lenses definitely cost more for what you get

[evilenglishman]

the D70 ANY time

[Mthorpe_Davies]

Nikon vs. Canon..........

It's been said many times, its not the body but the lens.

Look at thier lens line-up. Nikon DX lenses will only fit cameras with 1.5x crop factor...........so if you decided to go full frame in the future, those lenses will not fit..............:-)



Ro1

What about EFS lenses they only work on 1.6 crop factor cameras, what if you want to go full frame in the future, those lenses will not fit!

[CoolToolGuy]

Nikon vs. Canon..........

It's been said many times, its not the body but the lens.

Look at thier lens line-up. Nikon DX lenses will only fit cameras with 1.5x crop factor...........so if you decided to go full frame in the future, those lenses will not fit..............:-)



Ro1

What about EFS lenses they only work on 1.6 crop factor cameras, what if you want to go full frame in the future, those lenses will not fit!

The market for used Canon lenses is much better than for Nikon lenses. Take a look at B&H and you will see what I mean. Canon lenses don't last long there, and the prices they get for them are pretty close to retail.

So even if you do intend to go full-frame in the future you are better off with Canon, since you will have an easier time selling them.

My 2 cents.

Have Fun,

[Mthorpe_Davies]

Nikon vs. Canon..........

It's been said many times, its not the body but the lens.

Look at thier lens line-up. Nikon DX lenses will only fit cameras with 1.5x crop factor...........so if you decided to go full frame in the future, those lenses will not fit..............:-)

Ro1

What about EFS lenses they only work on 1.6 crop factor cameras, what if you want to go full frame in the future, those lenses will not fit!

The market for used Canon lenses is much better than for Nikon lenses. Take a look at B&H and you will see what I mean. Canon lenses don't last long there, and the prices they get for them are pretty close to retail.

So even if you do intend to go full-frame in the future you are better off with Canon, since you will have an easier time selling them.

My 2 cents.

Have Fun,

Yeah but EFS lense are crap, not as good as DX lense so not sure where you are coming from. EFS lense are useless unless your camera has and EFS mount, so whats the diff between these and nikon DX, the Nikon DX are better.

[ijohnson]

Nikon vs. Canon..........

It's been said many times, its not the body but the lens.

Look at thier lens line-up. Nikon DX lenses will only fit cameras with 1.5x crop factor...........so if you decided to go full frame in the future, those lenses will not fit..............:-)

Ro1

What about EFS lenses they only work on 1.6 crop factor cameras, what if you want to go full frame in the future, those lenses will not fit!

The market for used Canon lenses is much better than for Nikon lenses. Take a look at B&H and you will see what I mean. Canon lenses don't last long there, and the prices they get for them are pretty close to retail.

So even if you do intend to go full-frame in the future you are better off with Canon, since you will have an easier time selling them.

My 2 cents.

Have Fun,

Yeah but EFS lense are crap, not as good as DX lense so not sure where you are coming from. EFS lense are useless unless your camera has and EFS mount, so whats the diff between these and nikon DX, the Nikon DX are better.

The good news is that all you need is a hacksaw to make them all fit.

[MrChad]

I've only had my Canon gear a few months. I had (have) a full collection of manual Pentax gear. Friends of mine had Eos gear and my sister had an old AE-1 that I really liked vs. my Pentax. Knowing a bunch of folks with Eos gear, knowing I like Canon quality and knowing that almost all Eos lenses fit any Eos body were the reasons I got Canon gear.

I was tired of trying to figure out what lens types would and would not work with what gear and this body. That was a big reason I didn't go Nikon. With that said, I hope the EF-S lenses die out soon. Having multiple Canon Lens mounts is going to really cut into this whole any Eos lens will work on any future Eos body.

[HJMinard]

Yeah but EFS lense are crap, not as good as DX lense so not sure where you are coming from. EFS lense are useless unless your camera has and EFS mount, so whats the diff between these and nikon DX, the Nikon DX are better.

So I must assume that you've held, evaluated and tested all three EF-S lenses to form your informed opinion about their crappiness? All lenses with this mount should not be judged on the merits of the kit lens. The two recently announced EF-S lenses appear to be of a much higher quality (based on images, specifications and pricing) than the 18-55, but we won't know for sure until they're available and tested.

Yes they are useless without an EF-S mount, but so what? They're meant for 1.6 factor cameras and most likely all future release Canon DSLR's with the 1.6 factor will include the EF-S mount. Cameras with full frame sensors don't need these lenses - their equivalents (16-35 and 28-135) are already available.

[MrChad]

The 18-55 EF-S isn't very special
The 17-85 is ok but nothing real ground breaking. Not very fast either for the money, even compared to other IS lenses.

But the 10-22 EF-S, now I could see that as a god send for anyone with a 1.6x crop factor, reguardless of build. Hope it's good for those that need it.

[CoolToolGuy]

Nikon vs. Canon..........

It's been said many times, its not the body but the lens.

Look at thier lens line-up. Nikon DX lenses will only fit cameras with 1.5x crop factor...........so if you decided to go full frame in the future, those lenses will not fit..............:-)

Ro1

What about EFS lenses they only work on 1.6 crop factor cameras, what if you want to go full frame in the future, those lenses will not fit!

The market for used Canon lenses is much better than for Nikon lenses. Take a look at B&H and you will see what I mean. Canon lenses don't last long there, and the prices they get for them are pretty close to retail.

So even if you do intend to go full-frame in the future you are better off with Canon, since you will have an easier time selling them.

My 2 cents.

Have Fun,

Yeah but EFS lense are crap, not as good as DX lense so not sure where you are coming from. EFS lense are useless unless your camera has and EFS mount, so whats the diff between these and nikon DX, the Nikon DX are better.

I own two of the three current EF-S lenses, and while I understand the fecal reference as far as the 18-55 goes, the 17-85 is on its way to becoming my walkaround lens in lieu (not 'in the 'loo') of my 24-70 f2.8L. But to return to the original comment, used Canon lenses are in huge demand in general, and even the 'turd' 18-55 regularly sells on eBay for more than the $100 that it costs to buy one (not bad for a piece of crap, eh?). So even if one plans to 'go full-frame' in the future (which is questionable with the continuing improvements to 1.6 cameras like the 20D) you are not automatically left with something you have to flush down the toilet - you can get something back from your investment.

Have Fun,

[GreenTea]

Nikon vs. Canon..........

It's been said many times, its not the body but the lens.

Look at thier lens line-up. Nikon DX lenses will only fit cameras with 1.5x crop factor...........so if you decided to go full frame in the future, those lenses will not fit..............:-)

Ro1

What about EFS lenses they only work on 1.6 crop factor cameras, what if you want to go full frame in the future, those lenses will not fit!

The market for used Canon lenses is much better than for Nikon lenses. Take a look at B&H and you will see what I mean. Canon lenses don't last long there, and the prices they get for them are pretty close to retail.

So even if you do intend to go full-frame in the future you are better off with Canon, since you will have an easier time selling them.

My 2 cents.

Have Fun,

Yeah but EFS lense are crap, not as good as DX lense so not sure where you are coming from. EFS lense are useless unless your camera has and EFS mount, so whats the diff between these and nikon DX, the Nikon DX are better.

I own two of the three current EF-S lenses, and while I understand the fecal reference as far as the 18-55 goes, the 17-85 is on its way to becoming my walkaround lens in lieu (not 'in the 'loo') of my 24-70 f2.8L. But to return to the original comment, used Canon lenses are in huge demand in general, and even the 'turd' 18-55 regularly sells on eBay for more than the $100 that it costs to buy one (not bad for a piece of crap, eh?). So even if one plans to 'go full-frame' in the future (which is questionable with the continuing improvements to 1.6 cameras like the 20D) you are not automatically left with something you have to flush down the toilet - you can get something back from your investment.

Have Fun,


The 18-55mm EF-S lens going for more than $100 on eBay **TEXT DELETED BY MODERATOR** CDS

Check on eBay, they don't go for more than $60 brand new out of box. Not to mention there are lots of buy it now for $75...

[AzzKicker]

For the price of D70 you can get the 10D which is a far better Camera. The build quality alone is better.

[CoolToolGuy]

Geez, how things change - I guess since the 20D kit came out, the prices of the 18-55 have gone down, but I didn't think this lens was available by itself - just with a kit. So the lenses on eBay are take-offs.

Oh well, still not a bad investment - it gets pretty good reviews for a lens of that price.

So get the Drebel now, buy a lens or two, and with the rebate you'll still spend less than it would cost you to get a D70 kit. (USA only)

Have Fun,

[Drgisking]

They are both great cameras!

I just bought a d70 over a rebel the other day.

Its a great camera, there is so much to learn.

Get the d70 you wont be dissapointed,