Canon T1i v T2i v Nikon 3100

I have narrowed down my camera to one of these three, I have no brand loyalty. I do not care about the video but it is a nice added bonus, which would you choose and why if you had no biases like I do? I will be getting it at Best Buy and the Nikon is 587, the t1 is 699 and the t2 is 799, all three come with a 18-55 lens

I did a snapsort.com comparison on the T1i and the T2i. Pretty even. Can't go wrong with either. Do not have any input on the Nikon though.

the screen is nicer on the T2i and the sensor is supposedly better in low light but it's 18mp vs 15mp.

Kick the d3100 off right now, no I'm not some Canon dick-rider but I've had experience with the d3000. I'd say get the t2i because it's got a lot of the 7d guts and it's really got great value.

The t1i could be a good choice if you want money for glass I suppose.

D3100 vs T1i vs T2i Sensor comparison

Except the LCD screen, D3100 is probably better in most aspects, including sensor, AF. It even has automatic focus video, something Canon hasn't been able to do in 7D and 60D.

Thanks, the screen is not an issue for me at all, I had an xti and was happy with that screen

IMO - the T2i is the best of the three. The T1i is a great camera, but not quite as good in low light, and it doesn't have an ISO limiter.

pasm365 wrote in post #12032837
D3100 vs T1i vs T2i Sensor comparison

Except the LCD screen, D3100 is probably better in most aspects, including sensor, AF. It even has automatic focus video, something Canon hasn't been able to do in 7D and 60D.

I agree. The T2i is a fantastic camera, but the D3100 is great as well, and costs far less. I would personally opt for the Canon, but that's just from an ergonomic standpoint (I have never liked the Nikon menu system...). If you're a beginner to photography, the Nikon does have a decent "Guide" mode, and (listen up, Canon) a very handy "Info" button that is basically a built-in, on-screen owner's manual.

Either way you go, you'll end up with a fine camera.

daytona squared wrote in post #12032719
Kick the d3100 off right now, no I'm not some Canon dick-rider but I've had experience with the d3000. I'd say get the t2i because it's got a lot of the 7d guts and it's really got great value.

The t1i could be a good choice if you want money for glass I suppose.

The D3000 can not hold a candle to the D3100.

The one thing you get with a Canon camera is a lot of very good photo processing software...DPP...Zoomb​rowser etc.

The equivalent Nikon software will cost you extra $$$.

The D3100 is obviously the better IQ/AF, cheaper camera. That said, Nikon lenses can be (can be, not are) more expensive than Canon, and some of their less expensive lenses require in-body focus motors. They also have a harder time converting old manual-focus glass (a great option for a beginner) compared to Canon.

Just to throw another wrench into your thought process, have you looked at the Sony SLT cameras?

londonandlawson wrote in post #12031917
I have narrowed down my camera to one of these three, I have no brand loyalty. I do not care about the video but it is a nice added bonus, which would you choose and why if you had no biases like I do? I will be getting it at Best Buy and the Nikon is 587, the t1 is 699 and the t2 is 799, all three come with a 18-55 lens

The T2i (550D) is obviously the better camera in IQ, "AF", ISO performance and HD video but it's not as good as the newer Canon 60D or maybe the Nikon D7000
see
http://www.bjp-online.com …985/canon-eos-550d-tested

http://www.popphoto.co​m …on-eos-rebel-t2i?page=0,1

get the T2i. Although it is the most expensive it is the best on everything other than AF (and its AF is very good). Also the extra money will be saved immediately on software and over time on lenses.

watt100 wrote in post #12036585
The T2i (550D) is obviously the better camera in IQ, "AF", ISO performance and HD video but it's not as good as the newer Canon 60D or maybe the Nikon D7000
see
http://www.bjp-online.com …985/canon-eos-550d-tested

http://www.popphoto.co​m …on-eos-rebel-t2i?page=0,1

It's funny that you referred to 2 reviews written 6 months before D3100 was released.

Sp1207 wrote in post #12034154
The D3100 is obviously the better IQ/AF, cheaper camera. That said, Nikon lenses can be (can be, not are) more expensive than Canon, and some of their less expensive lenses require in-body focus motors. They also have a harder time converting old manual-focus glass (a great option for a beginner) compared to Canon.

First: the cheaper lenses that need the in-body focus motors become manual focus lenses. Second: why are old manual focus lenses a great option for a beginner?! The way D-SLRs are made today, the viewfinder is very small, and there is no way to accurately judge focus (i.e. the split prism viewfinders). Adding all that to trying to learn photography with an SLR makes old, manual focus lenses a poor choice for a beginner.

imo... all the same crap nowadays unless the body has a specific feature you NEED to have.

"99% of cameras are better than 98% of photographers"