Canon 500D Vs Nikon D5100.... & xxxxx wins

I was on leave and at a family get together, took pics with my Canon+Tokina combo. My brother in law used his Nikon 5100 + Nikon 18-105 combo. It was indoor low light conditions.

As we shared our pictures, my wife told me on the side in a hushed voice that her brother's pics have come much better. A huge ego bruise, especially since I use apertuture priority / maunal with RAW mode (meanining advanced ameture) as compared to my brother in laws auto + JPEG mode. However since she was right I quickly noded in agreement.

By night I thought the issue was forgotten, but my wife asked me more pointedly --my picutures are poorer due technique issue or camera. So I saw an opportunity and told her that my camera is no match in low light to Nikon5100. I pointed out that she should see my day light outdoor pictures which are comparable to her brothers. Next line was music to my ears -- you buy a new camera and give this one to me.

Wow I am dreaming of a new camera - my thoughts on the issue:

Option 1: Go FF with canon 5D2. It is fantastic at high ISOs. My 24-70 will cover FOV equivalent to 15- 43 mm focal length on APS-C. For me 15 mm is workable on wide side and I will dispose my Tokina (with a heavy heart)
Option 2: wait for Canon 7D mark 2. I am assuming it to be with APS-H (1.3 crop) sensor. With 20% higher price to current 7D model, pricewise it will be at par with or lower than 5D2 current price. Now fov of my 24-70 will be more akin to 18-55 mm. 18mm will not be wide enough but will accept it. Again Tokina will not be usefull and will be sold.
Option 3: Wait for Canon 6D? FF camera with around 40 mega pixles. I expect it to be positioned near to Nikon 800. So price wise beyond my budget as 5D2 is max I can afford.

Plse give your comments on my options above.

It's not the camera.

tkbslc wrote in post #14971581
It's not the camera.

Agree it is the technique or person behind that matters most.

I am feeling for some time now the limitation of 500D at ISO 1600 + f4 (Tokina) in low light conditions. In good lighting or when I bounce flash off ceiling, the camera / lens combo is good. i have also felt poor response of 500D's AF system in low light, however I am willing to live with it.

Get a Nikon D5200!

Upgrade the photographer (I kid.. I kid..)

I don't need xxxxx, xxx is already enough .

Sure we can tell you to go out and buy the 5DII, but the camera body alone isn't going to necessarily mean you're going to get better pictures than your brother. Instead of forking out well over $1K for a new camera body, why don't you go to your local bookstore and purchase a couple photography books on understanding exposure and light. You will not only save a good chunk of change, but you'll be educating yourself at the same time.

Nothing against your brother, but he's not learning anything by shooting on full auto. You could probably do the same thing and get similar results, but if you do a lot of trial and error, along with reading photo books, you will further yourself along in your photography.

-Nick

It is not the camera. The same settings on two different bodies should produce nearly indistinguishable results. If the shots are noticeably different, and his are better, look at his EXIF data and figure out which setting you could have used.

Ok, now go buy the 5D2, and apply what you have learned.

Although the d5100 is the next step up from the d5000 which is more comparable to the 500d (a 550/600d would have been more comparable to a 5100), the 12" behind the camera makes much more off a difference than the camera used.

But wait... his JPGs were looking better then your raw files? JPGs are processed in the camera.. so they'll always look better than a non-processed raw.

Sometimes I still fight to make my raw files look as good as the JPG.

ssmanak wrote in post #14971566
My 24-70 will cover FOV equivalent to 15- 43 mm focal length on APS-C

Uh ohhh.....

I can hear the FOV police coming...
In 3...2....1....

Dan Kearley wrote in post #14972879
But wait... his JPGs were looking better then your raw files? JPGs are processed in the camera.. so they'll always look better than a non-processed raw.

Sometimes I still fight to make my raw files look as good as the JPG.

Since it is not possible to view a RAW file without processing, he had to be viewing a JPG made from the RAW file(s).

What did your wife view the pictures in? Was it browsing the back of each camera's preview/LCD screen? Or after pictures were post-processed? You better be sure you know what she liked in her brother's pictures over yours; because if you get a new camera, and there's not improvement, you're not going to have a happy wife (=happy life).

Also, if you're thinking of full-frame, there are rumors of a 6D (5D2 replacement below the 5D3) that "might" be announced in Photokina next week.

Quit telling the OP he should improve his photography skills, or that his wife didn't properly view the pictures.... He just got permission for a major gear upgrade! Let him enjoy it!

Go right for the 5D3!

RTPVid wrote in post #14973349
Quit telling the OP he should improve his photography skills, or that his wife didn't properly view the pictures.... He just got permission for a major gear upgrade! Let him enjoy it!

Go right for the 5D3!

You are SO on point! I appologize! Op, go, run, add to cart, press "buy"...FAST!!