SteveB wrote:
> I currently have a Sony DSC H1, and I've outgrown it.
>
> Went to the camera store today to buy a Nikon D40x with the two lenses.
Had
> my check book in my pocket. The camera tekkie, a girl (woman) with
military
> and LEO experience steered me away from the D40x to the Canon 40D. In
the
> meantime, I held and looked at the Nikon 80 and 200. When asked what
was
> the best camera/deal, she had some convincing arguments.
>
> What I found in the Canon was a camera that fit my hand better, had more
> accessible controls, had the shutter release button in a more
ergonomically
> correct location,
You should probably go with the Canon then.
> had a bigger LCD screen, had a brighter LCD screen, and
> quite a bigger spread on some of the basic settings. More shutter
exposures
> per second. Electronic dust release on turn on/off. More weather
> resistant.
I don't think the 40D is particularly well sealed or durable but of
course it's light years better than the D40 for features and is a
significant upgrade from a D200.
> It was about twice the price, too, with two lenses, but now I'm almost
> convinced that instead of even the Nikon 200, a Canon EOS 40D is the
better
> camera.
>
> Comments, please.
>
> Thanks. I know this is an endless discussion re: the best camera et al.
> But when spending two grand, I'd like to hear from people who been
there,
> done that, and what they learned.
When I got a DSLR it was a choice between a little icky silver Canon
Rebel, a Nikon D70 & the Canon (20D?) seemed too expensive so I went
with the D70. I dropped the D70 while hiking a few years later & got a
D200 a couple years ago. For your case in 2008, the 40D is better than
the D200 (except for durability) and the D300 probably sounds
unreasonably expensive.
> I want a camera that I will will to my
> son because it will last that long,
The metal body & weather seals on the D200/300 are a plus for this aim.
On the other hand, this isn't 1978 & nothing these days is built to pass
on to your children so I can't say with a straight face that *any*
modern camera will be appealing in 20 years. That line of reasoning
suggests the D80 with better lenses: the lenses *will* be worthy and
appealing in 20 years if they are good stuff and my Nikon bias says that
Nikon has superior lenses. If you get the D200 you could get 30 year-old
lenses that kick ass and still will be appealing in another 20 years.
The lenses are the key component, expect the camera to die or become
obsolete. OTOH Canon's lenses are fine and it's a great solid system &
if the camera feels better that's good.
> and I will be satisfied with it. Went
> to stevesdigicams.com and they liked it and stated many of the same
reasons
> she had.
>
> Steve, who finds Google hard to use.
>
>
|
