It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
agreed 100%, started a response but figured someone had already attempted to answer. I'm a canon fan boy of course and when i pick up a nikon, i'm like what the fuck is this when the settings "aren't what they are supposed to be." You can change those settings if you want though.
Are you looking into doing photo or video? What is your experience? I am guessing video is a big thing because both of those cams have capibilities.
D90 and 7d aren't really in the same league video wise. D90 is 720p max and $600 difference. Maybe you should look into the 60d where the price is a little better. Look into the 60d or t2i aka 550d as well.
Also, don't listen to what NS does - I find that a lot of NS makes poor decisions and rush judgements and by now probably half the skiers running around filming on DSLRs are 14 year olds with very little prior experience.
If you want better consensus info, check out DVXuser. Don't just do what NS does.
Stick with nikon. They are on the forefront of imaging products. Canon has a slight edge with video..for now. If you need more reason or any real world experience I have shot professionally with canon, nikon and digital medium format systems. Nikon is my choice for small format. Changed over from canon a couple years ago.
listen to what others here have said. it's basically whether you're going with video or photo. Personally, If I was going to leap to Canon and invest in a more expensive body, more lenses and at the same time try to sale my Nikon stuff..I would go for the 5DMKII.
Though I'm not sure about the video from the 5D to 7D.
The question I would ask is "Is $700 really worth it for a little better viewing quality?"
I would say no, and that's the same reason I'm still using my D90.
I'm just waiting for Nikon to release something in the near future that will allow me to keep my lenses while upgrading to a professional body.
I think that I would be doing more photo than video. But from what I have seen, the 7D shoots amazing video quality. I would definitely film with it, but I would say a majority of it's use would be photo. Maybe 65%/35%?
By no means am I trying to do what NS does. NS has some very good photographers and videographers, a lot who know what there doing. So might as week ask people who know what therre doing, and who's media interests are the same or similar to mine.
it's personal preference. go hold each and you'll know right away. i cannot stand nikon or canon rebel bodies. canon metal bodies are perfect for me, it's like secks in my hand
those are just vague specs though. Nikon video still has worse artifacts than the Canon. However, Nikon destroys Canon for photography in my opinion.
The only reason I'm shooting Canon is because it has better video mode. Body layout is a moot point because it's such a personal preference. I am pretty fast on a Canon, but I could get used to Nikon just as easily.
Nikon upgraded to h.264 so they should improve greatly in the artifact and sharpness category, judging by Chase J's test videos with the D7000. The specs I mention can't hurt right :)?
and I agree, Nikon >>> Canon for photo. The D7000 is a seriously nice midrange photo camera, just not as much for video
IF you're going to take photos and only photos get the D90.
If you're going to take video's and only video's get the 7D.
If you're taking both, get the 7D.