Which camera to buy

[louie_the_fly]

Not sure if this is the right spot to post this. Mods feel free to move it if needed. Anywho, went looking for a new vacuum cleaner today. While Mrs fly (Louise) was choosing said vacuum cleaner (which, incidentally, didn't work when we got it home, so it"s another 1 1/2 hr round trip to take it back, but that's another story) I went looking at DSLR's.

So now I'm tossing up between the Canon EOS 1100D & Nikon D3100. The Nikon looks and feels more like a camera should. Like my old Pentax SLR years ago. Both come with an 18-55 lens. The Canon just feels like plastic, but I'm more after features suitable for outdoors and astro photography. A work colleague who's right into photography recommend the Nikon. The Nikon seems to be a bit higher spec than the Canon.

What do you guys use? Anyone got either or of these cameras? What do you like & dislike about them? How do they perform?

Even the Nikon lens looks and feels more robust than the Canon. The Nikon is about 150 smackers more.

Hmmm, have I answered my own question in there somewhere? :question:

Thanks. Louie.

[JB80]

The only thing I can say without using both is that the Nikons tend to have less 3rd party software support when it comes to astrophotography although this may be changing these days.

And if it was 150 more then maybe consider looking at the 600D as well?

In truth I think you will be fine with the Nikon if you chose it.

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-1100D-vs-Nikon_D3100

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-600d-vs-Nikon_D3100

[alocky]

Now you've done it. The Nikon vs Canon war! The main investment you will make in DSLRs is actually the glass (lenses). This is the only reason I am now a rusted-on Nikon owner as it would be too expensive and painful to change all my lenses over to Canon. If you don't already own thousands of dollars worth of lenses of one brand or the other, you're free to choose either. And if you're looking at the 600D, look at the Nikon D600 too - they are a magnificent camera.
Having said that, I use my Nikon DSLR for astrophotography, and have no trouble using the capture pro 2 software to drive the thing from a laptop, although I do slightly resent having to pay for it. I actually use an intervalometer most of the time which avoids the need for a laptop.
As as been previously stated there are more options for Canons and AP, but I don't believe it should influence your choice. They're both bloody good cameras compared to anything you might have bought two years ago.
cheers,
Andrew.
Sorry - just checked and the D600 costs 3 times as much as the Canon 600D - forget I said anything about it...

[UniPol]

Canons every time.

[louie_the_fly]

Thanks for the replies so far. You're not making it any easier. :rofl:

I'll have a look at the higher spec Canon since I'm happy to spend up to $500 at the moment.

[Phil Hart]

Stewart.. if you want meaningful advice you have to give us some pretty detailed information about what you want to do with these cameras. Are you solely intending to attach it to a monster telescope and take pictures of faint galaxies or are you hoping to go to the tennis and get a crisp shot of a backhand down the line as well?

You're looking at entry level DSLRs.. the low-light sensor performance on these is pretty good and all the specs of the high-end DSLRs won't gain you much for astrophotography, unless you move up to full-frame. But then the cost of glass goes way up as well or you need an awesome scope that can fully and sharply illuminate a full-frame size sensor.

The 'feel' of a kit lens is pretty much irrelevant. Choose the DSLR body you want to start with (bearing in mind what you may expand to in future) and then choose the lens, whether that is the kit lens or something else instead of or as well as. The kit lenses are good value but hardly expensive and pretty irrelevant to the purchase decision which is likely to lock you onto that brand in all respects for some time to come.

I have shot with the 1100D.. for the price you can't go far wrong and can spend the dollars you save on more lenses assuming you intend to stick with cropped sensor.

Phil

[louie_the_fly]

Thanks Phil. The main reason for a new camera is my old SLR broke down some years ago & I never got it repaired. Then I just sold all my gear. My current options for taking a photo are a Fuji Finepix or my mobile phone. I mainly want to be able to take photos at the footy & cricket, family Christmas party, landscapes, etc. But I'd also like to have a go at astrophotography. So astro isn't my main focus (no pun intended, but not a bad one none the less). If I decide I really like taking photos thru the scope I can always upgrade to something else later.

[Octane]

Straight out of the camera, the Canon gives you closer/accurate colour.

If you want an example, look at portraits taken with a D3 and a 1Ds Mark III. The 1Ds Mark III skin tone is so much more natural. That was about 6 years ago, and, the trend has continued today even though the high end Nikons nowadays use Sony sensors. Examples are easily found for the 1D X and D4.

Skin tone is a good indicator for tests as we are familiar with the colour of skin -- we are not used to the colours of the night as they are captured on camera.

But, then, I'm biased.

H

[killswitch]

Ive used both the 1100D and D3100 and the biggest dislike... the LCD screen. Its too pixelated for reviewing image sharpness.

If your really keen on Nikons, get the D3200 or D5100 instead. These are a leap forward in specs in comparison to the D3100. You can get either for under $500 if you buy grey, like from Kogan or DWI.

[ZeroID]

I'm a SONY man myself as some may have noted but I'll have to say if you want to do anything astrophotographically then the Canon is the way to go with the software and live view etc available. I've had Nikon, excellent gear, I have never had Canon but I admit I'm envious of the Canon owners with the range of options they have in software and they have pretty damn good glass.

[jjjnettie]

Most astro imaging programs are geared toward the canon cameras.
I've had 2x 20d's, a 550D, a highly modded 1100D and am now looking at buying a backup 1100D.
The only Canon lens I use is the very reasonably prices Canon 50mm F1.8 ($100 new) The other lenses I use are Tamron's, the 17-200mm for day to day use and night scapes, and the 90mm Macro F2.8 for astro imaging and macro work.
If you have lenses from other cameras you can buy adaptors for them to suit the Canon. They cost less than $20.

[louie_the_fly]

Thanks everyone for your advice/opinions. I ended up buying the Canon 1100D with the 18-55 kit lens. That'll do me at this stage. Down the track I'll grab an additional lens.

Bought the Canon for a few reasons. 1. Seemed a little easier to use than the Nikon. 2. The LCD screen seems clearer (someone mentioned that I think) albeit slightly smaller, 3. Price - was $150 cheaper, and I need to get a new battery for my ride on mower. 4. They seem very popular for astro work. 5. They had it in stock.

Seeing that I'm just starting out I decided I'll just get an entry level unit for now and get a better camera later, if I need it.

The Canon includes an EOS Utility program for controlling the camera from a computer. Seems pretty useful. Is this software OK for setting the camera up and controlling it for astroph/y? :question:

EDIT - Forgot to ask this. What do I need to buy to attach the camera to my Celestron C8? thanx.

Cheers all. Bring on the dry weather.

[Octane]

Nice one.

Yes, EOS Utility is all I ever used for astrophotography capture when I was imaging with a DSLR. It's simple and it works.

H

[Jon]

Having said that, Backyard EOS is a simply great program, very reasonably priced.

[Jon]

This adapter http://www.bintel.com.au/Astrophotography/Camera-Adapters---T-Rings/Celestron-T-Adapter/1401/productview.aspx plus the EOS T-ring recommended on the right of the page.