Need some advice......

Big Mike

So, I have a dilema that I would like some advice with. I currently have Canon 40d with a Canon 15-55 f/2.8 and a Caon 70-200L f/4 IS. I have the opportunity to buy a Nikon D300 for about $1200 - a friend of mine is going to the D3 and is offering me a deal. I am wondering if it would be worth it to sell off what I have, buy the D300 and spend the difference on lens for the Nikon. I like the way the Canon and Nikon feel, so there is no preference there. I know the reviews are great for the D300, but at that price, is it worth it to switch?

If it will help, I like to shoot candid portraits of kids or friends and family (no studio stuff at this point). I also like to shoot my nephew playing sports and my niece doing cheerleading and things like that. I also have a son who will be born in October that I know I am going to want to take all shorts of pictures of. As with everyone, I love to take candid portraits with good bokeh (nice and creamy!! Though the lenses I have don't give me as nice of bokeh as some of the longer more expensive lenses).

If you say I should switch to the Nikon, what lens/lenses should I go with to help fit what I like to do?

So, based on all of that - any thoughts?

Thanks!!!

ziggy53

Mike,

You have 2 of Canon's finest lenses. The Canon 40D is still a great camera.

While the Nikon D300 is a wonderful camera, and $1200 is probably a very good price (depending on the condition of the camera), I am not sure if stwitching would really get you much additional functionality.

Better bokeh is produced by lens design (including element design and maximum aperture), the number of aperture blades and the shape of the aperture blades.

Canon and Nikon both have splendid lenses in this regard, most of them prime lenses of large aperture (and large cost).

As for lens recommendations, Nikon has not developed a direct competotor to the Canon EF 70-200mm, f4L IS USM, so you would probably choose either the Nikkor 70-200mm, f/2.8G AF-S VR ED-IF or the Nikkor 80-200mm, f/2.8D ED, both of which are considerably heavier than the Canon f4. Don't misunderstand, the Nikkor lenses, those in particular, are splendid lenses, just no clear advantage over Canon I'm afraid.

For the standard zoom, the Nikkor 17-55mm, f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX is very similar in optical quality, and better build, to the Canon EF-S 17-55mm, f2.8 IS USM but it lacks stabilization, which works really well on the Canon lens.

If you want great bokeh, the Canon and Nikon 85mm, f1.2 and f1.4 respectively, do a wonderful job for many portrait applications (head shot and head and shoulder) while the 50mm, f1.4 lenses do pretty well for 3/4 and full length. (Heck even the 85mm, f1.8 from both manufacturers are pretty good wide open and very good values as well.)

The D300 does have faster shooting performance, especially with the added grip and battery, and a more advanced autofocus section. Micro-focus adjust and a sharper LCD are the other things that many folks mention.

I am still very impressed with the performance of the Canon 40D in terms of autofocus speed and accuracy, exposure, flash exposure, color balance, color accuracy and high-ISO performance. I have no intentions of changing to the Nikon D300 myself, although I would have the D300 if I were committed to Nikon lenses.

Cameron

ziggy53 wrote:

Mike,
You have 2 of Canon's finest lenses. The Canon 40D is still a great camera.
...

Once you get to the level of the 40D / D300 the body is not likely the limiting factor in most cases. Both are extremely good bodies and you already have fabulous lenses to go along with the 40D.
You may be more likely to improve your photos by spending money on additional lenses, post-processing software, or some photo courses.
For low-light stuff you could consider adding a 50mm f/1.4 lens. You could also consider adding a nice external flash if you don't have one. As I said, at this point you won't see a big difference between the Nikon/Canon camp - knowing how to use your camera to its full potential will be far more beneficial than any body switching at this point.

Congrats on the upcoming arrival - be sure to post pics for us to see!

swintonphoto

I also agree. I think that the things you mentioned you will use the camera for will be done extremely well with your current setup. Having to relearn the use of a different menu system would be enough of a factor for me.
The camera you have is fabulous, as are the lenses.

Big Mike

I appreciate the replies. One of the keys things I have been thinking about is the relearning of a new camera. Other than a few FPS, some mega pixels, and auto focus capabilities......is there anything significantly different about the D300 that I should consider over the 40d? I have heard that all things considered, the Nikon flash systems are a little better than Canons.

The only other question would be, is the 40d going to be relatively "new" technology for a while or is it going to be replaced soon? I know the D300 is pretty new technology so it should be around for a while.

I am just trying to gain every bit of knowledge that I can before making a 100% decision.

ziggy53

Big Mike wrote:

... is the 40d going to be relatively "new" technology for a while or is it going to be replaced soon? I know the D300 is pretty new technology so it should be around for a while.

...

According to DPReview, the Canon 40D was announced 20-Aug-07
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082010canoneos40d.asp

The Nikon D300 was announced 23-Aug-07
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082313nikond300.asp

The Nikon D300 is "newer" by 3 days.

Big Mike

ziggy53 wrote:

According to DPReview, the Canon 40D was announced 20-Aug-07
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082010canoneos40d.asp

The Nikon D300 was announced 23-Aug-07
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082313nikond300.asp

The Nikon D300 is "newer" by 3 days.

Well, I guess that answers that.....:D