Nikon 3100 vs Canon T2i
A friend is looking to go with one of these options (they are what Costco is selling). I never looked at this price point, so I'm not sure if there is substantial difference one way or the other. She has no lenses to push her one way or the other. In the film days, she says she had a rather high-end Canon and then got out of shooting for many years.
Both systems are at about $800 with an 18-55/55-250 (canon) 18-55/55-200 (nikon) lenses bag, etc. Not much to push one way or another in terms of what you get.
Looking at the basic specs, the t2i claims better ISO and a denser sensor (18MPix vs 14MPix).
Guys at snapsort give the t2i a very slight nod over the d3100, seemingly based on the MPix and max ISO. However, the D3100 scored better on noise at high ISO (thus I wonder if the higher ISO on the t2i is really usable), having autofocus that works during video, a little better IQ, and more AF points.
Any other points of comparison that I might want to be aware of?
Thanks,
-a
Both systems are at about $800 with an 18-55/55-250 (canon) 18-55/55-200 (nikon) lenses bag, etc. Not much to push one way or another in terms of what you get.
Looking at the basic specs, the t2i claims better ISO and a denser sensor (18MPix vs 14MPix).
Guys at snapsort give the t2i a very slight nod over the d3100, seemingly based on the MPix and max ISO. However, the D3100 scored better on noise at high ISO (thus I wonder if the higher ISO on the t2i is really usable), having autofocus that works during video, a little better IQ, and more AF points.
Any other points of comparison that I might want to be aware of?
Thanks,
-a
0
Comments
http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_eos550d&products=nikon_d3100
Beyond that they are almost alarmingly similar.
The availability of the $200 Nikon 35mm F1.8 lens might be worth mentioning, if looking past the kit zooms at a fast standard prime. The cheap 50mm from Canon is pretty long on a crop sensor.
The Nikon doesn't have in-body VR. Same for Canon.
Who is wise? He who learns from everyone.
My SmugMug Site
huh??
Canon T2i (550D) takes all of the Canon lens - EF / EFS etc.
Why would you think otherwise?
Actually Nikon is confusing to me with lens with the screw drive, some with AF, etc.
Both Canon and Nikon have IS /VR in the lens, not the body
Comparison of Nikon vs Canon
http://www.popphoto.com/gear/2010/05/camera-test-canon-eos-rebel-t2i
Do a search, Canon crop models (like the T2i) take all lens going back to the mid 1980's
For Nikon look at a chart like this - (it gets complicated !)
http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/slr-lens.html
Canon "FD" mount is the previous Canon manual focus lens mount, and it will not readily adapt to a newer Canon autofocus camera with the EF or EF-S mount, refardless of film or digital.
All EF lenses "will" mount on all EF and EF-S mount bodies, but all Canon EF-S mount lenses will only safely mount directly onto Canon EF-S bodies. The "S" in the EF-S designation means "short backplane" and EF-S lenses may protrude too far into an EF camera body to be safe. EF-S bodies include all Canon dRebel series cameras, all xxD series bodies, and the 7D.
In Nikon, it's a little trickier and best to resort to a compatibility chart:
http://www.nikonians.org/nikon/slr-lens.html
(Brett beat me to it.)
The best lens compatibility of all manufacturers probably belongs to Pentax, because even lenses back to the Pentax M42/Universal screw mount may be simply adapted and safely mounted on modern Pentax bodies (with a few exceptions). Minolta is another manufacturer to maintain great compatibility with older lenses and newer bodies, including Sony bodies (which retain the Minolta "A" mount).
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums