Need advice! Canon Rebel T2i vs Nikon D90

[LuckyDucker]

I just went through this same exercise.

I decided to go with the T2i, where the original poster (OP) went with D90. I'm sure we're both equally happy with our purchase.

Since my purchase, I've researched the available glass offerings from Canon and feel I made a good choice for the future. But, to be fair, I haven't researched Nikon glass at all, obviously because I won't be using them. So, having said that, I'd have to agree with Lonnie and others - let the lenses, etc add some weight in your decision.

It really is a tough decision, but ultimately IMO, you can't go wrong with either one...


Edit: on a side note, if you do decide to go with the T2i, skip the 18-55 kit lens and get a 50mm 1.8 (nifty fifty) or better. I haven't used my kit lens once since getting the 50mm.

[jhwilson3]

idelacruz: thanks for clarifying, i did not understand that from your initial response. is there any creedence to the thought of getting a nikon D40 or equiv. canon and better lenses? as you've said...technology changes fast and since the D40 came out processors have changed and new abilities have appeared on these entry level cameras. From the review(dpreview) of the D40 it seems like it was a good camera with an above average kit lens at the time of its release. Many have stated to get a used 5D body for ~$1000 and buy lenses. if $1000 were the top of my range is either the T2i/D90 worth the money over an older proven performer with better lenses?

ducky: thanks for the input. i'd be interested to get more observations from you as you learn the camera and have a better feel for it. i have heard a number of people say the same thing about purchasing body only and getting the lenses you want. it's a hard thing to do since I am not sure how i'll use them. i have casually looked at lenses and tried to see if there was a cost differential but not knowing what to look at complicates it. People seem very opinionated about this and it's hard to know who's pocket anyone is in.
i have an old AE-1, a canon FD 50mm 1:1.8 that i am pretty sure won't work on the T2i. i also have a 28mm and a 75-150mm for it but these are lesser after market lenses and probably won't work with it either.

thanks for your replies.

[ldelacruz]

Jason,
what will be your main subject or what will you make the most money at?

[ronaldfaldik]

Spend the big bucks on your lens.....Thats what makes the real difference!

[jhwilson3]

idelacruz: there is no money...lol. this camera is for both my wife and me. family, kids, etc...indoor/outdoor. personally i shoot landscapes, nature..outdoors.

on a side note i went out and looked at the D90, T2i (and D5000). i really like the feel of the D90 in my hands..there is just something about it being there. the shutter sounds and feels different. reminds me of my old AE-1 minus the squeak. the T2i almost felt like nothing after handling the D90 but, as this is a camera is for my wife and me, I am sure she will prefer the much lighter weight T2i. i shot pics of my son in the store. the hue and saturation of the T2i was better out of the box but i believe this is a canon thing and to be fair the D90 or D5000 can be adjusted in camera or after the fact to match the T2i. The pictures from the T2i just looked better to me at first glance, even in thumbnail view. the cameras did have different lenses and maybe i should have swapped the 18-105 of the D90 to the 18-55 the T2i had. it seemed like there were more slightly out of focus shots from the D90 than the T2i. I am not sure if that was a lens thing or the camera. (i was shooting in full auto or portrait mode just for comparisons sake.) one thing i noted was that i was able to basically get in my son's face and have autofocus lock on with the T2i but was unable to do so with the D5000 with a similar 18-55 lens. i'll have to go back and put the 18-55 on the D90 and see if it makes a difference. the auto focus on all was pretty quick but it seemed like it might have been slightly quicker on the T2i. i've read that white balance is better on the D90 but i am not sure how much or what that will translate to on prints.
Have a nice afternoon.

[jhwilson3]

i think it does matter what body someone getting into DSLRs gets today...even though technology changes and there may be a better camera out in the not so distant future. For non-professional entry level buyers we want to get the best that we can for the money that we have to spend. Speaking for myself, I am not going to chase down the latest and greatest in 6 months to get anything better. The body I get today will stay with me until I outgrow it and I assume it will take some time if I get either the T2i or D90. Would anyone advise a person to buy an entry level pentax or olympus system when for slightly more they can get a body that in many cases will outperform it? Sure, if your limit is $600 then the Kx or E420/520/620 will do great. What if the budget is $1000? (For the oly and pentax fans out there i am not knocking the cameras i know people who really like them and i myself have looked at them in this pursuit. i still have trouble dismissing the Kx.) The point is that for the money we have we want to get the best we can so it doesn't matter if the body will be out of date in 6 months time.

[jtriron]

Originally Posted by ronaldfaldik

Spend the big bucks on your lens.....Thats what makes the real difference!

Very true !!!

[jhwilson3]

i hear that from mnay people and I believe it. If the budget is $1000 would anyone advise getting the D5000 over the D90 or T2i?

I've found the D5000 for $542 body only, $644 w/ 18-55VR, $800 w/ 18-55VR and 55-200(non VR), $849 w/ 18-55VR and 55-200VR, or $1100 w/ 18-55VR and 70-300VR etc...

I've also seen the D90 for $770 body only. is the $200 worth the additional features?
Thanks for your input.

**left out T2i body for about $800...same questions apply**

[brewercm]

I'm shooting a D90 and for me the main feature between it and the D5000 is the limitations of Autofocus on the D5000. If you're not sure what I mean the D5000 will only work with the newer lenses with the autofocus motor built into the lens. If you are only getting the newer lenses with built in AF motor than no problem but the price difference is there also.

Difference between Nikon and Canon is really up to the user. I went with Nikon from Pentax due to the limitation of lenses with Pentax and I personally liked the D90. I have lots of friends that shoot with Canons and love them and actually my very first DSLR was the original Canon rebel. It felt plasticy and like a toy to me so that kind of turned me off to them at that time but had I stuck with them I'd be a little ahead on lenses and flash that I wouldn't have had to buy again. I'm sticking with Nikon because of the investment I now have in quality lenses for it.

That being said I would have to say that as far as looking around overall I'd say as far as lens availability goes it would be #1 Canon, #2 Nikon, #3 tied to me between Pentax and Sony/Minolta.

Just my .02

[guillermo]

Both are great cameras and both Nikon and Canon are great systems. I have used both and both advantages and disadvantages. In my opinion Nikon bodies are more user friendly and adaptable. Both make outstanding glass but Canon offers better affordable lenses. The best lenses from both are comparable but Nikon does not have lenses to compete with Canons 17-40 f/4, 24-105 f/4 and the 70-120 f/4 which give you affordable professional quality lenses. I switched to Nikon and do not regret it but I am using some Sigma and Tamron lenses because I cannot afford the Nikon ones.
If you love photography do not think that you will buy that camera and that will be it, you are buying into a system. Hope this helps.

[dbonyun]

My suggestion would be to get a used 40D and buy some glass that works for you. Nikon, Canon, Sony and Pentax are only names and maker of tools for photographers. Choose what works for you!

I shot Pentax for a while and I loved it. Later I changed to Canon and still love it.

For about $1,200 you can get a 40D and and a 50mm 1.4 with still some change to spare... Go for it!

[ldelacruz]

Originally Posted by jhwilson3

i hear that from mnay people and I believe it. If the budget is $1000 would anyone advise getting the D5000 over the D90 or T2i?

I've found the D5000 for $542 body only, $644 w/ 18-55VR, $800 w/ 18-55VR and 55-200(non VR), $849 w/ 18-55VR and 55-200VR, or $1100 w/ 18-55VR and 70-300VR etc...

I've also seen the D90 for $770 body only. is the $200 worth the additional features?
Thanks for your input.

**left out T2i body for about $800...same questions apply**

if I had a $1000 to spend then it would not be on a new body. The 40D would be my preference with a 50mm f1.8 and 85 f1.8. Great camera with decent lenses and will hold A lot of it's value so when your ready to upgrade it won't be a total loss.

[ngoduyviet]

Originally Posted by lifeasart

As weird as it may sound, my husband doesn't want me to buy anything used. So that's not an option for me (right now anyway).

If I'm planning to get a 18-55 mm lens & 50 mm f/1.4 lens, is the Nikon D90 going to give me anything more than the Canon Rebel T2i would when it comes to picture quality? Or maybe it's just a matter of preference... I think I've read so many different reviews/specs I've started to confuse myself.

Didn't get a chance to read the whole thing, but I just got my niece a used 10D for her to start out in photography. I bought it used of this board and gonna get her a decent lens. It's really is the lens you should worry about and not too much the body. I finally got a chance to do some test shots with the 10D with my 50 1.4, let see if the samples can convince your husband to let you buy used :)


No processing at all except for importing into LR & exporting out as web resolution to upload.

[jhwilson3]

@ brewercm...the lack of the in body focus motor has been one of my biggest concerns about the D5000. It bit me last night at the shop. I went to try out some primes and the 50 1.8 is AF, not AF-S so it is MF only on the D5000. I'd have to move to the 50 1.4 AF-S (~$485) or the 35 1.8($200) to get AF. Whereas the canon system has the "almost disposable" as I have seen it referenced to 50 1.8 ($100). (This point is what keeps the D90 on the table I'm just not sure if the price differential is really worth it.)

@ guillermo buying into the system is also a large consideration. I am comparing prices of flashes, other lenses (macros)...macros vs. ext. tubes. I learned last night that if I got ext tubes that the kit lens of the nikon will mate to them while the canon kit lens will not, I'd have to get an EF lens. I am planning to buy a prime anyway so it shouldn't matter. The advantage that I see on the canon side is I can buy either EF or EF-S lenses and not worry about the body I use(short of putting EF-S lenses on a full frame body, but the point is that the EF lenses won't lose abilities on the T2i(that i am aware of).

@ others who suggested the 40D. I think I may have done some reading about it but discovered it was discontinued and have not really considered it to this point. It may be difficult to get my hands on one to check out and take test shots. Thanks for throwing it out there. I'll look into it.

Thanks everyone. I appreciate the advice.