Canon/Nikon, New/Used?

OK, no religious wars, please...

We are thinking of getting a dSLR, and initially cirling on Canon or
Nikon due to availability of used fixed-length lenses.

We will be looking at the lower end, 350d/400d/D50/D70s/D80 and spend a
bit on lenses.

Use is family stuff, including my son's football (soccer). I like to
use available light, ie lenses that can be used at f/2.8 or better are
nice.

What I would like is:
- fast autofocus
- low shutter lag (I have given up on our Canon G3 for the 2 first
reasons)
- good low-light performance

>From brief fondling, it seems the Nikons fit my hands better. But what
about the more expensive Canons, perhaps 2nd-hand?

Or are used dSLRs a no-no?

I am at present using a Nikon FA + 35/2.0 + 105/2.5, that's what I am
comparing to.

Any 3rd-party zooms worth considering as alternative to the kit lenses?
Or are they so cheap you may as well have them?

As far as I can see, I am likely to want upgrades on computer (Mac)
front too, there are plenty of places for the money to go

TIA

Martin

"Martin Sørensen" <santana.sorensen RemoveThis @get2net.dk> wrote:
>OK, no religious wars, please...

Ask about religious topics, and you *will* get religious wars...

>We are thinking of getting a dSLR, and initially cirling on Canon or
>Nikon due to availability of used fixed-length lenses.
>
>We will be looking at the lower end, 350d/400d/D50/D70s/D80 and spend a
>bit on lenses.

Add the Pentax K100D to that list. I have not used it, or even
seen one, but it appears that it might fit your needs rather well.

>Use is family stuff, including my son's football (soccer). I like to
>use available light, ie lenses that can be used at f/2.8 or better are
>nice.
>
>What I would like is:
>- fast autofocus
>- low shutter lag (I have given up on our Canon G3 for the 2 first
>reasons)
>- good low-light performance
>
>>From brief fondling, it seems the Nikons fit my hands better. But what
>about the more expensive Canons, perhaps 2nd-hand?
>
>Or are used dSLRs a no-no?

Depends on how patient you are and whether you have the knack
for picking out the "right" used item. If you are careful,
"used" equals a "much better deal". If you get the wrong one it
is an expensive learning experience.

>I am at present using a Nikon FA + 35/2.0 + 105/2.5, that's what I am
>comparing to.

Compared to 35mm film, the Nikon digital cameras are similar in
"feel" and have obvious roots as far as controls, layout, and so
on. The sensor is smaller than 35mm film and has a 1.5 "crop
factor". That results in those focal lengths working the same
53mm and 158mm lenses would on a 35mm camera. Depth-Of-Field is
a bit wider on the DSLR.

The biggest advantage of digital, however, is immediate feedback
on exposure and framing. You can look at the image, and do a
retake if it is over exposed or Aunt Mary had her mouth open and
her eyes closed.

>Any 3rd-party zooms worth considering as alternative to the kit lenses?
>Or are they so cheap you may as well have them?

To a great degree you "get what you pay for". The curve is
exponential though, and adding that last bell or whistle will
double the price for perhaps a very small boost in performance.
There are good 3rd party zooms, but they cost as much as Nikon
lenses with the same bells and whistles.

Given you want to shoot a fast moving sporting event, fast Auto
Focus is important, as well as low light capability. I'm not
sure how much image stabilization would help, or hinder. Perhaps
no 3rd party lense can match a Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G VR, but
you pay for that too... (I use an 80-200 f/2.8 AFD ED.)

The greatest selling point (from my particular religious
perspective) for the Nikon over Canon is the vast array of older
lenses that are available. However, the lower end Nikon models
do not have the mechanical coupling to tell the in-camera light
meter what the aperture is set at, which greatly reduces the
functionality with those models. For the pro-model Nikons that
is not a problem.

The Pentax camera can also works with an astounding list of
older lenses. I don't know if Pentax has are similar
limitations to Nikon's on some versions of the older mounts or
not. I would want to research that carefully, but given your
prime interest is certainly going to be with newer Auto Focus
lenses, it shouldn't be much of a problem.

The particular advantage the Pentax K100D has is an image
stabilization system in the camera that works with all of those
old lenses. You don't have to pay $1600 for a 70-200mm f/2.8
lense that has VR built in...

>As far as I can see, I am likely to want upgrades on computer (Mac)
>front too, there are plenty of places for the money to go

Going to a digital camera? Get two of the largest disks you
can find...

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd RemoveThis @apaflo.com