Advice needed. Which way to go. Nokia or Canon

Nero the dog

Nero the dog

Midfield
I’ve currently got
Nokia D3100 with a DX 18-55 lens
and
Canon EOS 500 35mm film camera with 2 lenses. EF 80-200 and 28-80

So the 3 options are.
1) Sell Nokia and buy a newer Canon DSLR body.
2) Sell Canon lenses and buy another Nokia lens with A better zoom.
3) Sell everything and start agaain.

I will be mainly taking wildlife and landscape shots when I’m out and about walking.
 


I assume you mean Nikon, not Nokia?

I guess it depends how much you like the D3100, if you like it, probably stick with that and get another lens. You can always get a newer camera body later.

You also mention out and about walking though, so presumably small and light would be useful, so I would suggest having a look at compact system cameras where everything is smaller and lighter but can still be quite capable.
 
RTGAdmin said:
I assume you mean Nikon, not Nokia?

I guess it depends how much you like the D3100, if you like it, probably stick with that and get another lens. You can always get a newer camera body later.

You also mention out and about walking though, so presumably small and light would be useful, so I would suggest having a look at compact system cameras where everything is smaller and lighter but can still be quite capable.
Click to expand...
Yes, it’s Nikon, don‘t know why I typed that.
I’ve got a collection of small cameras. Got a Fuji one that i really like with a fantastic zoom. Just wanted to start getting into something a bit higher up the scale.
Dream eventually would be to do some Astro photography.
 
Fetch Fletch said:
As much as I’m loathe to I’d say Canon all day long.
Click to expand...

Why, what is wrong with Nikon?

I say this as a Canon user who doesn't have any Nikon cameras or lenses, I always thought they were both good with some slight pros and cons to each. I am just locked into Canon now as I have so much of it!
 
Roger said:
Why, what is wrong with Nikon?

I say this as a Canon user who doesn't have any Nikon cameras or lenses, I always thought they were both good with some slight pros and cons to each. I am just locked into Canon now as I have so much of it!
Click to expand...
Nothing per se. but for support both personally and technically you’ve got a much bigger pool imo. Along with more lenses/more modular stuff.

If I were to break out of Sony, I’d go into the Canon infrastructure in fairness. Just more choice.
 
I'd say go for Nikon as I have an F80, D80 & quite a few Nikon lenses (to cover most focal lengths from wide to decent long zoom plus a converter), I was advised many years ago by a pro. photgrapher to follow that route because of the variety & quality of available lenses & equipment, along with their metering. I accept it's purely about personal preference. I've never had a Canon SLR so can only comment on Nikon. I did have a Canon compact but that died on me on a winter day on a Cumbrian fell
Take a look at the photo mags for a more comprehensive unbiased review.
 
I've got Canon A1 and T70 both old 35mm SLRs with various lenses. Before that I had an Olympus OM10 with various lenses. For both those systems the main lens in each case was the 35-70mm medium zoom which I left on the camera most of the time as it is so handy for general photography. A little bit of wide angle at the 35mm end and a decent 70mm end for portraits. My own impression is that Olympus were better than Canon. The Olympus was aperture priority which is great if desired depth-of-field is the critical issue. The Canon was shutter priority which is great for moving subjects such as in sport and the A1 was the 1980 Olympic Games official camera.

I think by he 1990s Canon probably moved ahead of Olympus for lens quality as they and Nikon moved ahead of the other three main camera manufacturers, Olympus, Pentax and Minolta (The so called Big Five). Minolta glass was always very good which is why Sony probably purchased the company and introduced the same mount into their first DSLRs, the Alpha Series. Excellent cameras that packed a lot in for the money with lens that were interchangeable with some Minolta gear.

I've used a Nikon D60 for a long time now. It's a bit basic and you probably don't get as much packed in with Nikon as you do some other manufacturers cameras but if you like Nikon they are certainly decent. If you have a Nikon 3000 series with lenses, then you would find the Nikon 5000 series an attractive option. It is a much more advanced camera than the 3000 series, probably at the time one of the best budget DSLRs made. I wouldn't mind one of them.

They all use the DX series of lens which Nikon designed for cameras that were not full screen sensors but used cropped sensers instead. You probably know how this works with lens compared to 35mm SLRs. A 50mm lens is always optically a 50mm lens but because when used with a cropped sensor the field-of-view (sometimes confused with angle-of-view but essentially the same thing) of a 50mm lens is the same as a 75mm of a full frame DSLR or 35mm SLR. So if you want to go wide angle on a cropped sensor DSLR you need something like a 16mm lens to have the same field-of-view as a 24mm on a 35mm SLR or full frame DSLR.

Personally, I'd stick with Nikon as you already have a head start. I'd get a Nikon 5000 series body and try to expand on your lens collection. You'd then have a back up body that used the same lens and if you only buy a new lens when you encounter a need for a particular focal length then you wont waste money on lens that never get used.
 
Last edited:
Hiya Folks :) My first DSLR was a Pentax. I got some good shots with it over the years. I then purchased a Canon (EOS 100D) back in 2010. It came as a "kit" with an 18-55mm lens. I've had great use from it over the journey and have no complaints about it at all. A year or two back, I purchased a Canon EOS 70D body and a 75-300 lens. A (Canon-compatible) ProMaster flash unit makes up my collection, other than a couple of ND and polarising filters. With these additions I've pretty much got all the gear I need. I got my first wee camera for my 15th birthday in April1960, it used 120 film!! I'm just an enthusiastic "happy snapper" at heart, but love the medium itself and still manage to take the odd snap or two! As for the original question, sorry to be no assistance to you mate, but I'd find it hard to recommend one over the other (Canon/Nikon) but whatever you decide, I would say: get all your additional gear/accessories to be that brand. Some members of the photography group I belong to here in Melbourne get quite anal about one brand or the other and to be sure, there's more than a wee bit of "camera snobbery" around! Me? I'm a Canon user because it's been a user-friendly brand for ME, that's not to say Nikon wouldn't be similar.....aww jesus! I'm going round in bloody circles here! SORRY I'll sign off! Happy snapping mate! (WHICHEVER BRAND YOU GO WITH!:lol:)
 
My missus always chose Nikon over Canon when given the choice ( she was a travel journalist/ photographer for many years). Just personal preference.

Me, I'm a Fujifilm user, mainly because I just love their retro looks if I'm honest.
Currently have an X-T3, X-E2 ( full spectrum conversion ), and my carry around camera is the XF10.

Whatever the OP goes with will be great, I'm sure. The camera is just a tool that records what the photographer wants to see.
 

Back
Top