Need everyone's thoughts on this, please. I'm about to buy my first SLR. My price range is between Cannon EOS 400D (DIGITAL REBEL XTi) and Nikon 80D and so are my feelings. LOL!

I'm not a complete newbie, I've done film years ago so I do know the basics. I realize these cameras require some learning and I don't mind it. I treat photography as a hobby for life and I'd like this to be a long time investment, that's why I'm having a hard time making the decision.

Here are my specifics:

1. My main interests is macro, so I will obviously need macro lenses, too, but that's for later.
2. I'm also keen on landscape and architecture but not studio photography.
3. I don't plan on printing my photos too often.
4. work with Jasc PSP so I will need it to be compatible.

Care to share your thoughts on this, anyone, please? I've heard so many different opinions, I'm confused. I figured I'd ask some experts I know. Should I go for Cannon or Nikon? Or, perhaps take a look at other brands: Olympus? Sony? Fuji? Help, please!

Hola yo hace 15 dias me compre la canom eos 400d , estoy muy feliz con ella ademas, los objetivos  que buscas para macro no son muy caros, yo tambien  tuve la duda  de que si nikon  o canon pero alfinal me decidi por la canon, no se si sera de buena ayuda este comentario,

Dont know anything about the Cannon but I have a D100 which has served me well for a few years.A friend has a D200 and gets excellent reults with it.Another friend has a D80 and is getting excellent results on wedding photography.
Not much of a pointer but its a start.I am sure others will get far more technical on this subject
Eddie

Thanks ejn. I'm afraid the ones you mention are beyond my reach, though. They sound like professional cameras.

Perhaps I should compromise? Anyone heard of Olympus E-410? It's cheaper so I could afford additional lenses immediately. I also heard Olympus is good for macro?

It is all so much a matter of personal preference. Best advice is to get to handle the cameras if you can and see if one suits you more than the other. 

I wouldn't worry too much about comparing technical specs, all these cameras are very capable of producing nice images of a high quality. 

I would be very tempted by the Olympus especially if you can pick up one of the two lens packages they look a bargain to me.

My first question is, what type of film camera do you have?
You might want to see if youe exisiting lens's would be of any use

I own the Canon 400D (Rebel XTI) and have been quite happy with it.
I went the route of buying the body and lens's seperate.

Nikon vs Canon ....it just a matter of flavor..that's all, both are well made and have a good reputation. There are plenty of lens for either brand to choose from. Sigma makes great lens for both flavors. plus they have their own, s plenty of options

The Oly 2lens kit is a really good deal. I came really close to buying one. One really cool thing about the Oly is it has dual card slots..one for CF and one  for xD , I can see that as a handy feature. Here's a link to a good gallery taken with the e-500  girsempa
[http://www.adorama.com/IOME500K2.html

](http://www.adorama.com/IOME500K2.html)

I haven't used PSP in a few years, so you might want to see how it works with Camera RAW files.

[ Adobe Photoshop Lightroom

](http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshoplightroom/?sdid=YZVR) is a great product, but not exactally cheap.
I think any of the above would be fine choices.

I will reemphasize what Richard said about "handling" the camera if you get the chance.  To me, there is something to how it feel in my hands to make the final call, all else pretty much equal.    

I use a D70 and a D200.   The D70 is the one I carry everyday and it serves quite well with no complaints on quality of images, etc.  I would like the much larger LCD of the newer models or like on my D200 but it works well as is.

Remember, these cameras are capable of shooting RAW.  Unless the newest PSP has raw conversion you might also look to keep a few $$$ back for raw conversion software.  RAW unleashes the real power of the megapixels ratings. But I wouldn't be too concerned with that at first. The jpgs are quite good. Getting the lens you want is first, of course. And, all cameras mentioned are used by different members here will fine results.

Best wishes in the choice.  All look good to me..so I am not much help there.

I see that markablue was trying to decide,

between Cannon EOS 400D (DIGITAL REBEL XTi) and Nikon 80D

Another factor to consider is factory service ...

I can't speak about Canon service because I haven't had any problems
with either my Canon A1 (35mm film SLR I have owned and used for
about 30 years) or my PIXMA IP5000 printer.  IOW, I am very satisfied
with the built-in reliability of the Canon products I own. 

OTOH, my Nikon Coolpix 4300 did have a mechanical problem and I
had a major problem with how they handled the repair ...

I went through the usual contact, giving my info, how to wrap and mark
the package, where to send the camera, ... And then it went into a black
hole -- I could not get ANY status information from them ... not from the
website ... not by phone ... not by talking to supervisors ... everyone said
that they were going to revise the website ... etc. ... Eventually, it came back
repaired ... and has worked since ... but I was very unhappy for a while. 

--
Martin

As for Nikon, for a while a year ago or so they had a terrible backlog and supplies were on "wait" till it comes in.  That has been resolved and parts are now quick to obtain.

I did loose a cap on my D200, wrote Nikon USA as to where to get a replacement and they sent me one right away,no charge.  When there was a battery recall, I got my new one with in 4 days. This was fine service.   Now, I have not needed actual repair...can't speak about that.

Thank you so much for your opinions. It's certainly a lot of food for thought.

Yes, I heard the opinions that all of these cameras are basically undistinguishable for an amateur. I guess my main problem is defining an amateur. I certainly have no ambition to become a famous photographer but I still aim a little higher than taking holiday snapshots to be burnt on CD and replayed on a TV-screen (though that will be nice, too).

I don't have any equipment yet, so I'm not married to any brand. The film experience I had ended a few years back and I had to sell everything. Recently, I was just having a lot of fun with a cheap non SLR:  Premier DC6370, but now that I can afford something a little more serious, I'd love to dive into my favorite hobby again. :-D

Please don't thinking you are getting the short end by not going to much more costly "full pro" camera models.  I believe you will fine images from any of those mentioned to be quite worthy and quite capable of excellent prints.      The versatility of using different lenes is a true freedom..and burden of getting the lenes.

Onslow said it...all the cams will produce great images.  Play with them in the stores, get a feel for the ergonomics.

With regard to the two that you have mentioned...Canon 400D and Nikon D80;

1. FWIW, the Canon has the dust shake mechanism...the Nikon D80 does not
2. I think the Canon comes bundled with RAW software....the Nikon D80 does not
3. The D80 is priced a bit higher than the Canon 400D
4. The D80 allows spot metering, the Canon does not
5. The D80 has a top status LCD, the Canon does not
6. Full comparison between the two here..... http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonEOS400D/page21.asp

If your main interest is macros....you may want to consider a NON-DSLR...they generally produce good high quality, high DOF macros for a heck of a lot  less money than a DSLR with a dedicated macro lens plus extension tubes.

Also understand that DSLR's do end up being a money pit....add another $500 for a flash, add another $1000 for a macro lens, add another $1000 for a landscape lens....then add filters...then add a huge bag to lug all that stuff around...it never ends...LOL!

A final point to consider...some of these newer cams will produce 60 to 100 meg TIFF files....if you play with these by adding a few layers...you will soon end up with HUGE PSD files that will strain a PC that may be just a few years old.

Attached Link: http://www.dpreview.com/

Thanks for the link, Mark. Yup, I've seen it - actually, it's where I initially started my research. However, I value personal opinions of people whose work I know (and admire) far more than any anonymous website. :-)

And, Gradient, that's a very helpful post, too. Are you telling me that you're taking those wonderful insect macros with a non-SLR?! Anyway, I guess I'm ready to explore photography a little beyond auto-focus, auto-shutter and auto-everything. :-) I also have a pretty new computer and the huge files are not going to cause problems. But it was very thoughtful of you to mention it.

Yeah, I realize it's just the first investment. I plan on building the equipment over time. LOL! I think I'll go with Tom's recommendation and, provided the camera suits me, I'll pick the Olympus. The PSP version I'm using has the option of opening raw files so I'm assuming it's capable of dealing with them.

Thank you very much for all the help. It's still going to be about a month before I can actually put my hands on the new toy but I'll let you know! :-D

marka

Hi Marka, I've been following this thread for some time, but I didn't want to intervene or influence you, as I'm a long time Olympus adept and perhaps somewhat biased... Well, you seem to go for the Oly anyway. ;o))
So you're thinking about the E410 then..? Why not go for the E510? It's still a bargain, especially if you go for the dual lens kit, and here's why: the additional (excellent) Image Stabilization on the E510 will prove to be very handy and useful for Macro photography if you can't afford the really expensive fast Pro lenses, so on that part it will even save you money, ... and the Olympus kit lenses are just about the best on the market. I think you can't go wrong with the dual lens kit, even if you plan on getting additional or /and better lenses as you go along.
By the way, I got the EX-25 macro extension tube, and I use it with both kit lenses (I don't have a dedicated macro lens). Olympus has two short-range macro lenses (35 and 50mm); Sigma also has some longer-range macro lenses for the E-cameras (105 and 150mm) and even a macro zoom lens (18-50mm)...

Here's a link to a website that I have found to be very useful... lots of information about the Olympus E-system cameras and lenses, reviews, user information, technicalities and tips...

www.wrotniak.net/photo/oly-e/index.html

Good luck..!

@markablue;

My macros were taken with my 3 year old Nikon D70. 
Sorry if my post came across as trying to dissuade you from choosing a DSLR...that was not the intent. 
My reason for buying a DSLR was not solely for taking macros...if I was ONLY interested in taking macros, I am not sure I would necessarily go with a DSLR.  
There are some very good "point and shoots"  that have macro capability....the wonderful thing is that these type of cams have a very short focal length which gives a much greater depth of field compared to a DSLR with a 105mm macro lens plus extension tubes.  The bonus is that you can buy one of these cams for less than the cost of a dedicated DSLR macro lens alone!

You mention the "auto-everything"....that is certainly one of the drawbacks of the P&S cams...there are not many that support manual operation, or RAW capability.

Good Luck, I am sure you will be happy with the OLY....I know many OLY users...and there are many skilled OLY users here at Rendo!

PS....you may find that you need to get an update for your version of PSP that will support the RAW files from your new cam

Again, thanks for all the help. Gradient, my problem is, I'm interested in detail but it does not necessarily mean macro exclusively. Sometimes it's a tree, sometimes a cloud in the sky... Macro will probably be my main goal for some time but i'm not married to it. :-D

I don't think I took your post the wrong way. I'm not getting rid of my Premier, either. I'm still having a lot of fun with it and it may be useful for many shots in the future. I just get frustrated I cannot get it to focus on a spider on the web, for example. And, since money is not the issue (up to a certain amount, obviously), I thought I'd rather go for DSLR than a better digital because it's more flexible. And thanks for the wishes.

LOL! girsempa!  I just got back from a shop where I was to actually take a closer look at E-410 and left disappointed. You know what? That dinx that's used to fasten the strap is mounted exactly where I need to put my middle finger while holding the camera. And it's prety sharp, too. Very uncomfortable. :-( On our way back home my dad suggested I take a look at E-510. I sit at the computer, this thread is obviously the first place I check and... LOL! Your post is sitting there. Sure, I'll try it on Wednesday. It's only slightly more expensive than 410 and that thingy is mounted on top so it's not an issue. I also realize the kit lenses are good. They will sure be enough for me for some time so I'm still thinking Olympus.

You guys are terrific. I'll let you know!**
**

There is a 2 lens deal with the 510@$859

[http://www.abesofmaine.com/item=OLE5102LK~item.htm#top

](http://www.abesofmaine.com/item=OLE5102LK~item.htm#top)or the E-500@$579.00

[http://www.adorama.com/IOME500K2.html

](http://www.adorama.com/IOME500K2.html)So then the question becomes is the extra mega pixels worth the price?

Or would you rather spend the money on extra cards and things like extension tubes?

You have illustrated the benefits of actually holding the camera before you buy it perfectly. It can be the highest spec. camera in the world, but if it is not the right one for you then it is no good.

I think the Oly E510 has a few more benefits than just some extra pixels over the E500. But I'll leave that to the Oly users - I've got Canon .

Uhm... I live in Poland. I just went and checked online. The E-500 is only available in one online shop and the price difference between that and E-510 may be adequate to $20 so I doubt I could buy anything that useful for it. LOL!

Incindetally, it's interesting how different opportunites we are having here. I would have thought the prices were more universal... OTOH the price of only E-510 here varies as much as over $300 depending on a shop offering the exact same kit (already checked: the same lenses). The $20 is the difference between the only available E-500 and an average E-510. Whatever I decide, I'm not going for the cheapest offer anyway, in fear of bogus.

Attached Link: Which Camera Should I Buy?

Thanks for the link, cool, I'll read it.

I'm pretty much set on the Olympus E-510 and I'm gonna get the money in a few days. I'm so excited! :-D

That is awsome. Would be a top choice of mine too! ;']

In Poland you have the advantage of the EU, meaning guarantee and possible action against bogus. Some online sellers allow you to come and get your articles instead of sending them.

I have always been an Olympus fan, in the film days that is. It's incredible how well the OM system was designed from the very start. The camera's were light, sturdy and top quality. Yet I was less enthusiastic about the 8080WZ I nearly bought from my brother in law. I just couldn't get used to the way they had arranged the buttons. Also, Olympus didn't have DSLP's like they have now. Which I why I bought the Canon 350.
If I had to start all over, I guess the Oly 510 would also be at least a serious candidate. I read that the Oly sensor gives way better skintones that Canon or Nikon. Who, in turn, have their own strengths of course.

What I consider to be very important is

• RAW. There are free, or cheap applications on the market in case Olympus doesn't come with one. Bibble light is really worth a try ($70) in that case. read www.ronbigelow.com (articles) on why raw.
• manual focusing. In case you want to do close-up, the auto fiunction often focuses on, say, the body of the insect instead of the eye you absolutely want to focus on. Then you need manual focusing. Don't go for a motorised one.
• quality is not measured in megapixels. if you're not into prints then you don't need 8+ mpix, except for zooming in and vreating an even closer close-up.
• spot metering I consider to be a plus, but that's my opinion.
• sensor cleaning is a nice thing. dust is always a problem with DSLR's.

anyway: I guess that there are lots of great camera's on the market. Compared to film days they all have many, many advantages. It really boils down to your personel preferences. Ideally, you should be able to at least try each one out for a day or so. Because ease of use (many buttons) and handling are very important.

Good luck with your choice!

Again, thank you all for your wishes and advice. I just got the Olympus yesterday and I'm loving it! :-D

What I find particularly useful is that I can learn it one step at a time: Manually tweak one setting while having others set up automatically. Boy, am I going to have fun! :-D Renderosity, here I come!!! :-D

Oh, and I found out that for the kind of "macro" I like best, I can use one of the kit lenses. I'll probably be buying a dedicated macro lenses some time in the future but my favorite stuff can easily be done with what I have already.

Your enthusiasm radiates my room here and warms it!
I'm very happy for you and I hope you'll show us and keep taliing about your new tool.