Canon 500D or Nikon D5000

[ravens-eye]

Ok for the past 5 or so years I have built my progression to a DSLR by using my trusty Fuji S7000 and it has done me well (potw & potm being my proudest moments). I enjoy creative Photography and have recently discovered Timelapse but dont have the hardware to experiment so have decided that now is the time to progress to SLR.

I am currently torn between the Canon 500D and the Nikon D5000 (both with the kit lens). Both have advantages and disadvantages (if I could merge the 2 I would be happy) so I am looking for some advice by those who know better.

My hope is that if I list the requirements that I need the camera to be capable of, someone can advise me as to which one will best suit my needs or recommend a different DSLR altogether.

Obviously all of these will be an improvement to what I am used to, but in no particular order, this is what I want to use the camera for:

Night sky shots (eg, capture the milky way, star trails & detailed Moon shots) so low noise is crucial
City Night Skylines that really soak up the colour of the different lights
Some IR would be nice but not necessary as I can still use my S7000 with Hoya R72 for that. So to be sensitive to IR light.
Time lapse control software compatible (a must)
Glass lakes, misty seas waterfalls etc
HD Video although not important, it is still nice to have the function available.
& the usual landscapes, family (little one on the way) and holiday pics

Also the cost of future accessories is important (lens etc)

Any advice/recommendations/experience would be appreciated.

[TPilgrim]

From what i have read and seen nikon generally seem better in low light conditions.
I have had very good results with long exposure shots with my canon 450D (theres some in my profile http://www.dphotographer.co.uk/user/TPilgrim) my friend has the 500D and he has also got good low noise shots shooting at night.
I have used the canon tethered shooting software a lot and i have found it very good, you can set that to take shots at set intervals for timelapse shots, both shutter speed and gap between shots. it will shoot for a set amount of time or untill you run out of harddrive space/ battery! If you dont have it connected to the computer it is possible to get a shutter release cable which you can program to do it.
its also great for focusing on macro shots as you can use your whole screen as the live view viewfinder.
i have seen some great quality video from the 500D. I have no experience with the nikon D5000 so unfortunatly cant give you much comparison but i do highly recommend the canon software.
I hope thats of some help!

[nicolas orillard]

hi there,
I'm not a Nikon specialist, but according to lots of articles, Nikon is really good with low noise( high Iso),
BUT doing a lot of night photography and long exposure, I can tell you (and you probably already know) that for this kind of photography, the lowest ISO, the better photo.

High ISO is good when you need to take relativly quick shutter speed but for light trails and star trails, either you use a low ISO or you blend several pictures( considering you're not doing it just in a bulb shot, i.e 49minutes)

I'm using a 450D and a 5D mark II and both have great quality about ISO performance.My gallery contains lots of examples of night photography or long shutter speed photography.
I started photography with the 450D and would recommend it again and again, as a evidence of it's great quality, look at it's price, which didn't get down for so long( at least, not in France and Germany, tell me if I 'm wrong about England).
the 500D(never used it) as even more capability so I believe it's a good choice.The Video capability is ( as photo mags say) under the possibility and quality of the 5dII.
I have to say I almost never use it, I didn't buy for video but really for photography.

About IR, I'm shooting IR photography with my 450D as well as with the 5DII. With a R72 Filter.
I would recommend you to send your "old" camera to it's brand service or to a camera professionnal to remove the " anti-Ir" filter on it, allowing you to shoot only, i said ONLY, IR picture with it.
the "rest" of photography via you new camera.

About price for the future accessories, Canon or Nikon, same battle....
It all depends what do you want as accessories...

Hope this helps, if any further questions,I'll try to answer
Nicolas

[nicolas orillard]

last tips, for the kit with Canon I believe you're thinking about the 18-55mm, it's a great choice, but look after prices as you can find the lense on auction site for around 35/50euros ( 32/45 quid)....

[ravens-eye]

Thanks Guys,

Good idea re the IR Nicolas, I have read many tutorials on how to remove the filter on the sensor and have seen the results it can produce so I may give it a go myself.

Thats interesting about the kit lens Nicolas, I hadn't though before but may be worth me just buying the body then and getting the lens on its own?

Still very hard for me to decide though, as you both say, in reviews the Nikon does seem to edge ahead. Something is still pulling me towards the Canon though & I don't know what?

[nicolas orillard]

For me no question, as a good Canon user, it would be the 500D.But it's for me totally different as I already own several quality canon lenses, flashgun etc....

the " I don't know what" factor just comes sometimes of the reflect of the brand wants to have, I believe I choose Canon because, at some point, it reflects more my personnality than Nikon.When I bought my first dslr, I didn't really know a thing and didn't have a preference for canon.Maybe the marketing, also how it feels in your hand, the menu and integrated system change from a camera to another.
Habe you ever try the 500D and the D5000?
or any other from those brand, it can make a huge difference when you use it.
Don't forget that it's great to have a powerful camera but it's kind of a shame if you don't really like to use it...(again: menu, how it feels in your hands, the global perception of it)

Anyway, i believe with both camera you will achieve great results, coming directly from you and not from your camera

Remember as well that when you choose between one of those two brands, it is really difficult to switch after( accesories compability or just because you're used to )
rgds
Nicolas

[Seosaimhin]

Both are very good cameras, so I'd advise going with your gut feeling! Have you tried visiting a shop to handle both? That might help yoou decide, once you've had a chance to see how you get on with the interface on each - they're very different beasts to operate.

Take a memory card if you have one and take some test shots to look at once you're back home too, if you can - that should help clear up any uncertainty.

Best wishes,

Josie

[ravens-eye]

Thanks again. No I have not tried either camera, have not even held them. Great tip about taking a memory card to examine the shots when I get home, I would of never thought of doing that so I will be doing that for sure.

[Seosaimhin]

No worries! It's definitely worth trying them both out - if you're not tied to either brand yet it pays to make sure you like how whichever one you pick feels in your hand, and how it operates.

Both cameras accept SD/SDHC cards, so take a clean one and try them both out at different ISOs, with/without flash etc so you get a fair representation of what each camera can do.

Good luck!

Josie

[ravens-eye]

Thanks,

Can anyone explain to me what is meant by ISO range of 100 up to 3200 – expandable to 12800? It's spec for the Canon 500D

I understand the first part thats obvious to me, but "expandable to 12800" what does this mean? Expandable how, an add on pack?

Sorry if this is a basic thing.

Starting to lean towards the Canon more as it looks like a more serious SLR, Nikon is looking a bit ott and although the flip out screen is a nice feature, I am worried it will be the first thing to break and will get in the way of the tripod. Also the larger screen size on the canon will be or more use when focusing on small distant objects. I think I am right in thinking this?

Also, although I am not buying it for the HD video, the quality of the videos on youtube look far more professional from the Canon 500D compared to the Nikon D5000. The nikon has a sort of jelly wobble to it and the crispness just isn't there.

Will be going to look at them both tomorrow though.

[Seosaimhin]

The native ISO range is the list of options that are available in the normal ISO menu, but there is an extra option (the 'expandable' bit) that has to be manually activated in order for you to access it. This is in the main menu system and doesn't require any add-ons or anything - it's just tucked away and not part of the regular set of available ISOs, usually because it degrades the image quality by a fair degree, so the manufacturer doesn't want you to use it too often. It's there for emergencies, but I wouldn't use it every day!

Hope that helps.

Josie

[ravens-eye]

Thanks Josie, helpfull as usual.

I am also finding lens options more difficult with nikon due to it lack of built in motor. With the canon I have much more range to play with, especially in the used market. Building a range of len's for the canon is going to be much easier on the pocket although the body will initially be around £50 more. Then there is the build quality I am hearing about, canon feels too light and toy like.
The other thing concerning me with the canon is the chromatic aberration and over exposure, on some test shots I have seen its been a real problem and mentioned in many reviews. The Nikon however shines.

But how can a higher spec canon (500D) give lower quality results against a lower spec Nikon (D5000)? I think this is where my brain is having a hard time deciding, if I go for the Nikon I will feel like I have a lower spec and therefore missing out.

Oh this is driving me mad...................

The thing is, everywhere I have looked, Nikon it is coming top in all the reviews against the canon except here where the Canon recieved 5 stars and the Nikon only 4?

Someone decide for me, if you had to make the choice which one would it be and why?

HELP PLEASE

[Seosaimhin]

But how can a higher spec canon (500D) give lower quality results against a lower spec Nikon (D5000)? I think this is where my brain is having a hard time deciding, if I go for the Nikon I will feel like I have a lower spec and therefore missing out.

Why would you feel you were getting a lower spec camera with the Nikon? If it's because of the lower resolution sensor, remember image quality is not all about megapixels - as you've mentioned, reviews have noted exposure problems with the Canon on occasion - it lags behind the competition in terms of dynamic range. The Nikon has a slightly faster continuous shooting rate (4fps compared to the Canon's 3.4fps) and a more powerful flash, with a range of 17m compared to the Canon's 13m.

In terms of noise, the Nikon has fewer settings to choose from, but all of them produce usable images, with well-controlled noise throughout the sensistivity range. The Canon controls noise well up to about ISO 800, but things go downhill after that, and the 'extra' settings it offers produce images with less detail and more chroma noise.

On the flip side, the Canon has a higher resolution LCD, but it's also larger, so the noticeable effect is negligable, and I found the LCD on the D5000 to be very good.

As you've also correctly stated, the Canon is quite a bit lighter than the Nikon. whether that's a good thing or not is down to personal taste, but for me, entry-level Nikon's do feel more robust than their Canon counterparts.

Chromatic aberration is down to the lens - generally speaking with lenses, you get what you pay for. The more expensive optics will deliver greater sharpness and clarity with fewer aberrations.

It's good to research and gather other's opinions, but, as I've said before, try before you buy.

Josie

[ravens-eye]

Thats more or less convinced me on the Nikon now Josie..... I will try before I buy but I really value opinions from people who know what they are talkng about. At the end of the day I want the camera that will give me the best bang for my buck and although initial comfort and ease of operation are important, to me they come second. I am a very adaptive person and will learn to adapt and become comfortable with the best performing option.

I think I always rated the Nikon higher and reviews had backed this up for me in their tests but the Canon for some reason was the one I wanted deep down. I don't know why, I guess I just thought Canon were a market leader

Oh well, the hunt for the lowest price D5000 with 18-55mm lens kit (also running the £50 cashback offer) begins.

Not sure if I am allowed to mention names on here but with an online voucher code (DEC25) & Nikon £50 cashback, the best I have found so far £454 delivered, so not bad. Plus Nikons come with a 2 Year Warranty compared to Canons 1 Year

[Seosaimhin]

Everyone has a brand they favour for one reason or another. Up until several years ago, your assertion about Canon being a market leader would have rung true, but recent years have seen Nikon really excel with their entire DSLR range.

As I said before, they're both formidable cameras, but you're doing the right thing by gathering as much info as you can before making a decision - whichever way you choose to go, good luck with our photography, I'll look forward to seeing the results on the gallery!

Best wishes,

Josie