Ok, so I was looking at these two cameras and was trying to figure out which is the better of the two, and why. I was looking to get everyone's feedback, and not start the proverbial canon vs. nikon argument. So, here it is, If you were going out to buy one of these two, the 40D or the D300, which would you go with and why? As some of you know, I enter the cap codes for the coke rewards program and they have a sweepstakes with Best Buy for a $5000. gift card to be used for a digital camera and a high def camcorder. I am hoping (I know it is a long shot) to win this someday, and I was looking at some of the newer dSLR's and stumbled across these two. If not maybe one day I will actually get enough money saved to buy one of them. I was impressed by both but wanted some input from some more seasoned photographers here on the board. I appreciate the input.
Honestly it will come to personal preference. How each feels in your hand. Like Tim, I do have other personal reasons for choices.
Yeah I know I have to go and get some hands on time with each of them, I was wondering if there is some place online that shows one actually out performing the other
i agree with Roger. If you compare apples to apples, one is not better than the other. You have to try each camera and see which feels better in your hand, which menu you like better, button location.... I am a nikon guy because that is all I've ever had since 10th grade. I held Tim's and Rogers canons for about 30 seconds each, that is my longest experience with canon! And rogers, I didnt even look through the viewfinder, I just pulled the full auto trigger at 10 fps!
One problem that may arise is that while the companies may think they are competing against one another, they really aren't. The 40D is around $660 cheaper than the D300, which is about 36% cheaper! The D300 is 12 mp v the 10 of the 40D. The D300 shares pro level autofocus (note shares not uses), and has some features that Canon hasn't passed on yet to the non-pro bodies, like the lens AF microadjust. Burst speed without a booster is about the same, but the D300 slows down for 14 bit RAW mode, while Canon's speed does not. While I'm still playing around with it, I think Canon's Highlight Tone Priority is better than Nikon's Active D-Lighting (and Sony's Dynamic Range mode is better as well), so Nikon still has some work to do. But Nikon jumped on the CMOS bandwagon, so that's not really an issue anymore. With the lower cost you'd be able to afford more or better glass to begin with - it's going to depend on where you want to go.
How the camera felt in my hand made my choice. My camera isn't as nice as those but I was choosing between the Digital Rebel XT I think and the D40. I chose the D40 cause it felt better in my hand. The cannon had more megapixels but felt like I was holding a brick.
I'll just echo the old refrain ... if it's even close, go cheaper ... and spend the $$$ you save on glass. At the end of the day, it really is all about the glass. Well, that and the photographer - but there's only so much I can do with the chimp holding my camera.
If you are like most people, you'll get a new camera body in a relatively short time. So don't look at the body, look at the lenses that are available. Then flip a coin because you can't go wrong with either Canon or Nikon.
Go to http://www.steves-digicams.com/hardware ... html He even has sample pics taken with every camera!
