Camera Canon 550D vs Nikon D5100. Which one?

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Ankur.

Disciple
Hi guys.. I am planning to buy my first DLSR after using a Canon Powershot A630 for over 3 years. I have narrowed on 2 models, the Canon 550D and the Nikon D5100. I have read through the reviews on various sites but the confusion continues..
What exactly am I looking forward to? Excellent image quality and colors, compatibility with Pentax and Sigma lenses (in case i buy them in future) and the rest of the usua; features.. Both the cameras cost more or less the same so price is not an issue..

Please suggest which one and why?
Thanks! :)
 
@OP: 550D is a better buy coz it's cheaper and has better lens support... (all canon lenses will do AF). D5100 has stellar low-light performance. Also, I feel handling is better on D5100. But handling is subjective.
 
^^ Nah its not subjective in case of Rebel series, Nikon has superior ergonomics period. Also I dont know, why but a lot of users on the FB photography page, and now here also are posting information as Canon is easier to handle, or Nikon is easier to handle!! I dunno where this FUD is coming from, both are equally easy to operate.

Nikon D5100 is a fantastic camera, with the D7000 sensor, but as Hatter pointed out, Nikon's lens politics on the entry level sucks. You will miss out on the cheap prime lens in addition to a lot of AFD gems. The Nikon D90 should be for 38-39k (gray with which IMO is a much better deal).

Also 550D is good for the price, dont have anything to say against it at 34k price point.
 
You can get the D5100 off ebay for 34490 with kit lens, warranty, bag and a 4gb card if you buy it by tomorrow. Its a part of the deal of week promo.

I would have personally opted for the D5100 because of the awesome D7000 sensor, superior ergonomics, and the great onboard user guide which it has for beginners. Ive always found the entry level Canons to be quite plasticy and cheap. The D5100 is also a newer camera at a great price, much lesser than what you would pay for it in the US. The drawback is that it lacks a built in autofocus motor, but I don't see it as too much of an issue, specially since the AF-S 50mm f1.8 will be out next month!
 
550D has better video controls with full manual control over shutter speed and aperture whereas D3100 is automatic and does not allow manual control ... Also with Magic Lantern firmware modification on the 550D much more powerful features on the 550D for video can be enabled..

Magic Lantern Firmware Wiki
 
both are excellent DSLR cameras.. u cant go wrong with either of them:).....to me its the person behind the lens that matters:cool2:
 
Nikon is more beginner friendly with the diagrams and such. All the settings will be confusing at first so it will make a difference. Otherwise neither of them is significantly better than the other.
 
I would stick with the 550D IF you wish to dabble in old MF prime lenses.

Even Nikon MF lenses work better on a Canon body !!!! :p (No metering support for budget Nikon DSLRs).
 
hey why dont you get someone in a photography club around your area and try a Canon 550D. Most of them would be having this cam, but for Nikon its pretty new and yet to take ground! Only reviews of Nikon can be used to buy or not to buy. I would personally tell you to have a feel of the DSLR though your making a shift from 3years of using A630. When you hold the body of the cam for a n00b in the DSLR it would have many thoughts. So first have a real feel of it.

Please dont walk into Croma or other biggies for a demo, most of them dont have one to show it off. Most stock only Canon 1000d. So get hold of someone from a photography club, you'll be able to get a finer picture!
 
for beginners nikon is better,,,,just buy the dslr which fits in your hand perfectly, its better u go to the shop and check the cameras personally. my vote goes for nikon d5100 since i own the older ver nikon d5000 its a excellent camera for the price.
 
^^ No doubts its an excellent camera but in the DSLR world, its the LENSES that make the big difference. And in the budget area at least Canon is on top.

The Canon 55-250mm IS lens is better than the Nikon 55-200mm VR lens (more reach than the Nikon plus better close focusing ability). The Canon has a 50mm f1.8 lens for 5k while Nikon will in all probabilty launch their version for 11k - 12k.

Beyond that, if you decide to buy used lenses, many older Nikon AF-D lenses simply wont autofocus on the D5100.

So unless you wish to stay with a kit lens and a 55-200mm lens then Nikon D5100 is a fine purchase. However for those who wish to get lots of different lenses from the used market or dabble in MF lenses then Nikon is a poor choice IMO.
 
In addition to the above points, I have realized the importance of AF on large aperture primes. The depth of field is so narrow at 1.8 that what appears to be in focus during MF will look terrible when transferred to the PC. And these are miniscule turns of the focusing ring. AF, especially for beginners is very important to ensure that motivation from good results keep one going. Yes, as people mentioned, an AF prime for Nikon is around the corner, but double the price.

My take is if its anything below a d90, go for a Canon.
 
Nikon does have a newer 55-300mm which is pretty decent from what I've seen. It was launched a few months ago! But, yes, the 50mm AF-S f1.8 will cost much more than the Canon one.
 
Thanks for all the suggestions guys. I did go out and see the two cameras physically at Croma.. handling and grip wise I hardly found any difference between the two.. both of them were equally comfortable and firm to hold.. Further, lenses is one area where I want to stick with the Canon.

Talking about of image quality, considering the sensor in the D5100 is same as that of the D7000, is there any noticeable difference between the two cameras i.e 550D and the D5100? I mean can a person viewing images easily spot the difference in image quality (images shot in jpeg), if any?

As for buying a D90, its a bit out of budget.

Thanks again.
 
Well, in practical terms, from what I've read and seen online, the D5100 definitely has advantage where dynamic range and low noise performance are concerned. I've used neither of the too, but this is what I've read on multiple occasions. There are even some comparison samples.

From a theoretical point of view, you can have a look at this:

DxOMark - Compare sensors
 
^^ Take all theoretical benchmarks with a pinch of salt.

D5100 would be having better noise control at higher ISO's due to a more refined sensor. However at ISO 1600 or below you will not notice any difference (90% of the time you would be using ISO 1600 or below). For a detailed comparison refer to:

Nikon D5100 Compared to the Canon Rebel T3i / EOS 600D Side by Side

The 600D is identical to 550D but for a few things. I would however not choose Nikon lower end for its lens politics, the new 50mm AFS will not cost below 10k, and 35mm AFS prices have shot up considerably in the last 12 months. In addition there are other good AFD lens (80-200 f2.8 comes to mind) which you will not be able to use etc.
 
vb86 said:
Nikon does have a newer 55-300mm which is pretty decent from what I've seen. It was launched a few months ago! But, yes, the 50mm AF-S f1.8 will cost much more than the Canon one.
Click to expand...

No doubt its a better lens. But it costs 18k vs the 10.5k for the Canon 55-250mm IS.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top