Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Canon 1100d vs Nikon D3100

This thread is sponsored by:
Announcements Posted on
    • Thread Starter
    • 148 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Basically I'm getting a DSLR because I'm going to Calgary for my year abroad next year and I want to actual be able to get decent pictures. While my camera at the minute isn't bad for nights out and general day to day stuff, the scenery round Calgary would NOT be done justice by it...the Rockies would just look blah rather than wow.

    So I want an entry level DSLR and after a bit of research (and money taken into account) these are the two I'm debating between. I love the image quality of the Nikon, but don't like the constant auto-focusing during videos (I plan on skiing quite a bit so would like a decent enough video function). I also think the Nikon looks a bit more impressive (although I have nothing against the look of the Canon.

    I've read a lot of reviews on both and really can't seem to decide, so anyone got any suggestions?
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    We shoot Nikon exclusively. But I will say that it matters diddly squat which of those you get. But generally once you have chosen your brand and purchased a few extra lenses, it becomes very expensive to switch due to the lenses. Which ever one you go for try and pic up a twin lens kit, just having an 18-55 will be limiting where as having a 55-200 as well means you will get all the scenic shots you want and some nice portraits.

    I have been fishing in Northern BC three times and the contrast between the snow and the forests will push a non-SLR beyond its limits quite often.

    If you can hang on there for a month or so, there will great offers on the D3100, as the D3200 has just been announced.
    • Thread Starter
    • 148 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by evening sunrise)
    We shoot Nikon exclusively. But I will say that it matters diddly squat which of those you get. But generally once you have chosen your brand and purchased a few extra lenses, it becomes very expensive to switch due to the lenses. Which ever one you go for try and pic up a twin lens kit, just having an 18-55 will be limiting where as having a 55-200 as well means you will get all the scenic shots you want and some nice portraits.

    I have been fishing in Northern BC three times and the contrast between the snow and the forests will push a non-SLR beyond its limits quite often.

    If you can hang on there for a month or so, there will great offers on the D3100, as the D3200 has just been announced.
    I've already found the D3100 for £330 but can't really wait a couple of months more as it's my birthday start of May and parents are putting a bit of money towards it for me :ahee:
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by greeneyedgirl)
    I've already found the D3100 for £330 but can't really wait a couple of months more as it's my birthday start of May and parents are putting a bit of money towards it for me :ahee:
    Sounds a good price. The D3000 only got to about 20 quid less than that.

    Enjoy your birthday present.

    There really is nothing to choose between the two models other than minor details.

    We shoot Nikon, if they start paying me I will do marketing for them
    • Thread Starter
    • 148 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by evening sunrise)
    Sounds a good price. The D3000 only got to about 20 quid less than that.

    Enjoy your birthday present.

    There really is nothing to choose between the two models other than minor details.

    We shoot Nikon, if they start paying me I will do marketing for them
    Are there any major difference between Canon and Nikon lense wise? Apart from of course with the Nikon I'm limited to certain of their lenses because of the focusing stuff.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by greeneyedgirl)
    Are there any major difference between Canon and Nikon lense wise? Apart from of course with the Nikon I'm limited to certain of their lenses because of the focusing stuff.
    I don't really know in terms of lens quality certainly at the high expensive end both companies make awsome lenses. I am not sure how the cheaper ones compare, other than reading canon fanboys saying theres are best and the nikon fanboys claiming the oppoite.....sighs...

    You are correct in that with a D3n00 and D5n00 you can only autofocus lenses that are SWM (Nikkor) HSM (Sigma) and HSD (Tamron). This is not an issue for macro shots as you use manual focus anyway, that is how you shoot macro. But there is a total range of such lenses, they quieter and generally faster and some so sharp you can cut yourself with them. We only have one lens that needs a motor in the body and I will not be getting anymore, there is just no reason to buy the old lenses, most people who quote this as an issue just cant bare the thought of not being able to mount any lense, it just rubs their photographic hair the wrong way. If you come into money and decide to get Leica or Zeiss lenses you pay a fortune and they are manual focus on all canons and nikons.....

    I believe there is a restriction with Canon, not in terms of autofocus but to do with upgrade path if you have EF-S lenses, you cannot use them on a full frame body if you upgrade, but you can still get pretty far up their range i.e. trash your bank balance, before this becomes an issue.

    Where as that restriction does not exist on Nikon, although why you fit a 200 quid DX lens of 3Ks worth of FX body is a different question.

    6 of one and half a dozen of the other, you pays your money and takes your choice......

    Nikon lenses you should consider initially are one or more of the following, 18-55 VR, and (55-200VR or 55-300VR), later get a 35mm f1.8.
    18-55VR good for landscapes and scenic shots.
    55-200VR good for landscapes, scenic shots, sports and portraits
    55-300VR Razor sharp, good for landscape, scenic shots, sports, portraits and some wild life shooting.
    35 1.8. great in low light / in doors without flash. Good for all shorts of shots, except conventional wildlife or sports, also does great as a makeshift macro substitute, got some great bumble bees and spiders with mine before I got a macro.


    If you go Canon they have similar models of lenses to those I state above, just pop on the Canon website and have a look.

    Good luck and have fun.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    £299.99 for a 1100D from canon's outlet:
    http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Canon-EOS-...item3f16a7a245

    It's a refurb but comes with a full warranty. WE've got two 1000D's from there and both were new, only seals had been cut and under 5 photos taken by each.
    • Thread Starter
    • 148 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theronkinator)
    £299.99 for a 1100D from canon's outlet:
    http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Canon-EOS-...item3f16a7a245

    It's a refurb but comes with a full warranty. WE've got two 1000D's from there and both were new, only seals had been cut and under 5 photos taken by each.
    There are some refurbs on amazon too which I think is what my parents ended up getting for me. Decided on the canon because I can see myself using canon more in the future so the lenses etc. will be an investment.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by greeneyedgirl)
    There are some refurbs on amazon too which I think is what my parents ended up getting for me. Decided on the canon because I can see myself using canon more in the future so the lenses etc. will be an investment.
    Good luck with your new camera. As I stated, avoid EF-S lenses so your investment is protected for the future.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I'm a Nikon guy myself... Prefer them so much to Canon!
    • Thread Starter
    • 148 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pranavian)
    I'm a Nikon guy myself... Prefer them so much to Canon!
    See my dad's got a nikon but my best friend at uni has a canon so while I've used them both I prefer the canon marginally.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by greeneyedgirl)
    See my dad's got a nikon but my best friend at uni has a canon so while I've used them both I prefer the canon marginally.
    As much as I don't like Canon cameras, its all just a preference. Don't get a Nikon just because everyone says so, I'd get the Canon if I preferred that one as I tried it!

    But, since you've brought the one you want... Good luck with it and I hope it brings you many fantastic photographs!
    • 6 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by evening sunrise)
    Good luck with your new camera. As I stated, avoid EF-S lenses so your investment is protected for the future.
    There's nowt wrong with EF-S lenses, in fact they work better on cropped sensors than EF lenses do. They're lighter and more compact. I was slightly worried about buying my 17-55mm f/2.8 EF-S but then I figured I'm not going to be able to afford a 5Dmk2 for a while and the 17-55 commands a pretty decent resale value so I just went for it because nothing came close to it in terms of IQ and usability in that focal range.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nuffles)
    There's nowt wrong with EF-S lenses, in fact they work better on cropped sensors than EF lenses do. They're lighter and more compact. I was slightly worried about buying my 17-55mm f/2.8 EF-S but then I figured I'm not going to be able to afford a 5Dmk2 for a while and the 17-55 commands a pretty decent resale value so I just went for it because nothing came close to it in terms of IQ and usability in that focal range.

    Nobody said EF-S lenses had anything wrong with them except a limited upgrade path. Which is no different to folks who refer to bodies without motors being in some way deficient, laughable, when one considers the full range of SWM, HSM, HSD lenses available and the last nikkor lens launched with screw drive was 2003 and who wants a noisy scew drive lens anyway.

    Even a canon shooter on here referred to the fact that complete replacement of the their lens portfolio was one of the factors influencing a move, or rather a non move, to a 5D II.

    I am surprised that the EF-S work better on a cropped sensor than EF lenses do as with an EF lens you are using the central sweet part of the lens, less distortion, vignetting just about absent, sharper and far less prone to CA as you are not using the outer extremities. Unless it is some specific characterstic of the EF mount. But Nikons crop image circle lenses has some gems in the range too, so I know what you mean about your 17-55. I rate the 55-300VR far better than the 70-300VR for sharpness throughout the range.

    I agree though, cropped image circle lenses tend to be smaller and lighter and for certain types of photography, such as candid street, the better option, which is why I sometimes borrow them of my wife/daughter, likewise the D5000s.

    When I do buy cropped image circle lenses I dont worry about resale value as they mount on any body, this used to be a theoretical advantage but now we have full frame bodies at 36mp giving nearly 16mp resolution in crop mode this has become a material consideration and excellent news when you get a gem like the 17-55 you refer to.
    • 15 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by evening sunrise)
    Nobody said EF-S lenses had anything wrong with them except a limited upgrade path. Which is no different to folks who refer to bodies without motors being in some way deficient, laughable, when one considers the full range of SWM, HSM, HSD lenses available and the last nikkor lens launched with screw drive was 2003 and who wants a noisy scew drive lens anyway.

    Even a canon shooter on here referred to the fact that complete replacement of the their lens portfolio was one of the factors influencing a move, or rather a non move, to a 5D II.
    Apologies for the narcissism, I think the bold is a reference to me? Having to change lenses had its role in that decision, but it was a very minor one - more of an annoyance with having to re-figure out the best lens combination than anything else. The biggest problem was inability to simultaneously hold and use a 5DII. :lol: If I'd been able to hold it, having to change lenses wouldn't have stopped me.

    Unless someone has a planned and imminent-ish upgrade to an EF camera that really does make not having EF lenses a waste of time, I'd recommend they use EF-S lenses. They've been specially designed for use on an EF-S camera; the focal lengths used are designed to compensate for the crop factor, the optics are slightly different in order to reduce abberations and take advantage of the shorter distance between the lens and the sensor, plus they're cheaper and lighter.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheSownRose)
    Apologies for the narcissism, I think the bold is a reference to me? Having to change lenses had its role in that decision, but it was a very minor one - more of an annoyance with having to re-figure out the best lens combination than anything else. The biggest problem was inability to simultaneously hold and use a 5DII. :lol: If I'd been able to hold it, having to change lenses wouldn't have stopped me.

    Unless someone has a planned and imminent-ish upgrade to an EF camera that really does make not having EF lenses a waste of time, I'd recommend they use EF-S lenses. They've been specially designed for use on an EF-S camera; the focal lengths used are designed to compensate for the crop factor, the optics are slightly different in order to reduce abberations and take advantage of the shorter distance between the lens and the sensor, plus they're cheaper and lighter.
    No comment. I do not quote with reference to specific individuals on a topic such as this.

    Most of the positives (we have exactly the same debate in our camp regarding lens investments) I concur with as per my earlier posts. The big difference now is that the new gen bodies are providing adequate resolution in crop mode and hence crop image circle lenses do not need to be a throw away investment, unless you cannot physically mount them, except at extremely short focal lengths. My 10-24 will cover a full frame at > 20mm.

    I am unaware of any focal length adjustments other than at very short focal lengths like 10mm being available where as no rectilinear lens will cover a full frame sensor at 10mm. The focal length of the lens is the focal length of the lens.

    Anyway mute point. The OP stated they were going 1100D, because they would shoot Canon a lot more in the future so I made a simple statement around future proofing their lens investment given the physical mount constraint and refuted the garbage that tends to be spouted about in body motors.....but then some folks like 1950/60/70s sports cars, leaks, and in ability to go around corners, not withstanding.

    Each to their own. In fact looking at the decision logic, or lack there of, the OP followed, I am wondering if the thread was genuine or an attempt to instigate a brand argument, and we collectively decided not to bite only highlight the decision factors associated with the different product lines from different manufacturers.
    • Thread Starter
    • 148 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by evening sunrise)
    Each to their own. In fact looking at the decision logic, or lack there of, the OP followed, I am wondering if the thread was genuine or an attempt to instigate a brand argument, and we collectively decided not to bite only highlight the decision factors associated with the different product lines from different manufacturers.
    Ahem. Firstly I'm a mod so I would not be trolling or trying to create a flame war. Secondly yes it was very much a genuine question. Thirdly my decision logic followed: Okay no one is able to tell me anything which makes one significantly better than the other so it'll just be down to preference. Having used both a Nikon and a Canon I found the Canon more intuitive to use therefore I'll go for the Canon. Please do not making judging statements when you clearly have no idea.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I have the Canon 1100D, and I love it. For me it's good at taking a wide range of clear photographs.

    <3 x
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by greeneyedgirl)
    Ahem. Firstly I'm a mod so I would not be trolling or trying to create a flame war. Secondly yes it was very much a genuine question. Thirdly my decision logic followed: Okay no one is able to tell me anything which makes one significantly better than the other so it'll just be down to preference. Having used both a Nikon and a Canon I found the Canon more intuitive to use therefore I'll go for the Canon. Please do not making judging statements when you clearly have no idea.

    "Decided on the canon because I can see myself using canon more in the future so the lenses etc. will be an investment."

    Thankyou for the clarification compared with the circular statement above. The fact that the initial statement above was so circular and etheral caused me to question the initial post.

    Whilst I am happy, like other posters, to discuss the relevence of features etc in relation to what someone wants to shoot, I will not get involved with brand debates, of course there are differences between two cameras, SNR, dynamic range, mp, tonal range, colour depth, and egronomics, the latter you have experienced first hand and ergonomics are a very personal and subjective thing. My answer was that as an initial DLSR it did not matter which you chose, and as I do not receive commission or own shares in one manufacturer or the other I am not concerned which route you opted for. But as you mentioned lens investment I reminded you to beware of the upgrade path for lenses when buying your lenses. One manufacturer is strongly rumoured to be launching an entry level full frame body this summer, and I have no doubt the other will follow suit.

    Good luck with your new camera.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    They say you're either a Canon or a Nikon person, but in my experience you will always prefer whichever one you picked up first. At this point in the technological game they're both excellent! The Nikon D3100 is widely considered the best kit for the price and the reason I chose to buy it was how true to life the colours were. The clarity is amazing and the original lenses tend to be cheaper than most Canon ones, should you decide to add on!

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: July 1, 2012
New on TSR

Single, dating or in a relationship?

Chat about your life and loves in our Relationships forum!

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.