For some strange reason, from the very beginning of my career I have been a Nikon fan boy. Some how Nikon cameras seemed more professional than Canon cameras, in my hands. Ofcourse there is no question Canon makes a lot of good cameras as well.
This camera research came about since I am planning on selling off my trusty and excellent Nikon D200 (while I can) and buy myself a newer camera. There have been many cameras in my mind, lets look at them one by one.
Nikon D7000
Being the Nikon fan boy, the very first camera I considered is the Nikon D7000. It came out towards the end of 2010. The camera itself is fine, but in comparison to the excellent Nikon D300s, it falls short on a lot of parameters. Firstly the D7000 is an ‘enthusiast’ camera. In Nikon speak that means ‘not professional’.
This camera is for those who want to upgrade from the entry level cameras like D3100, D3200, D5100, D5200 etc. Comparing this camera to the D300s would be highly unfair. Both cameras are targeted at different buyers and different markets. It’s a ‘filler’ model that closes the gap between pro cameras and entry level cameras.
Simply the D300s is a far superior camera with higher fps, better IQ, a complete magnesium alloy body and better weather sealing. Incidentally the D7000 does not have a complete magnesium alloy body. Only the top and back panels are. The rest is poly carbonate. So it’s not as robust as the D300s. The picture quality too didn’t seem exceptional, like the D300s. I also doubt the weather sealing on the D7000 is also not as extensive.
D7100
Next in line is the Nikon D7100, the latest replacement for the D7000 which came out in Feb 2013. It is being positioned as a ‘flagship’ DX DSLR by Nikon, but does it have the caliber to be considered so? Let see.
The D7100 boasts a number of improvements over the D7000, which include a newly designed 24.1 megapixel sensor, Nikon EXPEED 3 image-processing engine, 3D Color Matrix Metering II 2,016-pixel RGB sensor, ISO sensitivity 100 to 6400 (up to 25600 with boost), 3.2-inch, TFT LCD monitor with 1,228,800-dot resolution, the elimination of the low pass filter (like the D800E), 51 AF points (same as D300s), 1,50,000 shutter actuations (same as D300s).
Even with such an impressive spec list, it still does not match up to the D300s in output quality or picture IQ. Should you buy it? At your own risk.
Nikon D90
The Nikon D90 is a poor photographer’s ‘pro like’ camera. I have seen a lot of wedding photographers use it. Surprisingly it outscores boththe professional Nikon D200 and latest feature laden Canon 600D. The spec list is not all that bad and includes a 12.2 megapixel sensor, live view, built in focus motor, self cleaning sensor and more.
I feel, irrespective of its short comings compared to the D7000 and D7100, the D90 is still a lot better and affordable camera than both. The shortcomings ? a completely poly carbonate body with no magnesium alloy panels and neither any weather sealing.
With the latest DSLRs boasting 24fps, 30fps at 1080p video, this one with just 720p video is a sham, still it’s the first DSLR in the world to have a video mode.
Canon 600D
This is only camera I felt comfortable with regarding the picture quality and IQ. Though it’s the latest and is feature laden, surprisingly the Nikon D90 still outscores it. What I like about this camera is, it is super affordable @ INR 38,000 and boasts an impressive spec list that includes an 18 megapixel sensor, Full HD 1080p video recording at 24/25/30 frame/s, DIGIC 4 image processor, Eye-Fi card support and much more.
It is the follow-up to the very successful Canon 550D. The color reproduction and tonality are as good as the 5D Mark II. No kidding, the rendition is on par with the Mark II. Can it be used professionally? Since I have seen the pictures, YES absolutely.
The catch? No weather sealing and no magnesium alloy body, but at just INR 38,000/- it’s a damn good deal.
I didn’t research the Canon 650D as it’s too high priced for my tastes right now. It’s almost in the bracket of the semi-pro 60D. Its costs INR 20,000/-more than the 600D. Are you kidding me Canon?
Sony a37
Let me begin by saying that I own an excellent Sony a200 DSLR whose quality matches if not exceeds that of high-end cameras of Nikon and Canon.
It is common knowledge that Sony’s technology is light years ahead of Canon and Nikon. Atleast on paper that’s partially true. The spec list of the Sony a37 far exceeds the competition, yes that’s true, but if it does not translate into good pictures then what’s the point?
The a37 is a poor follow up to the a35 and it couldn’t impress me with the image quality. In a non-studio, daily life shooting scenario, I don’t think this camera will perform well. So far the pictures I have seen seemed to be very dull, un-contrasty with washed out colors.
Since it is an entry level camera, no weather sealing or magnesium alloy body (yes, I am kidding). It’s also smallish compared to other cameras. Costs around INR 29,000/- Can you skip this camera? YES.
Conclusion: In the mid line-up only the D90 and D300s seem to be holding on their own. In Canon, since the 550D has been discontinued, the most logical choice is the 600D.
--Viisshnu--