Canon Rebel T5 or Nikon D3200 DSLR

91r100gs

Lunatic Member
Looking at entry level DSLR cameras. Both come with power zoom close up lens and telephoto lenses. The Nikon has VRII lenses on both. On the Canon the close up lens has IS but not the telephoto lens which has a longer lens than the Nikon. Not having totally stable hands at all times, the lack of IS on the Canon long lens concerns me a bit. Both are the same price and both camera bundles include a case. After CC cash back either can be had for a bit under $400 with tripod, memory card, and free shipping.

I am clueless which is better, and know I will not go beyond this level.

Help AK'ers
 
I'm brand loyal to Canon ever since the USM came out on the lenes. That said you"ll have the Nikon fan base chime in as well.

I really don't know what package your talking about as your not saying what lenes come with the camera bodies. Also you intent and use for the camera would be helpfull.

Generaly you don't pick a camera body just because of the lenes they give you and even less so the other way around. Think about your needs, if your shooting just around the house, parties and family events you want a wide angle lenes. Generaly with those cameras as low or lower as 20mm up to 100mm this will cover 90% of your shooting, group shots to zoom in portrait. When you start getting above 100mm 150mm you will need a mono pod or tripod for image sability from medium to low ISO speed. All assuming the package lenes are f4 and lower, I don't think they are giving you fast lenes.

That said they (manufacturers) try to lure you in with more items like two zoom lenes. Most buyer think more is better regarles of quality and what you'll really be using. I would rather get one good lens with my body that will get used a lot than to have two sub par with only one needed for 10% of my shooting.

You can also see what the Camera body cost alone, and how much the lenes cost and sell for NOS/mint used. That option to sell two and buy one is there. In other words get the best lens you can that will be used the most with whatever body. If your shooting people a lot indoors if you can avoid flash at times that's a good thing, that means you need a fast zoom lens f3.5 and lower. If you go on vacation or just want to go out for the day and need a long lens you always have the option to rent high dollar big glass. (depending where you live)

Anyway I like Canon and can't see myself ever switching after 30 or so years with auto focus.
 
Looking at entry level DSLR cameras. Both come with power zoom close up lens and telephoto lenses. The Nikon has VRII lenses on both. On the Canon the close up lens has IS but not the telephoto lens which has a longer lens than the Nikon. Not having totally stable hands at all times, the lack of IS on the Canon long lens concerns me a bit. Both are the same price and both camera bundles include a case. After CC cash back either can be had for a bit under $400 with tripod, memory card, and free shipping.

I am clueless which is better, and know I will not go beyond this level.

Help AK'ers

Both are perfectly good cameras. I'm not brand loyal to anything. Do you have the opportunity to actually handle them and try them out? Sometimes it comes down to what "feels right" in your hands. That and are the menu systems and controls easy to use.

What are the actual focal lengths, as 4-2-7 says 20 to 100 covers most things. I do 95% of my stuff with a 35mm and a 85 mm lens. I don't use zooms anymore except occasionally for travel stuff. As to shaky hands, anything over 85mm you should use a tripod for, and you can always up the iso/asa to compensate.
 
I'm a Nikon guy, have been for 40 years, but have noticed that many Canon lenses are less expensive than the Nikon equivalents. I am sure that the image and build quality are similar based upon the reviews that I have read.
 
Best advice is to find someone you know that has a dslr and buy what they have so you can share lenses. (said a loyal Nikon guy) Good time of year to buy as both are offering rebates/sales. Look at their sites for refurbs as well as Adorama, B&H, KEH.
 
... Not having totally stable hands at all times...

I'm guessing you would prefer the Nikon. Better "hand fit" IMO. And I have both Nikons and Canons, generally preferring Canons, but I gotta give Nikon props for an easy grip.
 
Thanks for the input everyone. I just need a decent camera to take pictures of everyday events. Not likely to go past either of these models or lenses. Point and shoot just doesn't cut it, especially in low light. Had a film SLR and did not use it a ton and sold it, that was many years ago. I am leaning towards the Nikon, rarely hear of anyone disappointed with a Nikon.
 
Both are fine... I'd get the Nikon kit. Having VR on, I assume, the 55-200 will be a big upgrade vs the non-IS version of, I assume, the Canon 55-250. I wouldn't worry about the extra reach of the Canon at all.


I think the Nikon 55-200 was a better lens until the Canon STM came out. What gives me pause is why the vendor for the Canon is still packaging a non-IS version of the 55-250. There are three newer versions of that lens at this point.

Whether you get the Canon or Nikon, as funds allow, I'd strongly consider getting the 50mm f1.8. They are cheap and very good in low light. While the 50s lack VR/IS, wide open, they allow about 16 times as much light to reach the sensor vs the 18 -55 lenses do at 50mm. They also allow you to more easily create portraits with the blurred background that many people prefer.
 
Just ordered the Nikon setup with a 16 gb mem card, tripod, and a carry case, The decision came down to recommendations here and at a photo mag customer review section, that if for amateur use, get the Nikon for the VR II lens on the 55-200 lens. It will be here Friday. Thanks again for the input and suggestions.

FYI, the Canon non-IS was a 75-300
 
I am only a novice. I have not tried the Canon, but a year ago I was in the same boat, deciding between a T5 and a D3300. I ended up getting the 3300 after reading lots of reviews, and I couldn't be happier. It came with the 18-55 VR lens and I used that exclusively for a few months, then bought a 55-200 VR slightly used for $80 on ebay.

I could not be happier with my 3300. It's so much fun, even though I don't really know what I'm doing.

The Ken Rockwell site has been very helpful to me, and his advice is what made me get the 55-200 VR lens, which I also love!
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3300.htm

I'm guessing I would have also been happy with the similarly priced Canon, but I'll never know, because I'm not getting rid of my Nikon. I have many friends who do high end photog as a business and they all have Canon stuff.

Here's a selection of some of the stuff I've been able to do with it.

Hope you enjoy your new camera!

12074573_10206164686053665_1141170186500616922_n.jpg


12191083_10206164687173693_5007982304925903591_n.jpg


12038296_10206164688773733_2728216470985616144_n.jpg


11220797_10206164693813859_3080827969771116930_n.jpg


10734187_10206063067633268_109021590109339857_n.jpg


12079184_10206063070673344_3542737899401421980_n.jpg


11745755_10205563031412675_2393798304604271400_n.jpg


11234046_10205563037252821_714102282190026344_n.jpg


11745751_10205563036732808_5013457371856821535_n.jpg


11221963_10205563037532828_3657681118180346804_n.jpg


11990504_10205883843592779_872551397159653258_n.jpg


11953224_10205883843712782_7701144781731878710_n.jpg


11665717_10205462734865324_8819603961381322396_n.jpg


11138612_10205434650883242_390457964957804137_n.jpg


11150790_10205135113434993_1459304383633786192_n.jpg


11751769_10205568014177241_7638374373898001529_n.jpg


11752558_10205568023897484_248586913218604165_n.jpg


11692638_10205419731990279_8934581856307979349_n.jpg


11168557_10206222394576342_3943615068848826958_n.jpg


12193637_10206222393976327_1831348529395011740_n.jpg
 
I'm a Nikon guy, have been for 40 years, but have noticed that many Canon lenses are less expensive than the Nikon equivalents. I am sure that the image and build quality are similar based upon the reviews that I have read.

This is mostly true except for the latest 70-200 f/2.8. The Canon IS is $2,500 as opposed to the Nikon VR II for $2,000. Fortunately, I bought my Nikon VR 10 years ago for $1450 after a $150 rebate. I use that lens 95% of the time and it's still going strong.
 
Some of the Canon Rebel bundles come with the EF 75-300 lens rather than the EFS 55-250. Having owned both I would say the later is a far better lens. The 75-300 is an adequate lens but noticeably soft at 300mm and it suffers from very noticeable lateral color fringing (CA), even when stopped-down. The 55-250 is sharper at all focal lengths and fringing is not really a problem - at least with mine. I've seen worse lenses than the 75-300 but consider it one of those better-than-nothing lenses. I much prefer the 55-250. Mine has IS but I have owned the non-IS model and it was better than the 75-300.

That Canon EFS18-55 IS is a pretty good lens that should serve you well. I owned one until I decided to go with short primes.

ENJOY!
 
Sorry that I didn't follow up, I bought the Nikon D3200 with the kit lens bundle with tripod, case, and SD card. It takes very nice pics with no flash with just normal day or night lighting. Have not even used the 75-200 lens yet. The VR makes a noticable difference vs. my Fuji point and shoot, as my hands aren't as steady as they could be. I am a bit disappointed with the battery life per charge. Beings this was discontinued in 2014 when the D3300 came out, the battery may have sat dormant for quite a while. Not a major issue but was expecting better, considering the reviews. My return period ends on Jan. 31st if something develops. Thanks for everyone's input. Will take more pics and post some after winter is over.
 
Either of them would be a fine choice. Personally, if it had to be either of those, I'd get the Nikon since they have better noise control. If I knew what I know now, I'd have gone with Pentax since they are a bit more cost efficient and actually advancing more usable features.
 
I like my D3200, bought as a kit with 2 lenses several years ago. But the few times I've looked at a Canon it seems they might be more intuitive for casual photographer like me. It seems have I have to 'relearn' how to use many feature on the Nikon everytime I use it.
 
But the few times I've looked at a Canon it seems they might be more intuitive for casual photographer like me. It seems have I have to 'relearn' how to use many feature on the Nikon everytime I use it.

Opposite of my experience, I find Canon very unergonomic. Nikon menus and buttons seem much better thought out to me.

But recently I have moved towards Sony. They have really bad menu systems, but great sensors. Can't win 'em all.
 
I don't think you could've went wrong .The market is such that they have to compete and we all win. Enjoy your new camera.
I don't think anybody mentioned after market lenses. I've had good luck with sigma and Tamron.
 
Opposite of my experience, I find Canon very unergonomic. Nikon menus and buttons seem much better thought out to me.

But recently I have moved towards Sony. They have really bad menu systems, but great sensors. Can't win 'em all.

Canon's is a bit confusing at first, but at least they have tabs and each tab has specific options in it. I haven't used Nikon so I don't know. My Sony NEX....I can't imagine much worse of a UI! When I want to change the video recording (usually 1080p@60 and rarely to @24), I have to scroll through a lot of crap to get to a section on "video options". It's like having a long 4 page Table of Contents, and you have to scroll through it all to get to the section you want. Very slow and second guessing. Love the camera images and ability to focus peak. Almost makes up for it. Almost.
 
Back
Top Bottom