What would you choose D100 or 300D

I have been wrestling with the decision between the D100 and the 300D lately. Because the debate does not require me to factor lenses in (I don't have any yet) I am curious what others thoughts are.

If you were deciding which way would you go and why?

If you already own one of these cameras why did you choose it and why (And, not because you already had one camps lenses as I fully understand that) Would you change if you could?

I find it to be a scary decision as it will commit me to one camp when the decision is made once I start to buy the lenses.

Also, housing are not a consideration between the two as I will be staying with Aquatica and they manufacture both housings.

Thanks for any insight as to why you chose, or would choose.

I would say that the two cameras' internals and functionality are roughly the same.

The big differentiator for me is the Nikon line of lenses. They have the 12-24DX wideangle zoom and Canon does not yet have an equivalent. Nikon has also just started selling a 10.5mm fisheye so we can finally shoot fisheye underwater again. For underwater use, the Canon or Sigma 15mm fisheye lenses will give good wideangle results, but they aren't much good for topside shooting.

Nikon also has an excellent line of macro lenses which are well supported by housing manufacturers (including Aquatica of course). I have shot both and I like Nikon's "starter" macro lens - the 60mm - much better than the Canon 50mm because the 60 will do > 1:1 if you get close.

That's all I can think of right now.

Cheers

James

Thanks James.

Those were some of my thoughts also.

If I were buying again today, I'd still probably buy Canon, as they seem to currently have the lead in terms of sensor technology, but that's really just personal opinion.

I've got to say that I think it could go either way, especially if you're only concerned with shooting UW and limiting your lens choices to Nikon or Canon. If Aquatica supports both, it's down to lens choice. You've removed the biggest problem I see with Canon, which is a lack of options for housing their cameras.

In defense of the 300D, the new Sigma 12-24 supposedly makes up for the gap that Nikon created with their 12-24. It may not be as good a lens in terms of performance, but it's at least an option.

If you're interested in long lenses down the road, Canon's lineup of super telephoto's is supposed to be the best available (300 / 400 / 500 / 600 IS), but those are lenses that cost multiple times what you'll spend on the body. There are also a few specialty lenses that you can only get with Canon like their MP-E lens, or the 3 TS lenses. But again, these are very specific lenses and have nothing to do with your choice for UW.

The flip side of the lens issue is that Canon doesn't have an equivalent to the 70-180 micro, which is a very cool lens by all rights. The closest thing in the Canon lineup is either the 70-200 f/4 which doesn't focus very close, or the 180mm macro which is pretty expensive and probably hard to house.

You'll definitely find more people on this board shooting with Nikon mounts than Canon, and as a result will probably get more mileage from their experience.

Another point is that I (personally) have a problem buying technology / cameras that are due for a replacement. The D100 has been out a while now, far longer than the 300d, and is about ready to be updated in theory.

Just to make it more confusing, why not an S2 Pro or a 10D? I think the Nikon is the last body in the class that I'd buy if I was doing it again. Having TTL would be great, so the S2 makes sense. And I don't think I'd choose the 300d over the 10D, unless the cost is a significant issue.

Ok, I'm done rambling. Sorry if this made it worse...

Tom

Thom Hogan predicts the D100 will remain in the line for 2004, perhaps with a modest update. I don't believe obsolescence is an issue for any of the current 6MP APS SLR's.

There is no direct match for the 70-180 micro or 10.5 fisheye on the Canon side. The Canon 180 is matched by the Nikon 200 while the Tamron and Sigma 180's are available for both. The new Sigma 12-24 is bigger, slower and less flexible than Nikon's DX lens and may not offer the image quality (a little early to tell). Canon's 50mm does not offer the close focus capability of Nikon's 60mm. All in all, Nikon's underwater lens choices are more complete, though the most popular lenses are available for both.

When looking for an underwater camera you need to consider your housings, lens, and ports. Considering those issues the D100 may not be the last choice of the three and some actually prefer it's handling above water to the other two cameras. The good news is that housing manufacturers are supporting the 300D. That means that Canon will receive broader support in the future once manufacturers can house their entire lens line.

I have no idea what direction I would go today. Canon has a slightly better sensor than Nikon. Nikon has a better assortment of lenses that would be used underwater. Canon has a better assortment of top side lenses. Fuji has a better sensor than Nikon and does TTL, but has a few shortcomings I don't like.

I have no clue what I would do today, but if you are selling your A5000 with camera, let me know.

Sorry but the A5000 is staying in the fold as a back-up. I can eliminate the concern of being set-up for wide-angle and missing the macro scenario that way. Or, just afraid to have a problem and then having to dive camera-less for the rest of a trip.

But, I'll keep you in mind should my wife tell me otherwise.

I am considering the camera choice mainly with U/W in mind but obviously will also shoot top-side as side thought.

I eliminated the 10D due to no Aquatica housing and the S2 due to adding even more dollars to the equation for the body.

The general pricing difference I have seen is $500CDN between the D100 and the 300D with the lens.

I definately like what I have heard of the 12-24dx so it is swaying me that way plus the 60mm. But, with the whole outlay of cash for body/lenses and then housing them you can see it adds up quickly.

The S2 has dropped to less than $300 of the D100.

Cheers

James

Considering those issues the D100 may not be the last choice of the three and some actually prefer it's handling above water to the other two cameras

Just to be clear, that's MY preference. I just don't like the D100 based on the infintessimal amount that I've played with it in a camera store. I'm biased towards Canon though, as I had an Elan 7e before my D60.

As for thinking about the whole setup, Todd mentioned that housing / ports isn't an issue, he's settled on the Aquatica lineup, so it's really down to lenses. I'd have to agree at this point that Nikon has a better lineup of lenses for UW use, most notably the native 12-24, the 10.5 fisheye, and the 70-180. I think you could argue back and forth on the 50 vs 60mm based on preference as well, but yes, in general there is better support for Nikon equipment than Canon from the housing manufacturers.

I really do hope that the 300d brings more support from manufacturers for Canon, if only in terms of ports / gears. Only time will tell...

The more I think about the decision, the more I would lean towards the S2. In the grand scheme of a camera / lens / housing purchase, the $300 is probably less than 10% difference overall.

Another thought would be to wait a couple months and see what happens. As Craig pointed out, nothing out now is deficient, but after PMA in February things might get more interesting.

Oops, I should have mentioned I will be waiting to see what PMA shows. If anything it may bring better pricing. CDN lens prices seem to have lagged in adjustement to the change in the USD and that should sort itself out in January with new pricing lists, I am assuming.

Everyone seems to be confimring my lens thoughts, which Craig had previously done in some of our conversations on the subject.

Can I then ask, what are the added benefits that you see in the S2 for the added dollars. I am assuming it refers back partly to your thread about the handling preferences you experience while in-store?(and James or any other S2 users, or heck anyone)

Of course Aquatica does a S2 housing so it certainly is relevant.

Thanks

Had nothing to do with handling at all actually. I'd pay the extra money for the S2 over the D100 for the ability to shoot TTL when I wanted to do so. The S2 is also supposed to exhibit the least noise of all the comparable dSLRs as well, if I remember correctly, not that noise is a huge problem in any of them compared to a P&S.

James, why did you buy the S2 over the D100 when you had a chance to switch when your housing flooded?

Ah, yes that thread on the noise comparisons. I briefly reviewed it but was wondering, in terms of visable to the naked eye, is there a true difference as noted in the comparison.

Maybe I need to find that thread and re-read the results also as at the time I was not serious in my considerations.

Hi Guys,

Sarah and I now own both the S2 and the D100.

I like the S2 better because it is spot on with its TTL exposures for macro shooting. It is a joy to use for macro w/ the 105 or the 70-180. Not having to touch your flashes is a big convenience, especially when the conditions get bad.

I also like that the S2 takes AA batteries.

Output from the S2 is an "interpolated" 12 megapixels - which is really about 1/2 way between 6 and 12 (9mp) and Phil's resolution tests show this. 16bit Tiffs from the S2 are ~69 megs. The low noise is also nice, especially for WA shooting in low light.

Since Todd is getting an Aquatica housing, the housing, ports, and lenses will be literally the same. For others, you have to look at the whole system:

I would say the S2 for wideangle w/ the 12-24 and the Aquatica housing, as the dome balances out the weight very well. For macro, the best overall "system"is probably the Nexus D100 with a housed SB80 or dual DS50's (or Inons if you can afford them).

Cheers

James

Well, dualing Z220s's are on the way already. That decision I had no problem making. Whether I keep my 90dx's or one of them is yet to be determined.

OK, the TTL advantage I knew but again, in the noise comparison is it a truly visable difference. I certainly can see the graph in the thread james had posted a while back and see a difference but, in actual visable differences what does that mean?

Also, in Herb's recent comparison, I found it somewhat confusing as the D100 was shot in iso 200 and seemed to overexpose slightly. What I did gather is the clear difference in noise between the ps and dslr's listed. Did this test demonstrate a clear winner? To Herb it must have as he choose the 300D.

I guess what I am sayying is numbers are all fine and dandy but, brass tax will I see the difference or are we splitting fine hairs?

Again, thanks for all your insights it is appreciated.

The reasons for my choice are lower noise and better exposure range.

The first was the exercise with the histograms I posted earlier. The second: the D100 only goes down to ISO 200 and the S2 has maximum flash sync of 1/125. The Canons can shoot at ISO 100 and 1/200 flash sync. That ~ 1 stop can make a big difference on shots into the sun.

I'm betting the housing, ports and lenses will become available over time.

Wow, thanks for this thread! Lots of great info.

I am in the research mode also and have come to the same conclusions in regards to comparing the systems. The interesting pricing point is that with the 10D & D100 being out for a while their prices have "matured", but the 300D isn't being discounted much. The Christmas buying frenzy and the upcoming show you've mentioned, has lead me away from doing anything for a while.

I'd have to say that from what I've seen the housings for the D100 are more expensive than for the 300D, although they vary. We don't yet know the pricing of Aquatica's offering. It does seem like they are going to be smaller and overall lighter (out of the water) with the 300D. As I travel, I am concerned with keeping things compact and as light as possible. And cost is a significant factor for me. Which may mean an Ike housing. But I am looking for overall value.

I really like the Inon 220 strobes and am wondering how they're going to work with the 300D, in terms of the laser pointer/focusing light, etc. I assume you can get Nikon bulkheads and S&S/Nikon cords to work them.

Thanks guys for the insights, keep 'em coming.

Jack

OK, first

Local pricing on a D100 is $2000cdn vs $2800cdn for the S2. Do you still think that is worth the price difference? (yes I could buy elsewhere if you can show me where you saw your price difference but I also like to try to support local. Sort of the same concern people were expressing when S&S mentioned closing) Nice to have a local contact and service etc.

Second, if Herb is correct then are the Nikon lenses that much better to compensate for the noise difference that Herb based his decision on?

Glad I could help Jack. I figured there must be more than a couple interested in this discussion thus why I started it.

Second, if Herb is correct then are the Nikon lenses that much better to compensate for the noise difference that Herb based his decision on?

Of course Herb is correct.

Noise is added by the image sensor, and cannot be corrected with a lens. For the moment, Nikon does have lenses that are better suited for underwater. The 70 - 180 macro that Craig mentioned, and the 10.5mm fisheye. The sigma 12-24 is F4.5 at the wide end vs the F4 for the Nikon. The sigma lens is spec to have a closer minimum focus distance, again a small difference. We'll have to see images from that lens to see.

I plan to go with the Sigma lenses: 15mm fisheye, 105 macro, 50 macro. That should keep me busy for awhile. Something else will aways come along.

Even though I cited noise as the first reason, I think the exposure range difference is just as important.

You can get an S2 in UK for around 2,000 Canuk Dollars.

You got along ok without ttl on the 5000 so why worry now with a D100?

You can house SB80DX's for Dttl, which would be perfect for macro. Cheaper than an equiv. UW strobe too.

There are good and bad points on all of the manufacturers kit mentioned, depends how serious you take or make em, and how much you might consider worthwhile spending on a hobby.

My apologies my good man. We all are correct just sometimes others think they are too.LOL As for sensors I think Craig might think he is right also but he can talk for himself.

As for the noise, I understand it is the sensor but, if the lense reduces the quality of the image also then would it not have a similiar effect in terms of overall image quality. Therefore making it a equal factor in the decision? I guess that would have to be quantified in terms of equal but, it would be a contributing factor.