
 Originally Posted by 
big guy
					 
				 
				I would go Canon or Nikon and for the money you said, go new and get a warranty.
Technology has come so far now that you be amazed what you get.
reason for canon is that they are probably market leaders right now in digital and especially in their compact and entry level digital.
They are not as robust as the nikon.
			
		 
	 
 Nether the Nikon or Canon entry level DSLR's will take much abuse.  Nikon's above this are definitely better sealed than their Canon counter parts.  The Nikon does come with slightly better built basic kit lenses than the Canon.
The only reason Canon is considered the market leader at the lower end is Marketing.  Originally it was because they had the first entry level DSLR to market.  In many markets now the Nikon D40/D60/D3000 outsells the Canon EOS 400D/450D/500D.
The bottom end of the market has now shifted a lot though with more players: Sony (ex-Minolta), Pentax, Olympus, etc.  Some of these cameras and their lenses are a much better pick than either the Nikon or Canon.  Especially if you are only starting out.
Ergonomically and functionally Nikons are probably the most superior.  I was playing with the menus on a D60 this morning alongside my D3s and both work exactly the same.  One just has a LOT more options and sub-menus and things to change settings of.  But of course this isn't necessarily relevant as you want the camera to feel right when you hold it.  For me Nikon wins hands down, but for others it is not the case.
I do agree that going new in the <$1000 range is a better option.  Most of these cameras aren't built to take more than about 20,000 to 30,000 pictures.
Also consider the Micro Four-Thirds cameras that are available from Olympus and Panasonic.
				
			 
			
		 
			
				
			
				
			
			
				MY15 Discovery 4 SE SDV6
Past: 97 D1 Tdi, 03 D2a Td5, 08 Kimberley Kamper, 08 Defender 110 TDCi, 99 Defender 110 300Tdi[/SIZE]
			
			
		 
	
Bookmarks