200mm or 300mm lense

[peggya]

I am looking at buying either the NIKON D3000 camera with a 55-200mm lense or the CANON eos Rebel with a 55-300mm lense. They cost the same. This will be for my 17 year old daughter that likes to take pictures and then play with them on photoshop. I wonder if the lenses are that different? Also, are the in camera eiditing capabilities with the NIKON worth the difference in the lesser lense?

 

[one-shot]

It's nice to see someone interested in Photography. I got into it a few years ago and it is quite expensive, but well worth every penny.

I'm not a big fan of the Nikon D3000. The 55-200 lens is decent. What model Rebel was it? the XS or XSi? I would personally look for a 55-200 for the Canon and skip the D3000. The 55-300 is a large focal range and you can start to see barrel distortion (pin cushioning) and soft edges of the image (falloff) if you are printing large prints. The Tamron 55-200 is a great lens and I prefer it over the Sony 55-200 and it rivals some more expensive Canon lenses, as well. This lens can sometimes be found for under $200 or as little as $150.

I personally don't shoot JPEGS too often so in camera editing isn't worth anything to me. Many of the features are for first time users moving up from a Point and Shoot. I mainly shoot RAW and convert them to JPEG or TIFF. Don't let the in camera editing be a selling point. However, I think it is important for her to get to know the camera. Shooting JPEGS from the camera and adjusting the white balance, ISO, and manually setting the Aperture and/or Shutter Speed will give her a much better understanding of the camera and will help her shoot better pictures. Also, RAW will give you better image quality than shooting JPEGS straight from the camera. Sometimes the difference is negligible, but it is nice to know you are using the camera to it's fullest potential.

I'm actually currently selling my camera to do an upgrade. Here are some pics I have taken http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/2391710214/photos

The Rebel XS and the Sony A200 I have are both 10MP and very comparable in Image Quality. I would urge you to skip the D3000 and move up to the D5000 if you really want a Nikon. The D60 is also a very good camera which shares the same 10 MP Image Sensor as my camera.

I think I covered everything, and if I didn't, let me know and I'll explain a little more.

 

[peggya]

Thank yo for the information. I will again compare the two cameras. I could not get your link to work so I could not see your pictures. I will try again later and if I have more questions I will ask, thank you.

 

[one-shot]

Here is the correct link

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/2391710214/photos

 

[Guest]

You will probably want to invest in a second lens 18-70 or 17-70 for portraiture work and such likes, 55-200 or 55-300 Are good zoom lenses, but not for closer work!

 

[Ubrales]

What makes lenses different in performance are the design, quality of the optical glass, and the manufacturing accuracy. The microscopic thinness of the anti-reflection coating has a different refractive index compared to the glass, and this microscopic difference is taken into account in the overall design and polishing of the multi elements lenses.

The real proof will be in test shooting pictures and comparing the quality of the output. I am a die hard Nikon photographer since the days of the F2.

 

[lucian85]

dude, skip the bullshit here, and head straight over to kenrockwell.com

 

[buwish]

Best answer selected by buwish.