Which Camera? Nikon D50 or Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT?

Hey, Ive been looking for a camera for a couple days now and Ive come to a conclusion. The Nikon D50 with Nikon 28-80mm f/3.3-5.6 G Autofocus Lens for 500 dollars or the Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT for 600 with Canon 18-55mm EF-S Lens. I am going to use this camera to take sports pictures and Im not sure which one would be best for that, keeping in mind the 100 dollar difference.

Here is a link of the D50

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controll...

Here is a link of the Canon Rebel

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controll...

So wich camera do you think?

First of all, don't assume that Canon is best because you see so many of them at sports events. Canon has amazing marketing strategy, including loaner lenses - those HUGE ones that nobody can afford - that can be signed out at events. They cater to the professional crowd. Nikon did the same thing in the 60's and 70's to gain brand supremacy when they were trying to break into the USA.

If these exact packages are your only considerations, I would go with the Nikon for the lens alone. The Canon 18-55 EF-S is crap. Go here and get a second opinion on that: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Revie... Even if it was a great lens, you would find the 55 mm focal length (88 mm 35 mm equiv.) is just too short for most sporting events.

The Nikon 28-80 lens (120 mm 35 mm equiv) is no great shakes either. It's not very well constructed, but at least it is optically better than the Canon you mentioned. See: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/2880.ht...

If it is possible to change your options, I'd think about getting the cheaper 55-200 f/4-5.6 DX lens. The focus is auto-slow, but just use manual focus to pre-set distances if that is a problem.

With either the Canon or the Nikon, you will end up wanting a better lens for sports, so consider that at the outset.

Without looking, i would choose the Canon EOS. Take a gander at what other sports photogs are using.
This is not to say that the Nikon is not a dang good camera. It is, and it may very well do all you want a camera to do for you. But I see the Canon's in the hands of National Geographic photogs, and those pictures in that mag can't be beat! If I had the choice to make, and had the extra hundred, I 'd go for the Canon.

I am not a Nikon person, but I do know that you can throw just about any EOS system lens or flash on that Rebel and it will work. I was also told that the CMOS processor is better than the CCD the Nikons use.

Personally, I would go with a Canon but I have been using Canon since the 70's. I recently traded my film cameras for a Canon 30D. Beautiful camera... Oh, and if you want to shoot sports, try and get the 70-200mm F.4L USM lens it is a nice lens.

get the canon. you can get the body only from amazon.com (or another vendor). upgrade the lens to a telephoto for sports. i have the 28-135 IS but it's pretty expensive. all of the lenses are described on canon.com

If you are doing sports photography you will need the higher zoom lens i.e. the 28-80 irrespective of which camera you have it on. The 18-55 mm means you will need to be very close to the action.

I held the Canon in my hands and I thought the grip was too small but that is personal taste. The Canon is a 8 MP vs the Nikon 6 MP, but again this is no big deal.

I personally own a D50 and I love it so much I bought the D80 as well. I normally use a Nikon AF 28-200 3.5-5.6 D lens and this gets most of what I am chasing in a wide variety of circumstances.

I own Nikon's "kit lens" 18-55 DX. My two criticisms are that at 18mm the edges of the photos are soft, and there is excessive (to my mind) perspective distortion.

I know I am a fan but I do love Nikon SLR cameras. Go and hold them both. You will quite likely like either one of them they are both a quality product.

They're both very good cameras. I prefer Nikon as a brand because they are a little more ergonomically correct for my hand than the Canon, which seems a bit boxy. Plus, the lens that comes in the Canon kit is one which you may as well throw away, the elements are so cheap. It can be found for very little money on Ebay.

I like Nikon's menu setup and mode conrols, because I own a N75 also, and it's essentially the same setup. I do believe that the D50 is on sale for $150 less than the Canon, if Wolf Camera can be believed.

If Image quality is an issue, and you think that somehow 6 Megapixels is too small, the Nikon allows you to shoot in Raw mode. I think the Canon does too, but on 10.1 Megapixels, that's just silly unless you're doing professional grade billboards. With Raw mode, you should be able to do a 24x36 poster without any pixelization visible.

go to a store and hold the rebel first...if you have big hands its really uncomforatable... if you have small hands then the cameras perfect

decide what you want to photograph first and buy the right lens... both those lenses are pretty junky for low light and indoor stuff without a flash...

if you plan on really getting into this i suggest try geting a used 20d...if your just getting 1 lens and a camera and thats it dont forget nikon has a d40 now...its a newer camera for pretty cheap

I think either one will be good for what you intend to use it for. The big difference is the lens. I recommend just buying the body of the camera and use that extra money you saved by putting towards the purchase of a different lens. I have the Canon Rebel XT with the 18-55 that came with the kit. It is great for family shots and events but useless for zooming. I have used it for enlarging photo's and it is great. No blurs or pixels. But I still recommend getting a different lens. Check out the link I provided for the reviews on the lenses. It is very useful.