Canon 40D And Nikon D 300 Cameras

[Killer Angel]

Between the Canon 40D and Nikon D 300,which camera focuses faster?Also,which among them is a better camera for shooting sports?And why?
Thankyou very much.

[Misirlou]

Between the Canon 40D and Nikon D 300,which camera focuses faster?Also,which among them is a better camera for shooting sports?And why?
Thankyou very much.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=158396\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You aren't likley to get too many useful answers to those questions, for two reasons.

1. Both cameras are pretty new, so the only people who have significant experience with both are probably camera store employees or full-time camera testers.

If you don't have a lot of experience with DSLRs, those two groups won't give you the kind of answers you really want. There are some really professional people working in some camera stores, and some complete lunkheads too.

Camera testers can be really helpful, but some of them get excited about details that you may never care about. Others are brand zealots, whose opinions are suspect. I doubt any of them have any kind of objective measurment of autofocus speed. Strong feelings perhaps, but that's not an easily measured quantity.

2. DSLR cameras are merely parts of lens/camera/flash systems. The suitability of either system for sports is dependent on a complex web of design and production tradeoffs that impact the whole system, and not just the camera.

I have a new Canon 40D, but that's because I've been using Canons for almost 30 years. Only a very highly-paid professional could justify ditching a whole system, including a considerable investment in lenses, just because another manufacturer had a "better" camera body. I'm sure Nikon guys feel the same way about their rigs.

So you have to decide between the Canon and Nikon systems when you make this choice. If you look at the sidelines of pro football game, you'll see that the majority of the big expensive lenses are Canons. Does that mean Canons are "better" sports cameras? I have no idea. Maybe they're ideal for football, but only mediocre for curling, yak racing or luge.

If you can provide some more specific ideas about how you would use the camera, what your experience level was, how much you intend to invest in lenses, you might get more, and "better" responses.

[Panopeeper]

The 40D has been on the marker for three months, and there are plenty of reviews, test shots and practical user reports.

However, there aren't many users (if any), who have both cameras and could report about their daily experience. Plus the majority of photographers on forums prefer to demonstrate the quality of their camera with their cat, baby, etc, posting usually center crops instead of raw images.

Both cameras offer many features; one has to analyze, which feature is important. For example the Canon 40D can make 6 (or more?) shots per second, but I doubt that I will ever use that feature - but there are other features, which are important for me.

Btw, the D300 is - or was - almost 50% more expensive than the 40D.

If someone does not have a collection of Canon lenses, one should check out the quality and price of planned lenses, because that investment is more important. (Nikon lenses can be used on Canon bodies, but Canon lenses are useless with Nikon bodies.)