I’m a fan of Canon DSLR cameras. When I’ve needed some really good-looking shots, they’ve never let me down. That’s why I was happy to see a 40D on this Popular Science list of the best low-light DSLR cameras, along with the Sony Alpha A700 and the Nikon D3.
It’s not the most exhaustive list, but it smartly addresses the differences between the three cameras in an easy to digest features/benefit format. Also, it explains not just that they’re different, but why. If you’re camera shopping for a mid-range to high-end DSLR, and you’re planning on any type of non-studio photography, take PopSci’s advice. Hit the link to learn more.
Shots in the Dark [PopSci]
My Rebel XTi (400D) takes nice low-light pictures, too, especially if I use the 50 mm/1.4 lens or one of the IS lenses.
Thanks for linking to my DSLR stories, Matt — this and the one for LAPTOP. Now I gotta get around to returning all these cameras.
Hey Dan, thanks for popping your head over onto crunchgear. Gotta ask though, I feel like you are comparing a bit of apples to oranges when putting these three cameras together.
Specifically, the D3 is 4x more expensive and the pro line camera, while the others are more the prosumer level. Might it not have been a better comparison to put the Nikon D80 against the Canon EOS 40D & Sony Alpha A700?
Yes, you’re right Paul. The D3 is definitely in another league, targeted toward professional photographers. The Pop Sci story wasn’t actually supposed to be a direct head-to-head comparison but more of a “Tech Trend” piece about advances made with CMOS imaging sensors to reduce “noise” in low light/high ISO shooting. The Canon, Sony, and Nikon just happened to be the three latest DSLRs that were doing interesting things with this technology even though the D3 is likely out of reach for most users. But wow, it *is* a very cool camera. (And I was just looking at a pre-production model.)