I think either the Canon or the Nikon will give you great results. I am Canon guy (currently have a 30D but very tempted by the 50D) and have stuck with them as I had several excellent SLR lenses from my film days. Canon used to have the edge with their quiet ultrasonic lenses and with image stabilization but patents have run out and everybody is offering those features now. If you have no lenses yet it's really just a matter of looking at the individual features and seeing if one or the other has something you really want. IMO, Nikon metering seems to be a bit better than Canon but the Canon sensors perform a bit better at higher ISO settings (i.e. less noise in lower light). Either will give you great images.
Full frame may give you a slight edge in image quality if you want to make really large enlargements. I have made great 17" x 22" enlargements from 8 MP APS sized sensor on the 30D. It's really the lens quality that will determine how much you can enlarge rather then the sensor. However, if you want to do more telephoto work than wide angle work the APS sized sensor gives your lens an effectively longer reach for less money. Compare the costs of a 600mm lens to use on a full frame camera to a 400mm for the smaller sensor. If you want to do primarily wide angle scenics etc. then a full frame camera is better. If you want to do more telephoto work (sports, racing, wildlife) then the smaller sensor is better. If it's a bit of everything then there probably isn't a great advantage to spending alot more on the full frame camera.
|