Originally posted by RSColonel_131st:
People, do yourself a favor and reconsider the 300D.
It was a nice, affordable piece of digital SLR when it first came out, and kudos to Canon for breaking the previously high price marks.
However, Nikon has already released the D70 at almost the same price.
And I haven't seen a single report or comparison where it didn't blow the Canon out of the water.
Check here for a detailed comparison:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond70/page20.asp
By all accounts I've read the Nikon has FASTER shutter speed than the Canon, it powers on faster than the Canon, it has almost all the features of the way more expensive D100 (compared to the castration the 300D had to endure downwards from the D10)...
Nikon got a REAL AF Assist light (so you dont have to open the flash slide like with the Canon), and you can change manually between Continous and Single AF - which as far as I read is not possiple on the Canon.
The LCD got higher resolution, too. And instead of a bit cheap silver looking plastic it's all black with rubber coating.
Seriously, I loved the 300D when it came out and would have sold my grandmother to get one - but now Nikon takes the lead. With camera equipment, it's a very tricky business. The Nikon does look good, but my main concern would be a lack of ISO 100. I believe it starts at 200. With 100 you get super clean pics (if at slightly higher shutter speeds).
The shutter lag should be pretty non-existant on any digital SLR (basically limited to the time it takes to raise the mirror).
The Canon is no longer a crippled version of the 10d with the release of the Russian firmware hack, which gets around the DR's greatest limitation its lack of adjustable flash level. Also, with the up and coming second hack (both for free), the addition of ISO 3000 and something (for really dark pics (though the higher the ISO, the greater the noise - much like grain in high ISO film).
As for batteries, I don;t know what the Nikon's is like but the canon fully charges in about 40 mins, and last a real long time. It also uses a seperate charger, so if you have two batteries, you can use the camera and charge the other - unlike, say, my Sony 717, which takes maybe an hour and a half and charges on-board, so you can;t use the camera.
With the body, colour isn;t that important; rather, its the quality of the finish. My canon's showing signs of age now, but it's paint is pretty resiliant. My sony is like powder. look at it and it scuffs.
If colour is important, they've released a black-bodied DR in Japan (it's called the Kiss). I don;t know, but I suspect the next release of the DR over here will be black.
But if you wait, as so many people do, think of all those shooting opportunities you'll miss.
My advice, the Canon or the Nikon will be great cameras. Either way, do your research, try them out in the shop (just for the ergonomics), and then put your money down and get out there and take some pics. Just remember - post process.