Budget Canon vs Nikon shoot-out

The budget end of the DSLR market represents a huge chunk of camera sales. It's the most contended sector, with cameras from Sony, Olympus, Pentax, Samsung and Sigma all providing competitive products. But, standing head and shoulders above all the others are Canon and Nikon, with the lion's share of this all-important sector.

We have recently tested the long-standing budget model from Nikon - the two-year-old D40 - and the latest offering from Canon - the EOS 1000D. How do they compare?

The Cameras
The Canon EOS 1000D has a distinct advantage over the Nikon D40. It's newer… and that means developments in camera technology. It's got Live View and a new 10 megapixel sensor (the Nikon hasn't and falls back on the classic 6MP sensor of half a decade ago).

The advantages begin to pall as soon as you get past the on-paper specs. In the hand, the Nikon feels more weighty and like a baby version of its pro and semi-pro models. In contrast, the Canon EOS 1000D feels more insubstantial. This is more 'feel' than 'reality' (both are rigid polycarbonate bodies and more than capable of withstanding shocks). In terms of functionality, we call a draw; if you are familiar with Canon cameras, the EOS 1000D will be easy to drive, if you know Nikons, the D40 will have the edge and if you are not familiar with either, they are both about as easy to steer as one another.

The Images
We have deliberately scaled the images to identical levels and used the camera's auto everything mode in both cases. This is showing both at their most unchanging. Manual operation and playing with different colour settings, manipulating in RAW will all provide advantages and you could exaggerate the benefits of one over the other by careful tweaking.

Why scale them? Because the difference between six and 10 megapixels is not so great as people might believe. It makes the difference between a large print and a slightly larger print without any post-processing manipulation. Unless you are in the habit of printing 12x16 images on a regular basis, or like to hack away more than a third of any image to get the right frame, the increase in pixel count between the two cameras does not add up to a significant change.

All that said, the Canon has a slight edge in its images. Not due to increased pixel count, but thanks to less soft shots taken straight out of the camera. However, by running standard sharpening, this soon clears up:

Also, the metering of the two cameras is radically different; Nikon's used to tend toward preserving highlights at the expense of shadow detail, while Canon used to goes for zing at the expense of burned out highlights. Both are reaching a sort of middle ground though; the Nikon images are brighter than previous models and the Canon's are more conservatively metered.

Nikon's D40 metering brightens up a dull day

Surprisingly muted tones from the Canon EOS 1000D

Verdict
We give the Nikon a very slight edge, primarily for two good reasons: