Nikon D5 100 and Canon 600D are hesitating. Please refer to experts, preferably comprehensive, thank you.

On the workmanship D5 100 is slightly better than 600D (most of Canon's entry machines are more like plastic toys).

On the price, D5 100 is a little cheaper, so the cost performance is higher.

On imaging, D5 100 is definitely better than 600D. . The reason is that the photosensitive elements and processors of D5 100 are the latest models of Nikon. Nikon D7000 also uses these ~ that is to say, D5 100 and D7000 have basically no difference in imaging, and the imaging core components of 600D are the same as those of the previous generation 550D (although 600D is an upgraded version of 550D, in fact, some new functions have been added to the new shell, and the imaging has not been improved). So if it is better than imaging D5 100,

D5 100 I haven't used it, but I have a D7000. . . Its imaging is still very good, not worse than Nikon's flagship D300S ~ I personally think it is better than D300S in noise resistance. Hey ~ although I haven't used 600D, my friend has 550D d. Well, I don't think there is much difference in imaging except that the shape is different from that of 600D D.

To put it simply, the new products of the two entry machines N and C are a real upgrade (D5 100) and an upgrade without changing the medicine (600D). Well, this is my idea ~ whether you like it or not is up to you. Nikon is suitable for scenery, canon is more suitable for portraits ~ of course, the digital map will be similar in the later period. And don't care too much about pixels when looking at digital cameras. 1800W is not necessarily good 1200W is not necessarily double ~ Hey, Nikon's top D3 series has 1200W pixels, but who can say that they are not good ~

Well, I hope you can buy your favorite machine ~