Nikon D90 vs Canon EOS 1100D

Winner
Nikon D90

100

Canon EOS 1100D

71

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon D90

High resolution screen
Screen resolution
930k dots
Large viewfinder
Viewfinder size
0.63x
24p movies
Supports 24p
For that film look
Great viewfinder
Viewfinder
Pentaprism
 

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS 1100D

Weight
Light-weight
459 g
Startup delay
Almost no delay when powering up
100 ms startup delay
Shutter lag
Barely any delay taking photos
110 ms shutter lag

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS 1100D.
Explore our gallery of 47 sample photos taken by the Nikon D90.

competitors

Nikon D90 Competitors

Nikon D5300

Nikon D5300

Entry-level DSLR

$474 body only

$459 with 18-55mm lens

True resolution Much higher true resolution
Movie format Higher resolution movies
Viewfinder size Much smaller viewfinder
Nikon D300S

Nikon D300S

Pro DSLR

$1,755 body only

$2,299 with 18-200mm lens

Focus points Many more focus points
Continuous shooting Shoots much faster
Size Much larger
Canon EOS 600D

Canon EOS 600D

Entry-level DSLR

$425 body only

$532 with 18-55mm lens

True resolution Much higher true resolution
Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
Viewfinder size Much smaller viewfinder

Canon EOS 1100D Competitors

Canon EOS 1200D

Canon EOS 1200D

Entry-level DSLR

$385 with 18-55mm lens

True resolution Much higher true resolution
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Viewfinder size Smaller viewfinder
Canon EOS Rebel T6

Canon EOS Rebel T6

Entry-level DSLR

$310 - $549 body only

$393 - $399 with 18-55mm lens

True resolution Much higher true resolution
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Viewfinder size Smaller viewfinder
Canon EOS 600D

Canon EOS 600D

Entry-level DSLR

$425 body only

$532 with 18-55mm lens

True resolution Much higher true resolution
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Startup delay Much more startup delay

discussion

Nikon D90
D90
Nikon

Report a correction
Canon EOS 1100D
EOS 1100D
Canon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments