Updated (July 2009): Compare the Canon EOS 500D vs Nikon D3000

Canon EOS 500D vs Nikon D3000

Winner
Canon EOS 500D

54

Nikon D3000

35

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS 500D

Full HD
Movie format
1080p @ 20fps
High resolution screen
Screen resolution
920k dots
Has live view
Live view
Preview your photos
Almost no delay when powering up
Startup delay
300 ms startup delay
 

Reasons to buy the Nikon D3000

Color depth
Great color depth
22.3 bits
Size
Really small
Prosumer size (126×97×64 mm)
Badge
Phase detection autofocus
fast and accurate
Thickness
Thin
2.5"

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS 500D.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D3000.

competitors

Canon EOS 500D Competitors

Canon EOS 1200D

Canon EOS 1200D

Entry-level DSLR

$365 - $438 body only

$307 - $570 with 18-55mm lens

Supports 24p Supports 24p
Autofocus Video autofocus
Screen resolution Much lower resolution screen
Canon EOS 1100D

Canon EOS 1100D

Entry-level DSLR

$439 body only

$422 with 18-55mm, 55-250mm lenses

Color depth Better color depth
Low light performance Lower noise at high ISO
Movie format Lower resolution movies
Canon EOS 700D

Canon EOS 700D

Entry-level DSLR

$480 with 18-55mm lens

Autofocus Video autofocus
Supports 24p Supports 24p
Shutter lag Much more shutter lag

Nikon D3000 Competitors

Nikon D3100

Nikon D3100

Entry-level DSLR

$364 body only

$555 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Low light performance Significantly lower noise at high ISO
Thickness Much thicker
Nikon D3200

Nikon D3200

Entry-level DSLR

$249 body only

$309 - $447 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Low light performance Much lower noise at high ISO
Thickness Much thicker
Nikon D3300

Nikon D3300

Entry-level DSLR

$279 body only

$349 - $397 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Low light performance Much lower noise at high ISO
Thickness Much thicker

discussion

Canon EOS 500D
EOS 500D
Canon

Report a correction
Nikon D3000
D3000
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments