mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Your're right I guess, but I figured a newbie with 2 posts didn't need an immediate introduction to the dark side of the force, (assuming your familiar with Star Wars).

Jim Bob

As usual, you have a good point. And by the way, I love Star Wars. Yoda's the man.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Nikon mid-20th century holdover vs Canon 21st century cutting edge.
Both have quality systems just do you hang onto historical past or look to the future in what you use?

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

First off, since you mentioned, or alluded to having done photography in the past, do you still have any equipment from those days. In my case, I had a great deal of Nikon lenses and a few models of Nikon cameras. So, it was an easy decision to move to Nikon DSLR, as a great deal of the lenses I already had would be useable on a digital Nikon.

If you've not kept any of your old equipment, your next research should be on which of the camera makers produce the equipment you consider necessary for our pursuits and then evaluate those. Another, not free, approach would be to rent several different brands and evaluate them. See which works best with you and your techniques.
--Bob

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Well, if nothing else, he'll have a great example here, with your posts, of someone devoid of much more than the autonomic lower brain function.
--Bob

Jim Bob

Well that would be 100% more than you can claim sh*t for brains.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Oh God. Here we go again. I guess I'll have to slap you both silly.

Jim Bob

I'm already there. But the other guy is an idiot. No slapping required.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Since you specifically mention landscape photography.... You might want to consider a full frame camera. If you primarily will be shooting landscapes, likely using wide angle and at most short telephoto lenses... have little or no interest in wildlife/sports that might call for fairly powerful telephotos.

Canon 6D or Nikon D610 are about the most affordable full frame cameras... around $1500 for the body alone. These will not have the frame rate or more advanced autofocus features and capablities the 80D and D7200. But full frame is ideal for landscape type shots and you don't need either fast frame rates or fancy AF systems for that purpose.

However, if you want to be able to shoot sports/action/wildlife too... the D7200 or 80D might be a better choice.

Assuming you are completely unfamiliar with either brand... I strongly recommend what some others have suggested. Go to a store and check out both cameras in hand. Some people prefer the ergonomics, controls and menus of one or the other... and both cameras are about equally capable. Possibly more important will be the lenses you choose to use on the camera. The lenses are what actually make a noticeable difference in images.... and both the Canon and Nikon systems are quite extensive and capable.

However, for landscape shots with one of those APS-C cameras you're likely to want an ultrawide zoom... and there you will start to notice some differences. Canon offers two ultrawides: EF-S 10-18mm IS STM for under $300 and a better built EF-S 10-22mm USM for about $650. Nikon also offers two: a 10-24mm for about $900 and a 12-24mm for around $1100. There are also third party ultrawides (Tokina, Tamron, Sigma), most of which sell for $500 or more. By the way, the image quality of either Canon is as good or better than anyone else's lenses... even the bargain priced EF-S 10-18mm (it's also the smallest, lightest UWA and the only one with image stabilization... but a bit plasticky build).

There are also ultrawides available for the full frame models mentioned above, but they will generally be bigger, heavier and more expensive than the same for APS-C cameras such as the D7200 and 80D.

You also should consider other lenses you may need, depending upon what you shoot.

I often think people tend to over-buy the camera and under-spend on the lenses they put on it. Whenever possible, I recommend budgeting more for the lenses, even if you have to step down a notch or two with the camera you buy. With Canon that's no problem... With Nikon the lower priced cameras restrict what lenses you can use upon them.

Others mention choosing modern Nikon DSLR because they had vintage Nikkors to use on them. And with D7200 (or D500) that's entirely possible... vintage manual focus lenses will work fine on them. They'll also fit on the lower priced cameras (D5000 and D3000 series), but the camera cannot meter them. They also require modern "AF-S" lenses to be able to autofocus ("AF-D" and some others are usable manual focus only).

Plus, vintage Nikkors also can easily be used on all Canon DSLRs via inexpensive adapters... still manual focus and manual aperture control. But on all modern (EOS) Canon metering will be fully functional (cannot use Program or Shutter Priority... but Aperture Priority, Manual and Manual + Auto ISO exposure modes all will work fine). In fact, the Canon mount also can accommodate a wide variety of vintage lenses... Olympus OM, Leica R, Pentax bayonet, Pentax screw mount, and others (but not Minolta MD, Konica K/AR or Canon's own FD/FL). Modern Nikon cannot be used with most of those other mounts. Only Sony can accommodate more (however they also make fewer of their own modern lenses.... and those they do make tend to be more expensive than either Canon or Nikon.)

But, vintage lenses may or may not appeal to you. Some of them can be great. And manual focus, manual aperture control are generally no problem with more sedate types of photography such as landscapes. But for any sort of action/sports/wildlife you're likely to want modern AF lenses... perhaps high performance AF (such as Nikon Silent Wave "SWM" or Canon Ultrasonic "USM"). Also, with the APS-C format cameras such as D7200 and 80D, there are no "ulrtawide" vintage lenses. That type of zoom only came about in more recent years, with digital SLRs. There were relatively few lenses wider than 17mm or 18mm made for film cameras.... and those that were wider tended to be especially expensive.

radar51

Thanks to all for your replies. I actually do have of couple of Canon EOS lenses, but they are over 20 years old (that's how long I have been away from the SLR world). The links have been very useful, as well as the suggestion to look at the mirrorless cameras. Going from Lumix ZS40 to any of these options is a big jump and I am trying to avoid future buyers remorse. I will continue to research my options and I will continue to follow the HOG.

Jim Bob

The OP asked about 2 specific cameras. Why in the hell would you bring up a third one? Geesus.