Canon vs Nikon

Canon vs Nikon

  • Total voters
    6
My film camera is a Nikon F4. Because of my lenses and workflow I'm going to stay with that system for digital - which I'm actually planning to get shortly. My partner made a hell of a find and I think I'm going the same route as he did.

The Fuji S3. It is based on a Nikon camera, takes Nikon lenses and produces a superb image. The camera is very pro looking, but it is not bullet proof like the top of the line Nikon (I could club a man to death with my F4 and then take his picture - the thing is a tank). But for studio work, or non-warzone field work, I think the Fuji is more than capable. It is a bit slower than the Nikon though, so if you want to do action work, go with the Nikon. Of course the Nikon will set you back $5,000 and the equivalent Fuji costs half that, so for me I think the Fuji is it.

Matt
 
John_Hudson said:
I would like to get my hands on the Russian Lomo.
Click to expand...
Whaaa? Buy AMERICAN (or Japanese)!

My first four cameras were Russian (should I say Soviet?). Smena I, Smena II, Zenit, and Lubitel. I loved them all dearly. I got the Smena I for my tenth birthday... probably the most coveted b-day present ever. Lubitel was a 6x6 - awesome picture, if you didn't mind slight vignetting. It was a copy of a Rolleiflex, with less durable body - need I say more?

Then I had a bunch of East German cams - Practicas - those were really great for what you could get in Eastern Europe back in 80s. I still own a Pentacon 6, a 6x6 SLR. I don't use though - now I use a Canon 10D. I have my eye on a 1Ds (full frame, baby! I love extreme-wide landscapes, which you can't really do with 10D's 1.5 conversion factor), but that will probably have to wait...

Canon is probably the brand I'll stick with until the grave...
 
XCheck said:
I have my eye on a 1Ds (full frame, baby!Canon is probably the brand I'll stick with until the grave...
Click to expand...

Get it. You won't regret it a bit. I use mine nonstop and it's a tank.
 
Ok I lied...

Just came back from the camera store with a mint condition, used, Nikon D1X....

So sue me.

Matty
 
I've had several Canons and I may stick with Canon... but I've always wanted a Nikon.

At this point it's a game of selling everything I've accumulated for Canon before I can make the switch... like 550ex flash and other stuff. I've dumped a total Canon kit before... but then just replaced it with another Canon!
 
excuse my ignorance in digital photography (i'm old school) but what do you mean by "full frame" digital camera ?

thanks
 
Full frame is a full 35mm sized frame. Most digital cameras have smaller chips, the Canon 20D is a 1.5 crop factor, so it's 1.5 times smaller than a 35mm frame. The new D5 is full frame though.

Graeme
 
I use a Fuji S2. Takes Nikon lenses, has Fuji electronics. Amazing color rendition, good resolution. As mentioned above, the S3 is amazing as well, but I picked up my S2 used for about $850 all told. Without spending upwards of two grand, it's the best camera I can buy. If I had 5000 bucks to spend, I'd love to have a Nikon D2X. I don't have anything against Canon, but Nikon always felt better in my hand (I know it sounds cheesy, but it's like choosing a gun...ergonomics count for a lot).

That said, it's less the camera than the person behind it. People would come into the photo store where I worked and ask for a pro camera so they could take pro pictures. I always tried to tell them that a pro would get at least an interesting result with a pinhole camera, and a decent result with even the cheapest film SLR. People get lost in the megapixel wars and forget that it's all about the image and the concept behind it...
 
I personally would opt for a full frame camera if you can afford it. That's the way the technology is going, and in a couple years there will be full frames for around 1k or less. Reason is that if you stock up on lenses with your 20Ds and D70s you'll be buying them for how they look with the non-full frame 1.5 convergance factor. Once you switch to the full frame you'll have to rethink your lenses (and probably need to buy new ones). The Canon 5D is taking a step in this direciton, offering a full frame 13 MP camera for 3k. Still kind of pricey but getting there! Canon I think has lead this space as well with their 5d, 1ds and 1ds Mark 2. Nikon is behind, but now has a 5k D2X.

I have a 10D and have been holding off on buying lenses while I rethink how they will look when I finally upgrade to say a 5D.
 
It certainly makes sense to take "upgrade to full frame" into account when buying lenses for a current non-full frame camera. I don't think you need to re-think and ditch old lenses though, if you've been careful in your choices and avoided the "designed for small frame" lenses.

Graeme
 
My (digital) still gear:

Canon EOS-1D mII
EOS-1Ds
Canon G-5

20 mm 2.8 fixed ("prime"...)
28 mm 1.8 prime
50 mm 1.4 prime
85 mm 1.8 prime
300 mm 4 prime
400 mm 4 prime
1.4x and 2x extenders

(16-35 2.8 I threw away, p.o.s.)
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8

100 mm macro
24 mm T&S
90 mm T&S

newest models all...

somebody else pays for this, by the way...

analog leftovers: Voigtlander Bessa L and R with 15, 35 and 90 mm lenses, Hasselbland SWC, couple of Contax G1 and G2:s, a spare EOS-1n.
 
thisiswells said:
I have two Canon's. Film and Digicam. While my 'vote' is going for Canon, I'll say I admire Nikon's innovation of the SPX800 flash system. It's incredibly useful, but only works with Nikon bodies.
Click to expand...


The SPX600 is just as usefull. Got one on order now.

I am a Nikon D70 fan, I like it for its colors. They seem deeper to me. I have used a Canon Rebel, and I liked it almost as much. I seem to get better pictures with more depth of field with Nikon.
 
been a nikon user since my grandpa passed down his professional studio system to me after he retired. mainly i still shoot nikon because of the mount.
 
By the way: canon eos-1 MkII shoots 8 fps for over 5 seconds. Some fellas have done simulated higspeed videos with this feature, where actors move a 1/3 speed (or try to) in public places etc. Easy to animate back to 24 fps in post. New canon e-5 can shoot 60 continuous frames at 3 fps.

I work as a staff photographer in a news magazine, and Canon has been gaining ground on the professional sector as their EOS-1 and EOS-1s bodies have been both faster and so much better quality imagevise than top Nikons. In our company (18 photographers) it used to be 50/50 N/C, now only 2 guys use Nikons anymore. All photoagencies I know have switched 100% to Canon. Better ergonomics, too.

I think the reason for Canon's lead is their office system branch (copiers etc). They were far ahead of everybody else in electronics when this digital camera thing appeared. Nikon, Olympus, Leica and many other top brands were only in cameras and optics.
 
Petrus said:
My (digital)
(16-35 2.8 I trew away, p.o.s.)
Click to expand...


you THREW AWAY a 16-35?!!? They're $1400 new!

I'm in the market for one right now. Have any other lenses you're looking to sell or throw away? :)
 
Thanks for pointing out a spelling mistake...

Threw away, figurativelly speaking. It now rests somewhere on a storage room shelf, to be given to poor unsuspecting summer trainees while I shoot away with my PRIME 20mm...

In a recent review they found out that the new Canon 5D at 13Mpix is as sharp as EOS-1Ds MkII at 16 Mpix. Why? Normally used (zoom) lenses are the bottleneck, they are not sharp enough for the best sensors. So, if you get a EOS-Ds MkII, you should use only medium speed fixed lenses, no zooms...

A word of advise, Kai: do not buy the F2.8 16-35, get the f4 17-40 (or whatever). Cheaper, lighter, SHARPER!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top