Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????  (Read 7477 times)
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8207



WWW
« Reply #20 on: August 30, 2011, 11:05:16 PM »
ReplyReply

As to Canon or Nikon...

I can without any reservations say Yes!
Alternatively, a good bet would be either Nikon or Canon.  Wink
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
meyerweb
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 163


« Reply #21 on: September 08, 2011, 02:12:06 PM »
ReplyReply

I've shot Canon for years, and have a modest array of Canon glass, which is motivation not to switch systems. I chose Canon when I moved from MF to AF because, at that time, I felt Canon's L lenses, overall, were superior to what Nikon offered, and Canon's AF technology was notably superior.

But were I starting over today, I'd be very tempted to go Nikon.  Although it would take me some adjustment now, I think I prefer the control layout of their bodies to Canon's more button / menu oriented approach, and I think Nikon offers better metering options. (Not necessarily better metering, but more flexibility). In terms of AF, Nikon has at least caught up with Canon, and perhaps bettered them in some respects.

But, as others have said, visit a good camera store and spend some time with bodies from both systems.  If you're not familiar with the control structure, let a salesmen walk you through basic operations. See what feels right to you. Either system is capable of producing very high quality photographs; the limiting factor is not likely to be the body. When I first started in photography in the 1970s, a mentor gave me sage advice. He said pick up the camera and play with it.  If it feels uncomfortable to you, walk away.  It's NOT going to get better.
Logged
joneil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


This is what beer does to you....


« Reply #22 on: September 08, 2011, 04:09:38 PM »
ReplyReply

  I've met many photographers over the years, going "way back the old days of film" Smiley, who based their choice of a camera brand or system based on the glass and the lenses first, and the body second.   I don't see why with a digital SLR that should be any different. 

 Along that theme, my flippant, tongue in cheek answer is this:  Since Zeiss makes superb lenses in both Canon and Nikon mounts, who cares?
 Grin

Logged
fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #23 on: September 08, 2011, 05:32:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Alternatively, a good bet would be either Nikon or Canon.  Wink
NOOOOO!.....I totally disagree!! .....He should buy a Canikon instead, or perhaps it would be better to reach for a Nikanon!  Roll Eyes Certainly the glass should be .......plastic! Huh Cheers, Theodoros www.fotometria.gr
Logged
JohnHeerema
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 187


WWW
« Reply #24 on: September 08, 2011, 09:45:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Nikon and Canon are more similar than different, but the companies each have particular strengths. A few somewhat gross generalizations might help you to figure out which matches your personal preferences & shooting style:

Glass
Nikon is known more for their short focal length lenses, while Canon's strength is more at long focal lengths.
The Canon mount is a bit wider, which allows Canon to use some lens designs which Nikon can't.

Technical Innovation
Technical features often appear in Canon a few years earlier than in Nikon. Some examples:
- Full frame DSLR
- Eye-controlled focus (later dropped by Canon)
- Piezoelectric ultrasonic focus motors in lenses
- Pixel count is typically a bit higher for Canon

Flash
Nikon has historically been thought to be ahead here, although Canon is now pretty comparable

Eyeglasses
Nikon has historically been more eyeglass-friendly

User Interface
While the subject of considerable debate, Nikon is often held up as being more photographer-friendly

Software
Neither Canon nor Nikon can write decent software.

As always, your mileage may vary...

Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8346



WWW
« Reply #25 on: September 10, 2011, 11:13:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Nikon and Canon are more similar than different, but the companies each have particular strengths. A few somewhat gross generalizations might help you to figure out which matches your personal preferences & shooting style:

Glass
Nikon is known more for their short focal length lenses, while Canon's strength is more at long focal lengths.
The Canon mount is a bit wider, which allows Canon to use some lens designs which Nikon can't.

I would argue that the gap between the performance of long glass is a lot less than the gap between wides. A lot smaller and a lot less relevant. Smiley

Speaking about what I know first hand, frankly I am not sure how a lens could be significantly better than the Nikkor 300mm f2.8 VR to give just one example. It is tack sharp from corner to corner at f2.8 on a 24Mp sensor, little light fall off, no obvious aberrations. According to Thom Hogan, it isn't even the best Nikkor super tele.

Focus accuracy is IMHO an order of magnitude more important that possible small differences in optical quality.

I am aware about the theoretical possibility that the EOS mount might authorize more extreme lenses, but today the only extreme lens that Nikon has not been willing/able to match is the 17mm T/S. On the other hand, Canon has also not been willing/able to match the performance of the Nikkor 14-24mm f2.8 for 4 years.

So I am not sure whether the smaller mount is an actual issue.

Cheer,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
stever
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1072


« Reply #26 on: September 10, 2011, 06:10:27 PM »
ReplyReply

one of the main practical differences for many people is that Nikon still doesn't have a price/performance match for the 5D2

i agree that Canon's strength is in long lenses - not that the best of one is better than the best of the other, but in Canon's greater variety of long glass for different purposes - from the 70-200 f4 to the 800

for most people Nikon is probably better on the wide end, but if you need a wide TS, you need to go to Canon
Logged
JohnKoerner
Guest
« Reply #27 on: September 11, 2011, 06:26:43 AM »
ReplyReply

one of the main practical differences for many people is that Nikon still doesn't have a price/performance match for the 5D2
i agree that Canon's strength is in long lenses - not that the best of one is better than the best of the other, but in Canon's greater variety of long glass for different purposes - from the 70-200 f4 to the 800
for most people Nikon is probably better on the wide end, but if you need a wide TS, you need to go to Canon


Not only does Canon have far more long lens choices, but Canon also has better macro lenses.

Canon's new 100mmL IS macro is the new 100mm leader ... and the MP-E 65mm 1x - 5x is in a class by itself.

And I would imagine that a new and improved 180mmL IS is not too far away ...

Jack



.
Logged
fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #28 on: September 11, 2011, 10:28:49 AM »
ReplyReply

I would argue that the gap between the performance of long glass is a lot less than the gap between wides. A lot smaller and a lot less relevant. Smiley

Speaking about what I know first hand, frankly I am not sure how a lens could be significantly better than the Nikkor 300mm f2.8 VR to give just one example. It is tack sharp from corner to corner at f2.8 on a 24Mp sensor, little light fall off, no obvious aberrations. According to Thom Hogan, it isn't even the best Nikkor super tele.

Focus accuracy is IMHO an order of magnitude more important that possible small differences in optical quality.

I am aware about the theoretical possibility that the EOS mount might authorize more extreme lenses, but today the only extreme lens that Nikon has not been willing/able to match is the 17mm T/S. On the other hand, Canon has also not been willing/able to match the performance of the Nikkor 14-24mm f2.8 for 4 years.

So I am not sure whether the smaller mount is an actual issue.

Cheer,
Bernard

So... if he buys Nikon.... it will make him a .....better photographer! I suggest ....Canon!
Logged
fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #29 on: September 11, 2011, 10:31:04 AM »
ReplyReply

one of the main practical differences for many people is that Nikon still doesn't have a price/performance match for the 5D2

i agree that Canon's strength is in long lenses - not that the best of one is better than the best of the other, but in Canon's greater variety of long glass for different purposes - from the 70-200 f4 to the 800

for most people Nikon is probably better on the wide end, but if you need a wide TS, you need to go to Canon
So....., if he buys Canon.... will make him a ....better photographer! I suggest .....Nikon!
Logged
fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #30 on: September 11, 2011, 10:42:12 AM »
ReplyReply


Not only does Canon have far more long lens choices, but Canon also has better macro lenses.

Canon's new 100mmL IS macro is the new 100mm leader ... and the MP-E 65mm 1x - 5x is in a class by itself.

And I would imagine that a new and improved 180mmL IS is not too far away ...

Jack



.
Jesus.....! I'm sure that "nonsense" is not enough to characterize this ...."advice". Buy Canikon or Nikanon or NONican instead! Chears, Theodoros www.fotometria.gr
 P.S. Have you considered.... photography, for a change?
Logged
JohnKoerner
Guest
« Reply #31 on: September 11, 2011, 01:15:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Jesus.....! I'm sure that "nonsense" is not enough to characterize this ...."advice". Buy Canikon or Nikanon or NONican instead! Chears, Theodoros www.fotometria.gr
 P.S. Have you considered.... photography, for a change?


No need to have a hissy-fit pal; I am simply stating the truth.

The simple fact is, if a photographer specializes in taking ultra-close macro shots, then Nikon doesn't really have the tools for the job readily available. By contrast, Canon offers the MP-E 65mm lens, which goes from 1x to 5x magnification superbly. Whereas if a Nikon shooter wants to get into this kind of magnification with his camera, he is going to have to invest in a cluster-**** of bellows and extension tubes by comparison to achieve the same results.

You might not believe this, but it really is a whole lot easier bringing a single specialized tool for the job out into the field, to shoot ultra-close macros, than it is to bring extension tubes and bellows along with your camera and lens

Which means that, yes, sometimes having better tools will make you a better photographer ... same as having a power saw will make you a more effective carpenter than if you try to do a big job with a manual hand-saw Wink

Jack



.
Logged
fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #32 on: September 11, 2011, 01:50:02 PM »
ReplyReply


No need to have a hissy-fit pal; I am simply stating the truth.

The simple fact is, if a photographer specializes in taking ultra-close macro shots, then Nikon doesn't really have the tools for the job readily available. By contrast, Canon offers the MP-E 65mm lens, which goes from 1x to 5x magnification superbly. Whereas if a Nikon shooter wants to get into this kind of magnification with his camera, he is going to have to invest in a cluster-**** of bellows and extension tubes by comparison to achieve the same results.

You might not believe this, but it really is a whole lot easier bringing a single specialized tool for the job out into the field, to shoot ultra-close macros, than it is to bring extension tubes and bellows along with your camera and lens

Which means that, yes, sometimes having better tools will make you a better photographer ... same as having a power saw will make you a more effective carpenter than if you try to do a big job with a manual hand-saw Wink

Jack



.
It just doesn't worth a reply!
Logged
JohnKoerner
Guest
« Reply #33 on: September 11, 2011, 06:14:11 PM »
ReplyReply

It just doesn't worth a reply!

And yet you did reply

The truth is ... you had no rebuttal to the facts I stated ... but still felt you needed to "say something"

Jack


.
Logged
RobertJ
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 601


« Reply #34 on: September 11, 2011, 09:19:33 PM »
ReplyReply

It's not what camera you choose, it's what RAW converter you use! Smiley
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4915



« Reply #35 on: September 12, 2011, 06:27:54 AM »
ReplyReply

OK kids, let's wind it down.

Michael
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8207



WWW
« Reply #36 on: September 12, 2011, 10:01:20 AM »
ReplyReply

OK kids, let's wind it down.

Michael

But Michael! I can't find the rewind knob on my Canon 5D!  Cheesy

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
fotometria gr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 568


WWW
« Reply #37 on: September 14, 2011, 05:37:38 PM »
ReplyReply

But Michael! I can't find the rewind knob on my Canon 5D!  Cheesy

Eric
Oh! that was included ....in the original packing!  Smiley You must have forgot it there  Roll Eyes find it and keep it in your.... pocket. Cool At least that's the case with my D700! Lips sealed Regards Theodoros www.fotometria.gr
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad