Gunship01 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 28 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3796 times:
Am thinking about taking the plunge and going digital. Nikon or Canon? Hmmmmmm. Have done and will continue to research both, but I must say, the pictures in this database that we all surf have me leaning towards Canon. The 100-400mm L IS USM lens is tops.
Let me know if I am off base and provide a Nikon sample, but the clarity of the Canon shots with that lens is spot on. Yes, I desire to see every rivet.
Though this may not get a good deal of response from folks other than "Another Canon/Nikon debate thread...ugh..", let me say to all who post here....thanks! Your shots are great and I enjoy seeing "where you live" and how aviation is as such a factor in your life as it is in mine.
Those without the means for the equipment (for now) do appreciate it!
Soon7x7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (4 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3785 times:
I just purchased the Nikon 200-400 f4. A nice piece of equipment that it is...quite expensive...very crisp...I've been a Nikon shooter since I was 14 years old...now 53...however, I think in the digital world, Canon does it better. Thats going out on a limb too as all my lenses are top of the line...On the other hand I think Nikon is a tougher piece of equipment and sustains abuse better. They are so close that in some cases it's a matter of whose better at post processing...j
Gunship01 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 28 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (4 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3764 times:
You are correct sir. Post-processing does account for some degree of skill. I will also say however that the human factor engineering on the Nikon cameras is better than Canon. Accessibility of various camera functions in the grip area and other aspects make me wish Nikon would have glass equal to Canon. I appreciate your comments.
Dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 32 Reply 3, posted (4 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3752 times:
Quoting Soon7x7 (Reply 1): I've been a Nikon shooter since I was 14 years old
I've been a Pentax shooter since I was 16 (32 now) so I think I can give a relatively impartial opinion on Canon vs. Nikon.
... and my opinion is that you've about figured it out already. I'd give Nikon a slight edge for its bodies and Canon a slight edge for its glass. I think both (like most dSLRs these days) would be capable of producing excellent results with decent glass, in the right hands.... and that includes post-processing, as already mentioned.
So... I guess I'm saying there is no decisive winner in 'Best Camera Brand', but I hope you're able to make a decision that works for you. Good luck!
Cpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 40 Reply 6, posted (4 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3687 times:
Quoting Gunship01 (Reply 2): I will also say however that the human factor engineering on the Nikon cameras is better than Canon. Accessibility of various camera functions in the grip area and other aspects make me wish Nikon would have glass equal to Canon. I appreciate your comments.
That's why I went Nikon - superior feel of the camera, nicer ergonomics. It's a nicer camera to hold for a long time. I didn't like the rival Canon cameras in that respect.
But Canon has a nicer range of lenses - and the 300mm F/4L IS is something Nikkor does not have any answer to.
Nikon does have the brilliant D700 however - at a quite reasonable price for near D3 ability.
Michlis From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 737 posts, RR: 3 Reply 8, posted (4 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3665 times:
As someone who is impartial, I would recommend the Canon. Having owned a Canon SLR before my current DSLR, I can say that I have been absolutely pleased with the photo quality and performance of Canon both in camera bodies and lenses (both L-series and non-L-series.) That being said, in the professional world of photography, the Nikon/Canon split is just about even.
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles.
Good point!...Pentax!... in the film days was a qualified leader...currently I have no idea what Pentax is doing digitally or what kind of line they offer, but that is a name you don't hear much of anymore.
AKE0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2534 posts, RR: 49 Reply 15, posted (4 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3537 times:
Well I just add my two cents here. I have used both systems Nikon and Canon.
When I seriously started back about 10 years ago, I had the same dilemma. Nikon or Canon,
back in those days the digital world was not really existing. I went to my local pro shop and had both SLR cameras in my hands, played around etc....
I went with the brand that felt right in terms of ergonomics etc... (Nikon), had all kind of lenses over the years 80-200 f2.8 and the big prime 400 f2,8. Switched to Digital back in 2002 bying the D100. A huge step up in terms of IQ.
In 2003 I made the switch to the dark side, mainly because Canon had the edge.
It was a costly switch and I was w/o a prime for about 2 years. Worth the wait.....oh yes.
Canon lenses (especially the primes) are much cheaper than the rivals.
Shooting with a Canon prime is such a joy....and IS is an outstanding feature. Up until last year Nikon's prime lenses were not equipped with VR.
Go out to any sports event....what do you see? Talk to news photographers etc.....the love the huge white lenses.
At the end of the day, you are the only one who decides. Go with what feels right.....
Canon or Nikon both are great systems.
BMW, Mercedes or Lexus it all comes down to personal preferences.
Soon7x7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (4 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3452 times:
I think the answer to this thread is despite the calibur of equipment that your quiver has...it's your inherent ability to see the image and compose it, regardless of the level of equipment you possess. Sure, ....big lens dollars pays off but a respectable level of talent is required here...I've seen incredible photo expositions by journalists that would blow your mind away due to the incredible composition and vision....all with a crapy $350.00 camera...To think what I have spent on gear...
Dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 32 Reply 19, posted (4 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3433 times:
Quoting Soon7x7 (Reply 18): I've seen incredible photo expositions by journalists that would blow your mind away due to the incredible composition and vision....all with a crapy $350.00 camera...To think what I have spent on gear...
Amen to that...people seem to get carried away by the latest and most expensive gear. But why aspire to buy a Ferrari if you don't really know how to drive it to its fullest capabilities, other than to say 'I own a Ferrari!' Beats me sometimes.
Quoting Soon7x7 (Reply 9): Good point!...Pentax!... in the film days was a qualified leader...currently I have no idea what Pentax is doing digitally or what kind of line they offer, but that is a name you don't hear much of anymore.
Yeah, kind of flying under the radar these days, but some pretty decent offerings. In fact on the basis of price vs. features, I'd say Pentax is right at the top, although as mentioned above there is very little separating dSLRs in terms of quality these days. There's a lot of good Pentax glass floating around out there too, as their dSLRs are backwards-compatible with the past 30 years or so of lenses.
Who knows, Pentax could be the sleeper here, they always had premium glass, and after all, ...isn't that what really matters?...This weekend I'm going to look at the Pentax line as this thread has given rise to my curiosity...Almost opens up a whole new thread...if you could find a twin lens reflex rollie, medium format and shot your favorite airliner...even by todays standards...the results would blow you away...My current most successful downloads on a/net are high rez scans from my Hasselblad (film)...even though I have some good Nikon digital goodies, the learning curve is greater than I anticipated...j