As many of you know, I recently acquired a Nikon 17-35mm IF-ED AFS lens on Ebay. The lens came from U.S. News & World Report photographer Jim Lo Scalzo: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/photography/portfolios/loscalzo/portfolio_scal.htm He had a lot of high-quality Nikkors up on the auction block, so I asked him why. His response was that Nikon DSLRs "stink", and he's switching to Canon, "as even us news is going more digital, i've got to keep up." So I asked him to enumerate the reasons Nikon "stinks". After all, other than the 11 megapixel Canon, their top of the line DSLRs are pretty comparable, aren't they? And hasn't Nikon had the PJ edge thus far? He wrote me back and asked that I call him to discuss the subject, so I thought I'd give you guys a chance to chime in before I do--it'll be like talk radio, where some of the questions for the guest speaker comes via email!
IMO, the only stinky things about Nikon are that they are panting behind Canon in DSLR and not giving them a serious enough run for the money. The other thing is the ISO 200 of the D100/70 (others?). Minor nits against Nikon include the lens compatibility myth (not that Nikon propagates it, just misinformed Nikon owners). A pj who briefed us last year was PO'd at Nikon cause he had to pay the same price as anyone else for Nikon gear, whereas accredited Canon pj's were getting a deep discount... Canon recognize the marketing value of pj's picking up a big white Canon lens at an event. It sounds to me like, he's rationalized a reason to jump ship and now feels he has to say nasty things about Nikon. Perhaps, like some he's been burned by Nikon service department which is lauded by some and despised by others. Cheers, Alan
Subject: Jim Lo Scalzo on Nikon DSLRs v Canon DSLRs Hi Matt: Nothing special, just the specific reasons: Economics incentive - is Canon giving him a price break on gear (as Alan mentioned) Canon Lenses better for his purposes (and why - sharper, better contrast, focus closer, better sealing against elements, something else?)? What was the straw (person/event/realisation, etc.) that broke the camel's back/made him decide to switch from Canon to Nikon? Does Canon have a better image browser that reduces time in viewing/sending/captioning/etc. his images? What other perceived and/or real advantages does he see getting out of Canon that he isn't getting out of Nikon (more MP? Useful custom functions? Ergonomics/control layout/usage?, etc.)? Is he switching because others have and would be able to get some use out of some pooled Canon equipment (bodies/exotic glass)? What DSLR does he have now and what does he intend to replace it with and why? Same question goes for lenses... Are there any other brands he's considered? For example, Minolta is coming out with a Digital Maxxum 7 that has built-in anti-shake feature that works with any lens). I'll probably think of more questions after I send this post, but hopefull this is a good start ;-).
Only a true Canon zealot would say that. Watch and cringe at the success of the D70. Looks to me Canon hasn't come up with a worthy competitor yet. Now, who's ahead of who? That's hilarious, I didn't know Tony Spadaro was a Nikon owner...
I guess there will always be motion from one system to another, but I have not heard of one Canon EOS shooter ever switching away from it. I know I wouldn't be tempted to ever again use another brand -- and at no time when I had other systems would I have said that, including the 12 or so years that I owned Nikon.
Subject: Re: Jim Lo Scalzo on Nikon DSLRs v Canon DSLRs What is it (one or many things)about Canon that "keeps you from temptation" from other systems, Tony? TIA
A couple of items. First is that while US News & World Report uses better quality printing than newspapers, it is still not a publication noted for image quality. In that respect, I think that nearly any digital file should easily meet the requirements for printing. This makes it seem more likely that camera issues are bigger reasons. One thing that surprises me is that he did not switch to Kodak, since they offer a Nikon lens mount. Of course, if he is depreciating equipment, or just getting a tax deduction, buying everything new would be the way to go. including new lenses. As other mentioned, service, software, and location support can be bigger issues than the gear. As an interesting side note, Olympus is offering some big incentives for fashion photographers to use the E1 on location, including on site support for most of the larger shows. Seeing as how Canon may indeed have more support at sporting events, that would be a great reason to switch. My own opinion is that the camera and lenses are just tools to get the end results, namely images. While there are ergonomic reasons that can help or hinder, these might be the only mechanical considerations. I went mostly Nikon for my small format gear, mostly due to the large availability of rental gear, though Canon is catching up in that regard. Seeing as how direct digital imaging ties one to a computer, software issues, speed of downloads, and other non camera ergonomics issues might become more important. Is it funny that I use mostly Canon film scanners after a few bad issues with Nikon film scanners, yet still use Nikon cameras? Ciao! Gordon Moat Alliance Graphique Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com>
From: "Matt Clara" Well obviously the guy knows his shit since he is dumping the Nikon crap for the modern Canon equipment. But if I was a Nikon shooter (as if!) I'd ask him how he managed to ever take a decent pic with equipment that "stinks" so badly.
First off the Canons fit my hand beautifully. I've always used a strap that locks my right hand to the camera and with the Canon that is so comfy I never think about it. I can spend the afternoon without getting a sore hand. But that is probably not a reason why others would prefer Canon -- although it might well be my main reason. I love the AF - but other brands have developed good AF in the 12-13 years since I went to Canon. I really like eye control focus, although now my eyes are so bad I can't use it any more -- That should improve when I get the cataracts done. I love IS -- of course there are Nikon IS lenses now too, and I suspect IS will be standard on most cameras and/or lenses in the near future. So I think it's the feel -- and the fact that whatever I want to do, my camera can do it. No need to get a different body for mirror lock, etc. My EOS 3 even has an intervalometer (optional and extra but it has one!).
Subject: Re: Jim Lo Scalzo on Nikon DSLRs v Canon DSLRs Thanks for filling me/us in, Tony. Happy Canon shooting .
Annika1980 said: Annika, we all know that you have a deep-seated obsession with Nikon equipment that probably equates to something like penis envy. Come on now, give in to your subconscious desires...get that Nikon D2H! Show us what yer made of, laddie!
Maybe Canon is offering Jim something, seeing that both Canon and Nikon have excellent products and would produce results beyond most proffesionals requirements. But you know what they say about Money............... Just a thought, no evidence available
I'm not a "Canon" zealot, although I certainly think they make fine lenses and bodies. Nikon has nothing quite like the 10D. The D100 is short of the mark. The D70 is possibly better than the Drebel, but the ISO 200 lower limit is a pain, IMO. the "nit" here is not that there are incompatbilities (and there are), but rather that so many Nikon proponents go around saying "all lenses going back to Moses" usually implying that all features/functions will work on all bodies/lenses. This of course is false as the table linked below attests. In fact in some cases damage may occur. http://www.nikonians.org/html/resources/nikon_articles/other/compatibility.html Yes, there are many, many Nikon users who will supply the proper caveats, but there are the ignorant few who propagate a purity myth. Paolo: did you receive the e-mail I sent yesterday?
Thousands of Nikon shooters have made photos far beyond anything you will ever attain in your life. It has little to do with the equipment.
Sure. If some company paid me to use their gear, it would be foolish of me to not use it. Any companies listening? ;-) Ciao! Gordon Moat Alliance Graphique Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com>
This seems like an appropriate place to pose a Canon/Nikon question. In August I will buy another DSLR. The features of the Canon EOS-1D MarkII make it the camera of choice for me. Only... all my gear is Nikon. So, if Nikon does not answer Canon with a comparable camera announced by or before August this year, I will have to (gladly) acquire new Canon lenses and software to get up and running with the Mark II. So to ease the suspense, would anyone care to make an educated guess as to the likelihood of Nikon responding to Canon at this level? TIA. mailto: clix.at.xeropixdotcom
Sure. If some company paid me to use their gear, it would be foolish of me to not use If any companies would like to pay me mega bucks to bad mouth their competitors I'd be foolish not to work up a few insults here and there.
From: Sooner or later Nikon will come out with something as good or better. The question is how much later and how long do you want to wait. Most of the new product announcements occur in Feb and Sept to coincide with PMA and Photokina so August is a stretch ...
Subject: Re: Jim Lo Scalzo on Nikon DSLRs v Canon DSLRs Why not wait till the next big camera show (Photokina? September?) to see what Nikon is up to. Anybody's guess is going to be just that, a guess and have no real validity unless they work for Nikon or know somebody who does. An 8 or more MP D2x may be in the works (who knows), one tip off might be lowered prices and/or a rebate on the D1x (if this hasn't happened already). Canon is a great system just like Nikon (and Pentax, Minolta et al), seems pretty unfinancially sound to me to just chuck your already paid for Nikon gear (and I'd say the same if you were going the other way 'round from Canon to Nikon). Wouldn't it be more cost effective to buy a D1x used or w/ rebate/price reduction (or whatever) and trade up (via selling the D1x) when you can get a good deal on a new or used D2x (after it comes out). You seem to be willing to wait for Nikon's next DSLR, why not use what you have (whatever that may be)? Will you lose shots or business w/ the DSLR gear you have now, if not, why not finance your own endeavurs/bank account instead of succumbing to "digifever" (planned digital obsolescence/must have the next new thing). What DSLR gear do you own now and what are its real short comings (if any)?
