Making my mind between Nikon or Canon

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Yuki, Aug 17, 2007.

  1. Yuki

    acl Guest

    Wouldn't it be nice if it were f/2.8.... It's f/4, unfortunately....
    I have the Sigma, it's ok. Too slow (f/4 at 10mm, f/5.6 at 20mm-I ask
    you!).
    Also Ruether's site,
    http://www.donferrario.com/ruether/slemn.html
    is excellent.
     
    acl, Aug 17, 2007
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Yuki

    acl Guest

    Nikon is changing their mount? I thought they just "defeatured" the
    D40 to force people to higher end cameras? Not that it's something to
    be applauded, but they all do it...
     
    acl, Aug 17, 2007
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. acl wrote:
    []
    No, Nikon didn't change the mount.

    I see the change more as moving the focus motor into the lens for future
    lenses, and that we may expect a gradual upgrade of many of the popular
    lenses.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Aug 17, 2007
    #23
  4. Isn't that changing the mount? While the physical size
    hasn't changed, moving the motor and adding new electrical
    contacts is certainly a change.

    Roger
     
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Aug 17, 2007
    #24
  5. As far as I know, lenses with focus motors included were available before
    the D40, so the D40 didn't change the mount. If anyone knows otherwise...

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Aug 17, 2007
    #25
  6. Besides, even without AF-S you are "only" loosing the autofocus. You can
    still mount the lens and use it with manual focus, just like photographers
    have done for over a century.

    jue
     
    Jürgen Exner, Aug 17, 2007
    #26
  7. How often would you shoot a wide angle lens at f/4, little enough f/2.8
    anyway? There have to be very few cases where this is needed, eh?
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Aug 17, 2007
    #27
  8. It is alleged that Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) claimed:
    Nikon did not change the mount. My brother has a Nikon N80 that he got
    years ago. I have a D40x. We exchanged lenses one day. He could use
    both of my lenses perfectly. All of his would mount on my camera, and
    while none of them would auto focus, which I expected, only one of them
    (a Tamron 400mm tele) wouldn't work at all.

    What Nikon did was require the focusing motor to be in the lens instead
    of the body with the D40 and D40x.

    --
    Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
    The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol

    Peter's Top 100 Things I'd Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord, #223.
    I will install a fire extinguisher in every room -- three, if the room
    contains vital equipment or volatile chemicals.
     
    Jeffrey Kaplan, Aug 17, 2007
    #28
  9. It is alleged that Yuki claimed:
    Then go with the Nikon. :)

    --
    Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
    The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol

    Peter's Top 100 Things I'd Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord, #223.
    I will install a fire extinguisher in every room -- three, if the room
    contains vital equipment or volatile chemicals.
     
    Jeffrey Kaplan, Aug 17, 2007
    #29
  10. It is alleged that Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) claimed:
    A change, yes. But not to the mount. The new lenses will completely
    work on older bodies, and many/most older lenses will mostly work on
    the D40(x), simply without autofocus.

    --
    Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
    The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol

    "I suppose there'll be a war now, hmm? All that running around and
    shooting one another. You would have thought sooner or later it would
    go out of fashion." (Amb. Mollari, B5 "The Gathering")
     
    Jeffrey Kaplan, Aug 17, 2007
    #30
  11. It's even simpler than that, Nikon glass on a Canon body. The 17-35/2.8
    Nikkor is killer on both the 5D and Mk III. The 17-35 Nikkor is Canon's
    answer to WA shooting, as is the 5D to Nikon's. There isn't a single piece
    of L glass under 400mm worth putting on a Canon body. And Nikon doesn't
    offer VR on their 400mm and longer lenses. It's impossible to not own both
    platforms if you want the very best image quality.







    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Aug 17, 2007
    #31
  12. Yuki

    Paul Furman Guest

    Ya, oops on that, if they could make it 2.8 it would cost $1,500 like
    the 14 & 18mm primes. I made the odd choice of the Sigma 12-24 full
    frame 4.5-5.6 and speed is not a problem. That one is beautifully
    distortion free, good for architecture but not the sharpest & prone to
    spectacular flare, and it's big. You could get one of those for a 5D if
    you really like going wide:
    http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1224_4556/index.htm

    Following up on the idea of a high quality wide prime, the best thing I
    have now is a 20/2.8 AF and I recall a few months ago hunting for such a
    beast, the suggestion of also checking David Ruther's list is good:
    http://www.donferrario.com/ruether/slemn.html#super and you can ask him
    to clarify here in the groups!
    He uses the same 1-5 subjective rating as Bjorn R. So what you can do if
    not willing to pay $1,200-$1,700 for a new f/2.8 is look at those
    reviews & possibilities come out like the old MF (AI-S) 18mm f/3.5 which
    if you are willing to stop down on a tripod & protect from flare, can
    offer really sharp contrasty wideangle images from right up close to
    infinity and that's nice to have these old options with the D200. My 20
    AF is not astoundingly sharp, but probably sharper and with less
    distortion than any of the wide cropped zooms and was not expensive. My
    sigma is sharp stopped way down but then it develops distortion and wide
    open it's distortion-free but not sharp <sigh>.
     
    Paul Furman, Aug 17, 2007
    #32
  13. Yuki

    G.T. Guest

    Not at all. You don't really think this hasn't already been hashed out
    an infinite number of times on Usenet and the web, do you?

    http://www.google.com

    Greg
     
    G.T., Aug 17, 2007
    #33
  14. Yuki

    G.T. Guest

    How's the autofocus?

    Greg
     
    G.T., Aug 17, 2007
    #34
  15. What is autofocus? Do I even need it?







    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Aug 17, 2007
    #35
  16. Yuki

    acl Guest

    Around half (or a bit more) of my shots with it are wide open, because
    they're handheld at night. The daylight ones usually are stopped down
    to decrease the hyperfocal distance, indeed. If you don't use it at
    night, then maybe it's not useful to have a faster wideangle.
     
    acl, Aug 17, 2007
    #36
  17. Yuki

    acl Guest

    Yes, it's one of the great things about it, you can find old excellent
    lenses for very much less than equivalent modern ones. I admit I've
    toyed with the idea of a 10.5mm fisheye (it's f/2.8) and defishing
    afterwards, but it's too specialise for me... Anyway most of my shots
    (almost all, infact) are with a 28mm f/2.8 or a 90mm f/2.8, and the
    rest with the 10-20. I almost don't use my other lenses at all. I
    guess artificial limitations increase the enjoyment of getting a good
    shot!
     
    acl, Aug 17, 2007
    #37
  18. I must say I always found mine to be pretty sharp - making due allowance
    for aerial contrast reduction on long distance shots. It may suggest
    there are sample variations. The pumping action theoretically seems like
    a concern but I have not found it a problem in practice.

    David
     
    David Littlewood, Aug 17, 2007
    #38
  19. Yuki

    Robert Coe Guest

    : For the flash system I don't really know how much better is Nikon's but
    : it's a bad signal that many people suggest to use Canon's in manual mode.
    : With my current T90/300TL I can get away with automatic flash overexposing
    : negatives a bit. Slides with flash belong to the category of "forget it".

    Be sure to read Gisle Hannemyr's disquisition on this subject, if you haven't
    already.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Aug 18, 2007
    #39
  20. I am sure many of the issues you have were already been covered. I
    would like to add one additional issue. That is the personal feel of the
    camera. How do your hands fit the camera. It is not likely your hands are
    the same as mine so only you can decide if you like the fit. How easy is it
    for your to reach all the commonly used controls. Pick up both cameras and
    see how they feel. Work all the controls and pay special attention to the
    ones you will commonly use.

    Also remember that if you have had a Canon or a Nikon sticking with the
    same brand will make the switch easier as they tend to keep the same way of
    working. It will feel more like home.
     
    Joseph Meehan, Aug 18, 2007
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.