Pro opinion, Canon versus Nikon

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by RichA, Sep 5, 2007.

  1. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    No one who really compares the two will say one is better than the
    : other. They are both great systems. There are differences but it is
    : not one good one bad. Most people will be happiest with the one they
    : have owned before or that the have a warm fuzzy feeling for.

    I don't know about Nikon, but there's an overall consistency in the look and
    feel over a lot of the Canon line. So when my wife and I got our XTi's, the
    transition from our old cameras (a G-5 and an S50) wasn't a complete
    re-learning experience.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Sep 22, 2007
    #41
    1. Advertisements

  2. RichA

    SMS Guest

    If he's doing sports or nature photography then of course he'd go the
    Canon route because they have the sports lenses that Nikon lacks, and
    they also have the limitations imposed by their lens mount.

    For studio photography it's a different ball game, and either system
    would be fine with the full frame or close to full frame models.
     
    SMS, Sep 22, 2007
    #42
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    : On Sep 6, 3:41 pm, Wolfgang Weisselberg <>
    : wrote:
    : > > RichA wrote:
    : > >> On Sep 5, 5:55 pm, Wolfgang Weisselberg <>
    : > >>> Have *you* any experience with any Canon model? Personally?
    : > >> Just the XTi and the 20 and 30Ds and 5D.
    : > >>> Have *you* any experience with any Nikon model? Personally?
    : > >> Just the D40, D50, D80 and D200.
    : > > For how long? 5 minutes?
    : >
    : > I bet he stared at them through the window pane a bit longer than
    : > that ...
    : >
    : > -Wolfgang
    :
    : So I take it then that you Canonwhores dispute the claim that their
    : pro cameras are unreliable compared to Nikons?
    : Canon was second-rate when SLRs ruled, the ONLY reason they were able
    : to claim the markets with DSLRs is that they succeeded in producing a
    : good sensor and they paid their way into the newsrooms and magazines
    : to take the spots. The mafia did the same with garbage collection.
    : It was later people found out the good times weren't going to last.
    : This seems to be what has happened with Canon.

    It's been a couple of weeks. Has anybody succeeded in figuring out what that
    paragraph means? Did the mafia's garbage collectors really produce a good
    sensor and pay their way into newsrooms? Enquiring minds want to know.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Sep 22, 2007
    #43
  4. RichA

    Paul Furman Guest

    Nikon is has announced new stabilized super-telephotos for that.
    The new 21MP Canon gets the advantage here, unless the priority is
    dynamic range, then the 12MP Nikon D3 leads according to reports who
    have tested it.
     
    Paul Furman, Sep 22, 2007
    #44
  5. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Lets see if Canon lenses even allow the difference between 16 and
    21megapixels to even be visible. I just saw another test where
    Nikon's 70-200mm stomped all over the Canon equivalent.
     
    RichA, Sep 23, 2007
    #45
  6. What do you expect when the Nikkor has nine rounded blades and Canon uses
    eight straight blades? Too bad the 70-200mm VR is a G lens or it would be
    on the old Mk III.







    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 23, 2007
    #46
  7. RichA

    TRoss Guest

    This is one of Rander's loonie conspiracy theories - he seems to think
    the only reason Canon has been successful is because it gave cameras
    and lenses to newspapers. He considers it an unfair trade practice,
    and compares it to the way Laidlaw, a waste management company, was
    able to maintain a virtual monopoly in waste management. And since
    waste management in some areas has been dominated by organized crime
    and Laidlaw is a waste management, Rich concludes that Laidlaw is
    controlled by the mafia.

    The problem with this deranged theory - well, one of the problems, for
    there are many - is it strays from reality. It's a common thread
    running through most of Rander's articles.


    TR
     
    TRoss, Sep 23, 2007
    #47
  8. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Canon, according to numerous reports, DID "buy" the market. However,
    I will say that their sensor techonology allowed them to a large
    extent to keep it and to some "buying" is merely good customer service
    to professionals.

    http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/in_focus/jensen.do
     
    RichA, Sep 23, 2007
    #48
  9. That Nikon is so bad that all you can harp about is blades.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 24, 2007
    #49
  10. Richie cannot stand the idea his beloved Nikons might be not
    perfect, hence he slanders Canon with everything from being too
    good to being the mafia. He's so way off his rocker there's no
    reason left at all.

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 24, 2007
    #50
  11. RichA

    RichA Guest

    I don't own Nikon, but I'll wager YOU own Canon. Who has the vested
    interest?
     
    RichA, Sep 24, 2007
    #51
  12. If you consider a few crappy barely consumer grade lenses, Wolfie has em.
    He doesn't know any better and thinks he's happy.







    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 24, 2007
    #52
  13. RichA

    ASAAR Guest

    I've never seen any evidence that he thinks any such thing. Maybe
    because what he has are fleas.
     
    ASAAR, Sep 24, 2007
    #53
  14. We all know that you don't own any brand of camera...as evidenced by
    your lack of knowledge about photography.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Sep 25, 2007
    #54
  15. Well I think the whole Canon vs. Nikon thing is rather amusing. I will say
    that I have been using Canon for years in 35mm and now I have the consumer
    Rebel XT now and I have a 10D that I got with a lens on ebay (needs a
    repair, haven't sent it yet). I have shot tens of 1000's of photos with the
    Rebel XT (to the point where I have worn smooth the parts of the body where
    my fingers are so they are shiny instead of the textured flat black) and it
    keeps going and going - I have shot in the rain (without any extra
    protection) and it has been fine (gotta love wet flowers!). Some of the
    things that I really like that the consumer Nikons cannot do, but my XT (as
    well as the prosumer and pro Canon's) can:

    I have adapters for M42 (Pentax Screw Mount), Olympus OM, Nikon (all
    including AF and non-AI) and the Canon XT WILL meter them (you have to do at
    least the Nikon D200 to get this). I could also get adapters for
    Contax/Yashica and Pentax K mount - all will meter and focus to infinity.
    You cannot even use adapters on the D40 (3 point AF is truly lacking also)
    and you have to use the lenses with autofocus motors built in so you cannot
    use all of the Nikon lens system anyway. I could use adapters for Leica R,
    Rollei 35, Minolta MD (needs optical element for infinity focus so I don't
    use it - same with the Canon FD adapter) even the medium format Pentacon 6,
    Kiev 60, Pentax 645, Hasselblad and it will focus to infinity and meter it.

    So I can use those Nikon lenses you say are so superior to the Canon ones as
    well as the Canon and many other lenses. I even have autofocus confirmation
    electronics on the adapters so it will tell me when it is in focus for those
    lenses. When I get the 10D repaired, I will be able to use all those items
    with it as well.

    To me, lenses all have their own "personality" and no one lens does
    everything best, so why not the best of all worlds? Take the great lenses
    of history, use them, meter with them on some of the best digital
    electronics in the world of digital photography. The ultimate in
    flexibility of a DSLR system IMO.

    Having my cake and eating it too!






    Dennis
     
    Dennis' Newsgroups, Sep 25, 2007
    #55
  16. I don't own a single Canon share, so my "vested interest" must
    be ... well, I dunno, maybe in my Contax?
    You don't own any camera, so you are completely free of facts.
    Well, somehow I don't have the budget to have space grade
    lenses specially built for me and attached to 1MPix sensors
    (See Opportunity and Spirit).

    Feel free to show images that are substantially better due to
    their lenses than what my lenses can manage. Your images shown
    so far do not inspire me with awe ...

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Sep 25, 2007
    #56
  17. Yep, but why would you need AF confirmation? I know that the viewfinder on
    my Mk III is so nice that I don't have any problems focusing any of my
    Nikkors, even at 17mm.
    Good point, but when you have to put Nikkors on a Canon to get great image
    quality you know there is something fundamentally wrong with L glass,
    especially on the wide end.
    Yep, same here. The Mk III has become a Nikon shooter's dream come true, at
    least till the D3 arrives.






    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Sep 25, 2007
    #57



  18. Well, I have the replacement focusing screen - diagonal split and
    microscreen doughnut, but I haven't installed it yet. The XT doesn't have a
    good viewfinder for focusing manually by itself (didn't design it for manual
    lenses, but gotta love the hackers who built the adapters and manufactured
    replacement focusing screens). In the mean time, I like having it.




    I cannot afford L series lenses so I wouldn't know about that. I would love
    to be able to afford some and a 1D Mach III, but cannot. This way with the
    adapters I can have a HUGE selection of affordable glass. I have been
    playing around with an Olympus 50mm E-Zuiko f1.8 (bought on ebay for $1 plus
    $7 shipping - total $8) and a vintage Nikkor-P 105mm f2.5 ($23.44 shipped -
    has a sluggish diaphram, but when using it focusing wide open and then
    stopping down for metering - it works fine for me). I have 3 of the early
    cult Vivitar Series 1 (28-90, 70-210 and 35-85 varifocal made by Kiron and
    Komura - each of these would be over $1000 in today's adjusted inflation) in
    Olympus OM mount (total cost for all 3 was $210 and the last one came with a
    Canon 10D body that needs a shutter repair as a bonus which I will get
    repaired). I have Super Takumar 200mm f4 and 35mm f3.5 M42 lenses - cost me
    $7.50 each. Some great lenses for less than the cost of a current mid range
    AF lens and in many cases superior optics. I have a hard time believing
    that the L series lenses are that inferior, but I cannot offer any opinion
    or evidence as I have not used them.






    Dennis
     
    Dennis' Newsgroups, Sep 26, 2007
    #58
  19. RichA

    C J Campbell Guest

    Took me awhile. I finally stayed with Aperture, not because it is
    better, really, but because I thought it was 'prettier,' whatever that
    means.
     
    C J Campbell, Sep 26, 2007
    #59
  20. RichA

    C J Campbell Guest

    It sounds like someone is rationalizing why he needs to buy the latest
    and greatest toy.
     
    C J Campbell, Sep 26, 2007
    #60
    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.