Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Milena, Feb 28, 2005.

  1. Milena

    Milena Guest

    five reason to choise Nikon digital reflex and five reason to choise Canon
    digital reflex ...
    if you wont five reason to choise other.
    Milena, Feb 28, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Milena

    Walt Hanks Guest

    How's this?

    BOTH offer excellent cameras and superb lenses
    BOTH are widely available, and hence, so are service locations
    BOTH are dedicated to maintaining and expanding their systems

    Now, for two differences that probably only apply to me.

    Ergonomics: The Nikons feel better in my hands. Balance, controls,
    everything just feels better to me. That is totally subjective.

    Longevity: My personal experiences with both brands still lead me to feel
    that Nikon bodies and, in particular, lenses, are more durable (though they
    certainly made some cheap lenses in their consumer series). Nikon also has
    a better history of backward compatibility, IMO.

    When the Canon rep told me to plan on servicing my lenses annually and
    replacing my lenses every 3 to 5 years, he sold me on staying with Nikon.
    In nearly 30 years of shooting Nikon, I never needed to have a lens

    That said, I don't think you could go wrong with either system, especially
    if you are starting from scratch. And, the Pentax, Minolta, and Olympus
    systems certainly deserve consideration, especially for an amateur shooter.
    Just my opinion though. I don't own a digital body yet (but one will be my
    next purchase).

    Walt Hanks, Feb 28, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. Milena

    George Guest

    Your Nikon lenses have only given you 30 years of flawless performance???
    Mine have been going for up to 32 years without ever needing any service
    that is NO Nikon lens of mine has ever required service and they range in
    up to 32 years old). AND they all work on my D70! ;^)

    I get a little frustrated with Nikon's lack of desire to produce a full
    frame sensor
    DSLR at times, but the equipment works even better than the Energizer bunny.
    I always prefer to pay for quality rather than maintenance and repairs (not
    a Canon
    slam...I have no experience with their SLRs or DSLRs).

    George, Feb 28, 2005
  4. Milena

    Robert Brace Guest

    I bought my first Nikkor in 1967 and the 50mm1.4 from then is still going
    strong today after being AI converted around 1979. Since that first
    purchase, up through today's AF-S Nikkors, I have never required lens
    service of any kind. Also through Ftn, F2as, F3, F3hp, F4s, F4e, F-100, F5
    and digitals (two - 4300 and D2), I have never required any major body
    service (only a meter adjustment on the Ftn).
    I think that speaks favorably for Nikon's reliability.
    Robert Brace, Feb 28, 2005
  5. Milena

    Brian Baird Guest

    That's nuts. To my knowledge, no one does that - unless maybe they
    shoot outdoors near saltwater and sand.
    Brian Baird, Feb 28, 2005
  6. Milena

    Walt Hanks Guest

    I thought so too. But, hey, it was a Canon rep, not just the typical store
    clerk. I've also had two independent repair shops tell me that Canon lenses
    aren't as durable as well. So it did have a ring of truth to it. Still, as
    a non-pro only shooting 2 or 3 rolls a week, I doubt I would have any

    The ergonomics, though, are enough to keep me with Nikon, and that is just a
    personal thing. It says nothing about the value, or lack there-of, of the

    Walt Hanks, Feb 28, 2005
  7. 1/ If you like Nikon, buy Nikon
    2/ If you like Nikon, buy Nikon
    3/ If you like Nikon, buy Nikon
    4/ If you like Nikon, buy Nikon
    5/ If you like Nikon, buy Nikon

    1/ If you like Canon, buy Canon
    2/ If you like Canon, buy Canon
    3/ If you like Canon, buy Canon
    4/ If you like Canon, buy Canon
    5/ If you like Canon, buy Canon

    1/ If you like X, buy X
    2/ If you like X, buy X
    3/ If you like X, buy X
    4/ If you like X, buy X
    5/ If you like X, buy X
    Charles Schuler, Feb 28, 2005
  8. Milena

    eawckyegcy Guest

    eawckyegcy, Feb 28, 2005
  9. Milena

    Walt Hanks Guest

    Walt Hanks, Mar 1, 2005
  10. Milena

    eawckyegcy Guest

    Nitwit: I made no argument. You are the one who has to back up your
    claim, not me. I will agree, however, that your _failure_ to
    substantiate your statements will make you a liar. Fortunately, this
    isn't my problem.

    So once again, please cite the date, place and name of the person who
    said what you claimed was said.

    You need to work on basic reading comprehension, elementary argument
    structure, and avoid the distraction tactics of an infant. A hint: "straw man" fallacy
    eawckyegcy, Mar 1, 2005
  11. Milena

    Drifter Guest

    I think the best I can do is quote "The Digital Shopping Dilemma" by
    Mike Johnston.

    (full article at )

    Begin quote...
    The Shopping Dilemma
    All over the internet, it seems like gearheads and equipment mavens
    are always industriously comparing the merits of three competing
    digital cameras. Doesn't matter which ones you pick — six months ago
    it was the D100, S2, and D60. Last year it was the Dimage 7, Sony
    F707, and Coolpix 5000. Next summer it will be the 10D, *ist D, and
    S3. The momentous question always is, Which One Shall I Buy?

    Is it just me, or does this whole exercise strike anybody else as
    being faintly silly? In most cases, aren't all three of the cameras
    good ones? Aren't all three going to be old news within a year or two?
    Isn't it possible to find enthusiasts of all three models who love
    'em? Beyond fastidious little differences, brand loyalty, and personal
    preference, what the heck difference does it make? Buy one and get to
    work. Is it really such a hard shopping decision to make when all
    three choices are so close to being equivalent that it's hard to
    detect major differences at all?

    Any given person could almost blindfold themselves, pick one at
    random, and within a few weeks of acclimatization they'd have gotten
    used to the camera and be making nice pictures.

    When shopping decisions are easy, it's because there's a clear
    distinction. Like Goldilocks, we can see that one's too this, one's
    too that, and one's just right. However, when shopping decisions get
    harder and harder, it's usually because all the choices are getting
    closer and closer together, and one choice doesn't jump out as being
    clearly better than the others. This should make shopping decisions
    less important. Or so I'd think.

    Strangely, though, what this makes people do is buckle down and work
    harder and harder to reach their conclusions — and then it makes them
    doubly partisan and belligerent about the rightness of their choice.
    What's the point here? Ego? Arguing for the sake of argument?

    For Pete's sake. Here's the question: You're considering three
    competing cameras. They're all decent. Which one should you buy? And
    here's the right answer: one of 'em.
    ....end quote

    "I've been here, I've been there..."
    Drifter, Mar 1, 2005
  12. Milena

    Chrlz Guest

    As we all know, one should not clutter the 'net with an "I agree!!"
    post. So I won't post anything...

    Chrlz, Mar 1, 2005
  13. Milena

    Alan Browne Guest

    Most people serious about photography already have moderate to serious
    investments in lenses and flash systems for their film SLR's. So their brand
    choice is set unless they want to sell their equipment (at a loss) and buy all
    the new lenses and flashes to replace them (coupled with new sets of filters,
    cause the size isn't the same; ...etc).

    If I were building from scratch, It would likely be Canon for the simple reason
    that they seem to be well ahead of the pack in "35mm" size DSLR's. I don't like
    the Canon control layout (of the cameras I've used), but I'd get used to it.

    Alan Browne, Mar 1, 2005
  14. Canon
    1. Ergonomics
    2. Low-noise CMOS sensors
    3. Upgrade path, since Canon offers cameras in all segments from entry-level
    to professional, while Nikon has no professional models yet.
    4. Lens selection
    5. Vertical grip available, even for entry-level, not the case on Nikon D70
    6. Canon U.S. will repair Canon products, no matter where they are

    1. Nikon hasn't changed the F mount like Canon changed from FD to EOS
    2. Nikon has better flash attachments
    3. More used lenses out on the market, since Nikon has been building F mount
    lenses for so long
    4. 802.11 wireless option on some models
    5. 1.5 crop factor on their consumer and prosumer models, versus 1.6 crop
    factor for Canon on their consumer and prosumer models (unfortunately, Nikon
    hasn't come up with a smaller crop factor for a semi-professional or
    professional model).
    Steven M. Scharf, Mar 1, 2005
  15. He tries to be humorous, but I disagree with his conclusion. When spending a
    couple of thousand dollars on a purchase, it is rather important to
    carefully choose a product that meets your needs. While there may not be
    major differences, it's often the little differences that matter. Have you
    seen the whining on one of the Nikon forums regarding the lack of a vertical
    grip, and lack of mirror lock-up, on/for the Nikon D70? Have you seen the
    Russian firmware hack to add mirror-lock-up to the EOS-300D. Do the lenses
    you want exist for the body you are buying? It's not difficult to narrow
    down your choices by the features you need, followed by a more subjective
    process to select from the few models that are left.

    What I do agree with, is that once some people make a specific choice, they
    get belligerant about the rightness of their choice, and get extremely upset
    if anyone points out issues with whatever they have chosen. Fortunately, not
    all that many people are like this, and on Usenet they are easily filtered
    out with the "Block Sender" feature.
    Steven M. Scharf, Mar 1, 2005
  16. Milena

    Jeremy Nixon Guest

    Well, no, the real problem is when you go and try to ask other people for
    advice, and they are unwilling to accept that anyone might have different
    criteria than they do.

    For example, I have a D70 right now. I don't care if there's a vertical
    grip; I wouldn't get one if they offered it. I wish it *wasn't* built
    into the D2x, because I find it annoying, and I just hope that when shut
    off it doesn't get in the way. I never really used mirror lock-up when
    I had a camera (film) that did it, so that's not very important to me

    It's like when people are under the impression that anyone who is serious
    about photography, and certainly all professionals, always needs to shoot
    at ISO 1600. Heck, I've never even used my D70 at 800. So why in the
    world should ISO 1600 noise levels be a consideration for me? I wouldn't
    care if the camera didn't even *have* ISO 1600.
    Jeremy Nixon, Mar 1, 2005
  17. On 01-Mar-05 00:38:47, said
    I would suggest it is. The OP was reporting his experiences and your
    response was IMO rather insulting. Why is that necessary? If you don't
    believe him, fair enough, but inflicting this nonsense on what was a
    mature and interesting discussion seems rather anti-social to me.
    Thanks for your time.

    All the best,
    Angus Manwaring. (for e-mail remove ANTISPEM)

    I need your memories for the Amiga Games Database: A collection of Amiga
    Game reviews by Amiga players
    Angus Manwaring, Mar 1, 2005
  18. Milena

    eawckyegcy Guest

    Don't be a nitwit.
    When Walt Hanks (not the "OP", but hey) told us that some
    "representative" for a major camera/optical told him that you have to:

    "[...] plan on servicing my lenses annually and replacing my lenses
    every 3 to 5 years [...]"

    he was not a "reporting his experiences". In legal circles it is
    called "hearsay", and is not admissible evidence. Go ahead, google it
    up. Extra points to find out why.

    Hence my calls for the name of the witness and the venue where the
    alleged statement was made.

    I don't expect a postive response from Hanks, though. Indeed, I find
    it highly unlikely a "representative" of a major camera/optical company
    is going to tell a potential customer anything of the sort (even if it
    was true -- which it is most certainly not).
    Hanks was shovelling it fast and furious; Brian Baird called his
    bluff, and I concurred. If you like bullshit, stick to the card game.
    I'll repeat myself: don't be a terminally credulous dingbat.
    Pound sand, dude. Pound it hard.
    eawckyegcy, Mar 2, 2005
  19. Milena

    Walt Hanks Guest

    Nor will you get one. I don't comply to the demands of sniveling cowards
    who hide behind Usenet anonymity while spewing their filth.

    Should Brian or Angus request more detail, I would be happy to provide it.

    Walt Hanks, Mar 2, 2005
  20. Milena

    Drifter Guest

    Walt, just killfile the troll and save your bloodpressure <grin>

    "I've been here, I've been there..."
    Drifter, Mar 2, 2005
    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.