Brand name Fanboys/girls

[bahandi]

(Please note... I'm not looking to start an argument. Nor am I looking to get people to repeat stuff that may have been said already. So if all that needs to be done is to post a link, please do so.)

Question 1: Why do Canon and Nikon products seem to come out on top all the time?

When I first bought a camera, I picked up an Olympus... I believe it was the FE 70 or 700. Something like that. I liked the thing, it did what I needed it to do.

Later on, someone told me that Canon's were better, so I gave my Olympus to my mom and picked me up the model before the Canon SD 750. Further down the road, I 'upgraded' to the SD 750 itself.

Now, I find that I need a little more control, but probably couldn't invest the time into a DSLR so I picked up a 'bridge' type camera, the extended zoom or 'advanced' P&S ones (which is the camera I have now... the Olympus SP 550 UZ)

Excitedly, I called up my cousin and immediately, he shoots down my choice, citing that "Canons and Nikons were the best in the market, but for $250 cdn, as long as I was happy with it." What gives?

Question 2: What are your criteria in choosing a camera... other than the brand?

I'm always on Future Shop's website looking at the specs of anything I am thinking about buying. Recently, I've been looking into DSLRs, though I'm still unsure about the commitment.

What makes a camera 'better' than the other? Aperture range? Shutter speeds? Optical zooms? I knew nothing about all this when I picked up my Olympus.. just that it was selling for practically nothing. Now I know that it's:

• 18x optical and I think 100x total.
• ISO 50/100/200/400/800/1600/3200/5000
• Aperture Value f2.8-8.0 (i think the minimum is 4.5 at full zoom)
• Shutter speed 15" to 1/2000
• 4.7 to 84.2 mm (lens length? lol... don't even know the significance of the length of lenses)

At first, I just wanted a huge ass display screen...:mrgreen: and the two Canons that I had gave me that.

Man, sorry for the novel.

Bahandi

 

[Sw1tchFX]

P&S cameras don't really matter, they're all the same anyway, they all have sensors smaller than your pinky fingernail, and the performance is pretty bad across the board with a few expections.


For Digital SLR's, company matters becuase everything about the camera is different. The button layout, size, sensor, lenses, everything except fot eh name on top the viewfinder.

I'm not going to say one is better than the other, becuase there is no best of the best, it's what is best for you.

For example, I don't really like the Ergonomics of Canon SLR's, especially the 1D's (2 hands to go through menu's? seriously now), Sony's give me cramps the button layout is so terrible, and I can't stand the 4/3rds aspect ratio so that rules out anything using those sensors.

If you shoot only once or twice a month with it, than it really doesn't matter, but if you shoot with it almost every day, than even the small things matter. That's why I shoot NIkon. For the most part, I love the ergonomics of my D70, and it only gets better with the D200/300 and D2/D3. The D2h is just pure joy to use becuase everything is instant, right where you'd expect the adjustments to be, and it fits amazing in the hands.

 

[jg123]

I got the olympus stylus 700 p&s because it offered a good value for the money, at the time it was about $300 and I liked that video with sound feature and some of the other extras, including its small size.

Everyone buys for a different reason, and sometimes it is purely based on brand.

 

[Mav]

All camera within a given class are going to be capable of about the same technical image quality with very little differences between them. Heck, a lot of the P&S cameras even use the same exact imaging sensor across all brands, and I bet a lot of them even use about the same lenses too. They're mainly exercises in systems integration with different companies putting the SAME components together in slightly different ways, with different control layouts, different menu systems and GUIs, and different bells and whistles. There's probably little if any difference between a Nikon or Canon or Olympus or Casio or Sony or whatever point and shoot camera in terms of technical image quality. Buy something that fits your hand nice, has menus that make sense, that fits in your pocket, or has the bells & whistles or controls that you're looking for. Or if you're my wife, whatever's cheap and comes in pink.

All DSLR systems within a given sensor size class are similar too (full frame is one class, Canon's 1.3x are sorta by themselves, Canon/Nikon/Sony/Pentax 1.5/1.6x are in another, and 2.0x Olympus are sorta by themselves too). These aren't just exercises in systems integration using other people's stuff though since these systems are proprietary by nature and a lot of the stuff is designed and produced in-house, including most of the LENSES. One of the bigger considerations to make in buying a DSLR system has nothing to do with the camera body itself but rather if the range of lenses is good enough for you and if they have what you're looking for. Nikon and Canon both have a full range of lenses and there isn't much missing, but there are some lenses that Nikon guys lust over that are in the Canon system, and vice versa. The companies do things different ways and have different philosophies. One system may do better in one area while another might do better elsewhere. Overall they're about the same though.

When it comes to DSLR systems, Nikon and Canon have the most complete lineup, and everybody else comes second. If you buy into a Pentax or Sony or Olympus DSLR system you might find everything you need until one day you decide you want to get really serious, and you just can't find what you need. Like a PRO level body, or a 300mm f/2.8 super-telephoto. Sony has one, but it's about $1500 more than on Nikon or Canon. You could buy the cheaper Canon/Nikon lens and another DSLR body to shoot it with and still come out ahead vs just buying the Sony lens itself. And what if you want a PRO level body? That's where the Nikon and Canon systems really excel. Anything you could ever want, they pretty much have between them. Can't say the same for the others, although they're all pretty much capable of about the same performance in given sensor size class, just like P&S's.

 

[RubyMagic]

Sigma point and shoot pwneth all others!

 

[Garbz]

Marketing and support. Nikon and Canon I would say have been in the business longer than any other modern high volume camera manufacturer. The name Nikon and Canon are often as well known as google or photoshop. Those not in the know will believe due to marketing that Nikon and Canon are the be all and end all of cameras even though technically there are other manufacturers that produce fantastic products too. Leica for instance.

The other thing is support. I chose Nikon because it allowed me to use a back catalogue of old Nikon lenses. They have a lens for every purpose, and a clear upgrade path. Canon and Nikon have cameras to suit every user whether consumer or professional or somewhere in the middle.

Looking at the other companies the worst in this case would be Sony. A company with no history of being in the photography industry bought itself into it, bought a company to produce lenses, and then released a camera. For more than a year they had a single SLR on the market.

That combined with my opinion of Sony as a company who likes to test the water and then jump ship does not make it a very attractive manufacturer. They still don't have a clear upgrade path with a total of 4 models on the market.

 

[Mystwalker]

I'm thinking that "those who do not know" will choose the DSLR that offer the most features. In most cases, the DSLR with the highest MP.

I would bet that if my wife wanted a DSLR, she will go Sony. If you put the A700 spec next to a 40D the Sony will look more feature rich. AND built in IS - WOW!!!

When I did my DSLR shopping, I wanted something with high FPS. A year ago, I did not find anyone else close to Canon/Nikon. XTi and D40x did not feel "solid" to me so I returned those. I wanted a D80, but noone had one I could touch. My next choice was a 30D which is what I have now. No regret with going with Canon.

 

[ScottS]

Sigma point and shoot pwneth all others!

You mean P&S....piece of ****, right?

JUST KIDDING GOSH!

No but i agree that for the most part P&S cameras are pretty much the same.

 

[mrodgers]

You mean P&S....piece of ****, right?

JUST KIDDING GOSH!

No but i agree that for the most part P&S cameras are pretty much the same.

Go out and compare a Sony DSC-S650 and any other sub-$100 camera and come back and make that statement. Or compare it to any other point and shoot camera. Cell phones do better photography work than that thing did.

 

[TamiyaGuy]

Question 1: Why do Canon and Nikon products seem to come out on top all the time?

Most probably because Canon and Nikon are the longest running camera companies, and the most popular. It doesn't necessarily mean they rule at everything, but they are certainly a very safe bet. Also, I know Nikon (and I think Canon) started out making lenses before they made actual cameras. Lens experience is far more important than electronics experience.

Question 2: What are your criteria in choosing a camera... other than the brand?

My criteria really wasn't that much. I inherited a Nikon F301 film SLR from my grandma, so I wanted something that was compatible with the 50mm F/1.8 lens I was given with it, I wanted something that was cheap, and I wanted it to feel "right" in my hands. So I went with the D40.

It was only later that I realised that the D40 had fantastic high-ISO images, a class-leading flash synchronisation speed (1/500s) and a sensor that's still good enough for 30" x 20" prints, which just made me glad I made the choice. They weren't my criteria in the first place.

 

[Antithesis]

Hasn't Pentax been around nearly as long as Nikon and Canon? And Leica has been around since the 20's, I think they pioneered 35mm film...

As far as point and shoots, I don't have a lot of experience with them. I'd probably look into camera's based on features. Right now, the only thing I'd even consider is the Canon G9 based on the images I've seen from the camera. The Sigma DP1 is amazing too, but they are just asking too much money for it.

People choose Canon and Nikon because they control the largest portion of the marketshare. Meaning, they have the most money for R&D and in the end they are the ones pioneering new technologies. There are specific reasons why they don't have in-body stabilization, one being that it's not as efficient (or so they'd have us believe). There are little convieniences that the other companies have developed (Live view, dust removal, etc.), but often times they are gimmicks to attract buyers, when the important stuff, like the sensor, are not very good.

Personally, I'd prefer to stick to one of the big two. Not because I'm dependant on the companies, but they just make better products IMO.

 

[TamiyaGuy]

Huh, I never knew Pentax had been in the market for so long. In that case, it's quite weird how Canon & Nikon got their (large) share of camera popularity, when Pentax didn't. I guess C & N pioneered newer technologies quicker.

After a bit of research, I've found out that Nikon released their first digital SLR camera in June 1999 (the Nikon D1), whereas Pentax released their first DSLR in 2003 (the *ist D). And, of course, longer in the running means more experience gained, so maybe that's why Pentax lost out on the popularity...

 

[ThePup]

Hasn't Pentax been around nearly as long as Nikon and Canon? And Leica has been around since the 20's, I think they pioneered 35mm film...

From what I can tell, Pentax started as a lens company, Asahi in 1919. Makes them older than Nikon and Canon.... At least for lens manufacturing experience.

Pentax was originally a model name of an Asahi camera, and was the first camera to feature a PENtaprism in a single lens refLEX camera (Guess PentAx sounded cooler than PentEx)

 

[Antithesis]

Well, Nikon was started in 1917 and Canon was started in 1930. And yes, it appears that pentax was started in 1919, so the whole "they started first" arguement doesn't work.

I think Canon and Nikon just have more aggressive marketing campaigns, meaning more people buy their equipment. It also means more growth, as I said before which also means more product development. I don't think I've ever seen a Pentax ad, but I have seen quite a few Sony ads, so they may emerge as the next big camera company.

 

[ScottS]

Go out and compare a Sony DSC-S650 and any other sub-$100 camera and come back and make that statement. Or compare it to any other point and shoot camera. Cell phones do better photography work than that thing did.

I was just kidding my friend.