Nikon v. Canon? Getting into photography...

[The_Traveler]

it does go higher, but from the millions of picture i've seen comaring the two, the nikon always loses more sharpness than canon. hands down. guess it depends on what the poster is using it for.

While I generally leave pregnant women alone (the hormone storms, you know), you are just wrong on this. The D3 has been acknowledged by all sources as the high ISO leader.

But having a good camera doesn't make anyone a good photographer.
This kind of argument is silly, like comparing horsepower or genital size.

Get the kind of camera that fits your hand and style.
Either line is fine; anyone who tells you different is a boob.

 

[Socrates]

Hello all,

I recently began doing work with my school's Sports Department getting photographs and writing short stories for them. I am currently borrowing their Canon XTi w/ Sigma 28-107 and Tamron 70-300, but I would like to purchase my own dSLR as I don't plan to get out of photography any time soon, and actually hope to expand beyond sports into landscape and photojournalism.

I am currently unsure which I would be better set with getting. I was dead set on a Canon XTi like the one I am currently using, but I am a life long shooter and hunter and my loyalty to Nikon for binoculars and riflescopes has me looking at them as well.

My two current choices are the Canon Rebel XTi w/ kit 18-55 and some form of telephoto lens, or Nikon D80 w/ whatever standard lens they have and a 80-200 Nikkor lens with VR.

One thing the Nikon has going for it is feel, they fill my hand better and I like that. However, Canon costs less and it seems like I see more Canon cameras around the events I shoot than Nikon.

Can someone please offer insight to a confused newb?

Thank you.

Honestly, you can't go wrong with either Nikon or Canon. Get whichever one feels best in your hands. I personally don't like the 3rd party lenses. I settled on Nikon many years ago because I wanted Nikon glass.

 

[mstephens]

never-ending debate!!!

 

[JIP]

Why do we let this even get started. Everytime someone tries to slip it in with a different kind of question and we get the same answer. The only real answer is go to a store figure out wich one you like the best as far as handling and features go and buy that one. As long as you stick with one of the two C or N you will do just fine. Really both companies make fine cameras with excellent features and great glass and wichever one you decide on just don't look back.


Now can we lock this one? I think all of the standard things have been said.....

 

[Arch]

Why do we let this even get started. ....

Now can we lock this one? I think all of the standard things have been said.....

your bang on the money... i'd usually lock it.. but just for the OP's sake i'll leave it unlocked for now... but seriously anyone who wants to try and persuade people that there is a big enough difference between these brands would need thier head testing.

The advice is always the same... go in a shop and have a look at them.... pick the one you prefer.

 

[pregnantcowlady]

haha. not pregnant. only 19.

but okay, okay. i haven't seen the new d3 at work yet. i believe you.

now stop yelling at me!

 

[lifeafter2am]

haha. not pregnant. only 19.

but okay, okay. i haven't seen the new d3 at work yet. i believe you.

now stop yelling at me!

It's not just the D3 either, the D300 is supurb when it comes to high ISO shooting. I am not a Canon hater either, its just what the tests results show. I have shot both and really don't have any brand loyalty.











I have to ask about the name!

 

[Mav]

but seriously anyone who wants to try and persuade people that there is a big enough difference between these brands would need thier head testing.

There isn't. But... There are subtle differences between them that give them both advantages in various areas. Depending on what and how you shoot, that's probably worth knowing about.

It's not just the D3 either, the D300 is supurb when it comes to high ISO shooting. I am not a Canon hater either, its just what the tests results show. I have shot both and really don't have any brand loyalty.

I think the D300 is more of a mixed bag. It does "look clean" at high ISO, but it ends up washing away a lot of detail in the process via creative noise reduction algorithms. For some types of shooting that's ok, but not for all. After seeing the D300 high-ISO results, I've decided to stick with my D80 for awhile and invest in some good fast glass instead, and keep using a flash. I may eventually get a D300 anyways, but if I do it probably won't be for the high-ISO performance.

 

[pregnantcowlady]

haha. i don't really know.
i made it up in 7th grade with friends, and it's easy to remember, so i stuck with it. haha.

thats it. nothing special.
i should probably make up a really good story like i had a cow baby or something, but i don't really know.

 

[lifeafter2am]

I think the D300 is more of a mixed bag. It does "look clean" at high ISO, but it ends up washing away a lot of detail in the process via creative noise reduction algorithms. For some types of shooting that's ok, but not for all. After seeing the D300 high-ISO results, I've decided to stick with my D80 for awhile and invest in some good fast glass instead, and keep using a flash. I may eventually get a D300 anyways, but if I do it probably won't be for the high-ISO performance.

Thats not why I am picking it up either, but it was between that or a 40D, and all the results I have seen show the D300 on top. Personally, it really doesn't matter to me as I shoot mostly surfing, which isn't really reliant on high ISO performance. I like the 8fps, which is awesome, especially for the price versus a D3 or 1D.

 

[elemental]

As for the other brands outside of Canon and Nikon, some of them may offer you a better value up front, but I personally never considered them because of the fact that the potential for buying and selling used equipment is much much greater within the big two. Half of the lenses I have were bought used, and I'm about to sell a bunch of them to help finance one much nicer lens which will be easy to do also, because there's such a large market for used equipment. Can't say the same for Sony, Pentax, or Olympus. One of the big reasons I got into SLR photography is for trying out a bunch of different lenses and thus wanted to be able to buy/sell easily.

Edit: BTW, it's important to consider lens prices and availability too, although it's nearly impossible to figure out what you want until after you've already bought into a system. If you're serious about sports photography, you'd probably be better off with Canon. They have a more complete range of top-notch telephoto zooms, and their telephoto primes are often thousands of dollars cheaper than the Nikon equivalents. And since most sports shooters still shoot Canon and probably will be for some time, borrowing and trying out the Canon super-teles would be far easier if you already owned the Canon system vs Nikon.

As a Pentax shooter, I will have to disagree here. The amount of old Pentax glass floating around is incredible- someone on here once described it as "an embarrassment of riches." The K mount goes back forever, and therefore so does Pentax lens availability. If you are limiting yourself to lenses made in the last three years or AF lenses only, the big two probably come out on top, but who only uses AF lenses? The OP may, of course, be one of these people, but overall I think it is important to point out that there is a ridiculous amount of excellent glass floating around that will mount right up to my K100D, much of it older than I am. I am not sure about other brands, I am sure some have limited availability of used gear, but I do know that Pentax is definitely not one of those.

I really think the OP is poorly served by listening to those who believe Canon and Nikon are the only brands that matter.

 

[JIP]

your bang on the money... i'd usually lock it.. but just for the OP's sake i'll leave it unlocked for now... but seriously anyone who wants to try and persuade people that there is a big enough difference between these brands would need thier head testing.

The advice is always the same... go in a shop and have a look at them.... pick the one you prefer.

Well barring that mabye there should just be a sticky it can be titled "Nikon V Canon the eternal debate" with mabye a subtitle of "dont forget about Pentax etc..."

 

[Mav]

As a Pentax shooter, I will have to disagree here. The amount of old Pentax glass floating around is incredible- someone on here once described it as "an embarrassment of riches." The K mount goes back forever, and therefore so does Pentax lens availability. If you are limiting yourself to lenses made in the last three years or AF lenses only, the big two probably come out on top, but who only uses AF lenses? The OP may, of course, be one of these people, but overall I think it is important to point out that there is a ridiculous amount of excellent glass floating around that will mount right up to my K100D, much of it older than I am. I am not sure about other brands, I am sure some have limited availability of used gear, but I do know that Pentax is definitely not one of those.

It's all relative. There's still far more used Nikon, Canon, and even Sony/Minolta glass out there than Pentax. Go search on KEH.com and you'll see. And the local pro shop is usually loaded with used N/C lenses, but just a small corner for other stuff. I think it's safe to assume that most newcomers are going to be sticking with AF lenses, and Nikon has a 10-to-1 advantage there vs Pentax. 27 pages of listings vs just 3 for Pentax on KEH. One lens I'm looking at for Nikon (an 80-200 f/2.8 telephoto zoom) there are 2 pages of listings just for that lens alone. I didn't see any Pentax f/2.8 telephoto zoom listings at all. That's what I'm talking about.

I really think the OP is poorly served by listening to those who believe Canon and Nikon are the only brands that matter.

The market collectively already kinda sorta decided that Canikon are the only two brands that matter ages ago. Don't ask me why, but that's the reality of the market today. There's Canikon, and then everybody else. You also get far better aftermarket support with Canikon with third party lens makers. They all make their lenses for both Nikon and Canon, but commonly not for the other systems. If you decide you want a full professional DSLR, Canon and Nikon both have multiple options to choose from vs zero from the other systems. And you'll still be able to keep using a lot of your lenses and accessories as well and won't have to re-buy. 5 of my 8 lenses will work 100% on a full-frame FX Nikon DSLR.

If you've got a collection of old Pentax lenses that you can use, it certainly makes total sense to buy into the Pentax system. I didn't. Or if you know you're never going to want to step up to a full professional DSLR and professional lenses and just have basic needs as far as lenses, it certainly makes more sense to consider the other systems as well. I can't say that either.

Personally I'm a fan of underdog companies, but none of the other systems really stood out to me. Are they pushing some groundbreaking revolutionary new sensor? Nah. Are there some incredibly unique lenses that you can't get within Canikon? Nah. Is there some huge value, feature, or functionality that they offer? Nah. Actually Nikon led the way on D40 pricing for awhile. I really wish one of these companies would take some risk and come out with some revolutionary new sensor technology to get people excited, like this Kodak sensor I read about awhile ago that didn't use Bayer interpolation and gave far greater image quality than a lot of what was on the market. Or how bout some dedicated black and white DSLR with just a sensor, no stupid color filters, and no stupid Bayer interpolation once again? The sensitivity and dynamic range would be HUGE. Swappable back consumer level DSLR where you can swap in different sensor backs depending on what you want to do? There are risks these companies could be taking that have the potential to really let them stand out, but instead I think they're all just playing it safe and trying to stay in business. That doesn't get you noticed, unfortunately.

Anyways, I'm sure this thread will be locked now. :mrgreen:

 

[MelsBels]

Don't get a Pentax ist D...whatever you do. I owned it for a few years and upgraded to a Nikon D80...LOVE my D80 and I hav since realized the different creatures they are..totally. The D80 is much better performance wise and focuses so quickly in comparison. The Pentax, I will admit, took some AWESOME photos....but I really like the D80 better overall.
Now, the best 35mm I have ever owned was a Pentax...too bad it went kaput when it's life was over....about 15 years.
CNET.com is a nice place to read reviews, ratings, and statistics on cameras!

 

[Socrates]

Now, the best 35mm I have ever owned was a Pentax...too bad it went kaput when it's life was over....about 15 years.

Mine still works after 45 years! (Once/year, I test it just for giggles.) It's a "Spotmatic," billed as the "world's first automatic SLR" because there was no need to stop down manually before pushing the shutter button. I am the original owner.