Opening a can of worms here......

[USM IS]

I have been watching this board and others for a while. I have owned Canon since the Pelix was out. Are the Nikon boy's that much better with PP, or are the Nikon's sensor that much better than Canon? A lot say they don't really do any PP, but the pics they post are OUTSTANDINGLY sharp (Eric Diller for example) Now I know I am not very good, but trying to use sense and fairly good equipment, I can never even hold a candle in sharpness to these guy's! I use Lightroom, a heavy duty tripod, ballhead, fast shutter speeds. I mean I make a halfway good capture (for me) and I am always frustrated at the lack of sharpness, and vibrancy!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Any input, besides I don't know what I'm doing...........Really tossing around the idea of dumping everything and going Nikon...............Mike

 

[den9]

id say good glass will make a bigger difference than sharpness.

for me i went from nikon to canon because they have cheaper and better selection of lenses.

i wasnt heavily invested in gear yet so the change wasnt bad. whats your gear list?

they all have their ups and downs but i dont think the differences are great.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

A lot say they don't really do any PP, but the pics they post are OUTSTANDINGLY sharp

That doesn't mean they don't do any at all. A little sharpening to counter the softening done by the camera's software may not be considered doing PP.

A digital photo is more like a negative than a transparency. A negative always had some PP done to it (even if minimal) and, depending on who was doing it, you would get different results. Which, btw, is why transparencies where the standard in commercial work.

Hope that makes sense to you and that it helps.

 

[USM IS]

When you have to send a 1d Mark III back twice for focusing issues. 5,000 for a non focusing camera is a bit bush league to me. Best lens I have is the 300mm F2.8. Can't put the 1.4 tele on it, reminds me of Vivitar's of the 70's. I have mostly "L" glass. Totally unhappy with 180mm Macro. A lot of pics I post, most heard reply is "soft" focus. Some shots with 1d, some with 50d......below is about as sharp as I can get, period.....Mike

 

[EhJsNe]

As I see it, VERY VERY generally, Cannons seem to be more working cameras, and working photographers dont have much time to edit photos that much, if at all.
Nikons seem to be more everybody cameras, and the average joe has more time to edit photos and make them POP more.
Not to say working photographers dont use Nikon, I know I will use my D70 if I ever decided to make...or try to make...a career with photography.

But thats just an observation and I cant ensure its right...Ive seen amazing shots from both Canon and Nikon.
It really depends on the photographer and what they decide to do with their photos.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

Would pros use Canon if they couldn't get a sharp image?

The last I heard, plenty of them do use Canon.

 

[gsgary]

Canon 300mmF2.8L with Kenko 2x fitted
looks sharp to me, only PP done is slight level adjustment, Contrast and a bit of sharpening don't like to spend too much time messing with them

70-200F4L on a 10D

300mmF2.8L on a 1Dmk1

300F2.8L

 

[Vinny]

Besides having a decent lens, something that I learned yesterday here and it was said in this thread is sharpening. Apparently, it's needed in digital photography vs film (negatives were mentioned in this thread as well - didn't know they were played around with). I am going to play around with some photos that I thought should have been sharp and parts were not, maybe that's the part that you're missing in your photos; I'm hoping it makes a difference in mine.

 

[USM IS]

Canon 300mmF2.8L with Kenko 2x fitted
looks sharp to me, only PP done is slight level adjustment, Contrast and a bit of sharpening don't like to spend too much time messing with them

70-200F4L on a 10D

300mmF2.8L on a 1Dmk1

300F2.8L

Sharper than mine will do with no tele extender, I am jealous.......Mike

 

[cfusionpm]

Image sharpness comes heavily down to your lens. I've had the 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS for quite some time, and was decently content with it. However, recently I picked up the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II and the difference is instantly noticeable.

These are 100% crops from some quick test shots I took when I first got it to compare with my old 70-300:

^ 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM @200mm and f/5.6

^ 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM @200mm and f/5.6

No post processing was done to either image (other than to crop out a small chunk to reasonable size).

Anyone saying that Nikons somehow produce vastly better images than Canons (or vice versa) are just skewing arguments for the sake of hyping up their own brand. Good glass will take sharp images on just about any body. The body only really changes what features and how quickly.

 

[USM IS]

Thinking that every L lens I have is junk. They all give me a soft image on either body. 24-70 F2.8 L/180mm Macro USM L / 70-200 F2,8 IS USM Mark I L / 300mm F2.8 IS USM L. 1.4x Teleconverter Mark II. Sharpening in Lightroom can only be used a little or I get the white edge around image against background.

 

[cfusionpm]

Then its all about getting the right exposure at the lens' sweet spot. I know that my 50 1.4 is pretty soft until about f/2.2 and its sharpest point is about f/2.8.

You can conduct your own tests like I did or check out here to compare sharpness at different apretures for different lenses.

 

[Hardrock]

Check this site out I dont think those lens are soft the least bit!
Juza Nature Photography

 

[NateS]

Boy, I don't know. I sure see some extremely sharp photos from some of the Canon guys. I haven't ever had a Canon so I can't say for sure. I know that my Nikon is always very sharp (actually the glass I use is very sharp and the Nikon resolves it nicely). I rarely do more than some contrast, slight sharpening and selective color adjustments using control points. Not sure what other's do, but that's my general work flow for non-people shots.

 

[gsgary]

Thinking that every L lens I have is junk. They all give me a soft image on either body. 24-70 F2.8 L/180mm Macro USM L / 70-200 F2,8 IS USM Mark I L / 300mm F2.8 IS USM L. 1.4x Teleconverter Mark II. Sharpening in Lightroom can only be used a little or I get the white edge around image against background.

What focus points do you use ? what do you have your AI servo sensertivity set to ? Have you tried micro adjusting your camera to your lens ? because every 300F2.8L i have used has been super sharp