A lot of Nikon over Canon?

[Derrel]

If you want cheap lenses, Canon has plenty of them.

 

[itf]

Canon users buy Canon cuz they think they're cool with their white L lenses.

Btw, I think the reason that Canon is cheaper because there are basic accessories that it doesn't come with.

5DMII doesn't come with a hotshoe cover. Even a Nikon D3000 comes with one.
I also heard that most Canon lenses do not come with hoods and hoods are pretty expensive for a good lens.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

:roll:

 

[KmH]

Canon and Nikon approach camera design and marketing differently.

Canon's design and marketing is all about hype and pimping their gear. They cram as many mega pixels on a sensor as they possibly can so they can advertise a bigger MP number than Nikon, because they know most people think more is better, which isn't always true.
But, at the same time they leave out features, like spot metering in many of their entry-level cameras, the ability for the point of spot metering to move with the selected focus point in many bodies, a viable off camera flash control system for it's more up scale bodies, across the board color aware metering, users manuals seemingly more geared to people that want to use automatic features.

Nikon seems to be more about usability than hype.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Canon and Nikon approach camera design and marketing differently.

Canon's design and marketing is all about hype and pimping their gear. They cram as many mega pixels on a sensor as they possibly can so they can advertise a bigger MP number than Nikon, because they know most people think more is better, which isn't always true.
But, at the same time they leave out features, like spot metering in many of their entry-level cameras, the ability for the point of spot metering to move with the selected focus point in many bodies, a viable off camera flash control system for it's more up scale bodies, across the board color aware metering, users manuals seemingly more geared to people that want to use automatic features.

Nikon seems to be more about usability than hype.

Nikon seems to be all about the camera doing everything so the user doesn't need to learn the mechanics and the technical nuances of photography. The target market seems to be MWC's.

 

[Timoris]

Nikon seems to be all about the camera doing everything so the user doesn't need to learn the mechanics and the technical nuances of photography. The target market seems to be MWC's.

Married With Children?
Mate With Cannibals?
Majestic White Cormorant?
Mean Willies Conjecture?

Male With Camera?
Moderate With Cameras?

 

[Rocan]

Nikon feels good to me. The controls are in all the right places, and pictures appear more natural.

Not to say there isn't many good canons out there. there are.

Know whats fun? hand over a pro body to a person, and watch them take shots that look terrible.

Its the photographer, not the camera. With the digital hype, in the beginning the major advancements did cause a lot of bias (with each company one upping the other) but now that we can do stuff with digital that we could never do with film, I feel like photographers have to stop it with this nikon/canon war and just go out and shoot. Agree to disagree. I like Nikon. I have nikon lenses, so I'm more likely to buy another nikon.

So end this thread here; stop taking pictures of test charts and doing 300 percent crops on images shot at 5 million ISO and go take some real photographs. I seemed to be able to take pictures that looked great using an old, freebie Olympus C-2500l, even with its many, MANY limitations.

 

[Slaphead]

I really don't get why I see this Nikon Canon debate all over the internet, cropping up time and time again. Do you want to know the real reason that I use Nikon as opposed to Canon?

Well, I'll tell you anyway. One day I walked into a photographic store wanting to buy a DSLR. Knowing nothing about cameras at all I asked the the guy behind the counter what he would recommend. He then presented me with a Canon and a Nikon entry level model. I asked him what the differences were, and he replied they're both as good as each other. The Nikon cost slightly less so I walked out with the Nikon.

A few years down the road I've seen nothing really to make me want to switch, with the possible exception of that crazy Canon macro lens, the MP-65E or whatever it is.

 

[usayit]

I like slaphead's honest answer.

In 1998 I figure I should move into a more up-to-date camera system. I shopped around simply walked out with a Canon with a 35-105 f/2.8 Tamron (great lens btw). Nikon never presented a compelling reason to change. Its as simple as that. It wasn't until 2009 did I change to shoot with neither.

I wonder what all the other non-canikon shooters think of all this nonsense...

 

[imagemaker46]

I've just finished shooting the world swimming trials in Canada using Nikon for the first time, I've used Canon for 35 years. I did find positive and minor negatives with the D3s, but those are a result of only having the gear for a week and getting used to new controls and menus. The quality of the images from both Canon and Nikon are pretty much the same, until the iso goes over 2500 and then I would give Nikon a big edge. As far as fps, everything is pretty much similar. The cameras both feel comfortable, but the Nikon grip feels more stable, not a slippery as Canon. The D3s is definately more expensive than the MklV, so it comes down to personal choice and cost.

Nikon in Canada treats the professionals as professionals, Canon treats the professionals like amateurs. From a pure customer service standpoint, I like Nikon.