Getting frustrated with Nikon ... so, what about Canon, then?

[JerryPH]

Nikon on the other hand has absolutely no aversion to killing D3 sales by putting nearly all of the features of that camera in the D700 (AF system, weather sealing, etc.). For the consumer of Nikon gear, that's a win - I wish Canon did it too. At the business level you have to wonder what the heck Nikon is thinking.

Oh its not all there, trust me. The D3's AF is noticeably better, both faster and more accurate. The hardware may be almost the same, but the EXSPEED processing and programming is quite different in the D3 and the AF motor much stronger and faster. They were not stupid for sure when they made the D700 as good as it was, but they only borrowed some of the good stuff from the D3, not all... it has a lot more to it than is evident by looking at the spec sheet.

The real differences come when you use both and can see the advantages. For me, at the time the decision to purchase, the advantages were not outweighed by the extra costs. I made a decision based on the fact that I was never thinking to turn pro and my needs at the time.

I am now turning pro (I suck at predicting the future... lol), but if I had known I was going to turn pro, I would have invested the extra for the D3. Thats ok, I am far, far from regretting my decision. All this means is that if things go well for me, I have a good reason to get a D4... lol

To bring things back on topic, there is no such thing as a perfect camera, but the D40 is not really made to be a professional camera and has inherent strong limitations, specifically in the AF area. This is a very good reason to upgrade if the business demands it or you can afford it.

 

[epp_b]

I think he truly believes that. If they were focused at or near infinity then there wouldn't be any out of focus area behind the boat. However in pretty much every shot where you can actually see very far behind the boat you can see that there is out of focus area in either the water or whatever other background is behind the boat. (Sad that I have to point this out).

"Near" infinity, meaning closer to infinity than macro. The backgrounds are not that far out of focus. Enough semantics though.

Feeding the frenzy here is not going to give you an answer that you have not already settled on.

I haven't settled on anything yet, I was looking for opinions.

No, that's not normal at all. You are either extremely unlucky (like meteor strike unlucky) or you are doing something very wrong, no offense.

I guess I'm extremely unlucky I take good care of my equipment.

 

[itznfb]

I haven't settled on anything yet, I was looking for opinions.

look at any Nikon vs Canon thread and you'll find the "locigal" conclusion is always that they are both amazing slr and lens manufacturers and either one can suit anyones needs from amature to professional. (outside of specialized needs of course).
if you're stuck between the two the only thing it comes down to is personal preference.
in this thread you've made it seem as though you're blaming your results on your equipment rather than your lack of skill/experience and you think changing brands is going to solve that. i do not mean this in an insulting way nor am i saying that i have some vast amount of experience or am extremely skillful in the art of photography. but i do know that when i miss a shot of a dog catching a frisbee due to my camera/lens not focusing in time... it's not the camera or the lenses fault. it's mine. and the most expensive best equipment in the world isn't going to help me with my lack of skill.

 

[gsgary]

They're certainly focused near infinity.

Do you really believe that or are you just messing around?

I think he truly believes that. If they were focused at or near infinity then there wouldn't be any out of focus area behind the boat. However in pretty much every shot where you can actually see very far behind the boat you can see that there is out of focus area in either the water or whatever other background is behind the boat. (Sad that I have to point this out).

OP - You are clearly negating anything positive to do with Nikon here. Just go buy a Canon already and get it over with.

Thankyou :thumbup:

 

[gsgary]

I think he truly believes that. If they were focused at or near infinity then there wouldn't be any out of focus area behind the boat. However in pretty much every shot where you can actually see very far behind the boat you can see that there is out of focus area in either the water or whatever other background is behind the boat. (Sad that I have to point this out).

"Near" infinity, meaning closer to infinity than macro. The backgrounds are not that far out of focus. Enough semantics though.

Feeding the frenzy here is not going to give you an answer that you have not already settled on.

I haven't settled on anything yet, I was looking for opinions.

No, that's not normal at all. You are either extremely unlucky (like meteor strike unlucky) or you are doing something very wrong, no offense.

I guess I'm extremely unlucky I take good care of my equipment.

Are you trying to manual focus while the lens is set to AF that can damage the lens

 

[epp_b]

Are you trying to manual focus while the lens is set to AF that can damage the lens

Of course not (unless it's a true AF-S lens)

look at any Nikon vs Canon thread and you'll find the "locigal" conclusion is always that they are both amazing slr and lens manufacturers and either one can suit anyones needs from amature to professional. (outside of specialized needs of course).
if you're stuck between the two the only thing it comes down to is personal preference.
in this thread you've made it seem as though you're blaming your results on your equipment rather than your lack of skill/experience and you think changing brands is going to solve that. i do not mean this in an insulting way nor am i saying that i have some vast amount of experience or am extremely skillful in the art of photography. but i do know that when i miss a shot of a dog catching a frisbee due to my camera/lens not focusing in time... it's not the camera or the lenses fault. it's mine. and the most expensive best equipment in the world isn't going to help me with my lack of skill.

I'm not to claim to know everything, but I know what I'm doing. I know to pre-focus and maintain the focus on a moving subject. The fact of matter is that, sometimes, the focus is just dead wrong, even when I've done everything right.

 

[dizzyg44]

I will also say, since you current investment is relatively low, jump ship now if you want, Canon and Nikons are both very capable. I say this as a former canon user now using nikon that has also owned the D40.

Notice I no longer own the D40, even the D80 was a revelation compared to the D40, the D90 I know have even moreso..... (and yes Jerry, both D80/D90 have focus motors). Even using my 20 year old 80-200 push pull beats the focus speed of my old D40 with any lens with motor (even the sigma HSM lens).

I was about to move to D300, but my shooting needs my D90 is close enough to it to not justify the cost plus since all of my lens are FF I'm going D700 instead (unless I win the lottery, D3X lol).

As old and heavy as that old 80-200 is my D90 still has the strength in its motor to torque around quite nicely

 

[soylentgreen]

Your best bet is to follow the previous advice and take your camera and lenses into a store to test them both out. Put your lenses on a D90/D300 and try some of the better glass on your D40. That should give you a clue as to which may be under performing. I am not sure that switching systems will make a difference. Both make great products and you are comparing apples to apples. The main switch will be for ergonomics more than anything. Canon had a slight edge in the auto-focus area years ago, but that has all been negated by now. You will only notice the difference in the 1D series if you want that ultra fast, precise focusing. I have used both systems from top to bottom and the "lag" you are referring to could just be the body. They do not have the same processing power as the higher-end bodies. That AF speed is also in relation to not only the lens AF motor but also the aperature, lighting, contrast, etc.

 

[epp_b]

Yeah, I plan to make a trip (1 & 1/2 hours for me) to a camera store some time to do this. I notice some lag in other areas on the D40 (like surfing through the menus, for example) that I don't see on even the D60 or D90.

 

[gsgary]

Yeah, I plan to make a trip (1 & 1/2 hours for me) to a camera store some time to do this. I notice some lag in other areas on the D40 (like surfing through the menus, for example) that I don't see on even the D60 or D90.

Thats because they are better cameras, you can't buy a skoda and expect Ferrari performance

 

[inTempus]

Yeah, I plan to make a trip (1 & 1/2 hours for me) to a camera store some time to do this. I notice some lag in other areas on the D40 (like surfing through the menus, for example) that I don't see on even the D60 or D90.

Thats because they are better cameras, you can't buy a skoda and expect Ferrari performance

Never heard of a Skoda before. Googled them... they don't import them to the US! Darn it.

 

[JerryPH]

They're a Czech car. When I last visited my "old country", I stopped off at the factory. They were working on a rally version of the car... which I chuckled at because it was so small... until I learned that it held a 390HP turbocharged engine in a very light car... lol

Skoda has been around a loooooong time. Did you know that the english translation of Skoda is "a pity" or "a waste"... LOL !!

 

[inTempus]

Skoda has been around a loooooong time. Did you know that the english translation of Skoda is "a pity" or "a waste"... LOL !!

Too funny, does it have the same meaning in Czech or is there something lost in the translation?

 

[JerryPH]

Skoda has been around a loooooong time. Did you know that the english translation of Skoda is "a pity" or "a waste"... LOL !!

Too funny, does it have the same meaning in Czech or is there something lost in the translation?

Oh, no, it literally means the same thing in Czech.
The thing is, Skoda was the name of the originator, kinda like Ford.

 

[gsgary]

Yeah, I plan to make a trip (1 & 1/2 hours for me) to a camera store some time to do this. I notice some lag in other areas on the D40 (like surfing through the menus, for example) that I don't see on even the D60 or D90.

Thats because they are better cameras, you can't buy a skoda and expect Ferrari performance

Never heard of a Skoda before. Googled them... they don't import them to the US! Darn it.

They used to be rubbish, but now they are up there with the best, won european car of the year many times very reliable now