Nikon or Canon Lens ?

[scomeau1]

I'm looking to outfit a new camara system with a large selection of lens and would like to know what company has a better lens selection ?

Thanks For your input.

 

[weepete]

6 and half a dozen. Both have a wide enough range of OEM and 3rd party lens options.

 

[AceCo55]

They both have very extensive range of lenses ... but that isn't necessarily what you should use as a basis for your decision.

What lenses do you need for the types of shooting YOU will do?
Which system has the best lenses and the best range of lenses for THAT type(s) of photography.

When I decided to go with Nikon, it was because they had a superb 200-400mm lens that was perfect for a lot of my sports photography. Canon didn't have an equivalent of the same quality.
Both had superb 70-200mm lenses, both had superb 24-70mm lenses.
It was just that ONE lens that I wanted above everything else that made me choose Nikon.

You won't go "wrong" with either Nikon or Canon.
They are both wonderful systems ... but one MAY have the LENS that you can't do without.

 

[nerwin]

Both have a large selection of available lenses..but I think Nikon has the edge because they haven't changed their mount since 1959, so pretty much any lens since then will mount and work on modern DSLR bodies with limitations of course.

 

[KmH]

Canon last changed their mount, to the EF mount, in 1987.
The EF mount replaced the FD mount, which replaced the FL mount, that replaced the R mount.
Canon added the EF-S mount for it's crop sensor cameras in 2003.
Canon EF-S lenses cannot be mounted on full frame Canon EF camera bodies.

Nikon DX (crop sensor) and FX (full frame sensor) lenses can be used on both DX and FX camera bodies.
Older Nikon lenses may not have a CPU or auto focus motor in them. With no CPU an older Nikon lens would not meter or AF.
However, metering and focus can be done manually.

 

[beagle100]

I'm looking to outfit a new camara system with a large selection of lens and would like to know what company has a better lens selection ?

Thanks For your input.

Obviously Canon has a better selection of lens
but can you afford them?
e.g. 400 2.8 - $10,000, 200-400 - $10,000
pretty soon you're need a 2nd or 3rd mortgage

 

[Solarflare]

I'm looking to outfit a new camara system with a large selection of lens and would like to know what company has a better lens selection ?

Tough.

For example a diamond of the Nikon lens setup was the 14-24mm f2.8. Now Canon published a 11-24mm f4, which seems to be excellent. Then again one can get the new Tamron 15-30mm f2.8 VC for either system as well, and this seems to be optically at least as good as the 14-24mm.

Another very nice practical lens of Nikon was their 16-35mm f4 IS(*). Canon offers exactly the same now. Neither of them is optically a stunner, but still.

On the other hand, Canon had a great 70-200mm f4 IS(*), which Nikon only introduced just when I got my camera 2 years ago.

Canon had a 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 IS(*) thats pretty popular, Nikon recently updated their 80-400mm f4.5-5.6 IS(*) for much of the same effect.

Canon also clearly has the better specialized lenses, like their tilt/shift can tilt and shift independently or that 65mm macro lens with 1:1 to 5:1 magnification. They also have a famous 85mm f1.2 hulk of a portrait lens, though the Nikon AF 135mm f2 DC is also quite famous. Still, an f1.2 lens with AF is nothing to sneeze at. Theres also a 50mm f1.0 for Canon, but thats prohibitevely expensive and only available on the used market.

Canon recently upgraded their 24-70mm f2.8. It is twice as expensive as the precedessor, but optically excellent. The Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 is a bit dated now. Neither of them offer IS; for that one has to get the Tamron version or use the Canon 24-70mm f4 IS.

Obviously Canon has a better selection of lens
but can you afford them?
e.g. 400 2.8 - $10,000, 200-400 - $10,000
pretty soon you're need a 2nd or 3rd mortgage

What the heck ? Nikon also offers a 400mm f2.8 IS(*) and a 200-400mm f4 IS(*) ?




(*) IS = Image Stabilization. Actually only Canon uses the shortcut "IS", everybody else has some other shortcut for the same. Nikon calls it "VR" for "Vibration Reduction", Fuji calls it "OIS" for "Optical Image Stabilization", Tamron calls it "VC" for "Vibration Compensation", Sigma calls it "OS" for "Optical Stablization", Sony calls "OSS" for "Optical Steady Shot", etc.

 

[raventepes]

One thing to consider and question, is which format are you wanting? Full frame or APS-C? Everyone seems to be assuming full frame, which is fine, but that may not be the case.

Also worth considering is that if you want to base your system around lens selections, that's your thing, but take it from experience in that if a camera just plain doesn't feel right in your your hands, it can make or break your experience. I switched from Canon to Nikon because Canon's just never sat right with me. Making the switch to Nikon made a world of difference.

Realistically, you take a system as a whole. If you don't have a specific lens, or it isn't available, you simply adapt and/or work around it.

 

[JacaRanda]

One thing to consider and question, is which format are you wanting? Full frame or APS-C? Everyone seems to be assuming full frame, which is fine, but that may not be the case.

Also worth considering is that if you want to base your system around lens selections, that's your thing, but take it from experience in that if a camera just plain doesn't feel right in your your hands, it can make or break your experience. I switched from Canon to Nikon because Canon's just never sat right with me. Making the switch to Nikon made a world of difference.

Realistically, you take a system as a whole. If you don't have a specific lens, or it isn't available, you simply adapt and/or work around it.

I agree. In addition to feeling right in your hands, the look and feel of navigating the menu system may be a deciding factor as well. Many may say you get used to those types of things, but that does not work for everyone.

 

[Solarflare]

Everyone seems to be assuming full frame, which is fine, but that may not be the case.

Thats because of context.

The APS-C lens lineup of both Canon (EF-S) and Nikon (DX) certainly ... has room for improvement, to say the least.

For example the lens lineup of Fuji X is already clearly superior to either of them. Plenty of good prime lenses, including for wide angles.

Nikon on the other hand currently has four DX prime lenses, which is one fisheye (AF-S 10.5mm f2.8 fisheye), two macro lenses (AF-S 40mm micro and AF-S 85mm f3.5 VR micro), and only one regular prime, the 35mm f1.8.

One can substitute telephoto lenses with FX lenses, such as the 50mm f1.8 which is very popular with DX shooters, but otherwise its only zooms, zooms, more convenience zooms, more superzooms. Dark, darker, the darkest, redundant, more redundant, even more redundant, the most redundant.

This is not compareable at all with the situation for full frame, in which Canon and Nikon are certainly leading over any alternative. Plenty of zooms for any need, plenty of primes for any need, plenty of speciality lenses too, and then theres the alternative offers from Zeiss, Sigma, Tamron and others as well on top of it.

 

[PaulWog]

Obviously Canon has a better selection of lens
but can you afford them?
e.g. 400 2.8 - $10,000, 200-400 - $10,000
pretty soon you're need a 2nd or 3rd mortgage

Uuuhhhh... what??? Nikon and Canon have a fairly equivalent lens lineups, with some differences that could sway a new buyer with deep pockets either way.

 

[petrochemist118 143]

Either have far more lenses than you would ever need, and many other manufacturers fill the full range of useful lenses too.
AFAIK its only in the real extremes that either Canon or Nikon can claim any sort of uniqueness.
Canon do the MP-65E (giving 1-5 times macro exclusively) & Nikon did a 220° FOV fisheye. .. If you need one of those then it might be a reason for choosing that brand.

IMO how the camera fits in your hand, how you get on with the menu system/button layout etc will be FAR more important.
I shoot Pentax & Micro 4/3, and have never found a shortage of lens options for either. The areas they have less options in are well outside any reasonable price range. (I'd like to be able to use a 600mm f/2.8 with fast AF, but I doubt I could carry it far, and I need my house.)

 

[JoeW28]

Not sure if it's your phrasing or the actual intent, but I don't think you should make a decision based on who has the largest selection of lens. The reality is that both makes have a ton of lens (more than you'll ever own). And both make a lot of good lens.

Nikon/Nikkor got it's rep by making lens. And they didn't shift mounts like Canon did. But the reality is...you can find good lens with off-brands too (like Sigma or Tamron).

Yes, buying a lens is critical, probably more so than the camera (though I do agree with the post that a particular model ergonomically make work for you when another one just doesn't feel right). But it's far smarter to ask: what do I want to shoot and what glass to I need to shoot it? And then start evaluating.