Nikon vs. Canon

OH Wow!!!! sorry, didn't mean to start a fight! it's a good thing you (ladyphotog and newrmdmike) are hopfully miles away from each other! lol ok.. ummm.... sort of fredcwdoc. But believe me I won't ask this question again. I knew that either you are a NIKON user or a CANON user. I guess what i was looking for is the pros and cons of both. And i guess what i was looking for is the cons of a NIkon from a Nikon user and the cons of a Canon from a canon user. i think then i would get the truth. Now i'm not saying you aren't telling me the truth. I just don't like the heat that is going on! scary! :) smile everyone. ;) So really I didn't get my answer that i was looking for, but i did get, it is merely a personal opinion.
 
darich said:
I think newrmdmike was merely pointing oiut that the original poster didn't ask about medium format v 35mm or v any other type of film. The original question, I believe, was should i buy a canon dslr or a nikon dslr.

I'm not disagreeing on the quality of medium format (although I've never used it) but that should be discussed on another thread methinks:mrgreen:

And if you look at my original post I was talking about Nikon and Canon and telling Mel that it was all about the glass. Why do people think that you can't have a friendly debate so therefore they have to intrude into something that was resolved with no problem whatsoever? Mike and I are cool, no hard feelings, just passionate about what we believe.
 
I, being a Ritz Camera employee would have to say I used to fall into the same trap of trying to switch a person and steer them away from what they ask for in my case being a Nikon person I have tried to sway people from Canon to Nikon. I have changed this attitude and think that if you stick with Canon or Nikon for a DSLR you can't go wrong. Now I know there will be people probably chiming in eventually saying "what about Olympus, Pentax, etc." but a few months ago they probably said the same thing about Minolta. The best way to choose between brands is to feel the camera in your hand, evaluate some of the features that differ between the 2 and decide for yourself. This is the age-old debate with alot of passion on both sides but that should tell you that there is really no absolute answer.
 
heck yeah, me and mel are cool, we go way back. lol.

I will say on her behalf that i too believe that nikon has the 35mm film market hands down.
 
It doesn't matter what system you shoot. Both of them are being used professionally all over the world and will deliver results if you know how to use them.

Optically, they both have their dogs and gems. Leica and Zeiss glass outperforms either one of them. When comparing nikon vs canon glass - you're splitting hairs. Some lenses are a bit better - some a bit worse. Good ones cost one to two grand each.

For studio the camera body doesn not matter at all. In fact I would buy a D50 or similar for studio shooting, because you don't need autofocus and the extra features.
 
It's like asking a redneck what's better, Dodge or Ford.

Either one will suit you fine pic the one that feels more comfortable
 
I use Canon... not by choice but because that's what was given to me. I can't speak for digital because I'm still using film however I will point out one thing which might help you mel. I've been looking at used lenses for the past month or two and it seems like there's a better supply of Canon lenses to choose from. If you're like me (shoestring budget) this means a lot. I can't afford to drop 700.00 on a new lens (omg that's a months worth of daycare for my daughter). I'm sure that each brand has their pro's and cons but in the end they both offer very well made equipment. Which ever brand you choose you're likely to get your moneys worth. good luck.
 
Flip a coin.

Not helpful, but neither are N vs C conversations generally. For every pro there will be an equally good con from the other side.

Right, so here's the experienced and biassed opinon of one guy....

Nikon make sharper primes.
Canon make better AF.

For studio work, where you're mainly aiming for sharpness(?) then Nikon. For studio work where you don't trust your ability to focus as much as AF, then Canon. Goes both ways you see?

I won't go any further cos there really isn't a lot in it from my pov. I'm a Nikon film, Canon digital convert. There is so little in it that other factors may influence your purchase such as pre-owned kit, experience with button placement, brand allegience etc.

Rob
 
on the field of SLR I started with a Canon film SLR .. and that means I have lenses and I got used to handling a Canon.

Now when I touch a Nikon it is confusing, all the wheels and buttons are in the wrong places FO ME .. for others it might be the other way around ;)

Also I wanted full frame since I am lazy and don't want to translated focal lengths all the time ;)

So that is why I decided for Canon DSLR.

Still I think Nikon makes both good cameras and lenses, as does Canon (even though this is debated). So in another world with a different personal history I might be a follower of Nikon ;)

Oh, and I even have Nikkor glass.... in my film scanner ;)


In any case, one should play with the cameras of different brands and then compare what feels best .. JMHO.
 
JIP said:
Now I know there will be people probably chiming in eventually saying "what about Olympus, Pentax, etc." but a few months ago they probably said the same thing about Minolta.
Yep, and people are still using Minolta cameras. Sony has adopted their system. Granted it must be annoying for Minolta users, but it's not as if their existing gear has suddenly ceased to work. Olympus are going their own way with the four thirds thing and of couse they're not the natural choice of professionals, but I don't think they ever claimed to be. Meanwhile Pentax have moved on from their insistence on making only entry-level models with the K10d, and I don't think the future looks particularly bleak for their user base. Again that user base may not include that many professionals, but that doesn't mean choosing their products is a wrong or foolish decision (which is sort of implied by saying that only with Canon and Nikon can you not go wrong).

Sorry, I know you've heard it all before. That's what happens in these threads; the Canon people tell you to go for Canon, the Nikon folks say Nikon, other folks say go for either but don't even think about anything else, and those of us who use anything-else get annoyed. Meanwhile I imagine the dedicated medium and large format people watch on bemused. Just like the film vs digital debates, "deja vu" doesn't even begin to cover it...


Alex_B said:
one should play with the cameras of different brands and then compare what feels best .. JMHO
Amen. All the theory, tests, graphs, reviews, testimonials etc are great but they won't really tell you which product feels more comfortable and convenient to use and produces the most pleasing images for you personally. That's something you have to figure out for yourself. Go to the shop with a blank memory stick, hold the various cameras in your hands and take a bunch of shots with them. One may not automatically feel more right than another; therefore find friends or associates with dSLRs and see if you can borrow theirs.
 
everyone is forgetting a very important factor here. who is going to serve you best in the future. if a company is going to abandon somthing and try somthing new, that may prevent you from using equipment you've spent money on. if you have tons of gear and tons of money invested in a system, and don't research all of the options out there you could get screwed.

more important than what feels right, or what looks slightly better, is who is going to continue to cator to your needs. if nikon suddenly went full frame, a lot of nikon users out there would be ****ed, it means your nice wide angle dx lenses are trash on a full frame body.

the reason i would say canon is the smartest investment is because they have continued to imrove their digital line.

Nikon has pretty much just upgraded the same system - making wide angle dx lenses etc means they plan on NOT going full frame.


canon also has introduced cheaper full frame bodies, just compare the price of 5d to d2x.

so, as many people on this thread have said, they are about the same, or that both are good enough. thats just on the performance end of current models. what about the economical end? what about the customer service end? is nikokn as financially stable as canon? who is improving?

unless you just have money coming out your ass then shouldn't everyone here be concerned with their systems future? nikon vs. canon is important.

most people here would agree that canon has nikon beat in the digital market. thats a huge deal considering that nikon isn't making but one film camera anymore, and there isn't exactly a huge demand for it . . .

i think that choosing canons system could be considered a smarter investment than nikons.

AND I SHOOT NIKON
 
I'm a complete noob so my opinion may be worth snot but you all have the priviledge of it anyways...

I ran into the same debate with the camera salesmen that you are facing, about 2 months ago. I ended up going with the Nikon (albeit a D50, rather than a D200) simply because it felt comfortable in my hands and I found most of the controls intuitive (to my taste, not to anyone elses).

I get the feeling that either way I might have went I would have been happy with the purchase (aside from the fact that the canon just felt like a cheap digicam in my hands). I'm just learning about photography so I am not so worried about all the professional features that I might miss out on, on one or the other. If I learn better down the road, or find a niche that I really enjoy then that will be the time to re-examine my camera choice.

All in all, probably a really naive reason to choose a camera but I'm happy with my decision and that's all that matters to me.
 
cptnwinky said:
I ended up going with the Nikon (albeit a D50, rather than a D200) simply because it felt comfortable in my hands and I found most of the controls intuitive (to my taste, not to anyone elses).

This, to me, still feels like a fairly good reason to choose a camera system. If I find that a system's ergonomics and operation is inconvenient and irritating and find it difficult to achive the results I want with said system, then repeating a mantra of "I have made a sensible investment... I have made an economically sound and pragmatic choice and am well insured against future developments" is not going to make it better.

Are Nikon users who buy lenses designed for APS-C really be ****ed? Of course the lenses would be no good on a full-frame body... but you said yourself that Nikon isn't making a full-frame body; I expect the people who buy those lenses will be aware of that. If cameras, lenses, flashes and accessories were programmed to immediately stop working the moment the competition makes something better, then they would be ****ed. But Nikon cameras and lenses continue to work, and continue to sell, despite the presence of the 5D on the market. And until it's proven that second-hand cameras transmit leprosy, I don't see why Nikon owners would find it impossible to sell on or trade in their gear should they decide to switch.

newrmdmike said:
AND I SHOOT NIKON

I think we got that :)
 
having used the D50 and the Rebel XT, I would still have to go with my Pentax *istDL. obviously pentax doesn't have a huge line at the moment but with the announcment of the K10D I am not in the slightest bit worried they will be dissapearing anytime soon. You really just need to pick something you like. Personally I love the menu's on the pentax as well as its unsurpased high ISO clarity (at least for the entry levels). Just pick what feels good to you, because if you were really looking for the best of the best, you wouldn't be looking at small format camera's anyways.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top