So is nikon a better company than canon

[Dao]

I do not think I will compare the companies.
If you are used to Nikon system, stay with Nikon, if you can familiar with Canon system , stay with it.

I will not say Nikon is better, but I will say the D700 is a nicer camera than my Canon 40D. But it does not guarantee to produce award winning photos for me. So I will stay with my 40D for now.


So when Canon starts to re-works their whole line of DSLRs and people like them, are you planning to switch?

Canon was leading the games before and it seems Nikon bodies stay ahead in the game now. Who know which camera company is going to lead later. Maybe Sony or Pentax.

 

[Gaerek]

My first thought was that Derrel is a Nikon fanboy (well, he is anyway), but after reading his post, I realize he is right. I shoot Canon, I've been shooting Canon for 14 years now, and I don't see myself switching anytime soon. You could call me a Canon fanboy, and you wouldn't be wrong, but I won't blindly recommend Canon over Nikon simply because I need to justify my own love of the brand.

The bottom line here is that they are both very different companies that operate in very different ways. Nikon specializes in cameras and optics. They do sell rifle scopes and spotting scopes, but their bread and butter is cameras and lenses, specifically DSLRs, DSLR lenses, and point and shoot cameras. Contrast that with Canon that has their hand in many different products. They might be best known for their still cameras, but they also make video cameras, printers, scanners, calculators, copy machines, and projectors. They are very diversified, but they aren't really specialized.

Nikon makes cameras to be usable by photographers first. Canon makes cameras to sell cameras. Why do you think they were the last to jump off the megapixel bandwagon? It's because, even though they knew high megapixels were killing their image quality, high megapixels would sell very well. Some would argue they still haven't gotten off that bandwagon.

So what does this all mean? Honestly, not much. Nikon cameras are awesome. Canon cameras are awesome. You're not going to be able to look at an image and say, "That was made by a Nikon." What it comes down to is how the camera works for you. I personally can't stand the ergonomics of Nikons. They don't feel good in my hands, and I have trouble finding what buttons do what. That's probably because I have used Canon for such a long time. But this is enough reason for me to not worry about the 2% better image quality or 4% better low light capability (made up numbers, by the way) that Nikon has. Find a camera that does what you want it to, feels good in your hands, and makes good pictures. Both brands make great products.

 

[djacobox372]

Derrel I'm not going to pretend to know everything your are talking bout but if what you say is true then why is it the majority of pro sports photagraphers I see on the side lines of the fields are using Cannon lenses.

Because your perception is skewed by Canon's white lenses. Nikon's black lenses just aren't as promenent. At most professional sporting events the mix is always very close to 50% Canon/50% Nikon.

The fact is, more top pro sport shooters shoot with Nikon gear, for all the reasons Derrel outlined above..

Not true, I'm a nikon shooter and I will free admit that Canon does have a much larger presence in professional sports photography. This is WHY they went with white lenses, to show off this fact.

But there's a simple reason as to why, and it has no bearing on the current differences between the cameras. Nikon was very late to produce a long telephoto lenses with fast and accurate focusing, this led most pros to opt for canon "at the time." And once you invest in gear, you tend to stick with that brand.

If you were to watch a pro-game in the mid 90's you'd be lucky to see one nikon shooter in the sea of canon cameras. It wasn't until the late 90's that nikon produced 300mm and 400mm lenses that could compete with canon.

Nikon has been making some serious inroads into this lost market, but they haven't reached parity in popularity just yet--even though their on-body autofocus system is better, and lenses are just as fast and accurate.

 

[Overread36]

Pfft Canon are way better- they have Nikon totally and utterly beat in the 5:1 macro world!
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5203/5313494861_30bbdfa8bb_o.jpg


granted that is a rather... tiny world - but its important darn it!!

Otherwise I've yet to see any photo that a Canon camera could take and a Nikon could not - and vis versa. Heck the same is true of even smaller companies like Olympus. The little differences are important, but they are only important to specific people not to the whole brand. It's only when you bring your criteria to the table that you can weigh up the different options and work out which is the best for you.
Also as for controls - eh - Canon users find Nikon confusing and visversa again - and Pentax are just nuts - difference interfaces always feel odd; especially so if you don't really like picking up the camera to start with

Also remember most of the "differences" people harp on about are body differences, not glass; bodies are designed to be short term investments these days; they'll last a good while, but are still not aimed at lasting 10-20 years (barring 1D line bodies possibly.....) like a pro lens.

 

[vtf]

I press button on my Canon, it clicks and make the demons appear in the camera. Thats good enough for me.
Why doesn't anyone have a Sony vs. Pentax thread?

 

[gsgary]

Nikon are not better than Canon and Canon are not better than Nikon, the most important part of the equitation is behind the veiwfinder

 

[KmH]

Nikon also makes microscopes. Likely the most technically demanding optics Nikon makes are steppers for doing photolithography in the semiconductor integrated circuit industry.

Sony makes Nikon's image sensors to Nikon design and specifications, and guess who Sony buys their photolithography steppers from?

Stepper - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Scarecrow]

I feel Sony is only in this market for capita and nothing more. Hence why they bout out Minolta in the first place...so they could step into the market of DSLRs. I so loved my old school Minolta 35.....

 

[MissCream]

KmH are you a robot?

 

[CCericola]

There is not much I can say that has not already been talked about. There are several companies that rent equipment, some stores will let you take a body and lens out for testing if you are serious about buying. Try them all out and see which one you like better. BMW's are not the BEST car on the road but I like them. Canon isn't the best camera on the market but I like them. Go, Try, Shoot. Then make up your own mind.

 

[usayit]

Dao has the best answer. The differences between the two are so small and the investment loss is so large when switching that any non professional willing to make a switch or feel the need for reassurance when one brand skips ahead of another really just needs to go out and shoot. It doesnt matter what everyone says or what the current marketshare looks like. You dont need to seek a group to get together with and sing Kumbaya. If the system meets your needs than thats all that counts.

In the years working retail, I think I recall three or four people who explained their reasons and I said... wow its a time for a switch. All other times it was a lot of BS to get them to switch and spend more cash doing so.

I personally prefer the Canon bodies and lenses..... never had a problem with their design or interfaces.


Oh yeh... To say that a diversified company is a bad thing is just plain stupid. If you think that the different entities of a large company do not operate independently with a certain amount of autonomy simply doesnt have enough insight into the corporate. Some of the best products come from corporations that have dozens of varying goods and services.... some of the worst products come from corporations that do well in other areas that the public sees little of. Toyota, johnson and johnson, Mitsubishi, Motorola, McDonalds are all involved in goods and services we would all be surprised to hear. JJ in IT services. Mitsubishi has components in almost every single car on the planet. Motorola makes components for weapons. McDonalds makes a large portion of income from real estate... just to name a few.

This is as misguided as thinking that every single employee of HP is involved with printers... my personal pet peeve. I cant tell you how many people asked me to fix their printer.

 

[Snakeguy101]

Cannon has proven their abilities in the point and shoot market (take a look at the cannon s90 series which is comparable and much lighter and more compact than nikons G11 series) but when it comes to advanced SLR, I have my faith in Nikon.

 

[ghache]

KmH are you a robot?

He got 10 interesting facts that he likes to shoot in threads over and over. "Sony is making nikon's sensors" is one of them.

 

[Ryan L]

:waiting: Seriously.....This topic....AGAIN?

 

[adversus]

I'm not responding to the original thread. But after reading through this, I have a geek-man-crush on KmH.