To Switch or not to Switch ?

Started May 8, 2012 | Discussions thread
David Hull
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,329Gear list
Re: Wouldn't put too much weight into this review..
In reply to bobn2, May 10, 2012

bobn2 wrote:

David Hull wrote:

My “go to” ISO for what I do is usually 400

If that is the way you are thinking about exposure, then you are probably right, that extended DR is not of much use to you in any case. Actually, what you are already doing is trading image quality to overcome Canon's poor low ISO read noise. In some cases you will be losing two stops of exposure over what you might have had, and thus most of the smooth high to mid tones which are one of the reasons for getting an FF camera in the first case. I don't know what f-numbers you are working to at your 'go to' ISO, but unless they are wide open, you might as well go to a crop camera and save yourself a load of money.

Basically, just like everyone else, I trade off the three legs of the stool, Aperture, SS and ISO. The aperture I use is usually determined by the DOF I want -- again pretty basic stuff. The push for me to the FF side was the desire to go wide with the better lenses available (24mm 1.4, 35mm 1.4 etc.) these are IMO some of the best lenses for shooting events indoors which I do a lot (company events, kids sports, the occasional wedding, etc.). The Nikon will do all this as well, but they didn’t build it with an EOS mount which becomes a big deal.

I think that this thread is about switching horses so for me the choice is stay with Canon for $0.00 (don’t upgrade), upgrade to 5DIII at a cost of $1500-$2000 (depending on what I could get for the 5DII). Or I could switch to Nikon at an estimated cost of $6000+ to change out all my stuff. I could also add a Nikon D800 at a cost of $3k but it would only make sense if I add a couple lenses to that like the 12-24 2.8 and maybe a 24-70. There is no sense buying a camera of the capability of a D800 and sticking anything but top drawer glass in front of it, so there we are talking $6000+ again.

The Nikon question then becomes one of whether the added DR is worth what it costs to get it. And then there is the whole issue of “the devil you know v.s. the devil you don’t” i.e. what little quirks does Nikon have that I won’t be happy with. For Canon the question is whether the things they fixed with the 5DII are worth $2k. That is more or less how I see it. Again, the DR is important to me, but probably not important enough to drive a switch since it has never been a limit to what I can do.

Philosophically: The problem that I see with Nikon is that they weren’t there with compelling offerings in the beginning and it has been somewhat of a struggle to recover ever since. Most people toting 5DII’s are already pretty well invested in Canon glass and not likely to pull the switcheroo. For most, adding a second system is probably the most palatable option, I already know a couple who have but it will be expensive if you equip that D800 with the glass it deserves.

Hopefully I proofread this one better than the last one

-- hide signature --


 David Hull's gear list:David Hull's gear list
Canon EOS 50D Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow