Switch from Canon to Nikon - advice on lenses

Started Jul 6, 2013 | Discussions thread
brightcolours
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,867
Like?
Yeah yeah
In reply to Devendra, Jul 8, 2013

Devendra wrote:

brightcolours wrote:

Devendra wrote:

Lenses and QA arguments aside (since they can be easily matched) - I find it very odd/strange to see the naysayers of D600 agreeing to a less featureful, less capable camera like the most canon's including 6D.

D600 vs 6D

24mp vs 20mp (only 4mp more is not a valid comment, we would have stayed at 4mp D2h)

Ok, you start off silly already. If you would say that the D600 on paper has a slight resolution advantage, you would have a slight point.

yes continue with the slight 4mp is not an advantage and we would still be shooting 4mp D2h.

Again the same nonsense. Keep it up (I know you will)

Canon has been stuck with this sensor size for a long time,

Yes, indeed. Canon has stuck to the FF sensor size ever since the introduction of the 1Ds. Nikon kept on saying they would not go the FF digital road until that stance could not be justified any longer. Luckily for Nikon users Nikon nowadays also offers FF sensor size.

so canon users like you have to justify everything. Despite that their sensors have not increased effective DR - except maybe at ISO 50600000.

You probably have no idea what you are talking about when you mention DR. Both cameras have way more DR than needed. Anyone who says they do not, have little idea what they are talking about.

39 focus points vs 11 focus points (is this year 2005?)

More accurate and fast AF for the 6D, with much more sensitive central AF. Both cameras only offer cross type AF point in the center. Both cameras offer a similar AF point coverage. The 6D performs better here.

Another BS way to put down 39focus points. D600 39 outer focus points work very well and are VERY ACCURATE FYI.

The 6D outer focus points work very well and are VERY ACCURATE FYI.

They are FAST and they lock in well. The Center point also works quite well.

They are FAST (6D AF points) and lock in well. The Center point works very very well. The Canon is faster (yet still accurate) in AF locking (provided one has a fast AF-ing lens).

CENTER POINT <-- that is always a canon thing to justify center AF and perhaps composition??? I find it very amusing how you canon users try to justify center focus point as the solution to ALL. Suggesting.. focus and recompose using center point for lack of AF points, lack of spot metering in AF points is Absolutely Absurd. FYI - One key advantage of FX is shallower dof. If you are a photographer you will know the advantages of having focus points spread. FYI - Even in DX/APS-C this flaw is highlighted. End of story. If that was not the case, Canon 5D3 would still have 11F points - but you guys are sure happy that canon gave 61 points.

The center point is just cross type and WAY more sensitive than the D600 points. No problem in using any of the other 6D points. Gee, you have silly arguments.

That the 5D mkIII has a way better AF system than the D600, I can agree on that with you.

REPEAT- D600 39 AF points work very well.

REPEAT- the 6D AF points work very well. They have the same spread as the D600's AF points. Both only offer cross type AF points in the center. The 6D center AF point is VERY sensitive.

If 6D has 39 AF points you guys would have been thumping your chest. Admitting that 39 AF point is equivalent to 11AF is illogical to say the least.

If for you more is better, good for you.

9 cross type vs 1 cross (is this year 1980?)

All cross type points from the D600 are in the center. Just like that much better cross type AF point from the 6D. Come on, stop being a spec sheet lover.

Again - same kind of reply. Please - do you guys always shoot with center composition and non-moving subjects?

You seem to be missing the point, AGAIN. Both cameras have a similar AF point coverage. Both cameras only offer cross type AF in the center. No reason why one can not use the outer non-cross type points on both the 6D and D600.

Spot metering on ALL AF points (every basic nikon camera has this wonderful feature)

Spot metering on an AF spot makes little sense. Metering and AF are not linked (metering assumes 50% gray (or 15/18% reflective grey)). Use spot metering to meter the scene correctly on a mid tone, and use AF points to.... focus where you want to focus. It is not complicated.

This is simply terrible thing to say. Your solution is again focus and recompose.

No, come on, don't be silly. The solution is to METER the scene. Then you are done. Until the lighting changes. Done. That is what M(anual) metering modes are for. Then, you focus on whichever subject you want to focus. With whatever focus point you find appropriate.

Your justification is going nowhere. Tell me why higher end (>3.5k) canon bodies provide these feature then? Overcoming every feature with a justification means - we will still be shooting manual cameras and sunny 16 rule. Of course Ansel Adams should also be ashamed of zone system according to you guys.

What are you talking about? Ansel Adams most surely did not meter on any AF point. Come on, stop talking nonsense here.

Here is an example of spot metering on the cheek without moving the camera. Having center point focus on the belly would have over exposed the shots

Center focus on the belly? You really do think metering is part of AF, don't you. And you dare to mention Ansel Adams? Come on, really.

Hint: Set your camera on M. Meter in the lighting you are in (on a MID TONE (or a light tone when you want to do low key, or a dark tone when you want to do high key). Then stop metering from shot to shot, unless lighting conditions change. Will work fine in a case like this. Spot metering is to meter on a mid tone. Nothing else.

- destroying the essence of my photography. Just one single reason why having AF and spot connected together for composition matters a lot.

Nonsense. One can reach the same results with a 6D, you just need to realize metering is not part of AF.

Hope you guys "get it". It is a canon thing not to do this for us it is normal since every nikon has this feature. Even the 39AF points 24mp D5200 camera.

Lol... funny. Stop thinking as AF and metering to be connected somehow, they are not (unless you use matrix metering, or Canon's equivalent "Evaluative metering", which both try to meter a whole scene but take special consideration on the subject (via weighting around the Af point used).

On board FLASH vs none (6D is not even a pro camera)

On demand grid lines vs NO grid lines

Intervalometer vs none (Nikon has offered this since D200/year 2005)

none ??

Virtual Horizon..vs

Virtual horizon.

silly line

If it is a silly line for the 6D with its virtual horizon, it is a silly line for the D600 with its virtual horizon.

etc etc

GPS and wifi(gimmic).. well internal 6D GPS is great, but I can use same one in multiple Nikon bodies.

GPS is a gimmick, WiFi is not. The WiFi allows you to use your iOS or Andriod device to act as remote screen for live view. Very very powerful feature.

I suspect you shoot in controlled studio environment most of the time to justify something like that?. I would like to know where in Badlands did I take this picture, or in Alaska or half the world across..... so GPS is not a gimmic

I remember from every shot where it was taken. Without GPS. Not that I need to know from every shot where I took it (rather senseless information), but I do.

- wifi, whatever.

Yeah, live view whatever. Right? Lol.

It is purely baffling to see the obvious differences and makes me wonder how one can skip such useful features so easily. If these are useless, then maybe you guys are missing a lot of quantifying factors to improve one's photography.

Don't be silly. The 6D is better in the AF area, much better in live view implementation, has nicer ergonomics, very good high ISO performance, much wider range of usable lenses, much better software package including USB tethering. And it is possible to use trap focus.

Oh live view - yeah the future. Again another absurd justification. In my entire life of photography I have never used liveview to take shots that I can wow at.

Lol, You are funny. Boasting about advantages that are not really there (not a better AF system, not a significantly higher resolution), but live view is useless? Hmmhmmm.

But I am very picky and good with powerful binoculars to study the fall color leaves before I take the shot. Or I can use the same to get a quick perspective of my composition before I pull out my 800mm lens. Instead I should just rely on live view and use a joy stick to compose and take a tiny 20mp shot, rather than use a gigapan to take a 800mb image. Regardless of the image size, live view has its purpose, and both cameras provide that feature. There are no extreme situations where one can be bettered by other to compete as an advantage.

There are huge differences in implementation, way bigger than the difference in AF system.

VERY HIGH ISO performance.... sure I always shoot in the dark and blow up only high ISO images. By the way D600 is no slouch in that area. It is nice to have, but the advantage at high ISO image - is pointless with current implementation. Also only the 6D JPEG shows high ISO (>25,600) advantage, at raw they are pretty close.

I did not say anywhere that the D600 is not good, high ISO wise.

Does the D600 even have a well implemented mirror lock up, by now? The D600's main advantage over the 6D is its 100% view finder. For the rest, both are capable cameras. Depends on which lenses you own or need which is the better choice for you, basically.

Mirror lockup works well in Nikon bodies, implementation with timers is what may be missing. Not sure how many times I have used it - but when I do in other Nikon bodies, it works quite well - serves its purpose when needed.

Oh wait, I didn't even use a mirror lock in the above shot and it is crisp.

anyway.. i wouldn't skip or brush off these features for anyone looking for a direct comparison

So, please 6D is not worth 2k that canon charges you guys. A used 5D2 will more than suffice to overcome the same situations that you tried to justify with your own logic over D600 usage to overcome "advantages" of 6D over 5D2. But 6D is NO WAY advantageous to D600.

The 6D has better ergonomics, better software package, better live view implementation, faster AF system, WiFi, GPS.

In equality terms - D600 is 80% 5D3, 6D is 50% 5D3, 5D2 40%.

Anyway, I am done with this thread..

I am still baffled at Canon users justifications to featureless still cameras and video focused bodies.

You invent features that are not there (for the D600) like "better AF system". Just more points does not make better AF system.

Like I said, both the 6D and the D600 are good cameras, and one's choice should depend on the lenses one has, or wants to use. Or maybe on the WiFi if remote live view is a feature one needs.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow