Canon v. Nikon

NPS- will not allow college students

CPS- does, which is great when you are young and don't have 8-10 grand for a 400 2.8 and your on the road to cover a football game.

I recently switched from Nikon to Canon. I do have to say that the user interface is a lot different but the autofocus is definitely faste. And anyone who says that an F5 is tougher than a 1v is kidding themselves. Not to mention the fact that the lenses are far more weather resistant. I know several shooters who don't even cover thier Canon equipment when it's pouring rain at a football game. ( Not a good move in my opinion but then again they don't seem to have any problems with their gear.)

It just seems to me that Canon is always one step ahead and that by the time that Nikon catches up their stuff is 500 bucks more expensive and no better than the Canon gear.

Anyway great thread.

what is NPS and CPS?

Is their discounts for College students?

Todd

Mark said:

NPS- will not allow college students
CPS- does, which is great when you are young and don't have 8-10
grand for a 400 2.8 and your on the road to cover a football game.

I recently switched from Nikon to Canon. I do have to say that the
user interface is a lot different but the autofocus is definitely
faste. And anyone who says that an F5 is tougher than a 1v is
kidding themselves. Not to mention the fact that the lenses are far
more weather resistant. I know several shooters who don't even
cover thier Canon equipment when it's pouring rain at a football
game. ( Not a good move in my opinion but then again they don't
seem to have any problems with their gear.)

It just seems to me that Canon is always one step ahead and that by
the time that Nikon catches up their stuff is 500 bucks more
expensive and no better than the Canon gear.

Anyway great thread.

Click to expand...

I'm confused by your "Canon is always one step ahead" comment. Seems to me that the 1D is showing up a tad later than the D1 series from Nikon and it also appears, from preliminary reports, that the pricing will be far from 500 bucks less. You have recently switched from Nikon to Canon in the film arena or in digital? If digital, from what to what? You are planning, then, on acquiring a 1D vs. a D1 family D-SLR?

Mark said:

NPS- will not allow college students
CPS- does, which is great when you are young and don't have 8-10
grand for a 400 2.8 and your on the road to cover a football game.

I recently switched from Nikon to Canon. I do have to say that the
user interface is a lot different but the autofocus is definitely
faste. And anyone who says that an F5 is tougher than a 1v is
kidding themselves. Not to mention the fact that the lenses are far
more weather resistant. I know several shooters who don't even
cover thier Canon equipment when it's pouring rain at a football
game. ( Not a good move in my opinion but then again they don't
seem to have any problems with their gear.)

It just seems to me that Canon is always one step ahead and that by
the time that Nikon catches up their stuff is 500 bucks more
expensive and no better than the Canon gear.

Anyway great thread.

Click to expand...

Todd,

That's referring to the two companies' respective Professional Services offerings. They are intended for full-time working professionals and offer things like new products prior to general availability, better pricing structures than retail, expedited repair and loaner gear while yours is in the shop.

His comment is that Nikon excludes college students, even those working professionally and Canon allows them.

Stan

Todd said:

Is their discounts for College students?

Todd

Mark said:

NPS- will not allow college students
CPS- does, which is great when you are young and don't have 8-10
grand for a 400 2.8 and your on the road to cover a football game.

I recently switched from Nikon to Canon. I do have to say that the
user interface is a lot different but the autofocus is definitely
faste. And anyone who says that an F5 is tougher than a 1v is
kidding themselves. Not to mention the fact that the lenses are far
more weather resistant. I know several shooters who don't even
cover thier Canon equipment when it's pouring rain at a football
game. ( Not a good move in my opinion but then again they don't
seem to have any problems with their gear.)

It just seems to me that Canon is always one step ahead and that by
the time that Nikon catches up their stuff is 500 bucks more
expensive and no better than the Canon gear.

Anyway great thread.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Mark,

From my perspective of being into photography since 1973, the two companies' tend to leapfrog each other. At one point, Nikon will be ahead and at another point Canon will be ahead in given areas.

For example, Nikon was ahead by offering AF before Canon. Canon went ahead in the AF department by offering their whole range with internal focus motors. Nikon went ahead by offering digital SLRs years before Canon did. Canon my have jumped ahead in the sports digital SLR market by offering 4mp to Nikon's 2.75mp.

In reality both companies offer entire systems that are pretty much equivalent to each other. One has to get into specific details in each system before one can say one company has an advantage over the other.

It's very much like the ancient Ford vs. Chevrolet battle one sees every week at the racetrack. There's dyed-in-the-wool, unwavering supporters in each camp. Each one has a die-cut graphic of Calvin (from the comic strip Calvin & Hobbes) urinating on the logo of the other camp. Cute. At least the Canon shooters don't have Calvins peeing on Nikon logos and vice-versa!

I now fear that I may have started something. If anyone wants a peeing Calvin sticker, drop me an email. I have a vinyl cutter and can make them up and ship them UPS! (Just Kidding. I do have a cutter, but I don't think I want to get into this particular business....)

Stan

Mark said:

NPS- will not allow college students
CPS- does, which is great when you are young and don't have 8-10
grand for a 400 2.8 and your on the road to cover a football game.

I recently switched from Nikon to Canon. I do have to say that the
user interface is a lot different but the autofocus is definitely
faste. And anyone who says that an F5 is tougher than a 1v is
kidding themselves. Not to mention the fact that the lenses are far
more weather resistant. I know several shooters who don't even
cover thier Canon equipment when it's pouring rain at a football
game. ( Not a good move in my opinion but then again they don't
seem to have any problems with their gear.)

It just seems to me that Canon is always one step ahead and that by
the time that Nikon catches up their stuff is 500 bucks more
expensive and no better than the Canon gear.

Anyway great thread.

Click to expand...

Hello Everybody,

Nikon is meant more for the commerecial professional photographer and has endless equipment to solve any photographic problem.

Canon appeals more th the sports shooters of the world, every sports shooter I know owns Canon equipment where as all the adveritsing/commercial people I know seem to work with Nikon equipment.

I tested out Canon about six years ago but quickly gave it up as not in the same league as Nikon, now that's just my personal opinion. But I am not a shooter I take my time with imagery and never ever use a motor drive.

The main thing is if the various systems Nikon or Canon work for you go with it. I know I could work with either system and get great images, personally I just happen to prefer working with the Nikon system.

Stephen

Mark said:

Anyway great thread.

Click to expand...

Hmm. Seems more like a troll to me. Use whatever works for you. Both companies make excellent products.

I agree that the two companies tend to leap frog one another and that Canon has been slow in digital. I guess I should qualify that to what is most important to me. Glass. Nikon may have been first but by the time anyone was thinking of using AF seriously Canon was the only way to go. Look at the 80-200 2.8 or 17-35 or 300 2.8 the Canon has always been and will probably always be better. Think about IS, Canon is way ahead, Nikon will come out with more VR but at what price, I hate to even think of it.

Second, after having worked full time for a daily college newspaper I dont' think it would be too much to ask that Nikon allow us to join NPS. I majored in PJ, had been working full time for a couple of years and they would even talk to me about it. I really wanted to get a 400 2.8 for a couple of important football games. My counterparts at a competeting college paper shot Canon and told me they had access to CPS.

And just for the record, it's not about cameras it's about pictures. " My camera is like I use my toothbrush, it just get's the job done"

I was trying to add on to another forum, and I think I hit the wrong button, that's why I had the great thread comment on my first post.

And to answer another question I moved from 2 F5's, 17-35, 28-70, 80-200, 3002.8 and 50 1.4 and SB 28's to the equiv. Canon glass and 1v's.

I have a D30 also which I love but I am looking forward to the 1D.

Tim said:

Mark said:

Anyway great thread.

Click to expand...

Hmm. Seems more like a troll to me. Use whatever works for you.
Both companies make excellent products.

Click to expand...

Stephen Livick said:

Hello Everybody,

Nikon is meant more for the commerecial professional photographer
and has endless equipment to solve any photographic problem.

Click to expand...

I'd say Canon has a better selection of tilt-and-shift lenses.

-Z-

Mark

I don't think any Pro spends time kidding themselves...equipment and opportunity=income. I have been doing hard (fast) action photography for a long time now and I am still not convinced about the "no better than Canon gear" phrase. I have been asking these questions (objectively) on another thread and received some solid answers. I bought my first Nikon in 1975 (F2 with the MD2 Motor Drive) and worked my way throught all of their top end cameras. Along they way I saw people jumping to Canon so I always had one eye in that direction. I wondered why. The prices were always less and the color to me always looked good as well as sharp. The only thing I can add is that I can still get the same results as the Canon people...a big pile of sharp pictures in the rain, in the mud and in the heat and if Nikon does catch up with IS lenses I can put them on my old F2 as well as the D1. But I have been looking around lately...asking the Canon and Nikon shooters why one or the other.....

Dennis Stiff

Mark said:

And anyone who says that an F5 is tougher than a 1v is

kidding themselves. > the time that Nikon catches up their stuff is 500 bucks more
expensive and no better than the Canon gear.

Anyway great thread.

Click to expand...

I noticed a photo in a recent National Geographic magizine where about a dozen or so NG photographers were at a special event, and all the cameras were sporting black lenses with gold rings. I would have thought there would be at least a few Canons in there.

I prefer Pepsi. Not only are the bottles and cans prettier, but also more durrable then those crappy Coke bottles and cans, plus Pepsi tastes bette!!

Anyone who thinks otherwise obviously has not taste for soda pop!

Hope this helps!!

JK

Z

Nikon had the 35mm and the 28mm shift/tilt lenses in the non-autofocus days...and by the way, they fit the D1 lens mount. Objectively speaking, because Canons costs are less and the fact they advertize the biggest lens selection in the world they will always have a this and that. I have and can still use (manual focus) 55mm micro, 105mm micro and a 200mm micro on any of my Nikons...they are as sharp as the competition. I think Nikon abandoned these lenses years ago. I know that Canon as a Corporation is a giant compared to Nikon and I think Canon's aggressive push for inovation, domination and oneupmanship put them on top so to speak. I can remember when the Nikon F was the standard (other than Leica) Canon only had the FTb...Canon's response was a curious take on Nikon's F, calling it the Canon F1...of course during the 1970's Canon took over using the AE 1 as a wedge into the serious amateur market...all Nikon had was the Nikkormat (idenitical to a Ricoh) and Olympus and Pentax were coming out with "mini" slr's (OM's and ME's). My Nikkormat2 had a sharper(flatter film plane) image edge to edge than my F2. It was way back in the 1970's I had questions about Nikons superiority but I kept on keeping on as they say and own all their stuff. But................

Dennis Stiff

Z (is real) said:

I'd say Canon has a better selection of tilt-and-shift lenses.

-Z-

Click to expand...

I don't know about the rest of you, but I have a small fortune invested in all sorts of Canon glass (14mm to 400mm f2.8), flashes, cords, cables, batteries, chargers and all the other expensive little toys.

Even if Nikon came out with an 8mp,, 12 frame per second camera that was smaller than a Leica, I can hardly afford to sell all my stuff to switch over to Nikon.

I have no desire to have a complete set of Nikon and Canon equipment, either. I bought into the Canon system and have been very happy with it. I have been using DCS520's for the last couple of years and a D30 as well for the last year or so. I've already ordered 2 of the 1D's and eagerly await their arrival. I'm sure they will be wonderful. But even if the new camera wasn't as cool as this one is, I still would stick with Canon because of the investment in the equipment.

Fred

Fred Greaves
Photojournalist
Southern California
http://www.fredgreaves.com

Dennis S said:

It was
way back in the 1970's I had questions about Nikons superiority but
I kept on keeping on as they say and own all their stuff.
But................

Click to expand...

Somewhere in the early 80's I was a high school student lucky enough to be able to borrow an F2A with a 105mm Nikkor, I think the 55mm macro, a 45mm Nikkor, and occcasionally something wider. I really loved the 55mm macro and the 105mm. A friend's Father had an A2E that he used to use and we'd argue about which brand was better. I shot a lot of chromes, some of which are probably worth digging up. But all in all, I wish I'd spent more time worrying about photography than caring about the equipment. I recently got back into photography but only shoot digital 'cause I don't have the patience for film. I still get seduced by the technology side but at least now I have some friends who take better pictures than I do to remind me its the skill I need to work on

(The one thing I really wish I had on the D30 from those days is a split prism focusing screen...)

-Z-

Z

Yeah, that's the point as you stated it below. I had to work hard to get at (or near) the top of my profession (shooting rafts crashing class 3 to class 5 rapids on various rivers. I made myself get better everytime I went out, which is usually 7 days a week for 6 months. Even with the best autofocus I need to shoot manual because the action is all over the place for a split second(s)...thus I need one touch zooms which leaves Canon out of the picture( even if they are better as many claim). At the end of the day my left arm can barely move (from all those zoom movements). I shoot really tight on the action( one touch 80-200 2.8 Nikkor D lenses) and I'm mentally exhausted from trying to keep focus and framing...but I love it like an addiction. This season my lenses were beat to heck and I had to shake the elements into focus. I use the D1(s) and for film I used N90s's and all of the top of the line Nikons. But now, I have some expensive repair work ahead of me. I have been asking Canon and Nikon people on another thread general(or specific) questions. If I could make my life easier with the right equipment I would go for it. My problem with all autofocus systems (except the wide rectangle autofocus sensor on the N90s) is that they go through the raft to the guide in back, leaving the people in front out of acceptable focus. Canon's retina control goes crazy and neither brand has a focus system that allows me to pick any spot in the frame I want in a split second. The N90s wide focus sensor at least catches the edge of a lifejacket in the front of the boat keeping the focus up front. But I'm in the digital world now for good...I was asking people just why is Canon so good.

Dennis Stiff

Z (is real) wrote:
. But all in all, I wish I'd spent more time worrying

Z (is real) said:

about photography than caring about the equipment. I recently got
back into photography but only shoot digital 'cause I don't have
the patience for film. I still get seduced by the technology side
but at least now I have some friends who take better pictures than
I do to remind me its the skill I need to work on

(The one thing I really wish I had on the D30 from those days is a
split prism focusing screen...)

-Z-

Click to expand...

Dennis S wrote:
[Describes a very demanding autofocus challenge.]

I'm kind of surprised the EOS-1D doesn't have focus bracketing. With 8fps and "free film," why not slew the lens across some estimation of the DOF? With three or five shot brackets, it would give some choice of where the focus really ought to be.

-Z-

Z

It goes like this. When the rafts break through the wave, thing's start to happen. If the guide goes up in the air (which is always unpredictable, such as how high) I have to view the entire frame and pick a focus point somewhere that keeps the people on the left side of the frame and the high flying guide on the right side of the frame and up near the right corner in acceptable focus. Without a cord from my brain to the autofocus control in the camera I need to manually pick a compromise point in a very short period of time and also set up for the next shot(s) in the sequence. Whole frame focus rather than point focus is something I taught myself years ago. The funny thing is, I have to look for smilling faces and no paddles blocking the face and lots of water splash before I can punch the button...it's fun. Like I said earlier, Canon's retina control loses it's mind as my eye moves all over the frame.

Dennis Stiff

Z (is real) said:

Dennis S wrote:
[Describes a very demanding autofocus challenge.]

I'm kind of surprised the EOS-1D doesn't have focus bracketing.
With 8fps and "free film," why not slew the lens across some
estimation of the DOF? With three or five shot brackets, it would
give some choice of where the focus really ought to be.

-Z-

Click to expand...

"First" is not necessarily best, nor is "last or late" necessarily a bad thing. Ten years ago, when Canon first introduced it's EOS line and EF lens, many critics thought Canon had missed the boat, been caught napping (to use a bunch of cliches). Not only that, Canon dared to abandon their old lens mount in favor of a new electronic one. In reality, Canon sized up the budding pro autofocus market, the short comings of the systems out there and managed to produce a far superior system. They realized that motors in the lenses was the way to go, not the body. That way, each motor in each lens could be optimized. Nikon eventually HAD to follow suit. However, if you look at the size of say a 300/2.8 from each, Nikon MUST have a larger chunk of glass in front because the rear lens opening is so much smaller. All this is a round about way of saying that Canon, though late with the 1D, may be closer to the mark than some think. After all, the magnification factor is only 1.3x, and they have not had to resort to some pretty weird pixel stretching to up the MP count. The EOS-1D is not all I'd hoped it would and seems significantly more expensive than I'd hoped. But time will tell if it's the right offering at the right time.

Nemo

Bill Dewey said:

Mark said:

NPS- will not allow college students
CPS- does, which is great when you are young and don't have 8-10
grand for a 400 2.8 and your on the road to cover a football game.

I recently switched from Nikon to Canon. I do have to say that the
user interface is a lot different but the autofocus is definitely
faste. And anyone who says that an F5 is tougher than a 1v is
kidding themselves. Not to mention the fact that the lenses are far
more weather resistant. I know several shooters who don't even
cover thier Canon equipment when it's pouring rain at a football
game. ( Not a good move in my opinion but then again they don't
seem to have any problems with their gear.)

It just seems to me that Canon is always one step ahead and that by
the time that Nikon catches up their stuff is 500 bucks more
expensive and no better than the Canon gear.

Anyway great thread.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Nemo

This is probably low on the relevant pole but the D1 beta tested Canon's path to the Pro Digital age. If not, we would still be paying $10k for Kodak's. Other than that it's still the same old status quo between the EOS and the F5...except that the Canon on first glance appears to be in the center between the D1h and the D1x...we really don't know how the new Canon operates in the dirt or how software and workflows do...they did go to a hard to clean CCD like Nikon. I think all Canon users have faith in the company and they certainly have plenty of good glass. The multiplier effect is actually a good thing for lenses. Outside of IS lenses, Nikon has caught up somewhat...the competition will improve quality on both sides and bring prices down. Nikon is actually in the best position it has been in since the middle 1970's when Canon took over.

Dennis Stiff

Nemo said:

"First" is not necessarily best, nor is "last or late" necessarily
a bad thing. Ten years ago, when Canon first introduced it's EOS
line and EF lens, many critics thought Canon had missed the boat,

Click to expand...