Why Nikon?

Both platforms are great. I prefer the user interface of Nikon to Canon, but that's just one person's opinion.

I'm in Holland



--
Philip

For me it is the feel and ergonomics of their bodies, and the quality of their lenses, and the accuracy of their flash system. My first AF camera was a Canon Elan in 1991. I didn't like it and didn't shoot much. I could never remeber how to set anything on it and shot in auto all the time. I never got any lenses other than the plastic mount 35-105 lens for it, because I was just not into it.

In 1999 I bought a Nikon F100 outfit after playing with a F3 for a while. The controls just seem obvious to me, and the quality of the lenses is amazing. I got the spirit with this system.

It's like trying to explain to a Lexus driver why I prefer a BMW. There is just a feel to it (car and camera).

Try both to see for yourself what you prefer.

I hadn't seen that, which I suppose means that ads are regionally distinct. Does the meter then proceed to 200%, followed by some full-tilt D200 marketing?

I agree with you that, all things considered, the imagery is a little ironic !

But marketing ain't about facts, it's about spinning the facts to support your goals.
--
Garland Cary

All overstated boogeyman issues that aps-c advocates use to scare people off from FF. All ultrawide zooms will have some kind of compromise, aps-c or FF. It makes me wonder what will happen when Nikon finally does FF. Will the aps-c crowd still have concerns or will Nikon FF be infallible?

proudfather said:

proudfather said:

2. I'd like my second camera to be a full frame sensor so that I
can use the wide aspect of my wide lenses- Canon has that option,
Nikon doesn't.

Click to expand...

Wide angle on the 5D is problematic, as most lenses (20 mm or
wider) are quite soft at the corners. Even the expensive Canon EF
16-35 mm is horrifically soft, especially at f2.8. The 17-40L
seems to be the best at the wider ends, but only when stopped down
to f8-11. At it's longer ends, it begins loosing its sharpness.
If you're o.k. with just 24 mm, then the Canon 24-70 or 24-105 are
good. But the latter lens is limited to a max aperature of only f4.

Honestly, right now for wide angle, APS sized sensors seem better,
with the best lenses being the Tokina 12-24, Sigma 10-20, and
specifically for Canon, the 10-22.

-proudfather

Click to expand...

Do people keep posting Nikon vs Canon threads, and why do we all jump in and fuel the argument.

The first reply was right, they are both good stytems, the photographer takes the photo.

Go and use both systems in a store, then chose which one you find feels most comfortable and easy to use.

Mike

Goes like:

'Top Quality', 'Absolute Precision', 'Outstanding Speed', 'Ultimate Results', 'The 200% camera' and 'Best DSLR Expert in Europe 2006'.
The ad points to this site: http://www.nikond200.info/

--
Philip

Well said. After reading all of this one thing is clear...there is no good answer to this question. Dog people, cat people; BMW people, Mercedes people; Beatles people, Elvis people; Fender people, Gibson people; Nikon people, Canon people.

The people on either side of any of these arguments usually have very strong feelings about why one is better than the other. In the end comes down to which one moves you, forget about every thing else...get inspired.

I don't have a D200, but I haven't chosen Canon because they use CMOS and on-chip noise reduction.

Bmark said:

I am still undecided on the Nikon vs. Canon platforms.

The D200 appears to be the best affordable prosumer camera
available today, but on the Canon side, there is a greater
selection of lenses.

Click to expand...

Perhaps. BUT, if you are willing to buy manual focus lenses, there's an additional 10 million used lenses availabele at VERY affordable prices.

I recently bought a 300mm f/2.8 AIS lens for $400 including s/h for a beater... excellent images but looks horrible... obviously used by a pro. Buy this AF lens new today is $4-5k

The best buys are the AI Micros and fast glass i.e. 55mm f/1.2 ~$250 or a 55mm Micro for $100, 105mm Micro $225 or so.

Using Pro glass at consumer prices was a big reason for me getting the D200 as I already owned the D70. This is a compelling reason to go with the Nikon platform in my book.

Bmark said:

I think I like the Canon 100-400 better than
the Nikon 80-400 (but there is the Sigma 80-400 OS) and we all know
that the lens is more important than the camera.

I would appreciate any substantive reasons why people choose Nikon
over Canon.

Thanks,
Mark

Click to expand...

--
My glamour gallery - Comments appreciated. Link below...

http://www.pixs.ws/gallery2/Models



Cheers,

Darrell

http://www.bron.ch/bc_pd_en/index.php

--
Philip

Someone asked why they continue to see Nikon vs. Canon posts. Well the answer is that I am trying to make that decision and it is a very tough decision because they are so close in performance. I was hoping that someone would provide some little tidbits of information that would sway my opinion. Before the post, I had not actually held and used both cameras, which I corrected earlier today, and I must say that for me, the Nikon felt better and I liked the controls better. The Canon felt light and cheaper and I really don't like the control dial for the menu navigation.

Thanks for all of the good thought provoking comments.

Mark

Nikon is a better camera

--
Julia

I'm debating the same issue. But I have the luxury of time since I have only a kit lens with my Digital Rebel and the 70-200 f/4L series lens. (And a few left-over Leica lenses I haven't sold yet from my years shooting with film.) So I could easily jump ship and go Nikon if I choose to relatively pain-free. At work I have a 1Ds Mark II, a 20D and a D60. Needless to say, I shoot almost everything with the Mark II.

I really like the D200. It's size and weight, weather proofing and ergonomics are by far the best for a camera in that price range if you ask me. The metering is accurate, the autofocus fast and sure. There is only one issue that gives me pause. Noise in images shot at 800 ISO and above. I can play with a D200 that our library has, so I can do some testing with noise Ninja to see if that will allow me to make acceptable photos with the D200 at high ISOs. I'm an availalbe light fan, so I don't like to use flash.

Also, Nikon's flash system is significantly better than Canon's system for a number of reasons. So even though I don't use flash much, that is an issue for me, being a pro. But since I have a 1Ds Mark II at my disposal, I'm able to shoot with that any time I really need a high-end camera. So I can wait to see if Nikon will come out with a better solution for high ISO noise before I buy. Maybe.

I just don't like the array of choice Canon offers. It's too divided between full frame and EF-S. If I buy an EF-S lens, then I can't use it on a full-frame body. And they won't make any EF-S L series lenses! And full frame is what really gives Canon the biggest edge in high ISO noise! Full frame costs significantly more as well! Although the 30D is no slouch at all, it's the bigger sensors that really do a great job.

For all of their troubles competing with Canon, Nikon has a more coherent strategy going with DX in all their camera models. But they also need to increase their pro-level DX lens options. Like they need a faster lens in the 12-24 mm range. And how about 24mm 1.4 and 35mm 1.4 lenses that are AF-S, ED, VR? Preferably 24mm. Or a 20mm AF-S, ED, VR? Nikon seems to love the 20mm focal length, so why not?

Oh, and the 300 2.8 AF-S VR is too expensive. But then they no doubt have to pay Canon for the license on the ultrasonic technolgoy Canon has patented. So how could they make it for the same price as Canon?

It's too bad someone doesn't come out with a camera without all the trade-offs one has to consider between different Canon, Nikon and other camera makers' products. And why won't my car fly? We were promised flying cars by now back in the 60s! :-D

--
Eric

Ernest Hemingway's writing reminds me of the farting of an old horse. - E.B. White

Why Nikon?

No particular reason, really.

My first camera was a Pentax K1000, many years ago. Eventually, I got a new camera; a Nikon. I stared buying Nikon stuff and I have been a Nikon user ever since.

Canon gear is every bit as good as Nikon, so you have excellent choices. Good luck with your selection.

Bmark said:

I am still undecided on the Nikon vs. Canon platforms.

The D200 appears to be the best affordable prosumer camera
available today, but on the Canon side, there is a greater
selection of lenses. I think I like the Canon 100-400 better than
the Nikon 80-400 (but there is the Sigma 80-400 OS) and we all know
that the lens is more important than the camera.

I would appreciate any substantive reasons why people choose Nikon
over Canon.

Thanks,
Mark

Click to expand...

PismoBeach said:

He sees what he wants to see I guess. Looks like both companies to
big and small upgrades.

Click to expand...

What has been the frequency at which Canon has upgraded its pro model and what is the frequency that Nikon has done the same? If you still cannot see the difference, good for you. It is you who sees what you want to see not me.

Both Nikon and Canon make great products. No doubt about it. But it is a fact that you cannot deny that Canon releases new products with minor changes way more often than Nikon

--
Speed is significant and interesting but accuracy is downright fascinating
http://www.pbase.com/pradipta

Paul Simon wrote this line in his song Kodachrome:

"I got a Nikon camera, I love to take a photograph"

Not one mention of Canon...

My Nikon sings... ;.)

Bob
--
'Photography is more about depth of feeling than depth of field'
http://www.pbase.com/mofongo

You can do almost equally well with both brands. Each brand gets a slight nod in certain areas.

At some point, a photographer makes a choice and buys a Canon or Nikon. This could have happened last month or in the last decade. Then you buy lenses and get more vested in the brand.

And as I discovered, when you run the numbers, you realize it costs a bloody fortune to switch once you've got a few good lenses.

And that cost, in my case, keeps me from switching to obtain what will probably only end up being a marginal benefit (full frame in my case).

So generally speaking, you stick with the same brand and really grow to appreciate the finer points of what it offers.

And some become really outspoken because they need to prove to others that they made the "right" decision.

--
Phil Flash
SF, CA USA
'Trust the 'kon!'

Stuff I own in my profile.

When I was shopping for a new camera about five years ago, a friend told me to only consider Nikon. He said I should pick the Nikon model that had the features I wanted, but to not even consider other brands.

IMHO, his advice would have been equally good if he had said Canon.

If a quick look at both lineups shows that one brand has something that you really need and the other doesn't, then that makes the decision. Or go to a store and see which brand fits your hands best. (Be careful to not be swayed by which gives the salesman a bigger markup.)

Otherwise, just flip a coin. Just make sure that when you get into the final decision making on which model, you're dealing with only one brand.

Ken Plotkin

--
Visit http://www.voider.net