Reading mode: Light Dark

Why Nikon?

Go to last post
Who's trying to defend Canon? are you really that thin skinned?
Fact is Nikon owns about 22.5% of over-all DSLR market
Fact is D70 to D70s, D2H to D2Hs and D2X and D2Xs is minor upgrades.

Dispute all your want, but don't confuse facts with brand loyalty, before you bash Canon, make sure you have your facts straight.

By the way, I can post anywhere I please, who the he** are you to tell me where to post?
--
Andrew
http://lpta.smugmug.com/
Smugmug coupon code:
 
Remember its not the camera but you! As for equipment if you have nikon equipment stick with it. If not, go with what is comfortable with you not with the masses. I have always wanted Nikon so now I have the D200. If you have the eye, you can take pictures. If your abilities extend to photoshop and you have the 'je ne sais quoi" of a hidden journalist or artist then go with Nikon. The rest, the masses love Canon. My personal observation, no pictures or pun intended. BnC
 
not bashing Canon at all, I wouldn't mind owning all good cameras just for the he.. of it. both are great, but your bull about statistics is what ticks me off. I don't care about statistics, I don't care what gear you like or use. Just a waste of time, I just looked and I didn't see the open house sign outside. if I felt like reading your statistics, I'd come join you over there.

you are just proving my point, none of us would. I would never dream of trying to convince anybody to use Nikon, it just works for me. I'll stick with my statement

BOTH ARE GREAT IN THEIR OWN WAY

so please post a statistic of how many words I spelled wrong,

see ya dude
--
Sascha
http://www.pbase.com/saschagast

'I really don't care if you think your gear is better than mine', my girlfriend is really hot...........
 
Oh, and I care even less how had the BIGGER upgrades. such a joke. in 5 years, all the cameras we love today will be the "old stuff from the past" most people can't make it much more than 6 months before they want an update. people asking for a D200s already,a 30d mark N IV or a 5D 1/2 or whatever.

like what you have and take pictures.

the funny thing is, guys like you only come and join threads like this, not when somebody is posting a nice picture or have a question about photography. oh well, your time spent rather useless....

c ya
--
Sascha
http://www.pbase.com/saschagast

'I really don't care if you think your gear is better than mine', my girlfriend is really hot...........
 
fuzzytalz said:
Cultured Vulture said:
Adam Kmiec said:
with digital you can do time interval shooting. so literally you
can capture images with out a photographer :)
--
Disagree with me all you like, but remember I have a right to an
opinion and a right to state it.
http://www.thekmiecs.com
http://www.adamkmiec.com
Click to expand...
Your being disingenuous about this one. You could do interval
shooting with film too. And you still need a photographer to set it
up to begin with. Before you tell me that you coudn't take many
shots with film. My brother has a 750 shot back for his F3 or F2, I
can never remember which.
Click to expand...
Even when robots are eventually devised to perform basic image
capture tasks, a person - effectively, the photographer - will have
programmed that photo-bot. And when machines become truly
artificially intelligent, their photographic "style" will be
nothing more than an amalgam of techniques and aesthetics learned
from its original programmer and/or the individuals (human or
mechanical) with whom it interacts (not unlike the way we learn
photography - what are the implications of that?). So, in the end,
photography - even reduced to rotely executed algorithms - remains
inexorably dependent upon an imaging device's operator, programmer
or engineer: the photographer.
Click to expand...
====

Disagree. Just place camera on street with shooting interval 10minutes for a whole day. And that's all. And then take all these pics to exibition.

This way you can't get pic like - "I am supporting Pizza Tower with my strong hands". But something like "Behind the Gare St. Lazare" shooted by our famous Henri it might take for sure :-/

 
where_am_i said:
slimandy said:
I'm not sure if that's good or bad. 6 months after you buy a camera
it's almost guaranteed not to be the current model.
Click to expand...
..unless you're the kind of person that always wants to own the
latest gear.. i.e. a gear head.
Click to expand...
then you'd be better with Nikon. The latest gear would last 2 years and not 6 months.
where_am_i said:
where_am_i said:
Ditto FF. Pros and cons. I prefer the DX making my long lenses
appear longer. I bought a 10~20 to cover the wide end. I know the
ins and outs of FF. If you need it you need Canon.
Click to expand...
Well, you have a choice unlike with nikon. You could get the 5D and
spend a few pennies more on a 350D to use with your telephotos.
Whats the big deal?
Click to expand...
No big deal. I'd just prefer not to.
 
Darrelll said:
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.
Click to expand...
Exactly my reason, and I have not been sorry. Another reason to go Nikon is that these older MF lenses fill very unique gaps or address issues that no Canon lens can hope to. UV photography is one example, if you are into that sort of thing. Macro another. Nikon has a wonderful flash system. Not that the Canon system is bad, but if you want to travel light, the Nikon system works like a charm because you have no extra parts to carry along for wireless etc.

Nikon primes made in the period 1970 onwards are mostly very good lenses. There are rare exceptions, but in most cases one can use such lenses within their strengths to still get wonderful results. There are a few very good zoom lenses also, and very underrated nowadays. Sometimes it pays to have a (cheap) old lens that is brilliant at one particular thing, rather than to have a (expensive) f/2.8 zoom lens that is good at most.

All that said, it still depends on what you want to do, how much you want to spend, your habits and preferences etc. You have to hold things in your hands before you will know for sure. BTW, the 100-400 Canon is not a good lens, unworthy of the L tag on it. If you are going to buy only one expensive lens and this range has to be it, then much rather go for the Nikkor. Even the Sigma 80-400 OS is better than the Canon, with the advantage that it is available for either system. Another thing about the Canon 100-400 is that during zooming it sucks in air and blows it out into the camera, a recipe for severe sensor dust issues. If in time you will expand your lens collection and you do not mind spending a lot, then Canon has some wonderful lenses, as does Nikon, and the differences are marginal with specialist offerings in either system, e.g. Nikon's 200-400/4 or Canon's wider range of IS options (300/4 IS) and 70-200/4 L.

Canons are more prone to dust, from what I have seen. My friends and family members who use Canon have pretty regular sensor cleaning exercises. With the Nikons the issues certainly are there, but they are not so severe.

Hope some of this helps.

Regards,
dorff

--
Stay hungry. Stay foolish.

If you have trouble falling asleep, visit my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/dorff/
 
Flashlight said:
One reason to choose Canon is that they don't have an ad on their
forum trying to sell a camera plagued with banding by showing an
annoying yellow band increasing to 200%.
Click to expand...
That's a very well informed and well reasoned argument against buying an excellent camera.
 
Sascha Gast said:
oh my god. if anything i like Nikon because Nikon people don't go
to the Canon forum to defend their choice of brand. what a joke, go
back where you choose to be and stop talking like this in a NIKON
FORUM.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I should make a comment here, as this whole subthread seem to start from my answer to Pradipta Dutta's claim.

If you start here in NIKON FORUMS make -what I see- false claims about my favorite brand, I see very fit to intervene. When the claims are based on facts, I keep stay silent. Simple rules, which also state method how you can avoid pulling some Canon users -or at least me- into these discussions.

And yes, there are lots of Nikon users participating this sort of discussions in Canon forums as well.
Sascha Gast said:
All of us here decided on NIKON for one reason or another.
Why do you come here and try to prove anything, I don't give a sh..
20% market share vs whatever, is this how you make decisions.
I am sure McDonalds sells the most burgers, but please don't tell
me that's because they are good or better than anybodies burgers.
they are everywhere, feel flimsy in your hand and have great
advertising. I like In'n Out burger, much better feel/taste and
suits my needs.

this is meant to be a forum for adults...hahaha, right.

but maybe I am just 20% right and 80% over all this cra....

and to the OP, it's like asking if you should buy a yellow labrador
or a golden retriever. feel them both and get what you like because
they are essentially the same kind of great dog.

but please do your homework and test them both

--
Sascha
http://www.pbase.com/saschagast

'I really don't care if you think your gear is better than mine',
my girlfriend is really hot...........
Click to expand...
 
slimandy said:
Flashlight said:
One reason to choose Canon is that they don't have an ad on their
forum trying to sell a camera plagued with banding by showing an
annoying yellow band increasing to 200%.
Click to expand...
That's a very well informed and well reasoned argument against
buying an excellent camera.
Click to expand...
Thank you. I already knew I'm very smart of course but still the praise makes me a little shy.

--
Philip
 
I had a Nikon F3 for 10 years - and sold it for approx US$ 200,00 less than what I bought it for. I never had any complaints about the camera, I bought a gridline viewfinder screen, a 24/2.8 and a 105/2.5 and travelled the world with this combi.

Then I found this delightful thread yesterday, somebody showing his D100 photos of crtitters:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=19082403

A 4-year old camera?? The Canon D60 was released the same year ...

I tried the 20D (brother in laws cam) and the new 30D ... probably good cameras, but just not for me. I find that the D200 I bought just feels right, just like and extension of my arm and eye ... when I had a look at my test shots with D20, D30, 2Dhs and D200 I liked the look of the Nikons much better, than the shots from the D20/30 ... I fould that I seemed to have less control over the photos on the Canons than on the Nikons (I used both cameras in M mode, but hat erratic results with the D30 (e.g. some pics turned out too dark and I had no idea why??). Then I tried the 20D with a (I believe540??) flash and found that the SB600 had a far more suibtle light - and was VERY CONSISTENT ... again I felt I had more control over the allover pic quality/light of the Nikons. I am sure both manufacturers make good cameras, but for one I can't be bothered getting used to the Canons somewhat hard to get used to interface (I always had a quick peek at the preview but didn't quite know what to do to compensate for the underexposed/overexposed photos (light balance didn't give clear enough indication, was very jumpy and left a lot to mere guess work). The Nikons were far easier to control, either in Matrix or spotmetered (manual) Mode.

Needless to say that the Canon users around me swear by their gear - good on them I have no problems with that, but I wouldn't want to swap camps even if I had the choice of gear.

Just my 2cts

IMO Nikon cameras retain their value much better than other models, because they still feel good and are still manageable
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...
--
Deed, Auckland, New Zealand
D200
 
I assume that the air blowing into the camera is a result of the push pull zoom on the 100-400?? Is your evaluation of the Canon 100-400 based on the dust issue or its optical performance?

Thanks,
Mark
 
The 100-400 is not L sharp. Nikon's 80-400 is MUCH sharper, even though it looks perhaps a bit plasticky. Although sharpness is not the only aspect of optical performance, I think it is the most obvious and important one, and the least fixable. I do not use Canon, but my father-in-law does, as well as close friends that are a family outfit of professional photographers. Their assessment of the 100-400 was that it is unsharp, and that their images were rejected at agencies because of the unsharpness. They had actually won the lens in a competition, and sold it within a few weeks. My brother owns the 80-400, and I have been impressed by the results. It stands up well to my 300/4 and 400/3.5, is light and handles well, and of course has VR. It would have been even better with AFS, but that would have made it more expensive and heavier as well. If you are not that critical about sharpness, I am sure that the Canon is an overall useful lens, but I would not feel comfortable with it on my camera. And of course with all similar lenses you can get better results by stopping down to f/11 or so. BTW, Bjorn Rorslett has a nice review of the Nikkor 80-400 on his website http://www.naturfotograf.com where he explains the weak and strong points of that lens.

Regards,
dorff
--
Stay hungry. Stay foolish.

If you have trouble falling asleep, visit my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/dorff/
 
I've shot extensively with both Nikon and Canon bodies.

In fact I've shot a wedding and a handful of "evening events" with both a 20D and a D70 around my neck. I've shot both with the latest flash units, and I've also shot nature photography with both cameras too...

Shooting with both cameras in such an EXTREMELY side-by-side fashion always leaves me wishing I just had two D70's around my neck.

Why? Firstly, the command controls are in better places on the D70. I love Canon's giant thumb wheel for blazing through the menus, but it's just not as practical for changing the apeture as Nikon's dial that is RIGHT where my thumb is. Also, having the Nikon dial right there and the AF-ON button right next to it is so much quicker than having to reach my thumb all the way down to the Canon wheel and then back up to the AF-ON button.

Secondly, the AF point selection technique is only now getting to where it should be with Canon, and it still doesn't compare to Nikon's. With Nikon I have a huge "joypad" where Canon's wheel is, while the Canon 20D and 30D have just this tiny little joystick that is no bigger than a laptop "eraser mouse" and just as annoying to try and use.

Other than that, there are a handful of complaints I have about the way Canon lays out their controls. Most of them are just personal preference, but one other that comes to mind is with the 1D series cameras: WB, ISO and QUAL have this annoying "safety" system which requres you to hold TWO buttons down to change these settings. And in all my life of being rough on cameras I have NEVER ONCE changed these settings by accident on my Nikon with just one button. Maybe it's not that hard to do, (I haven't shot too extensively with 1D series cameras) but it strikes me as a silly thing that should be done away with. Along with the "print button" on Canon bodies, which I think is an absolute joke and somebody should create a firmware hack that turns it into MLU which is a SORELY needed button on Canon bodies...

All in all I believe that both Nikon and Canon create lenses and sensors that far surpas my standards, so that is not an issue. I would go with Sigma or Olympus in a heartbeat if not for the fact that Canon and Nikon create the most WELL-ROUNDED camera bodies, that are such jacks of all trades at such affordable prices.

--
Take care,



http://matthewsaville.smugmug.com
 
ohyva said:
Perhaps I should make a comment here, as this whole subthread seem
to start from my answer to Pradipta Dutta's claim.

If you start here in NIKON FORUMS make -what I see- false claims
about my favorite brand, I see very fit to intervene.
Click to expand...
That is what is called uncalled for brand loyalty.

All I said was, "What I totally did not like about Canon was incremental update they were making every 18 months and releasing a new camera without true upgrades. On the other hand, almost every new product from Nikon was clearly a step above the previous model."

Which is clearly not Canon bashing. I never said Canon was doing it wrong. All I said was that I DON'T LIKE THAT STRATEGY. If you like it good for you. You suddenly got over sensitive and started interfering with what I like.

--
Speed is significant and interesting but accuracy is downright fascinating
http://www.pbase.com/pradipta
 
point taken, I don't go there to join those kind of threads.

But look at how differently you approach this vs some other guys. stating your side of the story is fine, but trying to prove who is the bigger, badder camera really is unnecessary. That's all.
thanx for your reply
--
Sascha
http://www.pbase.com/saschagast

'I really don't care if you think your gear is better than mine', my girlfriend is really hot...........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top