Jumping ship to Canon...

Started Mar 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
Teila Day
Teila Day Veteran Member • Posts: 4,694
Re: Jumping ship to Canon...
1

fft81 wrote:

RhysM wrote:

**Before i start, this is not an inflammatory post, i'm not a troll and am not looking to generate arguments.**

I used to own a D700, 24-70 2.8, 70-200mm VR I, 50mm 1.4 AF-S, 60mm 2.8 Macro, 2x SB-800... so not by any means someone who is a stranger to spending a bit of money on gear but sold it all due to buying my first house and needed the money to do some home improvements.

I'm now in the position where i want to get back in to the game but i just can't seem to find a nikon that suits me.

D4 - too big, and expensive.

D3x - to big and expensive.

D3s - too big and getting a bit old in the tooth in terms of resolution, DR and slightly behind high ISO noise when compared to the current range of FX sensors.

D3 - Same as the D3s

D800/e - Right size, but i can't see that need for 36mp and the file size/processing power needed to edit RAW files is also a concern, add in the QC reports for the left focus points and i'm not prepared to take the risk of buying a £2000+ camera with the knowledge it could potentially have a fault.

D700 - Nice camera, but second hand prices are just too high to justify spending £1200+ on a good used unit with technology that is approaching 5 years old, having only 12MP, only 12 EV of DR and a stop behind the current FX cameras at higher ISO's.

D600 - On paper this looks like the answer but regardless of whether it's considered an "entry level" full frame camera or not, it's still a £1400 camera and as a result should not have QC control issues with oil/dust. I also don't like the idea of having the same AF system as the D7000 that is currently available for £550 since the introduction of the D7100.

D7100 - This looks like a nice camera for sports/wildlife shooters, but i'm really looking for an FX camera, as i value high ISO output over the extra reach. I was hoping that Nikon had pulled something magical out of the bag and pushed the DX envelope in terms of high ISO but alas it's no better than the D7000/D5200.

Then there's the lenses, my first lens would be a general walk around however the nikon 24-120 is just not optically good enough to justify its £800 price tag.

So... this brings me to the Canon 5D mk III. 22 megapixels high enough resolution with good balance between pixels and manageable file size, mid-sized body, good image quality at high ISO output, to my knowledge no QC issues and the 24-105 F4 looks like a fantastic lens. The only downside i can see is the flash system doesn't seem to get as good reviews as Nikon's

Thoughts?

Grass is always greener on the other side. Truth is: its not about the camera, its about the lenses. Go for the system which has the lenses that allow you to do what you want to do.

The truth of the matter is that the actual camera depending on what you shoot, can be more important than the lens. Lenses aren't by default the most important aspect of taking a photograph and we can't assume that everyone using a dlslr shoots the same content and has the same needs.

I still use Canon and Nikon, but the I purchased Canon because Nikon didn't offer the resolution that I needed, and I got video as an added bonus, which I actually use still today.

Both Canon and Nikon have the most typical general and professional lenses, so that isn't an issue for the bulk of photographers. However, before the D800 came to fruition, the reality of Nikon coming up short was painfully obvious to many of us Nikon shooters. Even today, the difference between 6 and 4 fps if you shoot events is vast, and if you shoot video, having a more mature vid platform might be a large difference to many.  Both glass and camera play important roles and it's up to the photographer which, based on what/how/when they shoot is more important.

Point? It is often about the camera to a lot of photographers, and to them, it (focus points, frame rate, video features, etc.) can be the difference between night and day in their photography, especially if their shooting to make a living.

The divide between brands is getting smaller- yet a divide still exists, and that divide can make a lot of difference to a lot of photographers past internet fodder

-- hide signature --

Teila K. Day
http://teiladay.com

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
glo
McJ
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
glo
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
fad
fad
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow