Anyone Prefer Canon Over Nikon

steve · Anyone Prefer Canon Over Nikon

I'm the 1st to state I am at the Basic Consumer level with regard photographic talent got some nice Nikon stuff Basic D40 DSLR but some nice lens But tempted to just try a Canon 450D kit /18-55 VR stabalised lens just to see, you know how it is the grass is always greener on the other side . Any thoughts opinions on canon gear

steve

uncle aj

There always seems to be an argument as to which is best. I'm a Nikon user, having both a D200 and a D2Xs body. What I will say is the Canon range does better with noise levels at high ISO range than the Nikon DX range. However the D3 and D300 have now bettered Canon in this area. I suppose it will come down to what you are used to and personal preference. Lots of people have been asking if I will be changing to the D3 but to be quite honest, at the ISO levels I use, my pictures come out OK so I won't be bothering. Plus if you use a DX lens, which most of mine are, on a full format camera, the lens only acts in DX format and uses 5 mega pixels.

Tools

I like them both..

But I am a Canon user, having started with the brand in the 1970's..

I think we get used to what we have and feel comfortable with it...My Digital line-up is a Canon D350 and a Canon 30D...I do like the magnesium case over the plastic case even though it is a bit heavier..

Oddly enough my point and shoot camera is a Nikon Cool-Pix and I got the latest for Pam...

My underwater camera is an Olympus - So you see exactly how loyal I am..

Still, the old Canon does pretty well:

I also have a couple of these...

uncle aj

I have a few old ones lying about as wel. A 35mm Voiglader Vitessa and several Minolta SRT models. Brenda has a Brownie somewhere in the house. When I've settled in I'll have to take a few pictures.

steve

Defineately seeing this as an upgrade from my Nikon D40 regardless of brand
http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/eosdigital4/index.html

steve

Tools

Now that is nice....

I hate it when they come out with new stuff... I've barely got the old ones broken in..

steve

Resistance was futile

just pre-ordered

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012403canoneos450d.asp

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012404canoneos450dhandson.asp

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012415canoneos450dchanges.asp

steve

uncle aj

Looks good Steve, I can't wait to see some results from it.

steve

I was tempted by the D300 [body only] i got some nice nikkor lenses but maybe not aimed at my level, then again perhaps something to grow and learn with from. There does seem to be similarities

steve

uncle aj

If your Nion lenses are DX type, they get cropped on the D300 to a 5 mega pixel rectangle. You can over ride this but you get severe vignetting. The older Nikkor lenses work OK because they were made for full format cameras.

steve

does the same thing happen on the canon with the newer of there lenses adrian, appreciate the input

thanks

steve
[btw yes ALL my lenses are dx]

uncle aj

I would imagine if Canon make lenses specifically for DX format cameras, they too would reduce the actual pixels used when fitted to a full frame camera. I'm not sure but you may not be able to fit a Canon Dx lens on a full frame body. You would have to ask a Canon expert about that.

steve

The D300 isn't a full frame sensor i thought

does the crop not only occur if this is the case

steve

uncle aj

valentino

Ken Rockwell gets sent new cameras from Nikon and Canon for review. He gives the better of the two the Nikon badge.

Me, I'm a canon man. My lenses swap nicely between my 3 bodies, 35mm film, 5d and a 350d. The Nikon lenses are designed for the crop factor as are EF-S canon lenes. In other words there is no cropping as such if your lens is designed for the cropped sensor.

What is the benefit of a full frame over a cropped sensor? Well a 12mp full frame will have much more detail than a 16mp cropped as the pixels are bigger - you actually get a much better colour register as a result. If you use a full frame (canon AF/EF fitting) on a 450d you get a cropping effect of about 1.6x. Run an EF-S lens (as you can use both) and it will work at 1.0x so 50mm = 50mm.

The main thing about the two is they are both great makes each stronger in some areas over the other. The main thing to judge which to buy is how it feels in your hand as that is the most important. You will spend more time with it in your hand than looking at neglegable comparisons on output. I went canon for the greater choice (in my view) of lenses - there is just a wider range. Plus the shipped software and ergonimics won me over.

If you shoot raw, and eventually you will at some point, I am not sure Nikon ship any RAW software - certainly my friend didnt get any, instead a free version of some software he had to purchase. Canon ship everything you need and the software is bloody good.

In other words, ignore the branding and get it in your hand and see how it feels as that is the most important bit. Both will take good and bad photos

uncle aj

I thought that was a load of crop.

valentino

That was a good pun, actually for the first time since 2001 you made me laugh with you - not at you ;)

valentino

uncle aj

valentino

another thing to consider is that running a lens designed for a full frame (ok typically that means 35mm film body) that not only do you get a crop factor but you are potentially beyond the sweet spot for the focus - so images can appear a little softer.

I said about raw earler, some people argue that if you get the shot right first time that you can shoot direct to jpeg. What that doesnt give you is flexiblity to adjust sharpness. Yes you can adjust jpeg sharpness but its not as good as adjusting it in the raw file.

Running Canon software you get Digitial Professional 3.0 which is so bloody powerful that so long as you dont want to crop your images etc you would never need Photoshop as an example. When you shoot digital the sensor has a clear protective cover which, by design, introduces softness to images.