I imagine that if I wanted a little more DR from a Canon sensor ( something that I don't), I could just buy a Sony camera body and use the Canon lenses I already have. This would be a lot cheaper than switching from one system to another chasing after the latest technology. The thing is that everyday we have Canon users switching to Nikon, Sony, and the rest, and at the same time we have Nikon users switching to Canon, Sony, and the rest. Sony, Fuji, Olympus, and several other camera manufacturers are introducing a lot of competition to the camera market, and that's nothing but good for the consumer.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Almost switched to Nikon today... (glad I didn't)
- Thread starter Miltz
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Having shot both brands I would say that if you are comparing default jpg from Canons and Nikons it's not a good test. I think that Nikon has a philosophy of leaving their default jpgs a bit softer and less "poopy" than Canon's, maybe to leave more room to edit from.
Been a Canon guy since the early 90s, but bought a Nikon D5100 (used, but in mint condition) very cheap from a friend as a secondary DSLR (to my Canon EOS 6D setup)
The grip was no problem, and i like the tilt LCD. The menus, while different, was no problem to figure out in a minute.
However, i really don't get why the GUI of menu/settings in both Nikon & Canon cameras look like something that was made 15 years ago? Even with tiny resources for the GUI for the CPU, you could come up with something better. A lot better. But ok, it works, that's all that matters.
When it comes to Nikon.
Do i really need to use ViewNX 2? I could view and edit all Nikon Raw files from the camera both in the Finder and relevant image browsing/editing applications (Lightroom, Bridge, Aperture, Photoshop and so on).
I did some research on the net, but didn't really found anything indicating that ViewNX 2 was better in some way than the apps i already use.
But i may be missing something.
What's your favorite lens to use when you shoot people? I recently got the 85mm 1.8 and I like it so far. I can't to try on a photo shoot. If I only shot people I wouldn't even think to switch to Nikon.
----------
No, that's what "you think I'm saying" If I spoke about camera controls and button placement, then that's something you can get used to. A camera that feels bad when you pick it up will always feel bad. Even thought the Nikon D750 was new and different I loved how it felt.
I love my 6D with the 85mm, amazing for portrait!
No you don't have to use ViewNX 2. Most use Lightroom or Aperture for editing and conversion of RAW files.
I converted from Cannon to Nikon about 8 years ago mostly due to dodge focus I had with Cannon 20D. I used D300 and then moved onto D700. It's been razor sharp focus with a great ISO performance since then.
Since I don't use any Cannon DSLR, I can't tell whether the latest Cannons have better focus, though.
Currently, considering upgrading my beloved D700 to D750...
Since I don't use any Cannon DSLR, I can't tell whether the latest Cannons have better focus, though.
Currently, considering upgrading my beloved D700 to D750...
In February Olympus will introduce their E-M5 Mark II body. That will be the first M43 body to micro shift the sensor and combine several 16MB frames to create 40MB raw files. With that body you get the distance boost of 2x EOV on your lenses and a very detailed 40MB image. I image the 40MB image only works for single shot mode. So it would be for landscapes, portraits, and other still-life. I believe the body will be introduced no later than the CP+ show in mid month in Japan.
I hope we get a E-M1 Mark II later this year that also does the 40MB raw images.
I hope we get a E-M1 Mark II later this year that also does the 40MB raw images.
There's nothing amazing about that blown out background. It's so blown out that it's competing with your subject. Canons have terrible dynamic range.
Bah, be nice. It would appear he likes the bright backgrounds, judging from his site.
Huh? The focus should be on the subject, not on the background. If I wanted more focus on the background, I wouldn't have used such a wide aperture.
Yes the DR sucks but has nothing to do with the lens.
Wow! You call yourself a photographer, yet don't know the definition of a simple term like "blown out," which has nothing to do with focus, aperture, or the lens.
He doesn't need to.
The photos on his page are quite professional.
That said you are right about Canons having hideous DR and about his blown out backgrounds.
But his photos still look nice and that's really all that matters.
The thing with dynamic range is that there's no free lunch -- while the Nikon are indeed better for low ISO dynamic range, they suffer higher in the ISO range and have worse highlight clipping.
IMO, it depends what you're shooting. If you shoot birds in flight, you might need better high ISO performance and in which case, go with Canon. If you're shooting something like landscape where you'll likely be pulling shadows and exposure a few stops, then go Nikon.
IMO, it depends what you're shooting. If you shoot birds in flight, you might need better high ISO performance and in which case, go with Canon. If you're shooting something like landscape where you'll likely be pulling shadows and exposure a few stops, then go Nikon.
I already said it had nothing to do with lens. I know what blown out means (Too much light and loss of unrecoverable details). And yes it has nothing to do with focus and aperture but I never said it did, I just said the settings were used because the background was not important for me. So even blown out, it does not matter for me. And it is the price to pay to shoot in natural light.
No need to be offensive just because you would take the shot differently. Why so angry?
Either way, what I meant to say is that the 85mm lens is amazing for portrait. The amazing part was not meant for the picture.
If you cannot agree with that then you're the one lacking knowledge in photography.
----------
I love shooting with my x100 for that reason. The DR on that small machine is just incredible!
If only both Nikon and Sony cameras would be the most desirable cameras for landscape photography, there would not be landscape photographers using Canon cameras. In sports events, and BIF photography a great portion of the cameras used are Canon, but a lot of photographers use Nikon Cameras as well.
I am not a landscape photographer, but in my view the ten following tips are most important than DR alone:
http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2...-landscape-photography-and-how-to-break-them/
I am not a landscape photographer, but in my view the ten following tips are most important than DR alone:
http://www.digitalcameraworld.com/2...-landscape-photography-and-how-to-break-them/
Switching brands is always an expensive and time consuming business. It takes a long time to learn how to use a new brand of camera without looking. There is a lot of value in that old camera that feels like an extension of your hand.
My favourite camera to handle was the old Sony A700 with its big chunky grip. I still miss it years later and my Canons have never felt as good in comparison.
aerok don't let the troll get to you, you're doing fine work there.
My favourite camera to handle was the old Sony A700 with its big chunky grip. I still miss it years later and my Canons have never felt as good in comparison.
aerok don't let the troll get to you, you're doing fine work there.
I couldn't agree more. Switching from Canon to Nikon was extremely time consuming, especially when it came to packaging and selling all of my Canon equipment. I could kick myself now because I probably should have just picked up a Sony A7r with a Metabones adaptor and keep all of my Canon lenses. Then I just would have had to sell my 5DIII rather than everything when I went over to Nikon.
50 MP Canon 5D about to be announced... Specs just leaked.
http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/01/canon-eos-5ds-eos-5ds-r-specifications/
http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/01/canon-eos-5ds-eos-5ds-r-specifications/
If the new 5DS would render the beautiful images and colors of the 5Dc, it would be a winner. The 5Dc is an old camera, but people keep on using and hold on to them:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1159990&page=553
Last edited:
Typical sensationalist title :roll eyes:
I'd always want to handle a body before deciding whether it is for me or not. Image quality aside, I'd argue all are so close these days that that part almost doesn't matter, how they feel in your hand(s), the weight etc is most important.
I went in a shop with a friend when buying my first dSLR; I left with a D70 and he left with a 300D. I thought the Canon was too light and plastic like, and he thought the Nikon was too heavy and solid. It is what anyone prefers personally, and it is so personal that I don't think it is even worth sharing that decision online...
I'd always want to handle a body before deciding whether it is for me or not. Image quality aside, I'd argue all are so close these days that that part almost doesn't matter, how they feel in your hand(s), the weight etc is most important.
I went in a shop with a friend when buying my first dSLR; I left with a D70 and he left with a 300D. I thought the Canon was too light and plastic like, and he thought the Nikon was too heavy and solid. It is what anyone prefers personally, and it is so personal that I don't think it is even worth sharing that decision online...
I guess if you like taking pictures of plastic looking albino mannequins, then by all means get a Canon.
Just a bit. I shoot Nikon for my own reasons (cheap lenses from work being the main one), but if people want to shoot with a different brand, that's their choice.
I've seen some great pictures (as well as some average snaps) from every camera manufacturer. It's the person behind the lens that makes the picture.