Nikon or Pentax?

[epicwelshman]

This is slightly off topic.. but I just looked at your photoblog. The compositions are very nice-- a lot nicer than what I've seen many people with DSLRs shoot.

I think you'll be very happy with a DSLR with better glass-- whether or not it's Canon, Nikon, or one of the other parties.

After reading this thread, I've realized I'm *really* glad I made my decision without posting here or on other photography boards. It seems like several people are viewing this thread as a chance to convert someone to "their" side in the Canon vs. Nikon battles. If it were me, I would take a day or two away from websites, and then spend some time trying out each of the cameras.

I hope to see more of your work in the future.

Oh wow, thank you so much!

The main problem with trying out the cameras is that I'm either based in the Bahamas with only one store that sells cameras or in a small university town in Canada with no store that sells cameras. As such I'm limited to when I venture out into bigger cities and only have a small amount of time to get the feel of any particular camera.

The whole Canon vs. Nikon thing is sad, and I don't really want to partake in the debate, I just want the best gear I can get.

 

[coldrain]

Actually, Nikon owns their own glass manufacturing, and was Japan's first optical glass maker starting in 1917. Hikari Glass is a relatively recently acquired (2004) wholly-owned subsidiary of Nikon as well.

If you check, you'll see lots of Nikon patents too.

Ohara seem to think they're independently listed as of 2005, and don't seem to mention Canon at all in their corporate history:

http://www.ohara-inc.co.jp/en/company/history.html

I've seen it said that Mr. Ohara was behind Nikon's glass, and most Japanese companies are listed as customers of Ohara, but it's unclear what parts they supply and if it's camera lens elements at all.

Nikon produced Nikkor camera lenses starting in 1932, while the Nikon I camera didn't appear until 1946. Canon didn't show up until 1933 as Kwanon, and was trademarked as Canon in 1935.

You seem ill-informed.

Optical glass production (Ohara does that) and actually making lenses (you know, the moulded and polished "glass" inside those tubes YOU call a lens) are two different things.
Nikon and Canon both produce their own elements, Canon actually makes specialized glass itself for some lens elements, usually referred to as fluorite and UD elements. Whether or not they produce the raw material for the DO elements I do not know, that is a closely regarded secret.

Nikon gets optical glass from Ohara.
You should already know that since it was only a click away from the url you posted:
http://www.ohara-inc.co.jp/en/company/overview.html
Scroll down.
Major customers from Ohara: Olympus, Canon, Minolta, Nikon, Fuji, Ricoh, Pentax.

So far for Nikon actually producing their own optical glass.

Now about who owns Ohara:
Canon facts book 2006/2007
http://www.canon.com/about/library/canon_factbook.pdf

Just search for Ohara. You will find it to be a subsidiary of Canon.
So... that does sort of make Canon a supplier of optical glass to Nikon (and Pentax and Minolta and such).

And is that mr. Ohara by chance be the same mr. Ohara who is in charge of Canon's camera development center?

 

[840quadra]

After reading this thread, I've realized I'm *really* glad I made my decision without posting here or on other photography boards. It seems like several people are viewing this thread as a chance to convert someone to "their" side in the Canon vs. Nikon battles. If it were me, I would take a day or two away from websites, and then spend some time trying out each of the cameras.

I am glad I did what you did as well . I am a Canon user, however I would never want to force that upon someone that isn't sure what they want, especially if they indicate a stronger interest in another brand entirely.

I am recommending Nikon to this great photographer (I just looked at the linked work too), because it is one of the two main brands that they were looking into, and the epicwelshman also stated that Nikon felt good to them.

Now about who owns Ohara:
Canon facts book 2006/2007
http://www.canon.com/about/library/canon_factbook.pdf

Actaully Ohara falls under

*Nonconsoloated subsidiaries and affiliates

Which is quite grey,

My understanding of that , and documentation on Ohara's site would indicate that it is affiliated with Canon, not an entirely owned subsidiary of that company.

 

[coldrain]

Actaully Ohara falls under
Quote:
Originally Posted by canon_factbook.pdf
*Nonconsoloated subsidiaries and affiliates
Which is quite grey,

My understanding of that , and documentation on Ohara's site would indicate that it is affiliated with Canon, not an entirely owned subsidiary of that company.

Your quote is from the 2005 factbook. Look in the 2006/2007 factbook.

Go to page 8/9 of said PDF.

It states under "2. R&D, Manufacturing and Marketing Subsidiaries and Affiliates :"

Ohara Inc. Japan Nov. 41 409 Development and production of optical glass and special glass
http://www.ohara-inc.co.jp/en 15-30, Koyama 1-chome, Sagamihara-shi, Kanagawa 229-1186, Japan (81) 42-772-2101

This is in the same lists as such "affiliates and subsidiaries" as, a.o.:
-Canon Electronics Inc.
-Canon Finetech Inc.
-Canon Precision Inc.
-Canon Optron, Inc.
-Canon Components, Inc.
-Canon i-tech, Inc.
-Canon Semiconductor Equipment Inc.
-Canon Imaging System Technologies Inc.

It also states that Ohara is a subsidiary "As of October 31, 2005". Its status has changed in 2005 to fully owned subsidiary. Ohara Optics Inc. has been a full subsidiary of Canon for a long time already anyway.

 

[840quadra]

Go to page 8/9 of said PDF.

It states under "2. R&D, Manufacturing and Marketing Subsidiaries and Affiliates :"


This is in the same lists as such "affiliates and subsidiaries" as, a.o.:
-Canon Electronics Inc.
-Canon Finetech Inc.
-Canon Precision Inc.
-Canon Optron, Inc.
-Canon Components, Inc.
-Canon i-tech, Inc.
-Canon Semiconductor Equipment Inc.
-Canon Imaging System Technologies Inc.

It also states that Ohara is a subsidiary "As of October 31, 2005".

It states

*Nonconsoloated subsidiaries and affiliates

Not

"affiliates and subsidiaries"

The difference is absolutely crucial to understanding exactly what is going on. An affiliate is not owned or controlled by corporations they are working with in the afiliate program, a subsidiary is owned and controlled by the parent company. If it would say (point blank) that Ohera is a Subsidiary of Canon, then the issue would not be grey, but since they don't do that, it is still hard to understand if they are saying it is a Subsidiary, or an Affiliate .

And this is all I see on Ohara, within the PDF from Canon.

And the following is talking about Canon Korea business solutions, not Ohera.

I have no doubts that I am wrong, however I am not seeing what you are talking about, within any of the provided links.

 

[cube]

Look at page 4:

http://www.nikonimaging.com/global/products/lens/pdf/nikkor_lenses_36p.pdf

 

[coldrain]

I have no idea why you want us to look at page 4 of that Nikon marketing material, cube.

Anyway. Just do some searching on internet on your own. You can find many references to Ohara being a subsidiary of Canon and belonging to the Canon Group.

For instance this link, in which document Ohara is named as being a Canon subsidiary:
http://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/03e003.pdf

... In addition to these visits, we visited Ohara Optics Inc., Canon’s subsidiary...

For instance this link about lithography machines for chip production:
http://www.e.u-tokyo.ac.jp/cirje/research/workshops/micro/documents/chuma.pdf

Which attributes the ASML glass making for these machines to: Zeiss group (Hereaeus, Shott), Corning, Shinetsu, Crystal, Ohara.

Hereaeus, Shott belong to the Zeiss group.

And which attributes the Nikon glass making for these machines to: Mostly In-House (Nikon), Partly Ohara.

And which attributes the Canon glass making for these machines to:
Canon Group (Optron, Ohara).

Optron, Ohara belong to the Canon group.

 

[840quadra]

Thanks for the clarification and other sources.

I wasn't trying to pose a fight, just wanted more detailed information, which you provided .

 

[compuwar]

Anyway. Just do some searching on internet on your own. You can find many references to Ohara being a subsidiary of Canon and belonging to the Canon Group.

Funnily enough the Tokyo stock exchange lists Ohara as ticker 5218. They IPO'd in 2005, which is evidenced on their own site, as well as financial sites.

e.g.
http://www.irstreet.com/top/am/amfiles/e20051009_15.pdf
https://www.mworld.com/m/m.w?lp=GetStory&id=234631401
http://wrightreports.ecnext.com/coms2/reportdesc_COMPANY_C39262A00

Here's their current chart:

http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/quickchart/quickchart.asp?symb=JP:5218&sid=2119048&time=

It seems to me they wouldn't need to list an annual meeting of shareholders here:

http://www.ohara-inc.co.jp/en/ir/calendar/index.html

If the grand total number of shareholders was one.

Perhaps you can explain how Ohara can be *both* a publicly traded company on the Tokyo Exchange *and* a wholly-owned Canon subsidiary?

 

[Plymouthbreezer]

Eeek?!?1 Don't you think this thread has gotten away from the OP's true question....?

 

[840quadra]

Funnily enough the Tokyo stock exchange lists Ohara as ticker 5218. They IPO'd in 2005, which is evidenced on their own site, as well as financial sites.

e.g.
http://www.irstreet.com/top/am/amfiles/e20051009_15.pdf
https://www.mworld.com/m/m.w?lp=GetStory&id=234631401
http://wrightreports.ecnext.com/coms2/reportdesc_COMPANY_C39262A00

Here's their current chart:

http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/quickchart/quickchart.asp?symb=JP:5218&sid=2119048&time=

It seems to me they wouldn't need to list an annual meeting of shareholders here:

http://www.ohara-inc.co.jp/en/ir/calendar/index.html

If the grand total number of shareholders was one.

Perhaps you can explain how Ohara can be *both* a publicly traded company on the Tokyo Exchange *and* a wholly-owned Canon subsidiary?

Also good points.

Those links lead me to believe my suspision in the first place.. And why canon has the..

*Nonconsoloated subsidiaries and affiliates

Footnote on both the 2005 and 2006 fact sheet. I would personally think they would be touting the fact that they owned Ohara, and that they helped develop Nikon glass, if they truly did. I am also sure that fact would also be easy to find, and on Camera fan websites across the net.

Eeek?!?1 Don't you think this thread has gotten away from the OP's true question....?

WHAT on Earth are you talking about !!

 

[coldrain]

Eeek?!?1 Don't you think this thread has gotten away from the OP's true question....?

Just a very little bit ...

 

[sjl]

The whole Canon vs. Nikon thing is sad, and I don't really want to partake in the debate, I just want the best gear I can get.

Quite.

As I've said many times before: I shoot with a Canon EOS 20D. Because I have so much money tied up in Canon gear, I know their lineup reasonably well - it helps me plan my next purchase. Any comments I make about lenses from Canon come from that knowledge; I refrain from commenting on Nikon's lineup because I don't know it as well. If somebody wants to buy a DSLR, and ends up buying Nikon gear, I'm not fussed - Nikon makes stuff that is more than adequate for the vast majority of photographers, as does Canon, as does Sony, Pentax, Olympus, ...

Would I recommend Nikon to somebody who wanted a DSLR? Absolutely. I just wouldn't be able to tell them which lenses are good and which ones aren't so great. That's why I talk about Canon gear, and leave it to others, who know Nikon better than I, to talk about the Nikon equivalents.

People here need to remember: what somebody else chooses to buy does not invalidate the choice they made. It does not make those who bought differently somehow weaker, more ineffectual, or otherwise less worthy.

 

[epicwelshman]

Quite.

As I've said many times before: I shoot with a Canon EOS 20D. Because I have so much money tied up in Canon gear, I know their lineup reasonably well - it helps me plan my next purchase. Any comments I make about lenses from Canon come from that knowledge; I refrain from commenting on Nikon's lineup because I don't know it as well. If somebody wants to buy a DSLR, and ends up buying Nikon gear, I'm not fussed - Nikon makes stuff that is more than adequate for the vast majority of photographers, as does Canon, as does Sony, Pentax, Olympus, ...

Would I recommend Nikon to somebody who wanted a DSLR? Absolutely. I just wouldn't be able to tell them which lenses are good and which ones aren't so great. That's why I talk about Canon gear, and leave it to others, who know Nikon better than I, to talk about the Nikon equivalents.

People here need to remember: what somebody else chooses to buy does not invalidate the choice they made. It does not make those who bought differently somehow weaker, more ineffectual, or otherwise less worthy.

You know, that's probably one of the best comments I've ever heard on the whole Nikon/Canon debate, and can be easily applied to other fanboy-ish debates. Kudos.

 

[840quadra]

You know, that's probably one of the best comments I've ever heard on the whole Nikon/Canon debate, and can be easily applied to other fanboy-ish debates. Kudos.

I said basiclly the same thing to you, and I am a Canon user that recommended a Nikon to you .


I am only debating the issue regarding who makes or develops lenses. I am just looking for information for myslef, not to say one brand is better than the other.

 

[pdxflint]

Hey folks... good points, all... but, preferences aside, they're all good companies, and competition is always good. Why get so hung up on the name brand of your equipment, when it's your photos that really speak for you. The technology in photographic equipment in general, from any manufacturer, going way back to pre-digital days in fact, is simply amazing in that it allows us the potential to make photographic images of great quality as easily as they do.

I'm a fan of all of the companies, especially the great camera makers that have been around for a long time and survived into the computerized, digital age; Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Olympus, Minolta (Sony,) Fuji, Leica, Bronica, and all the others. The combination of technology (physics, optics, electronics) is easy to take for granted, but when you stop to think about it, it's mindblowing. What's the point of getting into an arguement over which is "best?" I say for anyone to buy what they want, or like, and let's keep all these companies in business for the long haul.

-Phil (previous owner of Kodak, Pentax, Fuji, Olympus, Canon and Nikon cameras, from Instamatics to 35mm rangefinders to manual SLRs to crossover cameras to electronic SLRs to digital point-n-shoots to dSLRs - all did their jobs, and well.)

 

[Grimace]

there is something so fun about saying "instamatic" camera. Sounds like the must-have gift of the holiday!

 

[pdxflint]

there is something so fun about saying "instamatic" camera. Sounds like the must-have gift of the holiday!

Heh... I wish I still had my old Instamatic. Of course film would be a problem. But, some of my old memories were captured and saved with that clunky little box, what with no metering, no focusing and all. I cherish those old squarish pics. They remind me of how cute my first girlfriend was.... ahhh. <sigh>

 

[Abstract]

After reading this thread, I've realized I'm *really* glad I made my decision without posting here or on other photography boards. It seems like several people are viewing this thread as a chance to convert someone to "their" side in the Canon vs. Nikon battles. If it were me, I would take a day or two away from websites, and then spend some time trying out each of the cameras.

Good advice.

This thread hasn't helped anyone at all, really.

I think I recommended the Nikon D80 to you because that's what you actually wanted. I don't know why you'd choose the 400D when you already said you didn't like the camera body. Do you realize you'll have to pick up and hold this camera whenever you take a photo?

Thing is, I love Canon products and was all gung-ho about getting a 350D, until I picked it up...... Not regretting buying a Nikon D50 at all, except now I'm far too competent to be digging through the menu on my LCD screen to switch from matrix to centre-weighted metering. I need to move up to a D80, really. Problem is that my D50 takes great photos and there isn't enough of a reason for me to sell my D50 + kit lens and spend the extra $600 AUD on a D80 body.

 

[Karpfish]

Canon's only advantage over Nikon is Noise. If you are shooting most of the time indoors or in low light, the 5D is a winner. The ISO 1600 files are so clean. Nikon has better ergonomics, and the bodies are all better for the price. Also nikon has all old MF glass to be had, whereas canon...doesn't.

 

[compuwar]

Eeek?!?1 Don't you think this thread has gotten away from the OP's true question....?

The OP's question has been answered directly about six or seven times, and the OP has gotten a lot of extra advice, some useful, some not so useful. The OP has flopped back and forth over a choice that really- in the scheme of things- isn't all that material to their photography-- either system will suit them just fine, and they'll do well with either system. All that's left is the little fluffy bits sticking to the edge.

 

[epicwelshman]

I said basiclly the same thing to you, and I am a Canon user that recommended a Nikon to you .


I am only debating the issue regarding who makes or develops lenses. I am just looking for information for myslef, not to say one brand is better than the other.

This is true, and I apologize for not thanking you as well.

The OP's question has been answered directly about six or seven times, and the OP has gotten a lot of extra advice, some useful, some not so useful. The OP has flopped back and forth over a choice that really- in the scheme of things- isn't all that material to their photography-- either system will suit them just fine, and they'll do well with either system. All that's left is the little fluffy bits sticking to the edge.

I know I've flipped-flopped back and forth on the issue, and I still have a lot of thinking to do. I do thank you all for your advice on the original issue, as well as all of the extra advice regarding lenses etc. I've learnt a lot in this thread, and I don't want to seem ungrateful or appear that I haven't noticed, because I have. You've all been a massive help, and everything that has been said will only help me with photography. Thank you.

 

[compuwar]

I'm not trying to reopen this, but I'd like to set the record straight vs. Canon and Ohara and it took them a while to answer my query. This is from the wholly owned US Subsidiary of Ohara:

Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 16:14:39 -0800
From: Janet Cole <REDACTED>
To: 'Paul D. Robertson' <REDACTED>
Subject: RE: Company question

Dear Paul,

Please excuse my tardy reply. It always takes a bit to recover from the
holidays.
In answer to your question, Ohara Inc. is not a wholly owned subsidiary of
Canon but the two companies have a business relationship. Ohara supplies
optical glass blanks for use in some of Canon's products. I hope this gives
you the answers that you need.

Sincerely,

Janet Cole
Sales Coordinator
Ohara Corporation

 

[Clix Pix]

Thank you, Compuwar, for taking the time to investigate this thoroughly and thinking to go right to the source, with the result of an accurate and true answer to the discussion instead of a lot of misinformation and confusion.