Thinking of going full-frame - Canon or Nikon?

[HBOC]

i see this all the time. Where people argue what is better. Just like with anything, there are pros' and cons'. I just don't get why people get all offensive? It isn't like anyone here personally designed or works for these companies. Regardless of what letters and symbols are on the body, it is still a tool that ASSISTS the person behind the lens. Like others have said, you could have a 1DS3, but if you don't know anything about how the tool works, how exposure, shutter speeds, etc work, then the body doesn't matter.

The only reason i keep going back to Canon, is because i know their system, have had Canon for years, and never have had a problem. My first DSLR was almost a D70. I ended up with a 20D because i had some glass to use.

 

[OreoCookie]

And where are Nikon's Tilt-Shift lenses

Nikon offers three tilt-shift lenses. Canon has one additional tilt-shift lens at 17 mm, though, the other three have focal lengths that are (almost) identical.

a true ringflash rather than ridiculous mobile heads

You can also get a true ring flash if you don't like Nikon's R1.

Unless you have very special needs, both companies offer a similarly complete lens and accessory portfolio. Not everyone relies on the availability of a defocus control lens or a loupe macro

Even more importantly: where is the relevance to the question of the OP? He hasn't mentioned a need for a ring flash, tilt-shift lenses or complained that Nikon has decided to offer full-frame bodies after all.

 

[compuwar]

Compuwar has already pointed out the existence of Nikon's perspective control lenses to you, which were introduced in January (24mm) and July (45mm and 85mm) of 2008.

Just in case someone mis-reads this as Nikon only having introduced PC lenses in 2008, mir.com has the follwing text:

Nikon introduced their first PC-Nikkor lense back in 1962 which was originally aimed to extend the appeal of 35mm SLR photography further with the success debut of the Nikon F. The original PC-Nikkor was a 35mm focal length lense and has a slow lens speed of f/3.5, the wideangle PC-Nikkor 28mm f/4.0 was only introduced in 1975. Both lenses were updated with a faster versions in 1968 - a f/2.8 lense for the 35mm and a f/3.5 version updated for the 28mm focal length which actually occurred quite late in 1980.

I'm pretty-sure that the 1962 PC Nikkor will work fine on today's cameras as well.

 

[HBOC]

oh and pdxflint, Shutterbug WILL MATCH B&H, Amazon, etc prices', as long as you include overnight shipping (or 1 day or whatnot). They matched amazons' price for the XSI + 18-55IS and 55-250mm for $730! I don't know how far you are from PDX (it says you are on the coast), but the Shutterbug on SW Broadway near Pioneer Square is amazing, FYI!

 

[Cliff3]

Just in case someone mis-reads this as Nikon only having introduced PC lenses in 2008, mir.com has the follwing text:

No, they've had them for a while (1962 to be exact: http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/lenses.html#PC ). I just wanted to note that the entire line-up was very recently refreshed. Some of the older lenses just moved in one axis too, I believe.

 

[John.B]

Nikon now has 3 T/S lenses, having added one in the last year- as many as Canon had until just recently when they added one more. Nikon has always called them Perspective Control (PC) lenses, so perhaps that's why you can't find them.

I know this is a bit a niche, and I'm sure I'm in over my head with this crowd, but...

I got a demo of the TS-E 24mm L II lens recently (on the inferior 5dmk2 ), and I was under the impression that the new Canon TS lenses would both tilt and shift independent of the other in ways that the Nikon perspective control lenses don't/can't. That the Canon is about a generation ahead in these lenses.

Admittedly, I got the Canon reps spin on this, but the guys at dpreview.com seem to agree.

FWIW, I was impressed at how interesting pictures with angled depth of field could look. A very cool technique.

 

[compuwar]

I know this is a bit a niche, and I'm sure I'm in over my head with this crowd, but...

I got a demo of the TS-E 24mm L II lens recently (on the inferior 5dmk2 ), and I was under the impression that the new Canon TS lenses would both tilt and shift independent of the other in ways that the Nikon perspective control lenses don't/can't.

I'm pretty sure that was referring to the fact that the shift isn't enough room for full movement on an APS-C sensor camera, as the DPR site says "full functionality with a D3." Tilt and shift are tilt and shift, it's just a matter of how wide the image circle is and how much movement the lens allows.

IMO, if you really need extreme movements you should be using a view camera or one of the Calumet Cambo bellows/lens plates units, but since the OP is talking about FF, the issue is moot.

(edit: Link to X2) http://www.cambo.com/Html/products_photo/set01/english/internet/Item752.html

 

[peskaa]

I know this is a bit a niche, and I'm sure I'm in over my head with this crowd, but...

I got a demo of the TS-E 24mm L II lens recently (on the inferior 5dmk2 ), and I was under the impression that the new Canon TS lenses would both tilt and shift independent of the other in ways that the Nikon perspective control lenses don't/can't. That the Canon is about a generation ahead in these lenses.

Admittedly, I got the Canon reps spin on this, but the guys at dpreview.com seem to agree.

FWIW, I was impressed at how interesting pictures with angled depth of field could look. A very cool technique.

That was my points. Nikon do offer T/S lenses, but they're behind the curve on technology despite being recently updated (I've used the Nikkor 24 myself). Nikon won't update them again any time soon, leaving Canon with the far superior current generation of lenses. Yes they're specialist, but companies should care about all their markets.

As for the ringflash, in my line of work we need proper ringflashes. Nikon don't offer one, and so we use previous-generation models which are on their way out. Yes you can go third party, but we don't want to. Again, its about caring about your entire userbase. Nikon UK's professional rep has said to me that they get a lot of complaints about this hole in the lineup and feed back to Nikon JP regularly, but nothing happens.


My overall point is that both companies aren't perfect. You guys bitch about the 5D2's AF as if it enough to turn the camera into crap, and vice versa.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

Uh, I don't think that's a quite accurate 5D Mark II body-only price... Amazon just stuck DBROTH as the default option and the option to buy straight from Amazon is on the right of the 5D Mark II body only's page.

I looked at Adorama and Best Buy, who were also selling for $2,700 (the CORRECT body-only price). For a while Best Buy was selling new bodies for $2,500.

Yes, a 5D II body costs around $2,700 in most places.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...p&A=search&Q=*&bhs=t&Go.x=14&Go.y=9&Go=submit

 

[rlb2444]

Nikon vs Canon

I have been through many digital cameras in the past ten years. I started with a Canon and stuck with Canon until I purchased a 1DS MKII. This was around 5 years ago and although it was 16mp compared to my previous 1DS of around 11MP it was extremely disappointing. I had quite a few Canon lenses but was really down on Canon so I sold everything and purchased a Nikon D200. It was OK but not exceptional but the biggest gripe was the smaller sensor. When the D3 came out around 2 years ago I jumped on it and without question it has been the best digital camera I have ever owned. Seldom do I really need the 24MP but will upgrade when the price becomes more realistic.

The D200, D300, D700, D3 and the D3x have really put a dent in Canon's sales and I suspect they are going to have to pull some rabbits out of their hat to gain market share.

 

[John.B]

I'm pretty sure that was referring to the fact that the shift isn't enough room for full movement on an APS-C sensor camera, as the DPR site says "full functionality with a D3." Tilt and shift are tilt and shift, it's just a matter of how wide the image circle is and how much movement the lens allows.

This has nothing to do with crop-sensors. The TS-E 24mm has a 67mm image circle, which is more than large enough for full frame sensors.

The difference with the new Canon TS-E lenses is that they can independently rotate on both the tilt and shift axises, vs. the tilt axis having to be 90° from the shift axis with the older generation lenses. It almost has to be demoed, its hard to explain if you haven't worked with one. (Canon had a video taken with the 5dmk2, where they went through the various gyrations using a building as a subject; unfortunately it hasn't made it to their website yet.) If you scroll 2/3's of the way down this page (dpreview.com) is shows the extent the lens can tilt and/or shift, but they didn't use the opportunity to show how those changes affect the shot.

What is literally revolutionary about these two lenses is that both allow, for the first time (at least for wideangle focal lengths designed specifically for DSLRs), independent rotation of the tilt and shift axes relative to the camera and to each other. (Hartblei's 'Super Rotator' designs achieve similar movements, but using longer focal length optics originally designed for medium format cameras.) Previously the tilt axis was set as standard at 90º to the shift axis, and the lenses could be modified to set them both in the same axis if the user desired. This restriction has now been discarded, making the lens movements, and therefore creative options, much more flexible. The tilt and shift mechanism rotates +/-90°, allowing shift in any direction, and in addition the tilt mechanism independently rotates +/-90°, allowing tilt in any direction relative to the shift. This functionality enables photographers to maximize depth of field in their images without stopping down as far as they would otherwise need - essential when wishing to squeeze every last pixel of detail from the latest 20+ Mp DSLRs while avoiding the deleterious effects of diffraction.

Again this is obviously a niche product, and but it has uses outside the standard "architecture photography" that really intrigue me. Being able to focus along a directional focus plane is an effect that I could really make good use of. Enough so, that it might just be the impetus I need to go full frame myself.

IMO, if you really need extreme movements you should be using a view camera or one of the Calumet Cambo bellows/lens plates units, but since the OP is talking about FF, the issue is moot.

Well, like most people, I have no intention of chasing down the medium format path. I'm only interested in this as a creative, additional lens for a dSLR.

 

[compuwar]

This has nothing to do with crop-sensors. The TS-E 24mm has a 67mm image circle, which is more than large enough for full frame sensors.

The difference with the new Canon TS-E lenses is that they can independently rotate on both the tilt and shift axises, vs. the tilt axis having to be 90° from the shift axis with the older generation lenses.

I didn't say it had to do with crop sensors, I said the APS-C bodies don't have enough for the full movements.

It doesn't *have* to be 90 degrees off, Nikon will modify the lenses to have them on the same axis, and typically folks shoot one way or the other. While the Canon's new lenses offer user-adjustability it's more of a "nice to have" for most folks and is only on the newest Canon lenses.

Well, like most people, I have no intention of chasing down the medium format path. I'm only interested in this as a creative, additional lens for a dSLR.

If you'd followed the link, you'd see that it has nothing to do with medium format cameras other than being able to use their lenses, the body/bellows units work with DSLRs, and besides tilt/shift you get swings just like with a large format view camera, and you get to use view camera, Hasselblad or Mamiya RB lenses depending on lensboard (normal or recessed) and adapter (if using Hassy/Mamiya lenses,) giving a lot more choices in terms of focal length. Since the DSLR has a shutter, the LF lenses don't even have to be mounted in shutter.

I've been looking at the X2-Pro for landscape work.

Here's the difference:

X2-Pro: Vertical Shift 17.5mm up/down
Horizontal Shift 17.5mm left/right
Tilt 20 degrees up/down
Swing 20 degrees left/right
Focal range: 28mm-150mm (really nearer 90-150 except for the retrofocus Schneider 28mm I think.)

Canon 24mm:
Shift 12mm
Tilt 8.5 degrees

Canon 17mm
Shift 12mm
Tilt 6.5 degrees

Plus you get rear standard movements on the X2, and the Schneider and Rodenstock digital lenses are pretty-much unequaled anywhere. I'm also looking at the Horseman LD series, which looks like it may go longer than 150mm and still accepts the retro-focus 28mm.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

The Canon TS-24MM is an outstanding piece of engineering. I don't have one, nor do I plan to, but it's an interesting lens. Its price is quite steep at over $2,000.

24mm focal length; F3.5 maximum aperture
± 8.5° Tilt and ±12mm Shift
Independent rotation of tilt and shift movements (through 90º and 180º respectively)
Angle of view

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_24_3p5_tse_c10/

 

[JFreak]

One thing to consider that I haven't read here is you can use a vast array of Older glass with Nikon, (such as the old AI-S manual focus lenses) but not with Canon as they have changed there mounts over the years.

Canon EF mount was introduced in 1987 and hasn't been changed since. So there's +20 years of compatibility. Also, the older FD mount (1971) is physically compatible with an adapter, so if you want to use manual lenses you probably won't even find anything older than that.

Nikon F-mount (1959) sure is over a decade older and still compatible with most current models. It's just strange that some Nikons don't even function without CPU-enabled lens and some old non-AI lenses cause even mechanical damage to newer bodies unless modified to meet AI spec, so nobody's perfect.

I'd rather say Canon's backward compatibility is easier to understand. All EF lenses are good, and all FD lenses are good with an adapter. Easy.

 

[JFreak]

IS 70-200 2.8 is heavy but just a super sharp, wonderful lens... if you don't want to carry all of this weight i highly recommend the 200 2.8 which is fairly compact

How about 135 f/2.0L then? It's an inch shorter than 200 f/2.8 and performs even better. Though it is somewhat more expensive as well.

 

[toxic]

One thing to consider that I haven't read here is you can use a vast array of Older glass with Nikon, (such as the old AI-S manual focus lenses) but not with Canon as they have changed there mounts over the years.

Canon EF mount is compatible with nearly every mount that exists as long as you have an (inexpensive) adapter. the exception is, ironically, the earlier Canon FD and FL mounts, unless you're willing to shell out for an expensive and rare adapter. also, the change in mounts was made 20 years ago.

 

[akdj]

"....the D200, D300, D700, D3 and the D3x have really put a dent in Canon's sales and I suspect they are going to have to pull some rabbits out of their hat to gain market share."

Wow, you nailed that one Have you tried to order (and wait) for a 5d2 lately (over the past year)? Most places have at least a 2-4 week wait, some as high as 2 months! While the Kit (w/24-105) can double the wait!

I Do, however, believe that the new range of HIS lenses from Canon look pretty intriguing. Course, the 60D and 1d4 are on the horizon as well....possibly the proverbial Rabbit(s)?

J