Canon vs. Nikon

[low orbit]

Having owned Nikon gear (F90x SLR) and handled Canon gear (not the 5D, I'm not that silly ) I'd have to say I like both, but the Canon switches and buttons seem a little more intuitive. Also I've heard the glass is better, something I'll be looking into when I get a DSLR.

Again, very much a personal preference and I'll be getting the camera that suits me and falls into my budget. If it happens to be another Nikon, then so be it. *ducks*

Cheers.

[Dellboy]

It's been posted on here before but you might want to check out this.

http://www.thatsmymonkey.com/Pages/0204canonvnikon.html

[liza]

Originally Posted by cdifoto

You should read the TOS of the site before you go off like that. You don't need a camera per se but you do need something Nikon-branded (at least eventually, or intend to buy):
How they actually expect to enforce that is beyond me.

They actually kicked Ed Malone off their forum for not having Nikon gear.

[low orbit]

Originally Posted by Dellboy

It's been posted on here before but you might want to check out this.

http://www.thatsmymonkey.com/Pages/0204canonvnikon.html

Ok that was quite funny

Originally Posted by liza

They actually kicked Ed Malone off their forum for not having Nikon gear.

And that's just sad. Maybe I'll stick with Canon because the people are friendlier. Yeah, that's a good excuse.

Cheers.

[dpastern]

Originally Posted by liza

They actually kicked Ed Malone off their forum for not having Nikon gear.

Really? That's nasty, their loss - Ed's a good photographer. At least the POTN forums are much friendlier (I do wholly admit this). In fact, I don't think any of the forums come close to POTN (FM, dpreview, Nikonians etc).

Dave

[_aravena]

I love that his choices consist of every DLSR out there except high end ones. Nikon vs Canon...


Honestly, the D40 is a toy and D40x is just an expensive toy. The D200 is great if you know how to use it. THe D80 is nice but compared to the XTi at price go for the XTi and then save for glass. IF you want the 30D, it's a bit more costly, but if you do sports, the speed is sweet.

But if we go into refurbed or used cameras, then it's harder cause Nikon did have great cameras that'd make this harder. Can't believe they got rid of the D50 and D70. I know the D40 was a downgrade and the D80 wasn't much of an upgrade.

[jr_senator]

Originally Posted by Billginthekeys

...nikon argueably has a better flash system.

Originally Posted by dpastern

1. Nikon has better metering and flash metering
2. Nikon has better flash units

How so?

[convergent]

It would be helpful to understand your requirements before recommending anything...

- What's your budget for body and lenses?
- What kinds of stuff do you want to photograph?
- Do you intend to shoot in very low light without flash?
- Do you need something compact with built-in flash, or do you intend to buy a separte flash gun to mount on the hotshoe?
- Do you anticipate taking pictures of fast moving subjects?
- Do you intend to take pictures in inclimate weather (rain, snow, etc.)?

etc...

[Billginthekeys]

Originally Posted by jr_senator

How so?

although i admitadly dont know much about flash photography, the main thing that comes to mind is the ability to wirelessly fire flashes strait from the camera (without a seperate master or transmitter attached)

[Livinthalife]

Just figured I would add to the fight with these!

[Raphael V]

Nikon offers better features at lower prices.

I fully agree with Dave and the Kid regarding the metering and flash. Nikon flash exposures are much more consistent while canon ETTL flash is a pain to master.

Some consumer grade lenses in similar focal length does not exist with Canon, like the AF Nikkor 18-200 VR or the 24-85 F2.8-4.5.

If have to start over again, I'll definitely go with the Nikon.

[convergent]

Originally Posted by Raphael V

Nikon offers better features at lower prices.

I fully agree with Dave and the Kid regarding the metering and flash. Nikon flash exposures are much more consistent while canon ETTL flash is a pain to master.

Some consumer grade lenses in similar focal length does not exist with Canon, like the AF Nikkor 18-200 VR or the 24-85 F2.8-4.5.

If have to start over again, I'll definitely go with the Nikon.

On the lens situation, there are a lot of places where Canon also has lenses that Nikon doesn't. Nikon has very few "modern" primes... many of them are older designs that rely on the camera motor to focus, and that means if you don't have a D2H or D2X it is going to be slow. Also, they don't have a complete line of VR telezooms where Canon does. There are a lot of other places where there is not overlap. Admittedly, the 18-200VR is a popular cosumer lens that I can't believe Canon doesn't respond to.

On the flash, I think its just different. I shot Nikon for 20 years and it took me a while to figure out how to use a 580EX, but I get pretty good results with it now.

The one thing, which to me is incredibly important, is high ISO noise. Canon absolutely dominates Nikon in this regard, and is only getting better. It was one of the primary reasons for my switch, along with the need for fast prime lenses for sports.

[Michael1116]

Hmmmm, let me think on that one awhile......

Nikon, the official camera of the NY Mets.

[jr_senator]

Originally Posted by Billginthekeys

...the main thing that comes to mind is the ability to wirelessly fire flashes strait from the camera (without a seperate master or transmitter attached)

That's nice.

[pieq314]

Originally Posted by cdifoto

You should read the TOS of the site before you go off like that. You don't need a camera per se but you do need something Nikon-branded (at least eventually, or intend to buy):




How they actually expect to enforce that is beyond me.

I read one guy there posting something without owning Nikon stuff. And the moderator actually removed that guy, even though some Nikonians come to his aid to beg the moderator not removing him.