You've got no gear at all - Would you get a 5DMKIV or D850

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18472363
If you had neither system, the decision is much harder and now only comes down to glass and nothing else.

Glass, and nothing else? I have trouble seeing it that way.

To me, there are a lot of other things to consider besides glass:

Familiarity with user interface. This is important to me, because I do not read manuals to figure out how to do stuff. I simply refuse to force my brain to focus and concentrate on something. So if I can't just pick up the camera and figure out how to use it within a few minutes of just "playing around with it", then that camera is not for me. Nothing in the world is worth the anguish that comes from making my brain work hard to learn something. If I were considering switching to Nikon, I would first have to pick up a Nikon and play around with it for several minutes, to see if the menus were able to be readily and easily figured out. Yes, something that seems so trivial to most would actually be a huge major consideration for me. This is my M.O. in many other areas of life, and I would not change my M.O. when it comes to camera systems.

Customer service. This is a big factor, and I am no over-rating it because it is so important that it cannot be over-rated. I don't know anything about Nikon's customer service, so I would have to do a ton or research to find out exactly how they handle this part of their business. The results of that research would be a major factor in deciding which system to use.

Widespread usage. How many Nikon users are there out there compared to Canon users? The more mainstream and popular a system is, the easier it will be for me to borrow or swap lenses and bodies with friends. It will also be easier to find used gear such as lenses, grips, and other accessories that are compatible with my system. For example, I own a Toyota Corolla because it is so common, and parts and accessories, both used and third-party, are plentiful and available just about anywhere at great prices because the supply is so high. If I owned a less-popular car model, I would not enjoy this smorgasbord of readily available, inexpensive stuff that fits my car. Also, just about anybody can service my car, because there are so many of them that everyone is familiar with them. The same can be said of camera systems.

There are yet more considerations, other than lenses, that are quite important to me, but I am tired of thinking and typing at the moment, so I won't be listing or discussing these other considerations at this time. Maybe I'll come back to this post and add them in later.

.

1) If you had no system, you wouldn't be familiar with either system presumably. The OP just says your gear disappeared and you were starting fresh, with no indication of which system you came from. Everyone is different, some are able to pick things up and learn them very quickly and also know how to take the PDF manual and search it quickly for a topic that seems to escape them. Others have complications in their lives that prevent this from happening, though, I understand, so usability could be more difficult.

Also, it takes about a week or two (true of most hardware and software even for average users) to get used to a different system, and then it no longer becomes a point of contention from one system to the other. Certainly not important enough in the long term decision of a shooting platform.

2) In the decade or more of owning a ton of Canon equipment, I can count on one hand how many times I have needed Canon service. Others may be less fortunate and have had needed Canon many, many times, but I am not sure who has the better service? If you use Canon service quite a bit, perhaps this is a concern, but then again there are enough horror stories from both sides.

3) Good question, but it is fair to say there are more than enough Nikon market share to make lenses available from 3rd parties, etc, considering Nikon and Canon go head to head year after year after year....

If you had neither system, you would have to learn one system over the other after the purchase, you hope to never use service if the product is good enough, and market share of each isn't in question. So again, the majority of the solution comes down to glass selection out of all the other factors, IMO.

If it takes alot of time to figure out other factors differentiating the two, then I would argue they just aren't deciding factors at all, they are considerations but aren't deal breakers.

.

It seems like you are taking the points that I made and saying that htey aren't really that important. That kinda frustrates me. . They may not be important to you, but they are huge considerations to me.

.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18473956
.

It seems like you are taking the points that I made and saying that htey aren't really that important. That kinda frustrates me. . They may not be important to you, but they are huge considerations to me.

.

They might be for you, but how important are they for the general population? I will edit my original reply that you quoted to make it more of a gray area than an absolute, however I originally stated what I did because as a general rule, the majority of discussions between the Nikon and Canon camps have all been about the differences in glass (both offerings and budgets) over the years. There is another thing that needs to be brought up, since it directly relates to the deliverables from the camera/glass combination, and that is the post processing tools/ease. That is a very important aspect, I think, and I will add that to the other post as well, and one I hope you would agree with.

Regarding Canon service, how much do you use that? Do you know for certain that Canon service is better than Nikon's? I have seen stories from both sides. I have used Canon service 4 times, 2 for warranty/recalls and 2 for fixing things that went awry. None of the 4 were notable in any way for me, positive or negative.

I understand that usability is a pretty important thing for you, but a) Nikon has bridged the usability gap substantially, even with the D850 release, and b) have you used Nikon? How would you know it is harder to use than Canon? I have looked through the reviews with menus and settings displayed, and it seems it wouldn't be too extremely difficult to pick up the D850 controls, especially with touch control, and Nikon adding the back function to the menu items for ease of navigation.

There is no disputing Nikon's market share and how large they are, so I don't see that being all that important. Sigma, Tamron and all others ALWAYS make sure they make lenses for each manufacturer, or they lose revenue.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18473942
It is great that Nikon was now the first to implement automatic AFMA. I always said that Canon could do this easily for us, but it is now Nikon that allows you to simply set up your camera and have it determine your AF offsets for each lens you own up to 20, like Canon. There was absolutely no reason Canon couldn't have developed this feature, especially with the advent of DPAF in live view, which could have been used for detection of AF errors from the phase-detect system.

No more test charts and purchases of glorified chart+ruler systems, just set up the camera with the lens, verify initial focus, and have the camera do the rest.



http://www.imaging-resource.com …s-with-the-nikon-d5s-auto

Another thing besides all the other nice features of the D850 that have me looking at it.... It has one killer of an AF system as well, and high res 46Mpx at 9fps with the grip... The redesigned ergonomics and redesigned menu structure seems to quell some of its usage complaints too.

Love Nikon's approach. I have never been a huge fan of the current MFA method. Before lens align came out I used to wonder why couldn't they use something like contrast detect as a reference. I was saying this a DPreview and someone replied to wait as this new method coming out which was Lens Align.

I did some reading about PDAF on LV. It uses a hybrid system as the mirror can't be used for normal PD. It uses PD to focus quickly and then switches to CD and fine tunes if needed. Pretty interesting.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18473958
They might be for you, but how important are they for the general population?

I don't know, nor do I care. . I am me, so I speak about what matters to me. . I am not the general population, so I have no business speaking about what is right for them.

I tried to it clear that I was speaking only about what is right for me (which is all any of us can do with any viability).

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18473944
Glass, and nothing else? I have trouble seeing it that way.

To me, there are a lot of other things to consider besides glass:

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18473949
1) If you had no system, you wouldn't be familiar with either system. Everyone is different, some are able to pick things up and learn them very quickly and also know how to take the PDF manual and search it quickly for a topic that seems to escape them. Others have complications in their lives that prevent this from happening, though, I understand, so usability could be more difficult.

I don't think this thought experiment works if the problem assumes no prior knowledge of photography or experience with one system or the other.

If that were my situation, I wouldn't be in a position to make a sensible informed choice between the two systems ... certainly not at the level of the 5Div and the D850. I possibly wouldn't even be looking at ILCs at all and certainly not at FF bad-boys like these. I'd be looking to spend a lot less money on something much more appropriate to my understanding. That's unless I'm just some conspicuous consumer with too much cash and too little common sense ... and then I'd probably be looking higher up the range for a "really serious" camera.

I'd be starting out as a Canon-user and I'd have a hill to climb in getting used to Nikon ... but if I was going to get a really good return for putting in the effort to learn a different menu/control system, I'd be up for it. It's not like Nikon don't know how to make a usable camera.

Anyway, I still think finding good subjects and interesting ways of photographing them using the lenses and body that you've got is far more important than any of this.

DaviSto wrote in post #18473965
I don't think this thought experiment works if the problem assumes no prior knowledge of photography or experience with one system or the other.

If that were my situation, I wouldn't be in a position to make a sensible informed choice between the two systems ... certainly not at the level of the 5Div and the D850. I possibly wouldn't even be looking at ILCs at all and certainly not at FF bad-boys like these. I'd be looking to spend a lot less money on something much more appropriate to my understanding. That's unless I'm just some conspicuous consumer with too much cash and too little common sense ... and then I'd probably be looking higher up the range for a "really serious" camera.

I'd be starting out as a Canon-user and I'd have a hill to climb in getting used to Nikon ... but if I was going to get a really good return for putting in the effort to learn a different menu/control system, I'd be up for it. It's not like Nikon don't know how to make a usable camera.

Anyway, I still think finding good subjects and interesting ways of photographing them using the lenses and body that you've got is far more important than any of this.

And somebody from the Nikon camp would say they would have an uphill climb to get used to Canon. Thus why there has to be a level playing field, OR we just acknowledge that both systems are usable, and one will get over the differences in due time, if you are switching from what you know to something you don't.

Hopefully you never need service, but again, is Canon better, or Nikon, or are they same? I don't know how to quantify that, and therefore it is hard to use that as a metric to a purchase decision.

Since this thread only calls out 2 cameras, I didn't throw others into the mix, but sure, perhaps the newest Sony offering, or Pentax, or Fuji should be considered. However, I don't know what they have that matches up to the 5d4 and D850? Then glass takes on a different perspective, because these types of systems can use many kinds of glass, including Canon with adapters.

We just need a D860 to be announced that accepts EF mount glass!

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18473968
We just need a D860 to be announced that accepts EF mount glass!

Yup ... that will be announced any day now ... I can feel it!

I would hope Canon has an announcement here shortly just in time for Christmas. If not, then we are looking at Feb/March for some sort of 90D, 7D3, or some new 1D series. Nikon fired one right into the ship's hull with the D850, imagine merging the 7D2, 5D4 and 5DSR into one model that takes the best features of all 3...

I actually had to make this type of decision about 1 year after the 5D3 came out - start over with nothing.

The first question that I ultimately decided was 'most' important in considering, in the field that I was participating in, was what were most of the Pros who made a living using, or would they use, if they were buying today? At that point in time, if you added everything together, that answer was two 5D3s - one with a Canon 24-70 F2.8 II and the other with a Canon 70-200 F2.8 II IS - it was an all in decision that weighed the quality of the glass more than the camera body - but it also put serious weight on all aspects of why that camera body was the right or wrong decision.

If I had to do it again, I would do exactly the same thing - what are you using the camera and lens for - what lens / lenses do you want to own for the next ten years and what camera body works for the next 3-5 years.

Today, what I see as the major differences from that period a few years back when I faced my decision:
- Canon appears to be on verge (12-18 months) of releasing a Pro mirrorless body (not sure how important this is - but it is real)
- Sony now has the amazing A9, likely is 12 months or so away from releasing a next-gen A7Riii which should be an amazing camera - and Sony now has a real set of lenses that they did not have 4 years ago
- there are much better 3rd party lenses from Tamron and Sigma which somewhat changes the entry price into certain types of lens categories
- while Nikon still has better DR at base ISO, Canon has closed the gap by at least 50% - and they are in better financial position than Nikon

I shoot professionally, I own multiple Canon and Sony bodies, L glass, 3rd party glass, lot of flashes etc. If I personally was handed a cheque today, for what I do, this would be my decision choices:

A) 2 Nikon D850 bodies with a Tamron D2 24-70 F2.8 VC and a Nikon 70-200 (latest version)
B) A Canon 1DXii and a Canon 5DSR with a Tamron D2 24-70 F2.8 VC and a Canon 70-200 F2.8 II IS
C) 2 Sony A9 bodies with G Master 24-70 and 70-200 F2.8s

Personally, at this exact moment, I would probably purchase the A) Nikon basket after weighing everything that has been mentioned in previous posts - the great specs of the Nikon D850 and the much better quality and better priced 3rd party lenses would swing me currently to Nikon - and that isn't even including the amazing Sony basket that wasn't available 4+ years ago.

I am not remotely the expert on the $10,000+ dollar massive white Canon lenses, and how that could / would change my decision - but I still think the Frame Per Second advantage with non AA filtered megapixels, and amazing tracking system of the D850 is going to sway the decision in favour of Nikon - it wouldn't surprise me in fact, that once Nikon can fill the D850 demand and back orders, and get enough vertical grips out there, that D5 sales don't grind to a complete halt - and if I shot golf, indoor arts and weddings, I would still purchase a Sony A9 for silent shooting (that is how I use my A7Rii currently)

No system at all?

Probably Pentax 645 digital

Financial longevity certainly plays a part in the decision. I had forgotten that Nikon is not looking the best these days, but I suspect they will exist in one form or another for years to come.

The 5D3 was a major shift for Canon in the 5D series, and was very welcome, that is for sure!

I still see complaints about the Sony A9 regarding hardcore sports shooting, it just doesn't quite fit. I don't know if the folks using it just don't know what they are doing or what.

Per Canon lenses, the STM line is quite nice for a body that has DPAF, and those that shoot video need STM lenses unless they are shooting with a complete off-camera mic system. Does Nikon offer the same in their glass? I don't know, but for those that want silent shooting for video, like during weddings, etc, glass is important there too.

The D850 DR and noise handling has pushed the DR envelope a bit more yet than prior offerings from Nikon or Sony, so the gap just enlarged a small bit between Canon and Nikon unfortunately. The samples I have seen from the D850 at ISO 25600 are pretty amazing too. I shoot at those kinds of ISO now, at least around the 12800 and 16000 levels these days. 25600 would be about as high as my needs would go, and with 46Mpx, I would have alot of versatility around the court with the 70-200. I keep saying that the 5D4 is my last camera, but if Canon would come out with something to answer the D850, I will most likely buy it.

9FPS with no AA filter and 46Mpx and a tilt screen would be all things I wanted out of my 5D4, and with a bit better high ISO and also DR at base ISO, that is icing on the cake.

It is interesting being on Nikon forums and seeing what they are saying about the D850.

Not the cheapest store in Australia (shopping around and buying lens from different stores will shave maybe around $800 - $1000 off each total), but their checkout basket works well for comparison of prices of lens line up for Canon and Nikon.

Adds up fast and that's without adding 16-35mm and 135mm that I had as well. Not sure if Nikon's 400mm zoom is going to be able to match Canons new 100-400mm (I had the dust pump and its IQ was great on my 5D2, ... ok on my 50D)

I didn't think the decision on replacing my gear would be this hard. TS mentioning above that Nikon maybe on the ropes (really???) gave me some instant pause for thought.

My choice came down to how the lens zoomed. I preferred Canon counter-clockwise motion to zoom in, over Nikon's clockwise.

With Nikon it felt my hand required to be 'ontop' of the lens. Canon my hand was underneith