Canon vs. Nikon

Actually, Fuji seems to be doing some interesting things right now. I've heard several Nikonians say that they're tempted to upgrade to a Fuji S5 pro over the D200 (which has noise and color balance problems). Fuji is doing the right thing by having a Nikon body and lens mount, but offering a better camera. Means less people will be using Nikon now

Price wise, Nikon D40/D40x is close to Canon XT/XTi, but function wise, Nikon D80 (with a price tag close to Canon's 30D) is comparable to Canon XT/XTi.

Michael1116 wrote in post #3022221
Hmmmm, let me think on that one awhile......

Nikon, the official camera of the NY Mets.

Yet every Tog in that box is using Canon... lol. funny stuff.

picturecrazy wrote in post #3040376
The funny thing is, Nikon and Canon don't seem to really have equivalents in their consumer lines. The XTi sits between the D40 and D80. The 30D sits between the D80 and D200. The D200 sits above the 30D but below the 5D.
Above that, canon 1-series destroys nikon's D2 series imo... almost no contest.

+1

Nikon seems to really be pushing for the entry-level market right now (D40/D40X at cut rate pricing and cheap, low end broad range VR lenses) that I wonder what Nikonians think of this possibly new image Nikon is trying to foster...

Personally, it's the upper end that defines a camera system to me (not the entry level), and with that, Canon dropped an H-bomb on the competition with the Mark III. It's an evolutionary paradigm shift that Nikon, et al., have no answer for.

Psh...the D40x is over $700 without a lens and the Nikkor 18-55 ED DX lens is well over $100 ($150 on B&H) thefore costing almost as much as an XTi still with 3 AF points. PLus other other lackings...that wasn't written well.

If you were a manual camera user in the '70's and '80's then you'll like the Nikon ergonomics of twisting knobs, holding in a button while turning a wheel, etc. The way the Nikon DSLR's work is so old school. They just recently announced electronic focusing in their lens, something Canon has had for the past 20 years.

Jon_Doh wrote in post #3051460
They just recently announced electronic focusing in their lens, something Canon has had for the past 20 years.

AF-S, and the SWM motor within, has been around since 1996. Hardly relevant now is it, and hardly recent either.

dpastern wrote in post #3048763
That pretty much sums it all up.

Don't forget to check the Sony Alpha out, it's not that bad a camera by all accounts, although noise wise it is outperformed by both Nikon & Canon I believe. Don't forget the Pentax K10D, itself not a bad camera.

Dave

I don't see this being possible since Sony makes Nikon chips.

davesrose wrote in post #3050121
Actually, Fuji seems to be doing some interesting things right now. I've heard several Nikonians say that they're tempted to upgrade to a Fuji S5 pro over the D200 (which has noise and color balance problems). Fuji is doing the right thing by having a Nikon body and lens mount, but offering a better camera. Means less people will be using Nikon now

I saw some pictures out of my father-in-law's D200 this weekend and there was an extreme lack of noise and color balance issues. The metering it that camera is amazing and the color is unbelievable straight out of the camera. Actually, unless Canon can make a camera like that in the next year, I'll probably be switching over until I can afford a 1D.

T Kubik wrote in post #3069018
I don't see this being possible since Sony makes Nikon chips.

he is saying both nikon and canon have better noise control, not the other way around.

Billginthekeys wrote in post #3069282
he is saying both nikon and canon have better noise control, not the other way around.

Right, so Nikon should have equal noise control because it's the same sensor, or is it the processor that decides noise control?

It's not just the chip, it's all of the various other doodads and processes in the camera that each company that uses Sony chips can use to fine tune the output.

pppft, you can put a nifty little wallpaper on the D40 and D40x. Beat that Canon! I've gone ahead and included the wallpaper I would use.

IMAGE LINK: http://img329.imagesha​ck.us/my.php?image=wpi​0010zg9.jpg

And Michelin makes tires for Sears, but don't bet your life that the Sear's ones are the same. This sort of thing is common in household appliances, pianos, paint, etc. A few major manufacturers make items for other companies to their specs.

Thus, don't count on the sensors of Sony and Nikon being the same.

And as smirchfa points out, there is more that affects the image than the sensor - it's a system.

T Kubik wrote in post #3069018
I saw some pictures out of my father-in-law's D200 this weekend and there was an extreme lack of noise and color balance issues. The metering it that camera is amazing and the color is unbelievable straight out of the camera. Actually, unless Canon can make a camera like that in the next year, I'll probably be switching over until I can afford a 1D.

The color issues I heard about the D200, was from Nikonians who were worried about reviews they had read that showed noise and color balance issues at higher ISO. Aparently, the Fuji is supposed to be better....especially ISO. DPreview has the images.

But a camera is just a tool that you have to get used to. They all have their quirks. I'm on the side of just picking one camp and sticking in it...rather be worried about making good pictures instead of "well is this camera good enough for me to make good pictures?"

I think that with the advances in technology comming at such a steady pace all of our beloved digital cameras of today, be they Canon or not, will seem quite crude in just a few years...

The Lenses are likely the only part of out current gear to soldier on into the next decade...

As sensor resolution increases, eventually even todays glass will not be good enough.........