Canon or Noink?!!

Right now people around me (mostly Noink users, still film) think that
Noink has better colors (like D200, D2Xs) then Canon. I think that they
are wrong. Let's say that i'm confused about Canon quality but I still
think that CANON produce nicer and cleaner colors... still amazed by Canon
crisp and clear colors...I do most of my work in RAW files and i'm not expert in
that. Use only Photoshop CS3 Camera Raw and I consider good enough to
work in pp.

Right now, my Canon EOS 30D is broken, so as my 350D...and 17-55 lens
and 70-200 f/4 L.

It would seem silly to me for people to say one brand is better then the other if they don't even use one of the brands they are comparing! Image quality is such a subjective thing with so many variables that saying one is better then the other is kinda silly.

Pick the system that best suits your needs and style.

Are you saying almost all your equipment is broken? that really sucks!

That must suck having 10GB of memory cards in SD when your cameras use CF.

Nikon's colors are too saturated in my opinion...

Nick_b wrote in post #4096060
It would seem silly to me for people to say one brand is better then the other if they don't even use one of the brands they are comparing! Image quality is such a subjective thing with so many variables that saying one is better then the other is kinda silly.

Pick the system that best suits your needs and style.

Are you saying almost all your equipment is broken? that really sucks!

Well said!

If you are editing in raw, then both are good because you can adjust the saturation to whatever you want. The 'better colours' argument is pointless. so what, you can set your saturation slider to +16 instead of +18... who cares.

On that note, I have not shot with the D200 but one of my second shooters does. I don't find his files particularly nicer. A heck of a lot noisier, but the colours don't jump out at me at all. I dunno, I don't think there is a CLEAR winner... not that it would matter.

Pick a system and stick with it. It looks like the D3 will trump the 1D3 in many ways, but it's not gonna make me change systems.

Amazing product can be produced from either brand... whether D70 or 1Ds3.

Yeah... it's whatever floats your boat. It's great to see that Nikon has stepped up to the plate with the D3. I used Nikon for something like 15 years and finally had to switch to Canon a couple years ago because it made no sense to stick with Nikon. Seeing Nikon get back into the game just means that both companies will continue to get better.

John

totally agree with lloyd. color and saturation is subjective. you can get the exact same image from both systems assuming you shoot in raw and post process. noise however, is another ball of wax.

cdifoto wrote in post #4096074
That must suck having 10GB of memory cards in SD when your cameras use CF.

Do you know what a technical term " ID 10 T "stands for?

A friend of mine has the D200 and uses it for macro shots a lot. As soon as he must use 400 ISO, you see clearly the noise in the darker background and that's the reason he started saving for the D3. (It's a hobby, even though some of his astro images got published internationally)

With tools you can reduce the noise, but if you have to edit most shots?

He is keen in both systems, still has a modified 10D for IR, but complained heavily about poor quality in focusing of his Canons as the AF drove him crazy.