pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Nikon to Canon or Canon to Nikon  (Read 8133 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

donding

  • Think before you speak
« on: January 15, 2010, 10:18 »
0
Question is this...how many of you have owned a Nikon then changed to Canon and why...or how many have owned Canon then changed to Nikon and why.

It seems Canon owners always stick with Canon and Nikon owners always stick with Nikon. Ever wonder why?

I'm just curious as to why.


« Reply #1 on: January 15, 2010, 10:20 »
+4
probably because once you have several thousand invested in glass, it is a real shame to have to sell it just to buy another brand of glass, when really either brand is great.

donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #2 on: January 15, 2010, 10:29 »
0
You got a good point there leaf. Those lens can cost a fortune and unless your camera pooped out along with the lens, which is really rare, then you'd stay with the same brand.

I'm sure there are some of you out there that own both and wonder which one you perfer?

« Reply #3 on: January 15, 2010, 10:31 »
0
Glass is the biggest part of it.  Then there are speedlights, which offer special control functions for the same vendor's cameras.  Plus other accessories: in my own case, a Nikon-compatible GPS, remote releases, a RayFlash (a ring light adapter that fits a specific speedlight), batteries, chargers, well, you get the idea.

« Reply #4 on: January 15, 2010, 10:35 »
0
There is another thing also - "hand memory" and menu items/locations. It is much harder to switch between brands than between different models of the same brand.
Even for SLR <-> PS I sometimes had troubles finding how to setup my wife's Canon PS (changed it to Nikon too recently)
« Last Edit: January 15, 2010, 10:37 by UncleGene »

donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #5 on: January 15, 2010, 11:10 »
0
That is exactly the reason that a new photographer really needs to find a camera shop that will let you compare the two and learn from posts like these. There are so many things to take into consideration. Like cost of lens as well as all the accessories that go with it. Not all salesmen in camera shops know what is good about each camera and what isn't so take some advice from forums as this as to what each photographer likes about their camera and why. It would really help to decide.

« Reply #6 on: January 15, 2010, 11:14 »
0
over 20+ yrs I've owned a lot of Nikons, Canons, Mamiyas and Hassleblads ... mostly pro and pro-sumer level nikons and canons. However, I have had a few consumer level SLRs as well (mostly for handing off to family members at birthdays and crap like that). Nikon has always been my first pick for 35mm or digital .. for different reasons over the years varied from model to model, new technology, etc. .. but if I had to sum my preference up in one area it would have to do with the internal functions of the metering systems and white balance. Nikons are more stable in this area. You can get equal results when comparing a low-end Nikon system to a high-end Canon system. However, you rarely can get equal results comparing a low-end Canon system to a high-end or low-end Nikon system.

If I was to show up at a shoot where gear was provided for me and it was pro canons and nikons .. I could just grab one at random and not have any concerns with completing the job. Put me in the same situation with consumer level nikons and canons and there's no way I'm going to pick up the canon. I will go for the cheap Nikon and still be confident in giving the client professional results while maintaining a fast efficient workflow .... this is also assuming that I would not be doing everything manually and being forced to rely on the cameras various presets .. white balance being one of the most problematic areas with a consumer level canon.

People who love spot metering will also tend to lean towards Nikons because they offer more precise control regardless of how much you are spending. Even a cheap consumer level Nikon will give you a 2.5% spot where an equally priced Canon is only going to give you a whimpy 9%. To get a Canon that can offer that level of precision means you are going to have to spend a lot more money.

So in a nutshell, if you're using pro-level bodies and know what you're doing brand honestly doesn't matter that much but if you're an amateur/semi-pro you're going to see more advantages with a Nikon in your workflow process ... better results with less time invested in the assignment.

donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #7 on: January 15, 2010, 11:28 »
0
I agree 100% xposurepro. I own a Nikon and know Nikon so will continue to own one.

« Reply #8 on: January 15, 2010, 13:16 »
0
Nothin' of that... Olympus is a future!

RT


« Reply #9 on: January 15, 2010, 13:43 »
0
I use a Canon for no other reason than that I've been using them for years and am familiar with them and have existing glass, but I could take just a good a photo with any other camera system and I'd say the same of any good photographer, if a photographer needs to rely on a cameras in built gadgetry they need to go and learn photography.

Some of the best photos I've seen have been taken with a ...hmmm I have no idea, guess it's the photographer not the camera which takes a good photo, and most often a little help with photoshop afterwards!

And although the OP didn't actually ask this in their original question I think it's worthwhile pointing out that stock buyers, art directors and clients don't care what camera you use either.


« Reply #10 on: January 15, 2010, 13:46 »
+1
Pentax !!  just as good and you don't pay for the badge !  ;)

« Reply #11 on: January 15, 2010, 13:54 »
0
What about a Sony a900?

vonkara

« Reply #12 on: January 15, 2010, 14:38 »
0
I have a Nikon D300 since a while and I don't see any way to upgrade for something better with them. The D700 is the same resolution even a little lower on a full frame sensor.

Full frame would be an advantage but it's not since the 5D MarkII perform the exact same if not better and this with 9mpx more resolution. Some would say wait for a similar camera with the D3x sensor. But first it's just not comming and second, that's a Sony sensor.

I look at Nikonrumor.com everyday and no new camera is comming before at least summer 2010 if not further in the year. Nikon look like Kodak in the film industry lately. It took everything for them to go with a full frame sensor after the D2x. Now they just don't move in the pro category.

 This said I am waiting for more money to buy a 5D MarkII with a 24-105 package asap

« Reply #13 on: January 15, 2010, 16:30 »
0
What about a Sony a900?

I use one with a bunch of CZ lenses and I adore it.

michealo

« Reply #14 on: January 15, 2010, 17:10 »
0
I switched from Nikon D200 to Canon 5D2 - the simple reason is that the 5D2 covers all 7 sizes

I looked at the A900 as well.

I didn't have good glass so I wasn't locked in.



« Reply #15 on: January 15, 2010, 19:44 »
0
I've used both with film and digital and prefer Canon for digital...but am going to get some of those lovely Zeiss ZE lenses this year...also shot with Contax 35mm and Rollei 6008 med format film cameras...can't beat Zeiss optics.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #16 on: January 15, 2010, 21:01 »
0
I went from Canon A-1 SLR to Nikon D50/80/300 DSLR back to Canon with a 5DMII.

Both systems have pros and cons. It's personal choice at this point.

I don't see what the big deal is with switching. Ebay everything and buy a new system. 

I switched because I wanted full frame and XXXL sizes without dropping $7K on a body. I waited for a D700x. And waited. And waited.

Glad I switched. 5DMII is awesome.



donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #17 on: January 15, 2010, 21:14 »
0
I don't see what the big deal is with switching. Ebay everything and buy a new system. 

Good point....if all else fails...just ebay it!! Never real thought of that one

« Reply #18 on: May 26, 2013, 03:41 »
0
We are Canon fans here - Can't switch

« Reply #19 on: May 26, 2013, 06:49 »
0
And we are nikonians.
Meaning we are a group of nikon owners. And thats very practical, because we can loan eachothers gear and share experiences.

So one thing is all the glass and camera related things you yourself have invested in. You have your collection of tools, and to that comes what the others have.
Fx in an emergency I can borrow a lens to my house or a house to my lenses..

If I shifted to canon, Id loose a lot of oppertunities. And would have to build a whole new collection and a whole new network of canonians.
Given that both canon and nikon cover all photographic situations and development is guaranteed, they are actually the only brands you can choose.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2013, 06:51 by JPSDK »

falstafff

    This user is banned.
« Reply #20 on: May 26, 2013, 07:12 »
0
over 20+ yrs I've owned a lot of Nikons, Canons, Mamiyas and Hassleblads ... mostly pro and pro-sumer level nikons and canons. However, I have had a few consumer level SLRs as well (mostly for handing off to family members at birthdays and crap like that). Nikon has always been my first pick for 35mm or digital .. for different reasons over the years varied from model to model, new technology, etc. .. but if I had to sum my preference up in one area it would have to do with the internal functions of the metering systems and white balance. Nikons are more stable in this area. You can get equal results when comparing a low-end Nikon system to a high-end Canon system. However, you rarely can get equal results comparing a low-end Canon system to a high-end or low-end Nikon system.

If I was to show up at a shoot where gear was provided for me and it was pro canons and nikons .. I could just grab one at random and not have any concerns with completing the job. Put me in the same situation with consumer level nikons and canons and there's no way I'm going to pick up the canon. I will go for the cheap Nikon and still be confident in giving the client professional results while maintaining a fast efficient workflow .... this is also assuming that I would not be doing everything manually and being forced to rely on the cameras various presets .. white balance being one of the most problematic areas with a consumer level canon.

People who love spot metering will also tend to lean towards Nikons because they offer more precise control regardless of how much you are spending. Even a cheap consumer level Nikon will give you a 2.5% spot where an equally priced Canon is only going to give you a whimpy 9%. To get a Canon that can offer that level of precision means you are going to have to spend a lot more money.

So in a nutshell, if you're using pro-level bodies and know what you're doing brand honestly doesn't matter that much but if you're an amateur/semi-pro you're going to see more advantages with a Nikon in your workflow process ... better results with less time invested in the assignment.

WB was something I worried about in the film days. I remember with horror all these kodak wratten filters, color meters and so on. Sticking all these plasticky CC  filters on Hasselblad optics made you want to cry.

Today however there is really no need for worries. You have Raw converters and PS,  programs that within seconds convert colors and WB to whatever suits you.

I use both Canon and Nikon systems extensivly. To me its all the same. However if the OP were to ask me for the perfect just shooting stock camera for micro. Then I would go for Canons MII and MIII. :)

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #21 on: May 26, 2013, 07:18 »
0
Old thread alert. But as an update I still have my 5DMII and now have a D800.

« Reply #22 on: May 26, 2013, 07:23 »
0
So you are back in the ranks with an alien twist.

We can live with that.

« Reply #23 on: May 26, 2013, 12:01 »
0
I'm just curious as to why.

Thousands of euros invested in Canon lenses, flashes, adapters, cable releases, TTL-cables and other accessories. I'm also familiar with Canon products, their usage and design etc. (I don't have the time and energy to learn Nikon's quirks - and "unlearn" Canon's) That's why I'm sticking with Canon as long as possible. D800 is a very nice camera, but I can't swap systems just because of one model without knowing what Canon is developing...

The bottom line: Both Canon and Nikon have great cameras and great systems. I would get equally good (or bad) images with both.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2013, 12:04 by Perry »

Poncke v2

« Reply #24 on: May 26, 2013, 12:16 »
0
Guys, you are replying to 3 1/2 year old comments, technology in cameras has advanced a whole lot since then. Zoomyimages dug up a bunch of old threads.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
28 Replies
10150 Views
Last post October 02, 2007, 10:37
by KiwiRob
8 Replies
4529 Views
Last post June 09, 2008, 12:39
by basti
5 Replies
10549 Views
Last post September 30, 2008, 10:37
by JC-SL
39 Replies
11319 Views
Last post March 31, 2009, 03:14
by RaFaLe
8 Replies
3520 Views
Last post January 15, 2010, 12:35
by Eyedesign

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle