| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/31/2009 02:05:11 PM · #1 |
Hello everyone,
This may come as a shock for a few of you, but I am considering switching from Nikon to Canon (*Gasp*). I posted in the off-topic section to try to minimize bias, and to help me decide if I should or not.
Reasons for switching? Mainly, Canon has more professional glass and at cheaper prices. It may not be as good as Nikons, but it is plenty good for me. I've also heard that Canon's are better for sports, which will/is my main focus of photography. In addition, while browsing around on other forums looking for gear, it seems that there is alot more used Canon gear than Nikon.
What is bad about switching? I would most likely lose money, and I don't even know what my current gear could get me, or if anybody wants an old D50 body (probably not). Another downside is that my family are Nikon people. My brother is set on buying a D90, and my mom thinks that I'm handing down my D50 to her when I buy a new body, and she was also the one who bought me the 18-200 VR for my birthday (thanks Mom ).
Looking around on the Fred Miranda buy and sell, it seems that I could buy a used 40D body $600-700. That seems like a great price to me for a great body.
Thoughts? I know it is a huge step to switch systems, but now would really be my only chance to as I don't have that much Nikon gear yet. |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 02:09:40 PM · #2 |
The Canon EOS 40D is a great camera. Its 6.5 frames/sec burst rate will certainly help you in your sports photography. I know...that is the body that I use! :-)
I don't know about Nikon glass, but the professional (and high-end "prosumer") Canon glass have a great resale value--they don't depreciate too much.
Message edited by author 2009-07-31 14:13:13.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2009 02:17:04 PM · #3 |
You are correct that Nikon lenses typically carry a small price penalty over their Canon counterparts. The quality of both systems is, in general, similar. You will find that in one case, a Nikon lens will best a similar Canon, then you will look at another case, and the equivalent Canon will best the Nikon.
The Canon system is more flexible when it comes to using non-Canon lenses. Older, manual focus lenses from a number of systems (Nikon, Leica M, M42/Pentax to name a few) can be successfully used, if that interests you.
You are smart to consider which system best suits your needs while you don't have a big investment in glass. |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 02:22:40 PM · #4 |
Well, I've been a Canon user 300D,30Dx2, and a Pentax user K100D, K200D, and now I use Nikon, D300. Something I never thought I would say as I always consider Nikon to be overpriced.
However, owning a Nikon has enlightened me no end. The quality oozes from the damn thing. Pentax were good, but limited in the range of glass.
With the current run of posts here about Canon cameras self destructing and falling apart, I think I made the right choice. Now it is time to invest in some decent glass.
Not really much help, but as stated above, I would choose Nikon over Canon now.
Added: Pentax K20D as well
Message edited by author 2009-07-31 14:50:19. |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 02:33:30 PM · #5 |
Canon cameras self destructing and falling apart? This is news to me.
Anyways, I added up all of my Nikon gear and the value only total $1500 give or take $200 if I were to sell it used... Not a whole lot. |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 02:39:34 PM · #6 |
Yup I agree, Except the one thing. Guys who use Nikons take better photos than guys that use Canon, It has nothing to do with the equipment., it is just us Nikon guys are better photographers. :0 Now when it comes to choosing a place for breakfast. I think I will give that one to the Canon guys!!...
Ref OP... This is really the last place in the world where you will find a majority on either side of the fence.
I will say when it comes to sports I do see more Canon glass on the sidelines of a football game then Nikon, But those very same photogs will in many cases have a Nikon in their hands when the game is over and it is time to get the close up shots of the Winning QB.
A good person here at DPC to ask about shooting sports would be  alanfreed he shoots alot of Steelers games from the sidelines. He would have some good insight for you.
Originally posted by kirbic:
You are correct that Nikon lenses typically carry a small price penalty over their Canon counterparts. The quality of both systems is, in general, similar. You will find that in one case, a Nikon lens will best a similar Canon, then you will look at another case, and the equivalent Canon will best the Nikon.
The Canon system is more flexible when it comes to using non-Canon lenses. Older, manual focus lenses from a number of systems (Nikon, Leica M, M42/Pentax to name a few) can be successfully used, if that interests you.
You are smart to consider which system best suits your needs while you don't have a big investment in glass. |
|
|
|
|
07/31/2009 02:40:15 PM · #7 |
I might not be much help, but I switched from Canon to Nikon.... sort of.
Before I got into digital photography, I had a cheap Canon Rebel Ti film camera. When I switch to a DSLR, I immediatly thought I would be buying the Digital Rebel... Until I went to the store and held it in my hand. For me, it felt light, and fragile. The salesperson had me hold the Nikon D70, which to be, fit my hand better, was a bit heavier, and felt sturdier. I went with the Nikon for that reason.
Why not go with both? |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 02:40:26 PM · #8 |
It happens.Originally posted by EricD:
Canon cameras self destructing and falling apart? This is news to me.
Anyways, I added up all of my Nikon gear and the value only total $1500 give or take $200 if I were to sell it used... Not a whole lot. |
|
|
|
|
07/31/2009 02:49:57 PM · #9 |
| I did not know that Canon cameras had problems. Must be pretty rare still though. |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 03:04:04 PM · #10 |
| You can avoid the issue entirely and buy an Olympus... |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 03:46:09 PM · #11 |
Well I'm of the mindset that both companies make fantastic equipment. I think it comes down to which system will better serve your shooting needs.
With that said, time for me to plug Nikon. I was shooting at a concert last night and had half a beer dumped on me and my D200. After my initial reaction of SH*%! I was amazed how it continued to shoot just fine throughout the night and this morning with zero issues. I've also drug my D200 around the world through all sorts of weather and it works like the day I purchased it.
I can also tell you that the build quality between the D50 and higher end DSLR's is huge. My old D50 seems like a toy compared to the quality of the D200, D300, D700 etc.. I would guess the same for Canon equipment.
I wish you luck in your decision making process, remember getting the different systems in your hand and testing them is everything IMHO.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2009 04:33:31 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by VitaminB:
... Until I went to the store and held it in my hand. |
Since you're willing to go with either (any?) platform, I think it is key to hold and use both cameras and see which feels right, and works (buttons, menus) the way you want. It doesn't matter if one camera is "better" if you find it awkward to use. |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 04:40:19 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by VitaminB:
... Until I went to the store and held it in my hand. |
Since you're willing to go with either (any?) platform, I think it is key to hold and use both cameras and see which feels right, and works (buttons, menus) the way you want. It doesn't matter if one camera is "better" if you find it awkward to use. |
Go and rent (or borrow) one of each to see which suits your needs better.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2009 04:58:52 PM · #14 |
I'll try to go to my local camera store sometime and hold each of the bodies. Right now, my choices are to upgrade to a D300/D90, or to sell/trade all of my gear for a 40D and Canon lenses.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2009 05:20:35 PM · #15 |
So, while I am a nikon user, I also like canon stuff (their G9/G10 series is awesome). I work frequently in a a co-op studio where it is about a 50/50 mix of nikon/canon users, with an occasional pentax or sony user in the mix. I see no difference in the quality of the final image, and can never tell that any image must have been taken by a high end camera, much less what brand. I can detect the use of poor glass vs great glass.
I would not say that either canon or nikon is best, nor would I say you should switch or stay nikon. It does seem clear you are in need of an upgrade.
I will say that before you make any switch, you go and get a d90 in your hand, get a 40D in your hand, and try out the controls, the feel, the "fit" with your style, your method, etc. I think you will be able to find good glass to meet your needs from either system. You already have the 18-200VR which is a good walkaround general purpose lens. I suspect you are due for high-end prime lens. I love the nikon 85mm 1.4, my friend loves his 85mm 1.2 canon. I got to use a nikon 70-200mm 2.8 lens, and damn it was wonderful. I like my 18-200vr, but it has limitations that can get in my way sometimes.
So, upgrade your body, and upgrade your glass. If you stay nikon, you have the advantage of already having the great general purpose 18-200VR right off the bat.
But get your hands on whichever cameras you are considering, see how intuitive/natural they feel to you, ergonomics, user interface.
One longer term thing to consider: if you expect someday to want to use speedlight(s) from either system, the Nikon CLS system allows remote, wireless, full TTL control from the camera (d90 for example) already built in--nothing extra to buy except a nikon speedlight. Off-camera use of speedlights provides, in general, superior results to on-camera use, and the CLS system makes that easy to do.
But whichever you choose, have a blast!! |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 05:29:04 PM · #16 |
I used a Nikon D50 for about 2 years until I upgraded to the D300. I NEVER looked back, some of my Canon friends have camera envy ever since. They do see how good my 24-70 is.
And don't forget Nikons flash system :)
But I do see where you are going with the Canon has more variety and lower prices.
it almost sounds like a issue of "Quality vs. Quantity", almost.
But I see it as "The grass is always greener on the other side"
And don't forget Nikons flash system :)
Message edited by author 2009-07-31 17:29:56. |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 05:47:48 PM · #17 |
Are prices for (highend) lenses really that different for Canon and Nikon? Did a quick compare for the Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR and Canon 70-200 2.8L IS at B&H, and the normal price is the same, $1900. Canon has $200 rebate these days, so today, it's $200 cheaper.
If you buy a D300 with the MB-D10 battery grip you get 8 fps (D300s has 7 fps without the battery grip) which is good for sports. With a fast and good lens I don't think focusing time will be a problem. The 70-200 is focusing *fast*.
As other has mentioned, the flash system is great!
I don't have anything much against Canon, I bought a D80 over a 400D just because it fitted my hand better. If I should say anything against Canon is that it feels cheap, too "plasticy". A friend of mine once asked me to hold his camera while he tied his shoes, and it felt like he handed me his old 350D, not the brand new 5Dmk2.
Message edited by author 2009-07-31 17:48:51. |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 06:28:38 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by hanserik:
If I should say anything against Canon is that it feels cheap, too "plasticy". A friend of mine once asked me to hold his camera while he tied his shoes, and it felt like he handed me his old 350D, not the brand new 5Dmk2. |
Ooh, ouch!
I do like the slightly larger grip on the Canons but the molding and rubber feel so much better with Nikon's. Plus, they do feel a lot more solid.
And don't forget Nikons flash system :)
Message edited by author 2009-07-31 18:29:17. |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 06:30:58 PM · #19 |
Canon's 70-200 f/2.8 IS and Nikons are about the same price, yes... But, Canon offers the 70-200 f/4 versions of this lens which are cheaper, but still offer extremely high quality glass.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2009 06:47:24 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by EricD:
Canon's 70-200 f/2.8 IS and Nikons are about the same price, yes... But, Canon offers the 70-200 f/4 versions of this lens which are cheaper, but still offer extremely high quality glass. |
and nikon offers a 55-200 f4 and a 70-300 f4, so unless you are convinced somehow that canon glass is that much better for your needs, choose the overall System that meets your current and potential future needs--getting your hands on each type will probably make the choice clear and easy. |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 06:57:10 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by chromeydome:
Originally posted by EricD:
Canon's 70-200 f/2.8 IS and Nikons are about the same price, yes... But, Canon offers the 70-200 f/4 versions of this lens which are cheaper, but still offer extremely high quality glass. |
and nikon offers a 55-200 f4 and a 70-300 f4, so unless you are convinced somehow that canon glass is that much better for your needs, choose the overall System that meets your current and potential future needs--getting your hands on each type will probably make the choice clear and easy. |
Nikon has F/4 versions of those lenses!? If they do, they're not anything you can buy new anymore.
Honestly, F/4 have there place, but for me and I shoot a lot of action. Are just a half ass version of F/2.8 lenses.
Speaking of shooting action, can you guess what frame rate I use for sports and action?
Here is a clue, I used to shoot 8 fps, but now I shoot less than 4 fps. Anything over 5 fps, is just over kill for amateur/semi-pro.
|
|
|
|
07/31/2009 06:57:49 PM · #22 |
| Nikons 55-200 and 70-300 are consumer grade class, not professional. |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 07:01:56 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by hanserik:
If you buy a D300 with the MB-D10 battery grip you get 8 fps (D300s has 7 fps without the battery grip) |
Not being a Nikon guy and just out of curiousity, how does the grip make the fps faster?
|
|
|
|
07/31/2009 07:10:47 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by AperturePriority:
Originally posted by hanserik:
If you buy a D300 with the MB-D10 battery grip you get 8 fps (D300s has 7 fps without the battery grip) |
Not being a Nikon guy and just out of curiousity, how does the grip make the fps faster? |
I assume it allows higher, more stable voltage and current to a internal processor.
*shrugs* |
|
|
|
07/31/2009 07:16:21 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by ben4345:
Originally posted by chromeydome:
Originally posted by EricD:
Canon's 70-200 f/2.8 IS and Nikons are about the same price, yes... But, Canon offers the 70-200 f/4 versions of this lens which are cheaper, but still offer extremely high quality glass. |
and nikon offers a 55-200 f4 and a 70-300 f4, so unless you are convinced somehow that canon glass is that much better for your needs, choose the overall System that meets your current and potential future needs--getting your hands on each type will probably make the choice clear and easy. |
Nikon has F/4 versions of those lenses!? If they do, they're not anything you can buy new anymore.
Honestly, F/4 have there place, but for me and I shoot a lot of action. Are just a half ass version of F/2.8 lenses.
Speaking of shooting action, can you guess what frame rate I use for sports and action?
Here is a clue, I used to shoot 8 fps, but now I shoot less than 4 fps. Anything over 5 fps, is just over kill for amateur/semi-pro. |
My typo: the 55-200 is f4 max, but not constant, and the 70-300 is f4.5 max, not constant |
|
