Nikon or Canon . . . and magazines !
Discussion
Having a balls ache choosing which . . . was about to choose a Canon 50D, felt good to hold etc but so many of the photographic press seem to dismiss it as good . . . but not as good as a Nikon.
Do the press have a downer on Canon until you're talking about the 5D or better or are Nikon DSLR's just better than Canon ? It seems that so many magazines and web reviews prefer the Nikon but when I look at some of the sample images I'm struggling to see any difference between some of them.
What's going on ? Should I ignore the reviews on the basis that as an amateur, anything from a Canon 450D or Nikon D90 up is going to be more than adequate or is there a real difference between the two makes that I've missed ?
If it makes any difference, I plan to buy some respectable lenses, not the kit lenses. Previous SLR experience with film demonstrated the benefit of doing that and the magazines do seem to agree with that too.
Do the press have a downer on Canon until you're talking about the 5D or better or are Nikon DSLR's just better than Canon ? It seems that so many magazines and web reviews prefer the Nikon but when I look at some of the sample images I'm struggling to see any difference between some of them.
What's going on ? Should I ignore the reviews on the basis that as an amateur, anything from a Canon 450D or Nikon D90 up is going to be more than adequate or is there a real difference between the two makes that I've missed ?
If it makes any difference, I plan to buy some respectable lenses, not the kit lenses. Previous SLR experience with film demonstrated the benefit of doing that and the magazines do seem to agree with that too.
Read all the mags, dpreview, all the online stuff and then - well don't quite forget it, but put it all in the back of your mind and consider two things:
- go and handle the bodies you've shortlisted
- decide what lenses you want (preferably do that first) and then get the body that fits.
I find that every magazine that writes about Nikon manages to get something wrong by ignorance or possibly deliberately (and I bet they do the same with every make, so I am sure they are expert in bribery and corruption from their friendly kit supplying mates!), or the reviewer simply does not appreciate what the kit does. Some are downright dangerously wrong, but most are just annoyingly and clearly cr@@p reviews that don't answer teh questions that you really want answered. I.e "Can I LIVE with this kit?"
- go and handle the bodies you've shortlisted
- decide what lenses you want (preferably do that first) and then get the body that fits.
I find that every magazine that writes about Nikon manages to get something wrong by ignorance or possibly deliberately (and I bet they do the same with every make, so I am sure they are expert in bribery and corruption from their friendly kit supplying mates!), or the reviewer simply does not appreciate what the kit does. Some are downright dangerously wrong, but most are just annoyingly and clearly cr@@p reviews that don't answer teh questions that you really want answered. I.e "Can I LIVE with this kit?"
They all, even the cheapo base models, take great pics.
To see any real difference you either need harsh conditions (forcing dynamic range or ISO sensitivity) and/or view very large. Web sized images you just realy cant tell.
50D I think got a bashing for 'having too many pixels' and morons viewing the file at 100% comparing it against 100% views of cameras with half the pixels. Especialy at a time when the 40D done 95% of the 50D but at near 50% of the cost & the D300 was launched, for more money - but same market. I still think the 40D was an utter bargain.
Also Nikon after years of CCD and crop sensors has managed a few very good CMOS full frame bodies which has shifted momentum away from canon in the press.
I quite like nikons FF bodies, even the D300/s is great, but the extra cost of nikons (superior sure) glass is too much.
To see any real difference you either need harsh conditions (forcing dynamic range or ISO sensitivity) and/or view very large. Web sized images you just realy cant tell.
50D I think got a bashing for 'having too many pixels' and morons viewing the file at 100% comparing it against 100% views of cameras with half the pixels. Especialy at a time when the 40D done 95% of the 50D but at near 50% of the cost & the D300 was launched, for more money - but same market. I still think the 40D was an utter bargain.
Also Nikon after years of CCD and crop sensors has managed a few very good CMOS full frame bodies which has shifted momentum away from canon in the press.
I quite like nikons FF bodies, even the D300/s is great, but the extra cost of nikons (superior sure) glass is too much.
I think the problem with magazines is that they're desperate for content. OK, if you pick one up from time to time in isolation they seem worthwhile, but if you actually subscribe to one or two as I did a year or so ago when I got into photography again, you soon realise that there's only so many articles they can actually write about technique, and there's only so much new kit they can write about.
They will therefore do anything they can to fill the pages. My particular bugbear is the inclusion of comparative test shots where, as you say, you really can't tell the difference, which is probably hardly surprising given the print resolution and paper quality of the magazine, I'd have thought?
Personally, my 450D is a better camera than I am a photographer. There may well be an equivalent Nikon which is slightly better, but I wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
One general observation - which may be wrong because I don't really know the Nikon specs - was that when I was looking, Nikon lenses seemed quite a bit more expensive than their Canon counterparts.
They will therefore do anything they can to fill the pages. My particular bugbear is the inclusion of comparative test shots where, as you say, you really can't tell the difference, which is probably hardly surprising given the print resolution and paper quality of the magazine, I'd have thought?
Personally, my 450D is a better camera than I am a photographer. There may well be an equivalent Nikon which is slightly better, but I wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
One general observation - which may be wrong because I don't really know the Nikon specs - was that when I was looking, Nikon lenses seemed quite a bit more expensive than their Canon counterparts.
My view is there isn't much to choose between the top two brands. Canon is the market leader having a marginally greater market share than Nikon (41% vs 40%). Then there's the rest... I personally chose a Nikon D50 years ago because at the time it was getting better reviews than the Canon equivalent and Olympus had infuriatingly made all my OM Zuiko glass obsolete unlike Nikon's lifetime fit approach. Thereafter the purchase of lenses has dictated a Nikon purchase path: D80, D300, D300s and now I'm considering a D700. The feel of the camera, the lenses you want and maybe flashes, battery packs/vertical grips are the real deciders. In essence they seem to leapfrog each other as each model comes out. Certainly for me the camera/lenses I have outstrip my talent - bit like my car really - but its great fun learning to drive the camera (and car) better!
ETA from wikipedia "As of 2008[update], DSLR sales are dominated by Canon's and Nikon's offerings. For 2007, Canon edged out Nikon with 41% of worldwide sales to the latter's 40%, followed by Sony and Olympus each with approximately 6% market share.[27] In the Japanese domestic market, Nikon captured 43.3% to Canon's 39.9%, with Pentax a distant third at 6.3%.[28]
The duopoly of Canon and Nikon is sometimes referred to as "Canikon" or "Nikanon" in online forums in skeptical challenge to the presumptive acceptance of these manufacturer's cameras as always "the best". Canon and Nikon have used their professional market presence especially persuasively in the sale of entry level offerings to the uninitiated general public who presume that everything from Canon or Nikon is superlative.[citation needed] Online contributors often challenge the "Canikon/Nikanon" supposed superiority when they believe there are superior innovations from the smaller DSLR manufacturers.
The DSLR market is dominated by Japanese companies, including all of the top five manufacturers (Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, and Sony), as well as Fujifilm, Mamiya, Panasonic, and Sigma. Leica is German, Hasselblad is Swedish, and Samsung is Korean, while the American company Kodak formerly produced DSLRs as well."
ETA from wikipedia "As of 2008[update], DSLR sales are dominated by Canon's and Nikon's offerings. For 2007, Canon edged out Nikon with 41% of worldwide sales to the latter's 40%, followed by Sony and Olympus each with approximately 6% market share.[27] In the Japanese domestic market, Nikon captured 43.3% to Canon's 39.9%, with Pentax a distant third at 6.3%.[28]
The duopoly of Canon and Nikon is sometimes referred to as "Canikon" or "Nikanon" in online forums in skeptical challenge to the presumptive acceptance of these manufacturer's cameras as always "the best". Canon and Nikon have used their professional market presence especially persuasively in the sale of entry level offerings to the uninitiated general public who presume that everything from Canon or Nikon is superlative.[citation needed] Online contributors often challenge the "Canikon/Nikanon" supposed superiority when they believe there are superior innovations from the smaller DSLR manufacturers.
The DSLR market is dominated by Japanese companies, including all of the top five manufacturers (Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, and Sony), as well as Fujifilm, Mamiya, Panasonic, and Sigma. Leica is German, Hasselblad is Swedish, and Samsung is Korean, while the American company Kodak formerly produced DSLRs as well."
Edited by ian in lancs on Wednesday 30th December 08:46
RobDickinson said:
...the extra cost of nikons (superior sure) glass is too much.
Kermit power said:
... Nikon lenses seemed quite a bit more expensive than their Canon counterparts.
Absolutely no doubt that many people will pick up on the Nikon glass being better, but more expensive. However there are other factors:- annoyingly Nikon are very slow to look at the holes in their range (no affordable good 400mm, for example)
- arguable that some lenses (12-24mm for example) are no way worth twice what an independent can charge
- there are shedloads of secondhand old (and older) Nikkors because they have not changed their mount, but these can be technically less than brilliant on some of the digital sensors (especially the densely packed ones)
- prices have risen very dramatically in the last two years. Every one of my lenses seems to have "appreciated" in value. I cannot believe some of the prices I paid for new (105mm at just over £400, 10.5mm at sub £400) and secondhand (70-200mm at £800, 85mm f/1.4 at £400, 17-35mm at £700 (from Grays!)) lenses even just two years ago: they are just not good value at current inflated prices (let alone with a tad more VAT to swallow!)
So choose carefully the glass you want - the body that fits it will do a great job with very few exceptions!
What I don't see in the magazines is a head to head system review. Say a Nikon vs Canon top DX body - D300s vs the equivalent Canon, I presume EOS 7D, and with their own f/2.8ish brand wide, mid range and telephoto lenses and flash functionality and performance and do a value for money comparison.
In reality though I think people largely upgrade and buy the next model up in the range they're committed to already. To switch is mega expensive.
In reality though I think people largely upgrade and buy the next model up in the range they're committed to already. To switch is mega expensive.
ian in lancs said:
What I don't see in the magazines is a head to head system review. Say a Nikon vs Canon top DX body - D300s vs the equivalent Canon, I presume EOS 7D, and with their own f/2.8ish brand wide, mid range and telephoto lenses and flash functionality and performance and do a value for money comparison.
Up until recently they've avoided going head to head - their bodies nicely interleaving on spec & price so as to avoid possible direct comparisons.D300s vs 7D is probably the closest they have got on spec, then you add in the lenses etc and do the maths.
Elsewhere the 5D2 vs D700 is close, playing resolution and video off against better autofocus and fps.
Here though thew good nikon FF glass is 50% more than the canon stuff.
I wouldn't get all too hung up on the glass question upfront. If you're getting into the DSLR game now, and haven't been a semi-pro photographer for a while, you can easily get started with tamron or sigma lenses. They both have quite good alternatives to Canon's or Nikon's finest... The price difference is sometimes very significant and for me, in almost all cases is not justified by better quality of the C or N offerings. There are even a couple of cases where general consensus is that a 3rd party offering is better (the Sigma 10-20 vs Nikon 12-24 comes to mind, or the Sigma 100-300 f4).
Having said that, also 3rd party prices have increased (Sigma e.g.) and of course they generally don't keep their value as well as the premium brand. Then again, my second tip - go 2nd hand, there are LOADS of bargains to be had, depending on how much risk you want to take (I have bought much Nikon stuff 2nd hand, incl most of my glass, and really never was dissapointed).
So in the end it indeed boils down to getting your hands on both (or other) brands and decide what you like. For glass (surely for C & N) there are many options, economic to ridiculously expensive.
Having said that, also 3rd party prices have increased (Sigma e.g.) and of course they generally don't keep their value as well as the premium brand. Then again, my second tip - go 2nd hand, there are LOADS of bargains to be had, depending on how much risk you want to take (I have bought much Nikon stuff 2nd hand, incl most of my glass, and really never was dissapointed).
So in the end it indeed boils down to getting your hands on both (or other) brands and decide what you like. For glass (surely for C & N) there are many options, economic to ridiculously expensive.
RobDickinson said:
ian in lancs said:
What I don't see in the magazines is a head to head system review. Say a Nikon vs Canon top DX body - D300s vs the equivalent Canon, I presume EOS 7D, and with their own f/2.8ish brand wide, mid range and telephoto lenses and flash functionality and performance and do a value for money comparison.
Up until recently they've avoided going head to head - their bodies nicely interleaving on spec & price so as to avoid possible direct comparisons.D300s vs 7D is probably the closest they have got on spec, then you add in the lenses etc and do the maths.
Elsewhere the 5D2 vs D700 is close, playing resolution and video off against better autofocus and fps.
Here though thew good nikon FF glass is 50% more than the canon stuff.
Kermit power said:
I think the problem with magazines is that they're desperate for content.
This is very true. Mrs Get is a freelance writer and writes for magazines (not photography), and she is constantly being asked to come up with new angles 'cos they've done everything 3 times already.Oh and by the way, in one mag (no names, cos she'll lose her job) she does the 'agony aunt'... and, sure enough, she makes up the questions, the people and the answers! (In case you ever doubted).
GetCarter said:
Oh and by the way, in one mag (no names, cos she'll lose her job) she does the 'agony aunt'... and, sure enough, she makes up the questions, the people and the answers! (In case you ever doubted).
Dear Mrs Get,I seem to be falling in love with a Canon 50D, however I have been having impure thoughts about either it's bigger brother the 5D or a Nikon D90.
Advice I'm getting seem to contradict what my heart is telling me and I'm in a bit of a quandry which way to turn.
I don't want to offend the 50D but when I hold it in my hands it just feels right - however there is always the thought that the grass may indeed be greener on the other side.
Should I stay with what my heart is telling me is the correct choice or follow the guidance of people who I've got no allegiance to and splash out on something else.
Yours truly
Busa_Rush.
crmcatee said:
GetCarter said:
Oh and by the way, in one mag (no names, cos she'll lose her job) she does the 'agony aunt'... and, sure enough, she makes up the questions, the people and the answers! (In case you ever doubted).
Dear Mrs Get,I seem to be falling in love with a Canon 50D, however I have been having impure thoughts about either it's bigger brother the 5D or a Nikon D90.
Advice I'm getting seem to contradict what my heart is telling me and I'm in a bit of a quandry which way to turn.
I don't want to offend the 50D but when I hold it in my hands it just feels right - however there is always the thought that the grass may indeed be greener on the other side.
Should I stay with what my heart is telling me is the correct choice or follow the guidance of people who I've got no allegiance to and splash out on something else.
Yours truly
Busa_Rush.
"I know you're very excited, but It's probably a bad idea to spalsh out on any of the above as the weather sealing isn't perfect".
I suggest you buy one from the internet and use it for a few days... make sure you keep all the packaging and open it really carefully. If you don't like it, by law you can return anything bought on-line within 8 days (some offer more) and the seller must give you a full refund - no questions asked (though you'll have to pay postage back).
If you like it great, if not buy one of the others.
Edited by GetCarter on Wednesday 30th December 12:05
GetCarter said:
crmcatee said:
GetCarter said:
Oh and by the way, in one mag (no names, cos she'll lose her job) she does the 'agony aunt'... and, sure enough, she makes up the questions, the people and the answers! (In case you ever doubted).
Dear Mrs Get,I seem to be falling in love with a Canon 50D, however I have been having impure thoughts about either it's bigger brother the 5D or a Nikon D90.
Advice I'm getting seem to contradict what my heart is telling me and I'm in a bit of a quandry which way to turn.
I don't want to offend the 50D but when I hold it in my hands it just feels right - however there is always the thought that the grass may indeed be greener on the other side.
Should I stay with what my heart is telling me is the correct choice or follow the guidance of people who I've got no allegiance to and splash out on something else.
Yours truly
Busa_Rush.
"I know you're very excited, but It's probably a bad idea to spalsh out on any of the above as the weather sealing isn't perfect".
I suggest you buy one from the internet and use it for a few days... make sure you keep all the packaging and open it really carefully. If you don't like it, by law you can return anything bought on-line within 8 days (some offer more) and the seller must give you a full refund - no questions asked (though you'll have to pay postage back).
If you like it great, if not buy one of the others.
Edited by GetCarter on Wednesday 30th December 12:05
I'm a big Nikon fan and would advise one to anyone in a heartbeat if I even had the slightest hint that it would be the right choice for them.
I wouldn't put too much faith in magazines, they will be sponsored and are likely writen by people with just as much bias as you or I. In truth Nikon and Canon are constantly leapfrogging eachother, neither is far ahead of the othere or the company lagging behind would be dead in the water. Go with what fels right in the hand ergonomics and control wise, because that's what will make you want to take more photos at the end of the day.
The only exception as far as I'm concerned is if the equivalant Nikon or Canon camera has a feature or lens that you MUST have. If the other doesn't have it you might want to sway to the one that does.
Busa_Rush said:
Canon 50D, felt good to hold etc
You'll want a Canon...I wouldn't put too much faith in magazines, they will be sponsored and are likely writen by people with just as much bias as you or I. In truth Nikon and Canon are constantly leapfrogging eachother, neither is far ahead of the othere or the company lagging behind would be dead in the water. Go with what fels right in the hand ergonomics and control wise, because that's what will make you want to take more photos at the end of the day.
The only exception as far as I'm concerned is if the equivalant Nikon or Canon camera has a feature or lens that you MUST have. If the other doesn't have it you might want to sway to the one that does.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff