Just wanted to say thank you too everyone that helped make my decision.. I purchased the D600 and in just one night of playing with it, this camera is amazing even with just the kit lens! Now all I need to do is start a wish list for some good glass and take advantage of all the potential this baby has, hopefully this will take my photography to the next level.. Thank you guys hope you all have a great Sunday!!
One other thing, are you sure you need a full frame sensor? It used to be a foregone conclusion that everybody would be moving to a full frame sensor at some point, but unless you're really interested in wide angle lenses, I'm not personally sure that the file size and cost really make much sense. But, I've got a long lens addiction that might be talking for me.
It's definitely a valid choice, but the price difference between the two would be sufficient to get some really good glass. Which is why I asked, unless somebody really needs wide angle lenses, going with a crop sensor and getting some good glass is often a better choice.
If the manufacturers opt to stop selling the entry level dSLRs, this is going to be the biggest problem. IMHO, it's often better to buy a Rebel and an L than a 60D or 7D and just a very good lens. Obviously, dependent upon the specifics. Just because of how long a lens will last.
If you like(d) your Nikon, just stick with it. As the others have said you'll be use to it. That's probably the major reason I'm staying with canon - I'm use to it and my first camera was a canon. It's done me well Both are great brands and it's easy to upgrade glass on both of them it seems it just really comes down to brand preference, and you get more megapixels with the Nikon D600, and it has a little bit of a quicker burst rate.
I don't think you'll be at all disappointed by either one, I'd lean towards Nikon since that's the interface you're used to. However I'd be more worried about the glass, keep in mind to keep up with either camera you'll need some delicious full frame goodness to put on the front Best of luck deciding, both cameras look like fun toys
What limitations does your D90 have that you are looking to overcome?
What sort of shooting do you like to do best? What sort of lenses do you shoot with now and what are your dream lenses?
Both of these cameras are very high quality and for almost all photographers they will produce very similar results. When compared in a lab the D600 seems to edge ahead in reviews but I wouldn't put too much weight into that.
I am pretty invested in Nikon and that is where I will stay but if every piece of gear I own was lost and I had to start from scratch I would be really strongly considering Canon for a couple of reasons. (I also might take a look at Sony) First being that Canon production is simply better because Canon is a MUCH larger company. Nikon seems to have shortages and waiting lists for a long time while Canon gets new products to customers pretty fast. This seems minor but I was not a happy camper when my main body died last spring and I had to sit on a waiting list for 6 MONTHS waiting for a D800. The other major one is nikon's lack of super fast F1.2 primes in the 50mm and 85mm focal lengths.
That said Nikon still makes FANTASTIC cameras and lenses and many of their offerings exceed Canon, just like many of Canon's offerings exceed Nikon. When comparing the two I would focus on what one side offers that the other simply doesn't rather than quality between two similar bodies. Here are a few examples:
Things Nikon Offers Which Canon Does Not: A Camera with a 25+mp sensor A Camera with now low pass filter Lenses with "Defocus Control"
Things Canon Offers Which Nikon Does Not: 50mm and 85mm F1.2 primes A camera with 11 FPS shooting (1DX) Better supply
Obviously any of this can change at any time but it is a good point of reference. It also showcases what cutting edge technologies each respective company is investing in which can help predict what their goals are moving forward.
1. Meh, no big deal. Lightroom has tethering built in and virtually any photographer who is going to be tethering is going to have LR 2. Tethering isn't really a complex thing. Most photographers don't need anything beyond the photo popping up on screen after they depress the shutter. Lightroom does this perfectly and it allows you to skip having to import images later too.
I will agree Nikon charging as much as they do for Camera Control Pro is a little ridiculous but in deciding what brand of camera to buy tethering doesn't even factor in for me personally. Even if LR couldn't tether SofortBild does a great job and has a big free price tag.
Did you try the d800E? Tethering was a pain. Even with capture one/nikon camera control pro. Stuff like shooting raw on cf and tether jpeg is standard on canon. Nikon seems to have forgotten that. btw lightroom did not have d800e tethering the last time I checked.(something to do with the nikon sdk)
Interesting, I've never heard of defocus control before. Not that it matters, I'm sold into the Canon system and just got a new body for it.
I would add that I think the biggest area where it's clearly Canon or GTFO is with the longer lenses and the sports photography. Nikon is still a very good choice in general, but you rarely, if ever, see sports photographers using Nikon gear.
I don't shoot Nikon gear, so I'm not really as up on their strengths as I could be. But, they are a photographer centered company whereas Canon is a bit more focused on the engineering and the science. They're both good approaches and they both yield excellent results, but the design focuses and priorities are a bit different.
Defocus Control is a special technology that Nikon put into the 100mm F2 and the 135mm F2. It is an additional ring that allows you to change the look of the Bokeh without changing the aperture.
I wouldn't say that. I think Canon dominates in this field simply because it used to dominate so everyone is invested in REALLY expensive sports gear. Nikon's super telephoto lenses are very good. Scott Kelby shoots sports with Nikon gear and does well.
I would say both are very focused on engineering and science related to the products they make but Canon simply has way more products. It is a much much bigger company. Ironically enough though it seems Nikon is just as invested, if not more, in new camera technology which is funny considering it has far fewer funds but it isn't Canon coming out with revolutionary new technology of late. Canon seems more focused on making what is already great even better rather than releasing products that redefine the scope of DSLR photography.
Of course they both focus on that, I probably misspoke, it's the approach that differs, Nikon tends to be more of a photographer company and Canon tends to be more of a camera company. And the layouts of the controls and the innovations they focus on tend to reflect this.
As far as revolutionary products, I'm not really sure what Canon needs that isn't an evolution over what they're doing. The Defocus technology sounds kind of cool, but I'm not really sure I'd pay extra for it. But, I need to do more research on that.
The main innovations I've seen lately are things which, quite frankly, I don't think need to be done at all. And some of them like in body IS is kind of a mixed bag. Sure it works with every lens you might want to hook up, but by the same token it doesn't help with composition at all as you're composing based upon a non-IS viewfinder.
Bear in mind that after nearly 10 years I'm only now updating my body to a new one. I think that speaks volumes about how good they were doing. My new body is a, fairly long, set of evolutionary steps over the previous bodies. And for years Nikon was way behind Canon in regards to high ISO performance, Nikon seems to have largely caught up, or at least last time I checked, but you do reach a point of diminishing returns at some point as well.
It really depends what your goals are. In terms of low light, Nikon has been well ahead for the last 4 or 5 years but now they are fairly even and both companies offer very impressive low light performance. Really where the most innovation is happening is actually at Sony, not Canon or Nikon. It isn't Nikon that makes those revolutionary sensors in the D800 and D600, they are made by Sony.
Personally I'd say if your top priority is a more consistent and reliable company Canon is a no brainer. But at least for now, Nikon has the lead on the highest possible DSLR image quality. But that might change at any time. I saw rumours of a 48mp Canon body on the horizon that is supposed to surpass anything Nikon has. They tend to flip flop hahaha. In the long run though the choice is pretty meaningless, regardless of what path you take it ultimately comes down to you whether your images are great or not. It doesn't matter which camera you use, they all make amazing pictures; Canon, or Nikon, or Sony, Or Pentax, even the rarely seen Sigma bodies can do very well. In lab settings one company may pull ahead of the others for a time but in real work use they are all effectively even.
I more or less agree with that. I'm sold into the Canon system, so, Nikon would have to pull unimaginably far out in front to justify replacing my lenses to switch.
One of the main advantages for Canon is that they do so much of the work in house. They design the sensors and the lenses and so it's not a surprise that they would be so consistent.
I don't know about Nikon being ahead, whenever I look at the images lately, it's always been slightly in favor of Canon. But regardless of whether I'm being properly fair in my assessment, I haven't seen anything to suggest that either company is way out ahead like Canon used to be. I think that's probably because sensors are a more mature technology and just generally better understood.
When looking a normal photos you won't be able to to tell the difference. The photographer's skill really plays much more into it than the sensor quality. Only the more elite pros will really notice a difference. The exception being of course the D800 because of how much detail it can capture compared to other bodies but Canon will have their own super high resolution camera along soon enough.
If you look at Laboratory test such as DXOmark (which has to be taken with a grain of salt) the Nikon sensors right now are getting slightly better scores but this doesn't really reflect everyday use. For example the Nikon D800 has 25.6 bits of color depth vs the Canon 1DX at 23.8. Which is very close and will be completely unnoticable in 99% of shots but sometimes it does give the edge in very specific circumstances.
Yeah, I have a nasty habit of not accepting my photos as good if I can zoom in to 1:1 and see any imperfections. That's something good to shoot for, but one should also realize that it's unnecessary in most cases. Unless you're planing on blowing them up to the point where you're printing at 150 dpi or something like that, people aren't going to notice it if it's being printed at smaller sizes.
That's probably one of the bigger changes in the last 10 years or so, you don't have to pixel peak as you probably have enough pixels for what you're shooting.