Why to start that war again? Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Zeiss, they all make great camera. Camera is just a tool, get what feels right in your hands and provide controls you feel you'll need. That's all to it.
I have always loved my Canon DSLR and Canon lens, however...
Last year I bought an Olympus OM1n film camera and it is certainly a thing of beauty. It prompted me to buy the new Olympus OM-D EM5 (last week) instead of my planned upgrade to the 60D, although I have not yet had chance to really use it yet, I can already see its appeal.
Before I'd picked up my first DSLR almost 10 years ago I'd had my heart set on a Canon 300D. But come decision time I found myself confused as hell picking it up, wondering where all the controls were and how to use it... Meanwhile the Nikon D70 made me feel right at home straight away, I could easily see where all the controls where and use them comfortably as they all sat where expected.
Fast forward and I'm now a self employed professional using a couple of Nikon D800s. I've had the odd job or occasion where I've used Canon 5D mk II/III cameras and feel a little more comfortable with the controls, but there are a lot of more intricate controls that I can access easily on the D800 (or if I'm confused about them there's a handy "?" button that tells me exactly what they do) whereas on the Canons even my gf who'd been using the cameras for years had no idea where some controls were or what they did. It's that kind of fast handling in the field and instinctive control that helped me get a lot of my winning shots in the early days. It also caused her to move to Nikon too just a few months ago.
I did flirt with the idea of going Canon a couple of years ago due to how much cheaper it was for equivalent gear (lenses, 5D mkII etc), but when the current generation of bodies were announced (mkIII and D800) that sealed the deal for me. The versatility and sheer detail of the D800 just takes the quality of images I can offer clients up a huge notch, most notably thanks to the huge dynamic range and insane shadow detail that they got dialled in with the D7000 and has translated to future models.
i probably should have added a description to the link. its a website that compares two cameras side by side weighing the pros and cons to each. i use a nikon 3100, but believe canon and nikon are about the same.
This matches the thread I made: [link] I choose Canon, because Canon to me is more easier to navigate through the means and the price and their style (body design). Also Nikon is very good also, I see MANY photographers use Nikon.
Canon. I had a Fujifilm in the past but only a small digital camera (when I was like 15) I now (17) have a canon 600d, It fits perfectly for the size of my hands and is really comfortable, I also think the interface is amazing!
If I'm using SLRs I've put my lot in with Nikon. I really like their glass, the ergonomics behind both their film and digital bodies. Also, they have (for the most part) stayed pretty consistent with their lens mounts, so buying old lenses becomes a much more viable/affordable proposition.
I rarely use SLRs anymore though. For the past year and a half I've been shooting with either a Leica Z2X, various versions of the Olympus Stylus, or a Sony Cybershot with a Zeiss lens.
I haven't heard of a DSLR version of the Cybershot myself, but I don't pay very close attention to digital tech.
If you aren't after one of the M or R models/lenses Leicas can actually be had for pretty cheaply. Their point and shoots (the Z2X and variations on the Mini) regularly go for under $75 on Ebay, and the CM is usually ~$200.
Realistically, they're a commodity! So what if nikon has a sharper 14mm and canon has a sharper 300mm, or pentax has the awesome pancake lenses. Any of the three will work well for the vast majority of people! Do your research though, there might be one tiny feature that isn't important to 99.99999% of people, but is to you!
I've been using Nikon since 2003, and the reason I went with Nikon was because of the lenses on offer from Nikon and the F-mount that makes it possible to use lenses from 1957 up til today. Also, the cameras is great quality as are the files. I went digital in 2010, with a second-hand Nikon D70, and I've worked my way through a Nikon D200 and now I'm shooting with a Nikon D800. When it comes to glass I've been using both Nikkor, Sigma and Tamron, but I now use Tamron SP-range zooms and Nikkor primes.
Love your choice in current camera bodies. A question on your D800--- ever had the shutter randomly go on you? And your choice in lenses is awesome. Nikkor primes are some of my favourites. My next is most likely going to be a 20 mm or wider prime.
Unfortunately, some of the best aren't compatible with my camera. No 10 mm prime for me! (Boo!!)
I use my Nikon D300 my dad gave to me, I love it!! Maybe its because my dad gave it to me or that fact I can't figure out any other type of camera that well >.>, I love how the D300 brings out the colors so well! And with animals it makes them look so beautifully! I guess thats a fwe things I love about my D300 c:
In 2008 my birthday and Christmas present was a Canon Eos Rebel XTi. I still use it today and it's been extremely reliable and has suited my needs while giving me the freedom and room to explore settings. I'm looking to make an upgrade because I want something slightly faster that can do video and I want to have an extra body just in case. Undoubtedly the second camera is going to be a Canon. When a brand does me well, I tend to stick with it. I've been curious about Nikons, but I've held a couple and they just don't "feel" right.
Not true. Unless you're the sort of person that regularly takes pictures of charts, going with Nikon on that basis makes absolutely no sense.
Nikon has very good gear, but quite frankly, lenses count for a lot as well. A Canon or a Nikon made today is likely to last for a decade easily. Who knows which manufacturer is going to be ahead at that time, and once you plunk down for a few good lenses, you're pretty much committed anyways.
Ultimately, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and it's been a good long time since there was sufficient IQ difference to justify that sort of enthusiasm either way when dealing with real life situations.
ou, yeah.. sure.. you know what? try to take picture of same situation with Nikon and Canon (talking about landscape with high dynamic range), then tinker with that raw a bit.. then write something about Nikon vs Canon again.
It's not a true fact though, unless you're somebody who only takes photos of test charts. Take a look at real images that people are taking in the real world and I dare you to find that amount of difference.
I personally shoot with a Pentax DSLR. Unlike both Canon and Nikon, it's not made in china, but rather in Germany. Also a majority of the lens (and all of my lens) are metal and very durable. On the more technical side, I like the display, and I find that the settings are really easy to navigate. That being said, I shoot with both Nikon DSLR and Canon DRLS at school, and they are both really, really good camera. A plus side to shooting with these more generic brands (and I don't mean that in a bad way) is that there is a really wide variety of lens at your disposal which is less true when you shoot with a Pentax.
I have a nikon d3100 dslr. Both brands are great. I don't get why people have to treat them like sports teams. I just chose nikon because it was more affordable and had the right amount of features I needed.
I use Canon - the 10D was the only decent DSLR camera I could afford at the time. Once I accumulated a good set of lenses that I really like, I am stuck with Canon. It's unfortunate because I think Canons have inferior auto-focus, sensors, and metering, but they do have awesome glass, which I think is the most important thing. Had I started today I may have gone with Sony - their sensors are superb (and I think they supply them to Nikon - or used to).
Yeah, that's true. Older cameras are built like tanks, which is why I love them. Don't get me wrong, I love my 5DIII, but it's no where near as well built as my old Canon AE-1 (which now I regret selling, not to mention FD glass felt much better built than EF glass.
That said, I'm currently bidding on several LF cameras on eBay, which I hope to put as decoration around the house, and use them from time to time (when I need high detail shots), although I still need to learn how to use them, and find a place that sell and develop LF film.
If you liked the AE-1, you've got to try the A1. Ebay is loaded with them and if you hunt a bit you can probably find one for under $40. It's an incredible camera (and yes, I have an AE-1 too).
If you are looking at LF cameras, one of the best deals you'll find will probably be a Calumet. It is a really good camera and they made so many of them that they don't have a lot of collector value. This means you can probably find one for under $100. The internet is full of places that sell 4x5 film, and there are quite a few that develop it. Personally, I like Calypso.
Hmm, sure, but I'll probably be limited to a lens or two (most likely the 55 1.2, I just love that lens), since I sold all my FD glass, and I don't see myself spending too much money on another line of lenses. As of now, my film usage is limited to a film Canon Rebel. I like it since it's EOS mount, so I can use all my lenses on it.
Hmm, interesting, but I'm worried about the expenses of sending and developing LF film. Might probably get the film scanned as well. Does Calypso do printing as well?