Canon/Nikon: The Industry "Standard"??

outsider · 12-01-2011, 02:32 PM

I stopped by a small photography studio I had been curious about on my way home from the store a few days ago. Me and the Guy that ran the place had some good conversation about photography and the differences between brands. At one point, he mentioned when he used to teach college photography, he would always tell his students to use the "industry standard" Canon or Nikon camera if they're looking for a job, or they won't even waste their time with you. I was quite shocked by that statement, but I also don't know much about the industry in that regard. Ironically, a few days later, I read a description online for a photography job, which required use of a "Canon or Nikon" SLR Camera (with NO mention of a preference for full frame). I'm curious to get opinions about this idea which apparently favors these two popular brands. Does this really exist? How prevalent is it? Why do certain areas of the industry think this way? Please no fanboy responses. Try to be as non-biased as possible.

Adam · 12-01-2011, 02:36 PM

It's just because they have so much of the market share (>80%), so there's a lot of common knowledge among pros and they can share gear and lenses - the two brands are almost part of popular culture. Canon/Nikon cameras are probably the best choice for any kind of action photography, although the difference doesn't become drastic until you're spending tens of thousands on your gear.

mtansley · 12-01-2011, 02:53 PM

If you use either of these two brands and you happen to have a body or lens break or fail, they are so popular that it is quite easy to rent what you need for short or long term.

Most lens rental places don't do any rentals for the 'less popular' cameras, i.e. Pentax, Olympus, Sony, Fuji etc.

For a pro that's a good reason to stick with the main two.

Zav · 12-01-2011, 03:34 PM

Those two are offering a real pro service as well. Unlike Pentax.
Canon Professional Network - Canon Professional Services

ofer4 · 12-01-2011, 05:41 PM

Zav, I just saw a blurb (somewhere on this site) recently that Pentax has a Professional Services (PPS) option, too. I can't vouch for its quality, but apparently it's out there.

JohnBecker · 12-01-2011, 05:49 PM

Don't overlook the fact that if you're sent out on an assignment and destroy a lens, you're a lot more likely to be able to replace a Canon or Nikon lens the same day. This is the value of ubiquity - universal availability.

twitch · 12-01-2011, 05:51 PM

Fact is, Canon & Nikon are the industry standard for pro's. If I wanted to be a pro I'd be switching to one of them, but I don't, so I'm not

RioRico · 12-01-2011, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by twitch

Fact is, Canon & Nikon are the industry standard for pro's.

Rather, C&N are the industry standard for certain imaging pros. Other pros require Hasselblad, or Sony, or Holga, or Nokia. There is vastly more to photo-imaging than is covered by the relatively few products from C&N. IMHO the idea that only images produced by C&N gear constitute 'photography' is pretty constipated, and totally wrong. That's a marketing meme.

Yes, for photournalism, action, sports, event shooting, C&N are dominant, but not ubiquitous even there. All the staff toggers on the cruise I took awhile back were shooting Olympus. I know established wedding shooters using Oly, Sony, even Pentax. I think many technical-scientific-investigative shooters use forensic dSLRs from Fuji and Sigma. I've read that many combat photographers use rugged Pentax.

Are the "photo-pros" to whom C&N appeal actually a shrinking market segment of professionals? That would be an interesting study: What proportion of paid-for images are shot with which cameras?

séamuis · 12-02-2011, 12:12 AM

Originally posted by RioRico

Rather, C&N are the industry standard for certain imaging pros.

I agree. the idea that canon and nikon define 'pro' in the field of photography and nothing else fits the definition, simply because one believes marketing jargon, is just utter nonsense. the world of professional photography extends so far beyond the borders of what the marketing department at canon and nikon want people to believe. so far beyond, and the choice of equipment follows suit. nobody would deny that both canon and nikon have good saturation in certain areas of professional photography, but to say they are 'industry standard' and leave it, so broadly defined and so narrowly represented is just absurd and reeks of no proper understanding of 'professional photography' outside of canon and nikon TV commercials.

Zav · 12-02-2011, 12:35 AM

Originally posted by ofer4

Zav, I just saw a blurb (somewhere on this site) recently that Pentax has a Professional Services (PPS) option, too. I can't vouch for its quality, but apparently it's out there.

After a little search, yep, you are right: PENTAX - PENTAX ANNOUNCES PRO PROGRAM: BENEFITS INCLUDE EQUIPMENT LOANS AND EXPEDITED REPAIRS
For the USA only...

Wheatfield · 12-02-2011, 07:36 AM

Originally posted by séamuis

I agree. the idea that canon and nikon define 'pro' in the field of photography and nothing else fits the definition, simply because one believes marketing jargon, is just utter nonsense. the world of professional photography extends so far beyond the borders of what the marketing department at canon and nikon want people to believe. so far beyond, and the choice of equipment follows suit. nobody would deny that both canon and nikon have good saturation in certain areas of professional photography, but to say they are 'industry standard' and leave it, so broadly defined and so narrowly represented is just absurd and reeks of no proper understanding of 'professional photography' outside of canon and nikon TV commercials.

Reality says something else. The fact is, if you are a pro photographer and are using something other than Canon or Nikon, you are pretty much an outlier. Their saturation in the pro market has been very secure since they stated pulling away from the pack technologically in the mid 1970s, and since the advent of digital they have made themselves into the industry standard on sheer numbers of cameras in the hands of professional photographers.
The number of non Nikons or Canons in pro use these days is pretty insignificant, not realizing that shows no proper understanding of professional photography.

Nesster · 12-02-2011, 07:57 AM

It's sort of like not knowing/using MS Office when applying for a job requiring their use, or not knowing whatever the industry leading CAD/CAM software is... sure the thing you know and use may be better in some ways, but it ain't what they're hiring you to use.

I know a pro dance photographer, and he's been getting into multi strobe imaging... and he just loves his full frame Canon. The image quality is great, and he gets support from Canon - they'll send a tech over to help set up the shoot and show him and his team how to use all the fancy bits. That takes serious money on Canon's part - and if doing this translates to big sales to those 'rubes' we Pentaxians keep talking about

, good for them!

séamuis · 12-02-2011, 08:17 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

made themselves into the industry standard on sheer numbers of cameras in the hands of professional photographers.
The number of non Nikons or Canons in pro use these days is pretty insignificant, not realizing that shows no proper understanding of professional photography.

I find it pretty generic to say they are the 'industry standard' when that encompasses a very large array of photography. Im a working professional photographer, and I have the credentials to prove the fact, and even I don't believe one can say that 'insignificant' is a provable definition. Im not arguing that they have a huge presence, even a majority role. however, 'insignificant' is I believe a poor definition. I know a number of wedding and portrait photographers here in Savannah (a city saturated with this type of work) and I can count more hasselblads, phase one's and mamiyas in use from the most well respected photogs than canon and nikon.

Nesster · 12-02-2011, 08:44 AM

Originally posted by séamuis

I can count more hasselblads, phase one's and mamiyas in use from the most well respected photogs than canon and nikon.

And these photogs would prefer to hire someone with experience with their equipment, unless they prefer to train someone. For a shop that uses Canon or Nikon, the same applies.

Wheatfield · 12-02-2011, 09:28 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by séamuis

I find it pretty generic to say they are the 'industry standard' when that encompasses a very large array of photography. Im a working professional photographer, and I have the credentials to prove the fact, and even I don't believe one can say that 'insignificant' is a provable definition. Im not arguing that they have a huge presence, even a majority role. however, 'insignificant' is I believe a poor definition. I know a number of wedding and portrait photographers here in Savannah (a city saturated with this type of work) and I can count more hasselblads, phase one's and mamiyas in use from the most well respected photogs than canon and nikon.

How about the "less well respected" photographers?
And what do they use when their Hassy, Phase One or Mamiya isn't the right tool?
You are using outliers and pretending that they represent a majority.

12-01-2011, 02:32 PM	#1
outsider Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Photos: Albums Posts: 416	Canon/Nikon: The Industry "Standard"?? I stopped by a small photography studio I had been curious about on my way home from the store a few days ago. Me and the Guy that ran the place had some good conversation about photography and the differences between brands. At one point, he mentioned when he used to teach college photography, he would always tell his students to use the "industry standard" Canon or Nikon camera if they're looking for a job, or they won't even waste their time with you. I was quite shocked by that statement, but I also don't know much about the industry in that regard. Ironically, a few days later, I read a description online for a photography job, which required use of a "Canon or Nikon" SLR Camera (with NO mention of a preference for full frame). I'm curious to get opinions about this idea which apparently favors these two popular brands. Does this really exist? How prevalent is it? Why do certain areas of the industry think this way? Please no fanboy responses. Try to be as non-biased as possible.

12-01-2011, 02:36 PM	#2
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,595	It's just because they have so much of the market share (>80%), so there's a lot of common knowledge among pros and they can share gear and lenses - the two brands are almost part of popular culture. Canon/Nikon cameras are probably the best choice for any kind of action photography, although the difference doesn't become drastic until you're spending tens of thousands on your gear. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Is it "Canon or Nikon" or nothing?	dmfw	Pentax DSLR Discussion	46	12-08-2011 04:59 AM
Best "Standard" Zoom	soppy	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	10-23-2011 05:41 PM
Which Pentax on Photo Industry Reporter's "most influential"?	pentaximus	Pentax News and Rumors	16	08-27-2011 06:15 AM
DPReview: Nikon P7000 a "profoundly unlikeable camera"	Unsinkable II	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	6	11-24-2010 04:38 PM
A "canon" is a rappers "weapon of choice"	Gooshin	General Talk	3	10-17-2008 05:19 PM

12-01-2011, 02:53 PM	#3
mtansley Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Ajax, Ontario, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,139	If you use either of these two brands and you happen to have a body or lens break or fail, they are so popular that it is quite easy to rent what you need for short or long term. Most lens rental places don't do any rentals for the 'less popular' cameras, i.e. Pentax, Olympus, Sony, Fuji etc. For a pro that's a good reason to stick with the main two.

12-01-2011, 03:34 PM	#4
Zav Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,371	Those two are offering a real pro service as well. Unlike Pentax. Canon Professional Network - Canon Professional Services

12-01-2011, 05:41 PM	#5
ofer4 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Utah Posts: 428	Zav, I just saw a blurb (somewhere on this site) recently that Pentax has a Professional Services (PPS) option, too. I can't vouch for its quality, but apparently it's out there.

12-01-2011, 05:49 PM	#6
JohnBecker Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Knoxville, TN Posts: 46	Don't overlook the fact that if you're sent out on an assignment and destroy a lens, you're a lot more likely to be able to replace a Canon or Nikon lens the same day. This is the value of ubiquity - universal availability.

12-01-2011, 05:51 PM	#7
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	Fact is, Canon & Nikon are the industry standard for pro's. If I wanted to be a pro I'd be switching to one of them, but I don't, so I'm not

12-01-2011, 07:04 PM	#8
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by twitch Fact is, Canon & Nikon are the industry standard for pro's. Rather, C&N are the industry standard for certain imaging pros. Other pros require Hasselblad, or Sony, or Holga, or Nokia. There is vastly more to photo-imaging than is covered by the relatively few products from C&N. IMHO the idea that only images produced by C&N gear constitute 'photography' is pretty constipated, and totally wrong. That's a marketing meme. Yes, for photournalism, action, sports, event shooting, C&N are dominant, but not ubiquitous even there. All the staff toggers on the cruise I took awhile back were shooting Olympus. I know established wedding shooters using Oly, Sony, even Pentax. I think many technical-scientific-investigative shooters use forensic dSLRs from Fuji and Sigma. I've read that many combat photographers use rugged Pentax. Are the "photo-pros" to whom C&N appeal actually a shrinking market segment of professionals? That would be an interesting study: What proportion of paid-for images are shot with which cameras?

12-02-2011, 12:12 AM	#9
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	Originally posted by RioRico Rather, C&N are the industry standard for certain imaging pros. I agree. the idea that canon and nikon define 'pro' in the field of photography and nothing else fits the definition, simply because one believes marketing jargon, is just utter nonsense. the world of professional photography extends so far beyond the borders of what the marketing department at canon and nikon want people to believe. so far beyond, and the choice of equipment follows suit. nobody would deny that both canon and nikon have good saturation in certain areas of professional photography, but to say they are 'industry standard' and leave it, so broadly defined and so narrowly represented is just absurd and reeks of no proper understanding of 'professional photography' outside of canon and nikon TV commercials.

12-02-2011, 12:35 AM	#10
Zav Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,371	Originally posted by ofer4 Zav, I just saw a blurb (somewhere on this site) recently that Pentax has a Professional Services (PPS) option, too. I can't vouch for its quality, but apparently it's out there. After a little search, yep, you are right: PENTAX - PENTAX ANNOUNCES PRO PROGRAM: BENEFITS INCLUDE EQUIPMENT LOANS AND EXPEDITED REPAIRS For the USA only...

12-02-2011, 07:36 AM	#11
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Originally posted by séamuis I agree. the idea that canon and nikon define 'pro' in the field of photography and nothing else fits the definition, simply because one believes marketing jargon, is just utter nonsense. the world of professional photography extends so far beyond the borders of what the marketing department at canon and nikon want people to believe. so far beyond, and the choice of equipment follows suit. nobody would deny that both canon and nikon have good saturation in certain areas of professional photography, but to say they are 'industry standard' and leave it, so broadly defined and so narrowly represented is just absurd and reeks of no proper understanding of 'professional photography' outside of canon and nikon TV commercials. Reality says something else. The fact is, if you are a pro photographer and are using something other than Canon or Nikon, you are pretty much an outlier. Their saturation in the pro market has been very secure since they stated pulling away from the pack technologically in the mid 1970s, and since the advent of digital they have made themselves into the industry standard on sheer numbers of cameras in the hands of professional photographers. The number of non Nikons or Canons in pro use these days is pretty insignificant, not realizing that shows no proper understanding of professional photography.

12-02-2011, 07:57 AM	#12
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	It's sort of like not knowing/using MS Office when applying for a job requiring their use, or not knowing whatever the industry leading CAD/CAM software is... sure the thing you know and use may be better in some ways, but it ain't what they're hiring you to use. I know a pro dance photographer, and he's been getting into multi strobe imaging... and he just loves his full frame Canon. The image quality is great, and he gets support from Canon - they'll send a tech over to help set up the shoot and show him and his team how to use all the fancy bits. That takes serious money on Canon's part - and if doing this translates to big sales to those 'rubes' we Pentaxians keep talking about , good for them!

12-02-2011, 08:17 AM	#13
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	Originally posted by Wheatfield made themselves into the industry standard on sheer numbers of cameras in the hands of professional photographers. The number of non Nikons or Canons in pro use these days is pretty insignificant, not realizing that shows no proper understanding of professional photography. I find it pretty generic to say they are the 'industry standard' when that encompasses a very large array of photography. Im a working professional photographer, and I have the credentials to prove the fact, and even I don't believe one can say that 'insignificant' is a provable definition. Im not arguing that they have a huge presence, even a majority role. however, 'insignificant' is I believe a poor definition. I know a number of wedding and portrait photographers here in Savannah (a city saturated with this type of work) and I can count more hasselblads, phase one's and mamiyas in use from the most well respected photogs than canon and nikon.

12-02-2011, 08:44 AM	#14
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	Originally posted by séamuis I can count more hasselblads, phase one's and mamiyas in use from the most well respected photogs than canon and nikon. And these photogs would prefer to hire someone with experience with their equipment, unless they prefer to train someone. For a shop that uses Canon or Nikon, the same applies.

12-02-2011, 09:28 AM - 1 Like	#15
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Originally posted by séamuis I find it pretty generic to say they are the 'industry standard' when that encompasses a very large array of photography. Im a working professional photographer, and I have the credentials to prove the fact, and even I don't believe one can say that 'insignificant' is a provable definition. Im not arguing that they have a huge presence, even a majority role. however, 'insignificant' is I believe a poor definition. I know a number of wedding and portrait photographers here in Savannah (a city saturated with this type of work) and I can count more hasselblads, phase one's and mamiyas in use from the most well respected photogs than canon and nikon. How about the "less well respected" photographers? And what do they use when their Hassy, Phase One or Mamiya isn't the right tool? You are using outliers and pretending that they represent a majority.