Nikon or Canon?

RioRico · 02-22-2010, 11:40 AM

In other, similar threads, I've told how I decided what photo gear to buy. I asked myself, 1) Where do I want to go? 2) What lenses will get me there? 3) What affordable body supports those lenses, and will I be happy with it for awhile?

Question 1) meant: what do I want to do, that I can't do with my 5mpx Sony DSC-V1? The answer: interchangable lenses, ultrawide, long tele, and low light. Everybody makes (more-or-less affordable) long and fast lenses, so I concentrated on ultrawides.

Question 2) meant: which ultrawide zoom(s) could I use and afford? In spring 2008, when I did this analysis, Sony had none; Canon and Nikon (and thus Fujica and Sigma) were too expensive; that left Olympus and Pentax.

Question 3) meant: who makes a good solid affordable body, with better than entry-level resolution, that I won't feel compelled to upgrade within a couple years? Again, non-crap Nikon and Canon were costly, and Olympus had problems; that left the Pentax K20D.

That was my thought process: where do I wanna go, how do I get there, and can I afford it and be happy? I ignored marketing hype. I read tech reviews and user ratings, and especially user complaints. I drew graphs of happiness vs cost. I did not start off biased towards Pentax, because in 50 years of shooting, I'd never owned or used Pentax. If anything, I was biased towards Sony, then Olympus and Nikon. But careful analysis led me to the K20D, and I'm quite happy.

(My codemonkey training included Top-Down Structured Analysis. Learn what outputs are desired and what inputs are available, then figure how to get the former from the latter. Break each big problem down into smaller chunks. Analyze from the top down; solve from the bottom up. It's a good approach to many questions.)

Yes, better low-light dSLRs exist, but you can learn how to shoot well in low light with just about anything. Use flash, faster lenses, tripod, patience. Practice, practice, practice. Keep in mind that, with film, if you want more or less or different sensitivity, you buy a different roll of film. With digital, the camera IS the film, and costs rather more to replace. Also keep in mind that Canikony exploit their high-end gear as come-ons to tempt unwary n00bs to buy their entry-level crud: "Hey, if I buy this X-1000-Z, I can sell pix to National Geographic and Arizona Highways and Hustler, too!" Yah, sure.

Last edited by RioRico; 02-22-2010 at 11:54 AM.

str8talk83 · 02-24-2010, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by Clicker

Start saving your pesos according to that rumour site (we're not allowed to mention competing sites?) the new 1DsmkIV will be announced next week and as history has shown, that model should more or less trump anything Nikon has out currently, should be in the ball park of ~8large.

Is this a serious recommendation? This camera is overkill for virtually all but pro shooters. If you've got the money, than go for it I guess...It would make a lot more sense (to me) to get a used 1ds mark III, D3 or D700 if you are wanting full-frame. If you really want to start on a budget the Canon 5D is a great camera if you just need the full-frame shallow depth of field, wider view, and better high ISO performance (although that is a bit dated now). The next step up from that is the 5D Mark II and 1ds Mark II for around $2400 I believe.

I agree with most of the posters that suggest learning to use your system. I think that the only reason to consider to move from Pentax is for better focus tracking. I'm going to go out on a limb here and doubt that you NEED that.

pingflood · 02-24-2010, 07:52 PM

Originally posted by str8talk83

Is this a serious recommendation? This camera is overkill for virtually all but pro shooters. If you've got the money, than go for it I guess...It would make a lot more sense (to me) to get a used 1ds mark III, D3 or D700 if you are wanting full-frame. If you really want to start on a budget the Canon 5D is a great camera if you just need the full-frame shallow depth of field, wider view, and better high ISO performance (although that is a bit dated now). The next step up from that is the 5D Mark II and 1ds Mark II for around $2400 I believe.

I agree with most of the posters that suggest learning to use your system. I think that the only reason to consider to move from Pentax is for better focus tracking. I'm going to go out on a limb here and doubt that you NEED that.

FWIW, the 1Ds Mark II has dropped to $1700-1800 for a good used one lately, making it a huge bargain considering the IQ and overall performance.

As for reasons to move, AF is a big one, but there are other valid reasons like shallower DOF, wide legacy primes (e.g. the wonderful Zuiko 24/2.8 loses something on a crop sensor), and the availability of certain glass like T/S lenses, long/fast teles etc.

But yeah, 95% of people or more would be perfectly fine with ANY of the current DSLRs if they were to take the time to learn how to use their gear properly.

str8talk83 · 02-24-2010, 11:07 PM

Originally posted by pingflood

FWIW, the 1Ds Mark II has dropped to $1700-1800 for a good used one lately, making it a huge bargain considering the IQ and overall performance.

They are that cheap now? I'm tempted to jump on one, even though I hate the old UI. The IQ is really top notch on the 1ds cameras though...so tempting.

dylansalt · 02-24-2010, 11:52 PM

Comparisons from a 1dsmk111 user - he prefers his 7d now and in terms of iso champions - the d3s is the champion

Juza Nature Photography

pingflood · 02-25-2010, 05:41 AM

Yep, check FM and you'll see them around that price frequently lately. Get one, you won't regret it.

(And yeah, the UI is a little wonky, but once you review the shots you tend to overlook the little quirks..)

jonlee · 02-25-2010, 11:24 AM

Originally posted by pingflood

Yep, check FM and you'll see them around that price frequently lately. Get one, you won't regret it.

(And yeah, the UI is a little wonky, but once you review the shots you tend to overlook the little quirks..)

+1 on that. I recently had a 1ds2, but decided to keep my 1DS. I don't use my Canon gear much right now, and it would have been a waste to keep such a nice body and not use it. Responsive, great AF, terrific large viewfinder, excellent metering, color, resolution, and even good high ISO capabilities. Like all 1D-series bodies, very large and heavy, but built like a tank. Small LCD too, as mentioned.

Clicker · 02-25-2010, 12:55 PM

Originally posted by str8talk83

Is this a serious recommendation? This camera is overkill for virtually all but pro shooters. If you've got the money, than go for it I guess...It would make a lot more sense (to me) to get a used 1ds mark III, D3 or D700 if you are wanting full-frame. If you really want to start on a budget the Canon 5D is a great camera if you just need the full-frame shallow depth of field, wider view, and better high ISO performance (although that is a bit dated now). The next step up from that is the 5D Mark II and 1ds Mark II for around $2400 I believe.

I agree with most of the posters that suggest learning to use your system. I think that the only reason to consider to move from Pentax is for better focus tracking. I'm going to go out on a limb here and doubt that you NEED that.

Yes, it is as that's what the OP wants.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax or canon nikon	garyk	Pentax DSLR Discussion	19	06-25-2010 08:48 AM
Canon/Nikon	dylansalt	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	21	11-04-2009 10:55 AM
Nikon vs Canon	Hey Elwood	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	104	09-18-2009 02:57 AM
If I were a Nikon or Canon user...	Buddha Jones	Pentax News and Rumors	135	01-20-2008 06:36 AM
Canon or Nikon?	benjikan	Photographic Technique	26	04-10-2007 10:25 PM

02-22-2010, 11:40 AM	#16
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	In other, similar threads, I've told how I decided what photo gear to buy. I asked myself, 1) Where do I want to go? 2) What lenses will get me there? 3) What affordable body supports those lenses, and will I be happy with it for awhile? Question 1) meant: what do I want to do, that I can't do with my 5mpx Sony DSC-V1? The answer: interchangable lenses, ultrawide, long tele, and low light. Everybody makes (more-or-less affordable) long and fast lenses, so I concentrated on ultrawides. Question 2) meant: which ultrawide zoom(s) could I use and afford? In spring 2008, when I did this analysis, Sony had none; Canon and Nikon (and thus Fujica and Sigma) were too expensive; that left Olympus and Pentax. Question 3) meant: who makes a good solid affordable body, with better than entry-level resolution, that I won't feel compelled to upgrade within a couple years? Again, non-crap Nikon and Canon were costly, and Olympus had problems; that left the Pentax K20D. That was my thought process: where do I wanna go, how do I get there, and can I afford it and be happy? I ignored marketing hype. I read tech reviews and user ratings, and especially user complaints. I drew graphs of happiness vs cost. I did not start off biased towards Pentax, because in 50 years of shooting, I'd never owned or used Pentax. If anything, I was biased towards Sony, then Olympus and Nikon. But careful analysis led me to the K20D, and I'm quite happy. (My codemonkey training included Top-Down Structured Analysis. Learn what outputs are desired and what inputs are available, then figure how to get the former from the latter. Break each big problem down into smaller chunks. Analyze from the top down; solve from the bottom up. It's a good approach to many questions.) Yes, better low-light dSLRs exist, but you can learn how to shoot well in low light with just about anything. Use flash, faster lenses, tripod, patience. Practice, practice, practice. Keep in mind that, with film, if you want more or less or different sensitivity, you buy a different roll of film. With digital, the camera IS the film, and costs rather more to replace. Also keep in mind that Canikony exploit their high-end gear as come-ons to tempt unwary n00bs to buy their entry-level crud: "Hey, if I buy this X-1000-Z, I can sell pix to National Geographic and Arizona Highways and Hustler, too!" Yah, sure. Last edited by RioRico; 02-22-2010 at 11:54 AM.

02-24-2010, 03:00 PM	#17
str8talk83 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Bluffton, SC Photos: Albums Posts: 674	Originally posted by Clicker Start saving your pesos according to that rumour site (we're not allowed to mention competing sites?) the new 1DsmkIV will be announced next week and as history has shown, that model should more or less trump anything Nikon has out currently, should be in the ball park of ~8large. Is this a serious recommendation? This camera is overkill for virtually all but pro shooters. If you've got the money, than go for it I guess...It would make a lot more sense (to me) to get a used 1ds mark III, D3 or D700 if you are wanting full-frame. If you really want to start on a budget the Canon 5D is a great camera if you just need the full-frame shallow depth of field, wider view, and better high ISO performance (although that is a bit dated now). The next step up from that is the 5D Mark II and 1ds Mark II for around $2400 I believe. I agree with most of the posters that suggest learning to use your system. I think that the only reason to consider to move from Pentax is for better focus tracking. I'm going to go out on a limb here and doubt that you NEED that.

02-24-2010, 07:52 PM	#18
pingflood Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Borås, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,169	Originally posted by str8talk83 Is this a serious recommendation? This camera is overkill for virtually all but pro shooters. If you've got the money, than go for it I guess...It would make a lot more sense (to me) to get a used 1ds mark III, D3 or D700 if you are wanting full-frame. If you really want to start on a budget the Canon 5D is a great camera if you just need the full-frame shallow depth of field, wider view, and better high ISO performance (although that is a bit dated now). The next step up from that is the 5D Mark II and 1ds Mark II for around $2400 I believe. I agree with most of the posters that suggest learning to use your system. I think that the only reason to consider to move from Pentax is for better focus tracking. I'm going to go out on a limb here and doubt that you NEED that. FWIW, the 1Ds Mark II has dropped to $1700-1800 for a good used one lately, making it a huge bargain considering the IQ and overall performance. As for reasons to move, AF is a big one, but there are other valid reasons like shallower DOF, wide legacy primes (e.g. the wonderful Zuiko 24/2.8 loses something on a crop sensor), and the availability of certain glass like T/S lenses, long/fast teles etc. But yeah, 95% of people or more would be perfectly fine with ANY of the current DSLRs if they were to take the time to learn how to use their gear properly.

02-24-2010, 11:07 PM	#19
str8talk83 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Bluffton, SC Photos: Albums Posts: 674	Originally posted by pingflood FWIW, the 1Ds Mark II has dropped to $1700-1800 for a good used one lately, making it a huge bargain considering the IQ and overall performance. They are that cheap now? I'm tempted to jump on one, even though I hate the old UI. The IQ is really top notch on the 1ds cameras though...so tempting.

02-24-2010, 11:52 PM	#20
dylansalt Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Durban, South Africa Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,052	Comparisons from a 1dsmk111 user - he prefers his 7d now and in terms of iso champions - the d3s is the champion Juza Nature Photography

02-25-2010, 05:41 AM	#21
pingflood Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Borås, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,169	Yep, check FM and you'll see them around that price frequently lately. Get one, you won't regret it. (And yeah, the UI is a little wonky, but once you review the shots you tend to overlook the little quirks..)

02-25-2010, 11:24 AM	#22
jonlee Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Southern California Posts: 51	Originally posted by pingflood Yep, check FM and you'll see them around that price frequently lately. Get one, you won't regret it. (And yeah, the UI is a little wonky, but once you review the shots you tend to overlook the little quirks..) +1 on that. I recently had a 1ds2, but decided to keep my 1DS. I don't use my Canon gear much right now, and it would have been a waste to keep such a nice body and not use it. Responsive, great AF, terrific large viewfinder, excellent metering, color, resolution, and even good high ISO capabilities. Like all 1D-series bodies, very large and heavy, but built like a tank. Small LCD too, as mentioned.

02-25-2010, 12:55 PM	#23
Clicker Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,241	Originally posted by str8talk83 Is this a serious recommendation? This camera is overkill for virtually all but pro shooters. If you've got the money, than go for it I guess...It would make a lot more sense (to me) to get a used 1ds mark III, D3 or D700 if you are wanting full-frame. If you really want to start on a budget the Canon 5D is a great camera if you just need the full-frame shallow depth of field, wider view, and better high ISO performance (although that is a bit dated now). The next step up from that is the 5D Mark II and 1ds Mark II for around $2400 I believe. I agree with most of the posters that suggest learning to use your system. I think that the only reason to consider to move from Pentax is for better focus tracking. I'm going to go out on a limb here and doubt that you NEED that. Yes, it is as that's what the OP wants.