Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 106

Thread: Beauties of Nikon versus Canon (Film + Digital)

  1. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Singapore bo gway hai!
    Posts
    396

    Default

    Originally posted by denizenx
    would be cool if there's a white edition... then all those hobbyist wun sell liao... can display LOL (geddit geddit?)

  2. #22

    Default

    Funny, I always am under the impression that Nikon is actually getting to be cheaper than Canon.

    /me looks at D60 & D100

    and of coz, Nikon seems to be on the shelf whilst Canon isn't to be found anywhere

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    L2TPYSG
    Posts
    4,057

    Default

    Originally posted by Revo


    pachyderm? lol
    "I'm... dreaming... of a wide... angle~
    Just like the ones I used to know~"

  4. #24

    Default

    Thanks for you all your comments and also for those more to come. The reason to start this question is because I've fallen into the pit again wondering whether if I should switch from Nikon to Canon or not.

    Xmen 1977 may be happy to read this.

    After much calculation, Canon's lenses are on an average S$400-600 lesser than the NIkon ones. Here, we are looking at the higher ended ones of both brands.

    Have also tried some nice Canon bodies and lenses, and results are seem to be better at times. It's more of a possible long term effect.

    Honestly, I am quite happy with my Nikon system, but it's the Canon IS lenses that make me jump!

    Just wanted to hear from you guys on some of your experiences.

    Am possibly considering getting a Canon 1V+100-400+550+battery pack for nature/sports shoots.

  5. #25

    Default

    This is too funny.. but I won't repeat what has been emphasied over and over again on deaf ears.

  6. #26

    Default

    dagger, don't change to canon lar. if you use Nikon, people will say " wow, professional !". when they see you using a white lens, they will also "wow", so moral of the story, buy both. left shoulder carry nikon, right shoulder carry canon.


  7. #27
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default

    Originally posted by Dagger

    Am possibly considering getting a Canon 1V+100-400+550+battery pack for nature/sports shoots.
    then I don't understand reason for the switch. Nikon has equivalent equipment.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default

    Originally posted by Dagger

    After much calculation, Canon's lenses are on an average S$400-600 lesser than the NIkon ones. Here, we are looking at the higher ended ones of both brands.
    That's the average but have you looked at the lenses that YOU actually need? The top of the line AF-S lenses are more expensive but not so for some of the primes.

  9. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    390

    Default

    Nikon may come with a surprise for all.
    They may lower the prices too.
    Look at the F55 and the older F65.

    but then I'm biased too.



    ___________________________
    A visit to Nikon service dept will
    nail down the problems of unhappy
    followers.

    Management isn't sleeping
    to the needs of the thousands of
    users


  10. #30
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default

    Originally posted by forward
    Nikon may come with a surprise for all.
    They may lower the prices too.
    Look at the F55 and the older F65.

    but then I'm biased too.


    AFS Nikkor 28-70 f2.8 IF-ED @ S$2,790.00
    Canon EF 28-70 f2.8 USM L @ S$2,050.00

    How much do you think they can slash off?

  11. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    390

    Default

    Nikon must have been sleeping
    all these while....
    aha, the sales went to Canon
    with hundreds contemplating of changing
    system.




    Hard standing decisions made by the top
    isn't so quickly and smoothly be by
    passed the sleeping marketing dept.

    The price should be beautifully priced
    at $1088. The more you sell, the more
    you gain, isn't it?

    ____________________________
    Some camera manufacturers are not equipped
    to be tomorrow's leaders, visionaries and
    entrepreneurs.

    New ideas has to be injected, this can only
    been achieved with a younger mindset.


  12. #32
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default

    Originally posted by forward

    The price should be beautifully priced
    at $1088. The more you sell, the more
    you gain, isn't it?
    Right. Wake me up when the time comes. I'll take 2 of em.

  13. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    390

    Default

    Kit,

    You and I can only take two of them,
    but they didn't know the world will
    take 200,000 of them when that
    item is priced right.

    Look at their 20-35mm, a failure too.
    Price is too high. Hope they will learn
    fast from the mistakes.



    ______________
    We'll see how fast implementation
    takes place. What I know off is
    that with efficient governing bodies,
    it just takes less than 24 hours.


  14. #34
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default

    Originally posted by forward
    Kit,

    You and I can only take two of them,
    but they didn't know the world will
    take 200,000 of them when that
    item is priced right.

    Look at their 20-35mm, a failure too.
    Price is too high. Hope they will learn
    fast from the mistakes.
    Haha........ don't even start with me on the 20-35. I managed to find a new one here in Melbourne. Guess what? It costs more than a new AFS 17-35. Oh well, I see it this way, "you get what you paid for".

  15. #35
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default

    forget the add this though. After using (actually showering it with salt spray and rain) the 20-35 briefly, it came out pretty unscathed. Good performance too.

  16. #36

    Default

    Originally posted by Kit
    AFS Nikkor 28-70 f2.8 IF-ED @ S$2,790.00
    Canon EF 28-70 f2.8 USM L @ S$2,050.00
    I found something on the ground. *picks it up* Hey, it's the flame bait everyone's looking for!

    Seriously, I am wondering why companies price their products as such.

    I can think of many reasons why Nikon decided to price its AFS lens higher. But isn't it afraid to lose less discerning buyers? After all, both are 28-70/2.8 at first glance. No other differentiating features.

    (If you buy just "a few more" AFS lenses, the difference would have paid for a free camera.)
    (void *) &NHY;

  17. #37
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default

    Originally posted by nhyone

    I found something on the ground. *picks it up* Hey, it's the flame bait everyone's looking for!

    Seriously, I am wondering why companies price their products as such.

    I can think of many reasons why Nikon decided to price its AFS lens higher. But isn't it afraid to lose less discerning buyers? After all, both are 28-70/2.8 at first glance. No other differentiating features.

    (If you buy just "a few more" AFS lenses, the difference would have paid for a free camera.)
    Well, to be fair. Pick up the 2 lenses and you'll instantly feel the difference. The feel is different. Don't know about the performance of the AFS 28-70 but let's just say I'll never use the 28-70 L (which I used to own) at wide open EVER, EVER AGAIN. No flames please, my personal experience. Nikon has my fair share of b****** too. Oh great, now I'm wide open to both sides.

  18. #38
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    390

    Default

    The young learning folks here are
    picking up the clues on how not to flame
    in a true dedicated forum.

    I found something on the ground. *picks it up* Hey, it's the flame bait everyone's looking for!
    The regulars are far more intelligent and
    adaptable at changing to adapt.
    They want to change to adopt and
    accept a wiser way of discussion. T
    They learned to respect each other opinions.

    Now back to serious discussion...



    It is best the manufacturers should be listening
    to forum members too. Though its more robust
    lens barrel is more costly, but then it also reflect
    on the selling price.

    Why don't they change to reflect what other
    manufacturer is doing and marketing?

    Like the 24-85mm f/2.8, any folks here think
    that the price is just right or is it too high?

    ___________________________
    We should whistle while we walk
    or shoot, and this we will do it
    with gusto.


  19. #39
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default

    Well, to be fair again, Nikon does a classification in their lens catalogue and recommends the top of the line lenses for professional use. I would imagine that their prices are necessary to negotiate for professionals who make their equipment pay back for themselves. As for the others, you just have to pay the premium for using their best.

  20. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    I am very, very, very impressed indeed. ClubSNAPpers have matured. 2 pages 38 posts and still no hot flames around. Keep it up! (Y)(Y)(Y)

    Dagger : You get get the equivalent of what you mentioned in the form of F5+80-400VR+SB80DX.

    Kit: From what you mentioned, a Canon user is probably better off with the much cheaper and discontinued Tokina 28-70 ATX Pro II. Sharp from f/4 onwards.

    Forward: AFAIK, there's no 24-85/2.8 from the 3 major manufacturers. Closest are the Nikon 24-85/3.5-4.5 AFS-G and the Canon one which it is alleged to be the same.

    The 20-35 is not a failure, I am told it's even optically slightly better than the 17-35. Pity that it's more ex over at aussie than the 17-35.




    Regards
    CK

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •