Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 106

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

  1. #41
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default

    Originally posted by ckiang

    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.

    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
    Maybe. The Canon is pretty decent when stop down to f4 though. Very good performance at f8.

    Send me 3k and I'll get it. Quick, while its still there!!!

  2. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Heh. I could write a thesis on this subject. But first, congratulations all on remaining nice, sane and logical in this discussion so far!

    Now here's my input.

    Darren makes some good points about the technology differences. The question that you need to ask when evaluating this and giving appropriate weightage is, are you going to take advantage of it? Sure Canon has lovely DO technology. Are you going to buy a 400/4 DO anytime soon, if ever? Or any future supertele they are going to develop that costs megabucks; since DO technology only really affects big heavy lenses?

    As I've already pointed out, the DO thing is also probably overhyped. Nikon lenses are already substantially lighter than their Canon counterparts (superteles), but for some reason nobody's screaming and shouting about this fact.

    I wouldn't worry about the 1D/1Ds. The 1D really only is a sportsperson's camera. The 1Ds is nice, but then Nikon/Kodak have one coming out in December that will cost half the price. Go figure! Seriously though, the state of digital camera bodies is the worst yardstick. From an objective standpoint, the D2 when it arrives should make the 1D/1Ds look pedestrian, like the Canon cameras make the D1x/h look pedestrian at present. Like they made the previous Canon cameras look pedestrian before that. The cycle goes on.

    Only 2 pieces of Nikon gear that's cheaper than Canon? I beg to differ. It really does swing in roundabouts. The D1x/D1h are cheaper than the 1Ds/1D, at the point of each of their launches. That's two. The Nikon 50/1.4 is cheaper than the Canon one. I'm sure I can think of more; just like I can think of many Canon items that are cheaper than their Nikon counterparts.

    Photojournalists using Canon gear? I've debunked this myth numerous times already on the forum. Trust me, the post 1D (as in, taking its effect into account) distribution is about even, even on the sporting arena. The Nikon users have rationally come to the conclusion that the D2 will eventually arrive. As will the EOS 1DsD and 1DsDs. Or whatever they call it.

    Canon user later finding German glass is better? Red Dawn, oh Red Dawn...

    Seriously though, top Swiss camera manufacturing company (Hasselblad if you must know) has decided that Japanese glass is indeed respectable enough to ping on the front of their cameras. Fujinon, not Zeiss, are producing the lenses for the new H1 autofocus 645 camera. Then again it might have something to do with Zeiss' own interest in the Contax 645; but if the good folks at Hassie are as pro German / anti-Japanese as some people around, do you really think they would even produce a camera that might sully their good name?

    Speaking of Kodak camera with Sigma lenses, I am really tempted by the price of the Sigma XD9; only problem is, it won't work with my existing lenses!

    Denizenx raises a good point that I've made above as well. For example there are several people in this forum who have Canon cameras and only Sigma lenses. This does not in any way incriminate them; after all there are very good reasons for choosing Canon, lenses aside. They have their own reasons and good for them. But before you throw "they have good lenses with a whizz-bang of features", make sure you intend to buy them and can afford them.

    A good camera between the D60 and the EOS1D/Ds? That sounds a lot like the Kodak DCS14n. Just statement of an observation on my part, not trying to sway the argument Nikon's way.

    Dagger, I've already been on about the IS thing many times before. IS only really benefits 70-200/2.8 class lenses, and 300/2.8 class lenses. I suppose if money is an issue (and when is it not!) then it is benefitial on 300/4 and 80-400 class lenses as well.

    Agree with those who say that if you already have an investment with Nikon kit, stick with Nikon. And vice versa.

    I cannot speak for the consumer market, Forward, but (and I have said this before again) as far as professionals are concerned, there have only been really two issues that have swung professionals either way over the last few decades. First was fast, effective AF. That had plenty of sports and to a lesser extent nature snappers switching to Canon. The F5 and the AF-S lenses solved that problem (yes, solved) in 1996 but by that time there wasn't any point in re-switching systems just to get back to Nikon.

    The second fundamental change has been the digital revolution. The D1 series of cameras led the way for 2 and a half years, during which time there really was no Canon equivalent. And we are talking about a REAL fundamental difference here, even more so than USM/AF-S. Imagine if only one manufacturer offered an affordable DSLR and you really wanted one for yourself despite your using the other system. Now change that want into a need, because that was the situation for press, sports, catalog, and to a lesser extent nature snappers.

    The 20-35 Nikkor is a failure, Forward? I beg to differ. The general consensus among professionals I encounter is that it is one of the best, if not the best, wide angle zoom ever made. There is someone on this forum whose main reason in switching from Canon to Nikon is because of the weakness of their wide angle zooms. Whether he wants to identify himself is up to him.

    Distortion on that lens is unbelievably low, and is a good enough reason to take that lens over the AF-S 17-35. There comes a point in time when price really isn't the be all and end all. Optical quality was also superb, possibly due to the precision ground aspherical element, which is extremely costly. Whether Canon uses one I do not know, but that would at least explain the relative lack of price difference between the two Nikon offerings (the 17-35 doesn't).

    Now, this is possibly sounding too pro-Nikon now; I have to maintain my apparent impartiality! But seriously, just correcting Forward's statement.

    Erm. Is that the end already?

  3. #43
    ClubSNAP Admin Darren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    8,510
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Originally posted by ckiang
    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.
    Not strictly a f/2.8 lens, but there is a Nikkor AF 24-85 f/2.8-4D lens available.

  4. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    6,405

    Default

    Originally posted by Darren
    Not strictly a f/2.8 lens, but there is a Nikkor AF 24-85 f/2.8-4D lens available.
    Oh yes, forgot about that one but yeah, it's not a 2.8 lens. And at that kind of price, might as well go for the AF-S version.

    Regards
    CK

  5. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    5,499

    Default

    Originally posted by ckiang
    Oh yes, forgot about that one but yeah, it's not a 2.8 lens. And at that kind of price, might as well go for the AF-S version.

    Regards
    CK
    no lah, the 24-85 f/2.8-4 is priced abut $1000++, the AF-S 28-70 f/2.8 is $2800 new leh... still a lotta difference...

  6. #46

    Default Hur hur hur....

    Bwahahaha.... Canon vs Nikon again. They are both money hungry conglomerates who like milking consumers like us out of our hard earned money... specially when it comes to digital.

  7. #47
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    390

    Default

    Clap clap for maturity at hand

    With enlightening heart and writing
    with a smile, we have come close to be
    a happy lot of passionate contributors
    who sincerely want to discuss about
    photography.




    Now that we don't see used 20-35mm
    anymore in the used market.
    Just a couple of years ago I was taken
    aback when some of my peers started
    selling away their 20-35mm f/2.8 stating
    that it is heavy, too difficult to focus
    manually and lacking dof.

    Well, these are all foreign to me as I don't
    use lenses in this category. I use primes
    most of the time.

    Ckiang, don't underestimate the folks
    in this forum, they learn fast and will
    adapt in less than a couple of minutes.
    We will be one of the most gracious
    forum so to be with enthusiatic folks who
    will want to help to improve and promote
    photography.


    Thanks Jed for your correction and you
    started to enlighten me in your approach.

    It is a good start
    and love to all of you.



    _______________________________
    When we provide an intriguing item
    of news we are also providing rapport
    in be in a state of friendly friendship.


  8. #48

    Default

    Originally posted by forward
    It is a good start
    and love to all of you.



    eeekssS!!!!!

    I'm straight!!!!!!
    I'm STRAIGHT!!!!!

  9. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    5,499

    Default

    Originally posted by Bluestrike
    eeekssS!!!!!

    I'm straight!!!!!!
    I'm STRAIGHT!!!!!
    are you sure? very very sure???

  10. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,464

    Default

    Originally posted by Kit


    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.
    kit, u must have a bad sample. (it's from the grey market, no? ;P)
    my personal experience with the 28-70L has been nothing short of positive. The only reason I sold mine was because the 28mm end wasn't wide enough on the D30 and the 28-70 range is weird on a digital SLR with a focal length multiplier.

    It's a lens to be used wide open with full confidence. (not so for the 17-35L, but that's another story ;P)

    mine also does not suffer from the lens droop you mentioned before........
    David Teo
    View my work and blog at http://www.5stonesphoto.com/blog

  11. #51
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default

    Originally posted by Red Dawn


    kit, u must have a bad sample. (it's from the grey market, no? ;P)
    my personal experience with the 28-70L has been nothing short of positive. The only reason I sold mine was because the 28mm end wasn't wide enough on the D30 and the 28-70 range is weird on a digital SLR with a focal length multiplier.

    It's a lens to be used wide open with full confidence. (not so for the 17-35L, but that's another story ;P)

    mine also does not suffer from the lens droop you mentioned before........
    Dang, should have got yours!! Yup, its gray.

  12. #52
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,464

    Default

    Originally posted by Larry
    are you sure? very very sure???
    Larry, wat have you been doing with Bluestrike such that you know he's not straight?
    David Teo
    View my work and blog at http://www.5stonesphoto.com/blog

  13. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    2,464

    Default

    Originally posted by Kit


    Dang, should have got yours!! Yup, its gray.
    nothing wrong with grey - my Leica gear is, too
    I believe it was supposed to be in a batch destined for Moscow, but some enterprising businessman diverted it to Hong Kong instead...ha!
    David Teo
    View my work and blog at http://www.5stonesphoto.com/blog

  14. #54

    Default

    Originally posted by Larry
    are you sure? very very sure???
    So he is not straight?

  15. #55
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,650

    Default

    Originally posted by Red Dawn


    nothing wrong with grey - my Leica gear is, too
    I believe it was supposed to be in a batch destined for Moscow, but some enterprising businessman diverted it to Hong Kong instead...ha!
    Hah!! You bought grey Leica!?!? You trust Don a lot eh?

  16. #56
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    L2TPYSG
    Posts
    4,057

    Default

    wow was reading this with bated breath.
    no fiery denials so far! besides the "straight" issue lol... all so modest and humble

    as a starting newbie when I looked at any systems I tend to compare their pinnacle products. Hence was very impressed by the F5 and stuff, and loved the FM2, until I got to try the F65 and coolpix 990.

    I had tried the F65 at the same time as an eos 500, similar tele lens, on a beach (sentosa). so was horribly disappointed that the performance of a consumer-class body from nikon was so neglected or perfunctory, as compared to the older 500...
    the 990 gave good pictures, but the chance of capturing them was almost nil for candid and action shots, unless I prefocus.

    so two points of realization:
    one is canon has better consumer focus, probably experience garnerd from selling so many types of stuff, esp to "loyalty? who me?" PC users; therefore I had seriously considered Minolta too, but they're (locally) serious under-marketed... shd change agent.

    two, is that personally I rather have a fast system to catch the worm, than to a quality "after". cos personally I got shaky hands and imperfect eyesight I need more compensation.

    now whenever I look at a system I look at the system that will give me what I want at my price point, be it hifi, PC, camera, portables etc...

    currently using a consumer 75-300mm with USM, but usm is usually unused as I tend to go into WSM, wrist-speed motor... (although seriously KIVing IS lenses)
    also using consumer 19-35mm, nice enough at full open. And learnt not to be too discerning, after all, a connoisseur pays connoisseur prices...
    "I'm... dreaming... of a wide... angle~
    Just like the ones I used to know~"

  17. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Hey Dagger, I think u already have a very very good setup that most of us here admire. No point to switch system. u know someone here might be happy with even sickmas, er?

    The fact is: the more i shoot, the more I (indeed) feel - it's the man/women behind that small little thing makes the difference, given a fairly okay setup. Have a visit in photosig.com the consumer class camera categories (like Nikon 995 / Canon G2 / Sony 707 etc). I was shocked by some art works...

    Regards,
    Tom

  18. #58
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    5,499

    Default

    Originally posted by tomshen
    Hey Dagger, I think u already have a very very good setup that most of us here admire. No point to switch system.
    but if you do decide to switch systems 100%, i 'chope' your lenses first...

  19. #59
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Originally posted by Larry
    but if you do decide to switch systems 100%, i 'chope' your lenses first...
    She has TWO F100s and ONE D100 plus a LOT of good lenses, right? Maybe I should switch system if cheap enough

  20. #60
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    5,499

    Default

    Originally posted by tomshen
    She has TWO F100s and ONE D100 plus a LOT of good lenses, right? Maybe I should switch system if cheap enough
    hey!!! line up first!!!

    hey i know i know... you swop systems with her lah!!!

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •