Canon vs Nikon

[bobotto]

First of all, let me just state that this is a friendly comparison from a practical point of view.
So die hard users, keep your flamethrowers and bombs pls!
:nono:

Have been using Canon 10D for 9 months now but curious to know what life is like on the other side.

So let me list out what I personally feel about the 2 systems from these few months of Canon experience. Statements about Nikon are purely based on VERY limited usage of them so pls correct me if I'm wrong.


What I like about Canon:

Camera functions like buttons and LCD info screen feel more intuitive & user friendly.

Seems to come out with DSLR models with better specs earlier.

Silent USM lenses.

Immediate Manual Focus overide, ie no need to switch to manual focusing mode first like Nikon​

What's tempting about Nikon:

Nikon Speedlight Flashes "feel" to be of better build than Canon's

Comparing 10D and D100, the D100's viewfinder seems brighter

Although noisier, the lenses give a more solid feel when focusing (becoz of the noise and vibrations? :dunno: )

Lastly and most importantly, I usually shoot in Manual exposure mode so to be able to change apeture and shutter values quickly and comfortably very impt.
The utmost good thing about Nikon is that coz the 2 main dials are within reach, we can just change it easily unlike Canon's where they are too far apart! This is valuable in cases when I want to change from getting a sharp pic with short shutter to a pic with "motion" with longer shutter. With Nikon, when we already have a correct exposure setting, we can just simultaniously turn both dials in opposite direction by the same amount to get a sharp or "motion" pix while still keeping the exposure setting the same! However Canon's dials are too far apart to do this accurately.

Furthermore the design of Nikon's dials are so that the thumb and middle finger are used. Leaving the index finger free to always be on the shutter ready to go. With Canon it is also possible to change the dial settings without leaving the shutter, but it requires us to use the middle finger to press the shutter instead. And believe me, it feels much more akward than it sounds!​

So users of both system, pls share with us what you like about your systems from a practical point of view and save me from this equipment envy!!
:cry:


- Bob

 

[espn]

Hi, I've written a review on most of the cameras in the market, check them out here - http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=50361

 

[quekky]

"Immediate Manual Focus overide, ie no need to switch to manual focusing mode first like Nikon"

not really sure what u mean by that

 

[bobotto]

Hi, I've written a review on most of the cameras in the market, check them out here - http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=50361

Wahaha.
I knew this was coming!
:bsmilie:

But just need to get it out of my system lah.

Seriously though, what do you guys like about your system.
And any advise from those who have used BOTH systems long enough to make a more fair comparision?

Like overall handling and feel of each brand's various camera models and lenses, resale value, or anythings we should look out for when we're investing in the long term.

- Bob

ps
I just realised there's 2 other similiar threads going on.
Is there an "equipment envy" flu bug going on?!
haha

 

[bobotto]

"Immediate Manual Focus overide, ie no need to switch to manual focusing mode first like Nikon"

not really sure what u mean by that

For Canon, even in Auto Focus mode, you can just focus manually by turning the focus rings of your lens.

From what I know of Nikon though, it requires you to change the switch from Auto Mode to Manual Mode before you can turn your lens' focus ring easily.

 

[Kit]

I just realised there's 2 other similiar threads going on.
Is there an "equipment envy" flu bug going on?!

If you haven't noticed, this bug has been around since day 1.

 

[dirtbiker]

For Canon, even in Auto Focus mode, you can just focus manually by turning the focus rings of your lens.

From what I know of Nikon though, it requires you to change the switch from Auto Mode to Manual Mode before you can turn your lens' focus ring easily.

That's not altogether true. All of nikon's AFS lenses offer the same manual focus overide and silent wave motor focusing without flipping the switch.

 

[bobotto]

That's not altogether true. All of nikon's AFS lenses offer the same manual focus overide and silent wave motor focusing without flipping the switch.

That's what I thought also.
But somehow when i was using my friend's D100, I had to use MUCH more strength if I focused manually without changing the mode. Furthermore there's this "crunching" sound that the lens will make too!

His lens was either a 50mm or 35mm fixed I believe.
Do only the newer/better Nikon lenses (sorry have no idea what AFS mean. equal to Canon's L?) have this function, or is it time for my friend to send his lens for service!
haha

- Bob

 

[quekky]

For Canon, even in Auto Focus mode, you can just focus manually by turning the focus rings of your lens.

From what I know of Nikon though, it requires you to change the switch from Auto Mode to Manual Mode before you can turn your lens' focus ring easily.

oh. that depends on the lens, for some nikon lens u could do the same








ok, here's my comparision: (in no special order)


canon
------
on the 10d and 1d, when in preview and zoomed in, it is very easy to navigate left/right/up/down

the cheapest full manual consumer or dslr is canon

auto WB is better

focus motor is on the lens, change lens and u change your motor, so u have a choice of fast or slow AF with the same body

most of all my friends use canon, easier to exchange lens/flash if needed

on the 1d, there's no such thing as buffer full, it can shoot at 8fps till the cf is full (i duno how they do it)

on the 300d, in full manual mode, u have to press a button to change aperture. same with the A60/A70

easy to select AF point on 300d/10d, unlike d100

cmos

lens on the eos66 kit feels like toy, the focusing ring is so small




nikon
-----
the mirror slap is not that loud compare to 300d

faster startup (not really that important)

3d color metering (i duno how it helps, seems like not much difference to me)

maybe faster write time? at least higher fps comparing d70 and 300d reported by dpreview. however i feel that we seldom need that speed

can use almost all nikon lens

on the d70, setting most record settings is quite fast

higher flashsync for built-in flash

rear-curtain flash with built-in flash (seems like not useful to me)

d100 dun have those portait, nite, whatever dun-need-to-think-modes

free dust cleaning on the filter in front of the ccd within the warranty





both systems are good. i am a d70 user, but have tried several of the slr/dslr beforehand, mostly canon. both dslr systems feels good on hand too





edited: some of my points are not true, i grayed them out

 

[espn]

I like...

Nikon's ergonomics, dedicated full range of lenses
- AF-S 10.5DX, AF-S 12-24DX, AF-S 17-55DX, AF-S 18-70DX
- AF-S 17-35, AF-S 28-70
- AF-S 24-85, AF-S 24-120VR, AF-S 70-200VR

Fully covered for DSLR or SLR.

Doesn't repackage minor upgrades to a new camera and launch, careful design & research to provide REAL technology advancements in new cameras, far foresight in planning.

 

[clive]

hmmz heres my take:

nikons:

1. ergonomics dont suit my hands..lolz! =) when using the f100 i got to read the manual many many times and spend weeks to "condition" my hand to get used to the dials, arrow pad, buttons. dials a bit too stiff...my thumbs are weak so whenever i turn a nikon body's thumb dial...feels abit scary..hehe.. but the body feels strong n good

2. the nikkor lenses make u feel real. ok its mainly psychological...but u know, its that comfy feelign that u r shootign with a classic work of art. and not to mention the all time favourite black crinkle finish. a real hunk of a good lens. good to use, good for feel, delivers the results. stuff like 24/2.8 AFD, 80-200/2.8 AFD 2touch, 20-35/2.8 AFD, etc.

canons:

1. ergonomics suit my hands like a glove. groovy curves, presumably the cleanest layout ever, no issue with the palm door, well lubricated dials, nice, simple n straight fwd push buttons, and the all time favourite quick thumb dial. can't live without that, dude. stuff like eos1n, 3, 1v...they had me hooked =)

2. the EF lenses: L or non-L, plastic or metal, big or small, they all feel very hightech. they feel good, perform well as lenses ought to be, and these are the stuff to shoot with, especialy if u wanna impress babes ;-)

 

[justarius]

That's what I thought also.
But somehow when i was using my friend's D100, I had to use MUCH more strength if I focused manually without changing the mode. Furthermore there's this "crunching" sound that the lens will make too!

His lens was either a 50mm or 35mm fixed I believe.
Do only the newer/better Nikon lenses (sorry have no idea what AFS mean. equal to Canon's L?) have this function, or is it time for my friend to send his lens for service!
haha

- Bob

I hope you didn't spoil your friend's lens. :nono: What you did was trying to manual focus a lens while the camera is still on auto mode. Your friend should have known better than to allow you to manual focus a non AFS lens whilst on Autofocus mode. This will either spoil the lens or the autofocus motor.

You can only touch up manual focus while in autofocus mode on camera if you use the Nikon AF-S series lens, equivalent in technology to Canon's USM. If I'm not wrong, only USM lenses in Canon lineup allows you to manual focus while camera is in autofocus mode. This is true also for Sigma's HSM or Nikon's AF-S. Most primes from Nikon do NOT have AF-S (except the super telephotos, 300mm, 400mm, 500mm, etc). Canon's USM technology has been incorporated in quite alot of their lenses, but even so, only the pro-level lens have the highest tech USM similiar to AF-S, the rest have a different type of USM motor.

Canon's L lenses don't really have a Nikon equivalent, though the closest perhaps would be ED designated lenses, which have Extra-low Dispersion glass in the lens.

__________________

Anyway, personally I very much prefer Nikon's styling and body construction to Canon's. Technology wise, I'm pretty sure both companies have enough accessories etc to satisfy even the most discerning photographer. In the end, it simply boils down to how each camera feels in your hands.

 

[ahbeng]

here's my view after using both brands, specifically on the holding area.

Nikon:
1) Very comfortable to hold but EL/AL too far from my thumb when gripping tight (using heavy lenses).
2) First finger rubs on center finger when rotating the Main dial (I dun use center finger to dial).
3) Sub dial too near to the right of camera, would prefer positioning it near center of the LCD. Bigger wheel preferred as well.

Canon:
1) Hand cramp after holding for too long, Grip too big.
2) Main dial, thumb wheel and EL are reachable.


I guess, it still also depends on what size of hand, fingers, thumb you have and the way you hold it.

 

[Watcher]

Bobotto,
Let me just say that your comments comes from not knowing Nikon system and your expectation letdown is due to this.

I hope you didn't spoil your friend's lens. :nono: What you did was trying to manual focus a lens while the camera is still on auto mode. Your friend should have known better than to allow you to manual focus a non AFS lens whilst on Autofocus mode. This will either spoil the lens or the autofocus motor.

Precisely. Try doing it to a Canon AFD lens like the EF 28mm f/1.8 USM

<chopped>
Canon's L lenses don't really have a Nikon equivalent, though the closest perhaps would be ED designated lenses, which have Extra-low Dispersion glass in the lens.

Because the only definitive definition from Canon about what a L lens is defined as is that it contains LD and SLD elements. Nikon has many lenses that has one or more ED (released in 1972) elements in it. Just like that recent thread, the 'kit' lens for the D70, AF-S 18-70 DX has SWM, just like USM, ED elements and IF, all for the list price of < $600.

 

[BraveHart]

Precisely. Try doing it to a Canon AFD lens like the EF 28mm f/1.8 USM

Uh...the lens is already a USM lens...where does the AFD come in?

 

[mpenza]

Because the only definitive definition from Canon about what a L lens is defined as is that it contains LD and SLD elements. Nikon has many lenses that has one or more ED (released in 1972) elements in it. Just like that recent thread, the 'kit' lens for the D70, AF-S 18-70 DX has SWM, just like USM, ED elements and IF, all for the list price of < $600.

just wondering.... who came up with the definitive definition?

Canon USA website has some info on L lenses:
http://www.usa.canon.com/eflenses/technology/lseries.html

some other items are mentioned like Super Spectra Coating, designed and built to meet the needs of the most demanding professional photographers, etc which probably should be included in the "definitive definition".

There's no doubt that Nikon has lenses which are in the same class and quality as Canon L lenses (Nikon is better in some focal length, while Canon is better than others). Is the AF-S 18-70 a top performing Nikon lens and designed and built to meet the needs of the most demanding Nikon professional photographers? "Replication" of technology doesn't mean the same product and quality. Just as there're some L which do not perform well, some Nikon ED are not good despite having the same "technology" as their better cousins. There're also some third party lenses which perform well having similar technology to Nikon and Canon, e.g. the 70/80-200 f/2.8 zooms, Tamron 28-75 XR (on par or better than the AF-S 18-70 at the same aperture? maybe it's a better comparison to the AF-S 18-70 since they are in similar price range?), etc

 

[concuss]

just wondering.... who came up with the definitive definition?

Canon USA website has some info on L lenses:
http://www.usa.canon.com/eflenses/technology/lseries.html

some other items are mentioned like Super Spectra Coating, designed and built to meet the needs of the most demanding professional photographers, etc which probably should be included in the "definitive definition".

There's no doubt that Nikon has lenses which are in the same class and quality as Canon L lenses. Is the AF-S 18-70 a top performing Nikon lens? "Replication" of technology doesn't mean the same product and quality. Just as there're some L which do not perform well, some Nikon ED are not good despite having the same "technology" as their better cousins. There're also some third party lenses which perform well having similar technology to Nikon and Canon, e.g. the 70/80-200 f/2.8 zooms, Tamron 28-75 XR (on par or better than the AF-S 18-70 at the same aperture?), etc

I think what he meant was that the prerequisite technologies that make a Canon lens "L" can be found in the AF-S 18-70, like SWM, ED, etc.

He was comparing more on a technology basis than on a optical comparison. I mean, that much more money spent has to be justified right?

 

[mpenza]

I think what he meant was that the prerequisite technologies that make a Canon lens "L" can be found in the AF-S 18-70, like SWM, ED, etc.

He was comparing more on a technology basis than on a optical comparison. I mean, that much more money spent has to be justified right?

What I meant was that the comparison isn't too useful if the definition isn't that right to begin with cos there're non-quantifiable qualities which are equally, if not more, important. The technology found in the AF-S 18-70 could also be found in top "ED" Nikkors, so does it mean the AF-S 18-70 is the same class as the top pro Nikon lenses designed to meet the needs of Nikon professionals?

e.g., why not compare the weight, length of the lens, number of elements, etc? ;p

 

[bobotto]

Hi guys,

Thanks for sharing all your experiences so far.

There's always some danger when Canon & Nikon are put together in a thread
So let's try not to get into war zone yeah guys.

Let's share what we like/dislike about our system.
And NOT get into petty debates about technicalities and stuff which do not actually help us understand each other's system better.


Make love, not war!
:cheers:

For those interested to see what our Offstone brothers have to say, here's a link to Offstone's clone of this thread.

Continuing Thread in Offstone


- Bob

 

[Jed]

Oh what a fun thread Kudos to everyone for keeping it moderately sane thus far. Now for a response:

What you like about Canon:

[1] Camera functions like buttons and LCD screen feel more intuitive.

That's very interesting. If I may suggest, one big reason will be that you are a Canon user, hence Canon functions will always seem more familiar to you. Ultimately ergonomics is a personal preference thing, but I would argue that logically, I think Canon's ergonomics are very strange. Most functions take two buttons pressed at least before a twirl of a dial, and to memorise all the different button combinations is a nightmare to me. With Nikon everything's one button one dial. Another example is the delete function on DSLRs with regards to LCD feel, I think the 1D system is a nightmare, and not much beats the Nikon system of deleting pictures. Phil Askey agrees. And when reviewing the 1D mk II, self-confessed Canon fan Michael Reichman too states that "that it takes four button presses to turn mirror lock-up on and off is really unacceptable".

[2] Seems to come out with DSLR models with better specs earlier.

At the moment, that would seem to be the case. Then again, that's arguable too. Nikon came out with the D1, Canon had nothing. Nikon came out with the D1x/h, Canon had nothing. Canon came up with the 1D, Nikon had old technology. Canon coming up with the 1D mk II, Nikon has arguably dated technology with the D2h. Edge to Canon, at present, although 3 years ago you were damned if you were Canon.

Canon came up with the 300D, but within half a year Nikon has the D70 which is a far more capable camera. Edge to Nikon.

Canon came up with the D30, Nikon had nothing (well, S1). Canon came up with D60, Nikon had D100. Canon came up with 10D, Nikon had nothing, but then the 10D really was the D60 as it should have been. I'd call this one a par.

So that's 1.5 to Nikon, 1.5 to Canon in my eyes anyway.

[3] Silent USM lenses.

Agreed. Nikon have taken a while to get AF-S built into their lenses. But they do have a reasonable range now.

[4] Immediate Manual Focus overide, ie no need to switch to manual focusing mode first like Nikon

Another triumph for Canon marketing then. I keep having to say this. For some lenses, yes, Canon has a limited, hardly useful form of full time manual focus override, while Nikon doesn't (non AF-S). But for some lenses, Canon has a limited, hardly useful manual focus override, while Nikon has full and proper manual focus override.

Specifically, in any of Canon's (or Sigma's for that matter) lenses, you do *not* have full time manual focus override. You only have manual focus override in single servo AF, and even then only after your camera has attained focus lock. If you're in continous servo, or in single servo and your lens is racking back and forth struggling to get a lock (one reason why you want the override!) then you can grab the ring and turn, but the camera will continue to try to focus, fighting you every step of the way.

With Nikon, it doesn't matter if you're in AF-Single or AF-Continuous, whether your camera has locked focus or not. Just grab the ring and turn.

Admittedly you can't do this at all on non AF-S lenses, but as argued above, Canon's "FTM" really is of dubious value (if your camera has already locked, why do you need to override...).

What you like about Nikon:

[1] Nikon speedlights "feel" better.

Erm, right. I don't know about feel. But I do find Canon flashes too big and heavy. In fact, everything Canon is too big and heavy. The 1D series is too heavy, the long telephotos are too big and heavy, and the flashes are huge compared to their Nikon counterparts. Not slating Canon, but for me this is an important consideration. When you carry two bodies, 17-35, 70-200, and 300 or 400, you really do not want any extra weight.

[2] D100 brighter viewfinder than 10D.

Don't know about that one.

[3] Position of main and sub command dials.

Actually, I prefer the Canon format in the main. Their sub (rear) command dial is faster to use when viewing pictures, but a nightmare to use to select focusing points. I find reaching both of them easy enough. My main beef with the Canon is that the way I pick up the camera means I always end up shifting the rear dial/wheel. Which isn't very helpful.

Quekky's post, prefers Canon:

on the 10d and 1d, when in preview and zoomed in, it is very easy to navigate left/right/up/down

Erm, what are you on about? If you have no experience with the 1D don't just throw it in for the sake of throwing it in. You can't zoom in on the 1D, period. Never mind easy to navigate left and right. Nikon btw have done a beautiful job on the zoom in on the D2h, it wasn't quite so great on the D1x/h.

auto WB is better (on the Canon)

Might well be, I can't trust the Nikons at all. But then in contrast, I much prefer Nikon colours.

focus motor is on the lens, change lens and u change your motor, so u have a choice of fast or slow AF with the same body

Erm, not quite. There was a good explanation on this in a thread several weeks back ironically on shutter lag. Yes, you can having faster focusing AF, but ultimately your body still decides bottom line focusing speed. A fast lens on a fast body is fast, a slow lens on a fast body is still slow. A fast lens on a slow body is still slow, a slow lens on a slow body is neanderthal.

most of all my friends use canon, easier to exchange lens/flash if needed

Very, very valid point, do not underestimate the importance of this.

on the 1d, there's no such thing as buffer full, it can shoot at 8fps till the cf is full (i duno how they do it)

The 1D has a 21 frame buffer, and plenty of my colleagues bemoan it. OTOH the D2h has a more generous 40 frame buffer, which is all but impossible to fill (due to improved CF write speed as well). The 1D mk II will also have a 40 frame buffer, but with bigger files.

easy to select AF point on 300d/10d, unlike d100

You are kidding aren't you?

Quekky's post, prefers Nikon:

the mirror slap is not that loud compare to 300d

Erm, on what camera? As a general rule, the Nikons are louder than the equivalent Canon.

faster startup (not really that important)

Agree, but who says not important? Individual needs vary.

3d color metering (i duno how it helps, seems like not much difference to me)

Nope, I'm with you on that one, both take well exposed pictures with the odd blip.

rear-curtain flash with built-in flash (seems like not useful to me)

Canon has rear-curtain sync on their higher-end cameras too I'm sure. Or on their flash units anyway. Rear-curtain flash is critical in any long-ish exposure flash images.

Clive's post:

Lots of it is subjective feel and stuff. Just for interest, in terms of "feel", I wouldn't personally consider any of the lenses he listed as top drawer in terms of feel. Ironically of all the glass I own, lenses like the 85/1.4 and 28/1.4 are the ones I'd point to as being quality pieces of glass.

Ahbeng's post:

1) Very comfortable to hold but EL/AL too far from my thumb when gripping tight (using heavy lenses).

Depends on what camera. I had this problem with some of the cameras, the D2h has sorted this problem out for the change. But introduced a new one, the vertical AF-On/AF-L button is too awkward to use.

I'm just responding the stuff already posted at the moment, not introducting any new ideas, otherwise I'd still be writing come next Easter...