DSLR decisions...

[randytay]

This thread is mainly aimed at Canon/Nikon users (because thats the only 2 brands I used and am using).

When you bought your first DSLR or if you are contemplating on getting one, other than price, what was the main factor that influence you towards Canon or Nikon? What do you prefer about Canon or Nikon?

Since I started, I thought I would share also:

I liked Canon because it gave me bragging rights (FF and highest MP) and without a doubt, any jobs I pitched for will be unchallenged when my potential client knows I am using the camera with the higest MP out there. Of course, in terms of system support, Canon has the largest range of lens to date (not comparing to old nikon lenses) and is very comprehensive in their range.

BUT... I really prefer the ergonomics and intuitive user interface of Nikon systems. No matter which model of Nikon you choose, they are all roughly the same user interface or layout. At Canon, when I was so used to the 1 series and when a 5D was passed to me to use, I will go "er... how do you...". Also, while lens are not as comprehensive, the flash technology is a tad better than Canon (more consistent across the board at least) and accessories are much cheaper than Canon (wireless tethering is half of Canon's).

So what about the others? Please share your experience and thoughts.

 

[Rashkae]

This thread may be closed because it could incite another brand war...

Don't we have enough C vs. N threads already? Seriously...

 

[ptwong]

For me it's because people surrounding me were using canon. It gave me access to their lenses. Unfortunately in terms of bang for bucks, I feel Nikon is better. (let's not include the FF thingy)

why do i say nikon is better- build quality and functions for entry and mid levels cams are much better than canon

 

[randytay]

This thread may be closed because it could incite another brand war...

Don't we have enough C vs. N threads already? Seriously...

Oh nono, this is nothing about a C vs N, its more about why you make/made the decision.

As I mentioned, I use both systems and both have their time to shine.

 

[waileong]

Wonder what type of clients you have, judging you by the no of MP.

 

[randytay]

Wonder what type of clients you have, judging you by the no of MP.

If you are asking me, my clientele includes a myriad of genre, ranging from performance artistes and their management who needs pictures for publicity materials (e.g posters) and album covers, to portraits to commercial clients for advertising. While most are in the loop about digital development, they are also not that well-informed that MP is only half the equation. When I meet clients like that, that is when the 1Ds2 comes in useful.

In other words, instead of trying to convince them that "you know, its not really necessary....", I tell them "don't worry, I have the best there is right now..."

Guess which story they prefer?

 

[Randius]

For me, it is purely the ergonomics and handling of Nikon that won me over. Range of lenses? Yes, sometimes I do envy the range provided by Canon but that is only because of the USM primes and tilt/shift lenses. Nikon has equally good zoom lenses.

 

[peepeedog]

D3, without a doubt.

My humble recommendation

 

[cantaresg]

I chose a canon system because when I first tried to use a SLR camera, it was a EOS 50. So it was carried on from there.

 

[Ah Pao]

Canon EOS cameras used to be able to boast better (subjective) image quality and noise control over Nikons in the early years of DSLRs, but this is no longer the case...both brands produce comparatively high quality images consistently through their range of low- to high-end DSLRs.

I must say that Nikon has better ergonomics and more intuitive user interface, and better design and build for it's lower end cameras (I'm a Canon user for that matter). The only bragging rights Canon users have is that their cameras and lenses gets refreshed more frequently than Nikon, and has every segment of the market covered.

Nikon - slow in upgrading but each upgrading is a big jump in features
Canon - fast in upgrading but each upgrading is incremental in features


BTW, I'm using Canon because I started with Canon in my Uni days, so just follow what I'm familiar with.

 

[zac08]

Nikon user,

what won me over was the ergonomics, good support on lenses from 1977 til now and the excellent flash system...

 

[waileong]

Really? How sad. It's like asking a chef what oven he uses.

If I was the client, first thing I would ask is to see your portfolio. Not the no of MP or even the brand of camera.

If you are asking me, my clientele includes a myriad of genre, ranging from performance artistes and their management who needs pictures for publicity materials (e.g posters) and album covers, to portraits to commercial clients for advertising. While most are in the loop about digital development, they are also not that well-informed that MP is only half the equation. When I meet clients like that, that is when the 1Ds2 comes in useful.

In other words, instead of trying to convince them that "you know, its not really necessary....", I tell them "don't worry, I have the best there is right now..."

Guess which story they prefer?

 

[Rashkae]

I use neither... Because I preferred the ergonomics and UI of a different brand.

 

[randytay]

Really? How sad. It's like asking a chef what oven he uses.

If I was the client, first thing I would ask is to see your portfolio. Not the no of MP or even the brand of camera.

That is the first thing they ask too and that goes without saying, but some clients like to act as if they know what they are talking about to prevent themselves from being ripped off. We are all guilty of that once in a while, so it doesnt hurt to actually have the tools for the job. Futher, if going by what you say, then there is no reason for pros to get the 1Ds2, 1Ds3, D2 etc. We can all survive on 10Ds and D100s. Even the Hassys, Leafs and Phase Ones would have to be out of business by now.

It is all part of a negotiating process, and to a certain extent, I do not agree with you. Would you pay 10,000 to a photographer for avertising photography if he uses a D100 even if he has an awesome portfolio? Bear in mind the advertising photography fees hre in NYC is in the region of USD30,000 on average.

Gone are the days where the person behind the tools are more imortant because, if it was 10 years ago, it really does not matter which SLR you have. With the right film and ceteris paribus, you can take a 35mm SLR manufactured in 1980s and a 35mm SLR manufactured in the 1970s and get 99% identical quality. This is not so with digital.

There are even some jobs that even the 1DsII are not suffificient and that is where rental comes in. On rare occasions, we would have to rent the Hassy

Using your analogy, you would not go into a fine dining restaurant and pay $70 for chicken rice

 

[randytay]

Nikon user,

what won me over was the ergonomics, good support on lenses from 1977 til now and the excellent flash system...

Agreed. The CLS so far has been the standard.

 

[randytay]

D3, without a doubt.

My humble recommendation

Ah... yes, the much anticipated D3. For some reason, it has created more excitement than the 1Ds3.

 

[randytay]

I chose a canon system because when I first tried to use a SLR camera, it was a EOS 50. So it was carried on from there.

How did your first EOS 50 came about?

 

[randytay]

For me, it is purely the ergonomics and handling of Nikon that won me over. Range of lenses? Yes, sometimes I do envy the range provided by Canon but that is only because of the USM primes and tilt/shift lenses. Nikon has equally good zoom lenses.

Nikon used to have TS lenses too bu now they only have tge 85PC. Wish they can make a wider angle version for interior shots.

 

[voldisinarta]

I started learning photograph around 14 years ago, and I started with a Yashica FX3 Super2000. When I decided to be a serious amateur, I choosed Nikon.

Why?

This is my 2 basic reason:

1. I want a tough and reliable camera. Nikon was, and still is, the choice of those journalist who went to cover the war... Vietnam, Korea, Dessert Storm I, and some more tough and demanding assignment. I have never heard a war journalist using Canon until quite recent. Yes I am not a war journalist, but I am still using my Nikon F3 (a product of 27 years ago) and it never fails me. (Well, I have a dream that someday Nikon will produce F3D, a DSLR based on the F3 body )

2. Lens compatibility. Correct me if I'm wrong. Nikon's F-mount has been there since donkey years ago... So older lenses will always be usable in the newer bodies (of course with some minor exceptions). Some people does not agree with me on this, and they highlight the compatibility of earlier lens (Pre-AI) with newer bodies after 1977. But hey, we still can use those old lenses with modification. (Btw, I am still using the 55mm f/1.2 on my D200, F3, and N70, with 5 minute modification which I did myself). Maybe I am wrong, but as far as I know, at the same time span as the Nikon F-mount, Canon had changed their mount 4 times.

Just sharing my humble experience. I hope these 2 reason are logic enough.

 

[cantaresg]

During my uni days. The CACS photography subsection had a couple of EOS 50 which I had the chance to learn with. Though it was only a couple of times that I actually used the camera, but that was the first SLR I touched? Haha. Sentimental.