I always switch all Nikon models colour settings to Neutral. I find it easier to do changes in vibrancy, contrast and colour saturation in photoshop if and when I want to, rather than have the picture taken all "pump-ed up"...
-- marios
thinking of jumping boat to Nikon
- Thread starter song
- Start date
-- marios
I have used Nikon equipment (SLR bodies from the FM/F models and how onto DSLR D3, D700) and many of their lenses (primes and zooms) for 30+ years, and here are some personal opinions. Hope this helps.
1) Nikon equipment are very well built and they can withstand 'tough' usage.
2) Most (in fact all) of their primes lenses are built for 'pro' use. They offer good contrast, sharpness and good colour. And the lenses are reliable.
3) Most (in fact all) their zooms offering constant aperture throughout the zoom range are 'pro' quality, e.g AFS 14-24/f2.8, AFS 24-70/f2.8 and the AFS 70-200/f2.8 VRII.
4) On the semi pro and pro DSLR bodies and the pro lenses, Nikon has taken extra care and have provided better seals and gaskets at crucial points to reduce the chances of dirt, moisture, etc. going into the DSLR and sensors.
5) I have take Nikon equipment across the USA (by road on a motorcycle), shot with Nikon in sub-zero temperatures, and had a Nikon body and lenses fall with me into fine desert sand in the Middle East,
AND ALL MY NIKON EQUIPMENT DID NOT FAIL.
If you're really serious about going FX, I'd go with Nikon.
Good luck.
:thumbsup:
My dad's 30 year F2AS, 20 year old F4, and ALL his Nikon Ai Ais AF AFD glass all still work today as well as the first day he got them.
My dad's D40x kit was given to my brother who in turn gave it to me. Never ever had a single problem with it.
His Fuji S2pro did not fair as well. In and out of Fuji SC many times, it now sits in the dry box with a bad shutter. And I am still debating if I should even bring it in to get it fixed.
I am now on the D90 and I have a lot of confidence in the cam. Why? I've shot with my non-weather sealed D90 in -25 deg C temperatures with no issues whatsoever.
I'm sticking to Nikon.
Last edited:
And don't forget Canon's decision to have spot metering only at the center AF point for all models except for 1D series. Nikon has AF point spot metering in all models, even in the D40.
my fav part about nikon is backward compatibility. if u cant afford to play around with the newer lenses, go try the AI-S manual lenses and see if u like the feel. examples,
AIS 135 f2.0 -$800 EX condition, 135mm L about 1.4-1.6k
AI-S 50 f1.2-$750 max, canon 50 1.2L about 1.9K
personally use those 2 lenses 70-80% of the time. and i can still use them on my 1967 nikomat slr,
from what i hear from pros(i ve shot with afew), nikon color is more natural, lending it to portraits, nature, sports. but canon color more vivid and 'artsy' so nicer feel for weddings and stuff.
for me, i dont want 21mp for fullframe and i love nikon ergonomics and colour.
AIS 135 f2.0 -$800 EX condition, 135mm L about 1.4-1.6k
AI-S 50 f1.2-$750 max, canon 50 1.2L about 1.9K
personally use those 2 lenses 70-80% of the time. and i can still use them on my 1967 nikomat slr,
from what i hear from pros(i ve shot with afew), nikon color is more natural, lending it to portraits, nature, sports. but canon color more vivid and 'artsy' so nicer feel for weddings and stuff.
for me, i dont want 21mp for fullframe and i love nikon ergonomics and colour.
I've made this point before, but there are far, far bigger influences on your "colour" than the lens - the sensor or the film, the developing choices/options whether digital or film, if in digital, your white balance, ISO/available dynamic range, etc.
And also, personally the vast majority of my wedding images have people in them. So I've no idea how Nikon is allegedly better for portraits while Canon is allegedly better for weddings...
Hi TS,
I was a jumper previously, and I suffered a great loss of money because of that.
I don't say that Nikon is better than Canon or vice versa.
I advice you to stick to your current system.
Changing system doesn't give you warranty that you could achieve a better photography.
Just my 2 cents advice
I was a jumper previously, and I suffered a great loss of money because of that.
I don't say that Nikon is better than Canon or vice versa.
I advice you to stick to your current system.
Changing system doesn't give you warranty that you could achieve a better photography.
Just my 2 cents advice
I was contemplating a change from Canon to Nikon too. Do a search of my nick and you know I meant seriously switching and I went over to a lot of Nikon forums to ask people for opinions since I wanted to know whats so great about Nikon.
The final decision, I stayed.
When I got the idea to switch, I realised that I no longer treat photography as a skill but instead, I started to look more like an IT or engineering gadgets collector. Because I was comparing functions to features and cost to handling, which a lot of all these doesn't necessarily make you enjoy the process of shooting and admiring the results later. Who can really tell apart what is taken by a Canon or Nikon or Sony? Its a hard educated guess but those who can do it are probably people who spend more time on reading technical literatures than going out shooting.
I wasn't really following what the market has to offer me in terms of hardware until I decided to make a switch. I have my own lists of wants and requirements which prompted me to start sourcing for 1 all over again. The 20D I owned doesn't really impress me when Canon just release it. So its not that hard for me to reconsider other systems.
Nevertheless, when trying to decide for a system, comparing the wants and wishes will almost help you immediately. Most people after asking themselves that question, will know what brand, body, lenses and accessories you should get. It is usually those people who doesn't know what you specifically wants that makes the decision making hard.
My advice is, get to know what you want to do immediately. As in if you got the cash now, what can you buy for what you want to shoot NOW. Its not tomorrow or the day after, its just the subjects that you can't wait. Eg. your new born kid, your aging parents, your girl/boy who is going away for 10 years etc in a week time.
Switching is always about what you see "good" in the other side of the camp. You probably matters more of what others have at the other side rather than thinking what you will lose when you switch over. Some people will eventually stopped thinking of the switch because of the immediate lost in financial and later on the sentimental value it had given you when you are using them. Probably your best shot or most sentimental event, person or moment was captured by your old trusty Nikon or Canon? And now you are switching because of some cold hard engineering hardware improvements that people brag about?
The "hard" part of photography is about light, travelling, bags, camera, lenses, tripods and ballheads etc. What about the "soft" part? The memories, the moment, the feel and the sentimental aspect of every bit of the shooting process.
When you are viewing a photo with your family, friends or love ones, if all you can recall is about lacking megapixels, angle not wide enough or exposure too short, AF speed too slow etc, then you probably would want to go for the best technological advanced systems you can afford. But if you are all talking about "oh I remember this is the place where we had our first anniversary!", "how old is ah boy when this photo is taken?" or "you look so young that time"....then it doesn't really matter what gear you have at your dry cabinet anymore. Because a photo that can triggers a great memory from you, will beat a Canon or Nikon "photo of the century"...... anytime.
The final decision, I stayed.
When I got the idea to switch, I realised that I no longer treat photography as a skill but instead, I started to look more like an IT or engineering gadgets collector. Because I was comparing functions to features and cost to handling, which a lot of all these doesn't necessarily make you enjoy the process of shooting and admiring the results later. Who can really tell apart what is taken by a Canon or Nikon or Sony? Its a hard educated guess but those who can do it are probably people who spend more time on reading technical literatures than going out shooting.
I wasn't really following what the market has to offer me in terms of hardware until I decided to make a switch. I have my own lists of wants and requirements which prompted me to start sourcing for 1 all over again. The 20D I owned doesn't really impress me when Canon just release it. So its not that hard for me to reconsider other systems.
Nevertheless, when trying to decide for a system, comparing the wants and wishes will almost help you immediately. Most people after asking themselves that question, will know what brand, body, lenses and accessories you should get. It is usually those people who doesn't know what you specifically wants that makes the decision making hard.
My advice is, get to know what you want to do immediately. As in if you got the cash now, what can you buy for what you want to shoot NOW. Its not tomorrow or the day after, its just the subjects that you can't wait. Eg. your new born kid, your aging parents, your girl/boy who is going away for 10 years etc in a week time.
Switching is always about what you see "good" in the other side of the camp. You probably matters more of what others have at the other side rather than thinking what you will lose when you switch over. Some people will eventually stopped thinking of the switch because of the immediate lost in financial and later on the sentimental value it had given you when you are using them. Probably your best shot or most sentimental event, person or moment was captured by your old trusty Nikon or Canon? And now you are switching because of some cold hard engineering hardware improvements that people brag about?
The "hard" part of photography is about light, travelling, bags, camera, lenses, tripods and ballheads etc. What about the "soft" part? The memories, the moment, the feel and the sentimental aspect of every bit of the shooting process.
When you are viewing a photo with your family, friends or love ones, if all you can recall is about lacking megapixels, angle not wide enough or exposure too short, AF speed too slow etc, then you probably would want to go for the best technological advanced systems you can afford. But if you are all talking about "oh I remember this is the place where we had our first anniversary!", "how old is ah boy when this photo is taken?" or "you look so young that time"....then it doesn't really matter what gear you have at your dry cabinet anymore. Because a photo that can triggers a great memory from you, will beat a Canon or Nikon "photo of the century"...... anytime.
I've made the switch from Nikon to Canon, back to Nikon, back to Canon, and now, with Nikon again.
Why? Because I can (and probably because I have a serious problem).
Canon bodies I've owned to date: 5D, 5Dii, 1DMKiii, 1DsMKii.
Nikon bodies I've owned to date: D40, D70, D80, D90, D1, D700.
And to put things into perspective, this is my camera ownership in chronological order:
I personally don't have a preference to which brand is better. I don't think anyone can argue one over the other. The sole reason why I have switched systems, and back and again is purely based on pricing. I saw a bargain to be had and took it. I've never been overly invested into a single system. If I could afford it, I would like to have a Nikon and a Canon.
What I like about Canon.
1. The jogwheel.
Some people love it. Some people hate it. I love it. It makes navigating menus and photos so easy and smooth.
2. A lot of EF lenses available secondhand
I like to own stuff. I live to sell stuff. I don't know why I don't rent because it would be easier on my wallet but there is just something to owning something, even if it is for a few days. Due to Canon's popularity based on it's 5D back in the day, a lot of shooters are Canon users. This means the market is flooded with a lot of competitively priced secondhand lenses. All the more for me to play with! I'm a suck for fast lenses, and Canon to date, have the upper hand on the number of primes available. IQ-wise, I won't comment, but the more the merrier I say!
3. Colours
Things out-of-camera are warmer. Nikon produce slightly colder exposures. Nothing PP won't fix but for some JPG shooters, this may be of significance. Note, I don't have a set of grey cards. I use the shunned auto-WB feature. Shock horror!
4. Menu system
When I first shifted from a D90 to a 5Dc, I hated the outdated menu system. To put things into perspective, I had gone from 2008/9 technology to 2005 circ technology. Not rocket science that the UI would significantly be worse. At first, I couldn't stand the weird embedded menu structure found on the 5Dc, and subsequently got a 5DMKII quick smart.
Fast forward a few months and a switch back to Nikon, I now miss the simple nature of the custom fuctions. Ironic? Indeed. I now find the Nikon menu system way too categorised, and in a way that is not logical to me. Weird? Hell yea!
5. L ... L is for ...
What can I say? It could be nothing more than marketing but L-lenses rock.
6. Positioning of the exposure lock button
Simply put, I can reach the AE lock button on the 5D and 1D series with my thumb with ease. With the D700, I have to stretch my thumb. YMMV.
Now, this is what I like about Nikon (WRT D700).
1. CLS
To put this into perspective, until I owned the 580EXII, I hated the way my 5D and 5Dii interacted with the 480EX. I could not get the two to play nice. I had to do change a custom function so that the 5D/5Dii would know that a flash had been mounted and would do the right thing in Av-mode. Come the 580EXII, external lighting was a breeze.
However, I do think Nikon do have an edge with iTTL compared to ETTL.
2. D700 feels much more sturdier than 5D/5Dii
This is personal opinion only. I find that the 5D and 5Dii were toy-like. And the cheesy shooting-priority mode dial makes things even worse. I really like the 1D's implementation of changing program modes.
I dropped my 5Dii from hip height. My fault entirely but the resultant damage was pretty ghastly. For some reason, I feel as though the D700 would come out better if dropped and/or blended. I'm not willing to test that theory out just yet.
3. Auto-ISO
A lot of photographers, hobbyists and pros will cringe at auto-ISO. I use auto-ISO where possible. The 5D obviously didn't have it, nor did the 1DMKiii or 1DsMKii, but the 5Dii did. I can't speak for the 1DMKiv but from my experience of the 5Dii, the auto-ISO system of Canon is a bit weird. It tends to go for the highest ISO possible, rather than the minimum. Please not that I am not commenting on high-ISO noise quality. I am purely critiquing the method of how auto-ISO is applied.
4. Choosing AF points and their reliability
Once again, my initial reservations of Canon's AF points were marred by my switch from a crop D90 to a FF 5D (didn't grasp the clustered AF points of FF). I loathed how it was a chore to switch between AF points with the 5D. I resented the fact that all but the centre AF was reliable. However, I'm glad I started to rely on the centre AF point as I still do that to this day, regardless of which body and system I'm using. I still think with the D700, that selecting the desired AF point is easier with the D-pad. Once again, YMMV.
Why? Because I can (and probably because I have a serious problem).
Canon bodies I've owned to date: 5D, 5Dii, 1DMKiii, 1DsMKii.
Nikon bodies I've owned to date: D40, D70, D80, D90, D1, D700.
And to put things into perspective, this is my camera ownership in chronological order:
- D40 (end of 2009)
- D70
- D70s
- D90
- 5D
- 5Dii
- LX3 (what the!!?!)
- D80 with 18-200VR (what the!!?!)
- 1DMKiii
- 5D
- 1DsMKii
- D700 and D1
- 5DMKii
- D700 (today)
I personally don't have a preference to which brand is better. I don't think anyone can argue one over the other. The sole reason why I have switched systems, and back and again is purely based on pricing. I saw a bargain to be had and took it. I've never been overly invested into a single system. If I could afford it, I would like to have a Nikon and a Canon.
What I like about Canon.
1. The jogwheel.
Some people love it. Some people hate it. I love it. It makes navigating menus and photos so easy and smooth.
2. A lot of EF lenses available secondhand
I like to own stuff. I live to sell stuff. I don't know why I don't rent because it would be easier on my wallet but there is just something to owning something, even if it is for a few days. Due to Canon's popularity based on it's 5D back in the day, a lot of shooters are Canon users. This means the market is flooded with a lot of competitively priced secondhand lenses. All the more for me to play with! I'm a suck for fast lenses, and Canon to date, have the upper hand on the number of primes available. IQ-wise, I won't comment, but the more the merrier I say!
3. Colours
Things out-of-camera are warmer. Nikon produce slightly colder exposures. Nothing PP won't fix but for some JPG shooters, this may be of significance. Note, I don't have a set of grey cards. I use the shunned auto-WB feature. Shock horror!
4. Menu system
When I first shifted from a D90 to a 5Dc, I hated the outdated menu system. To put things into perspective, I had gone from 2008/9 technology to 2005 circ technology. Not rocket science that the UI would significantly be worse. At first, I couldn't stand the weird embedded menu structure found on the 5Dc, and subsequently got a 5DMKII quick smart.
Fast forward a few months and a switch back to Nikon, I now miss the simple nature of the custom fuctions. Ironic? Indeed. I now find the Nikon menu system way too categorised, and in a way that is not logical to me. Weird? Hell yea!
5. L ... L is for ...
What can I say? It could be nothing more than marketing but L-lenses rock.
6. Positioning of the exposure lock button
Simply put, I can reach the AE lock button on the 5D and 1D series with my thumb with ease. With the D700, I have to stretch my thumb. YMMV.
Now, this is what I like about Nikon (WRT D700).
1. CLS
To put this into perspective, until I owned the 580EXII, I hated the way my 5D and 5Dii interacted with the 480EX. I could not get the two to play nice. I had to do change a custom function so that the 5D/5Dii would know that a flash had been mounted and would do the right thing in Av-mode. Come the 580EXII, external lighting was a breeze.
However, I do think Nikon do have an edge with iTTL compared to ETTL.
2. D700 feels much more sturdier than 5D/5Dii
This is personal opinion only. I find that the 5D and 5Dii were toy-like. And the cheesy shooting-priority mode dial makes things even worse. I really like the 1D's implementation of changing program modes.
I dropped my 5Dii from hip height. My fault entirely but the resultant damage was pretty ghastly. For some reason, I feel as though the D700 would come out better if dropped and/or blended. I'm not willing to test that theory out just yet.
3. Auto-ISO
A lot of photographers, hobbyists and pros will cringe at auto-ISO. I use auto-ISO where possible. The 5D obviously didn't have it, nor did the 1DMKiii or 1DsMKii, but the 5Dii did. I can't speak for the 1DMKiv but from my experience of the 5Dii, the auto-ISO system of Canon is a bit weird. It tends to go for the highest ISO possible, rather than the minimum. Please not that I am not commenting on high-ISO noise quality. I am purely critiquing the method of how auto-ISO is applied.
4. Choosing AF points and their reliability
Once again, my initial reservations of Canon's AF points were marred by my switch from a crop D90 to a FF 5D (didn't grasp the clustered AF points of FF). I loathed how it was a chore to switch between AF points with the 5D. I resented the fact that all but the centre AF was reliable. However, I'm glad I started to rely on the centre AF point as I still do that to this day, regardless of which body and system I'm using. I still think with the D700, that selecting the desired AF point is easier with the D-pad. Once again, YMMV.
A bit OT, just sharing some info.
Fuji S2pro is a Nikon F80 fitted with Fuji sensor.
If you open up the camera, you will the the film compartment including the film railings.
And yes, Nikon film SLRs are still popular today compared to it's counterparts
And continuing with this off-topicness, the Fuji SXpro series are absolute awesome DSLRs where adequate lighting is available. You just CANNOT get the same colour rendition from current Canon and Nikon offerings. I don't know why but the Fuji's ROCK. But once light fades ... put away the Fuji and bring out the Canon/Nikon.
For me very easy why I use Nikon, cos my frds are using Nikon, it easy to borrow lens from them (situation where I only only need a particular lens for 1 situation or I wanna test the lens which I wanted to buy) and save me a huge deal!
Secondly, love the Nikon frds, cos go out can ask advices and pointers cos all using Nikons cam.
Secondly, love the Nikon frds, cos go out can ask advices and pointers cos all using Nikons cam.
For those who have brought their cam overseas and shoot in harsh conditions, we would appreciate the ruggedness and reliability of the cam and the lens too.
I have been in NZ, shooting in the snow, in the rain, in a moving train, between 2 carriages so that I dun need to shoot thru' glass. My D200 was weather-sealed, but the lens isn't, but I didn't get even a single drop of water inside the lens. The only thing I did after wet weather shoot was to wipe the filter. And that was just a mere kit lens, the 18-70 lens that I got since the D70 days.
Last edited:
