Printable View
I was really interested to hear that Nikon launched a 24mm f/1.4 this week (among other lenses):
AF-S Nikkor 24mm f/1.4G ED
I thought I would mention it here in case anyone else was waiting for Nikon to do something like this. The Canon 24mm f/1.4 is my favorite lens ever, and it's also the reason why I haven't switched to Nikon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Browning
*The* reason? So... now you'll switch?
PLEASE DONT SWITCH TO NIKON DANIEL us amateurs need you here on TDP! Don't worry, Canon and Nikon always leapfrog each other, in 3 years Canon'll be far superior [:D]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Ruyle
It was definitely the main reason. But there are still a bunch of secondary reasons:
- 70-200 f/4 VR
- 21 MP for $2500 (hopefully the Nikon D700X will do that)
- Quality 1080p video
- White balance preconditioning, black clip, star killer algorithm, electronic first curtain
- Not covered on the-digital-picture.com (this is the big one).
Now that the 24mm f/1.4 is taken care of, Nikon just has five more things to scratch off their list, then they'll steal me from Canon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bburns223
Thanks, Brendan. It has taken Canon 8 years, but they're finally adding some of the features that make me want to switch to Nikon: AutoISO, in-body flash control, and pro-level autofocus. They're still not quite up to the level of Nikon yet (AutoISO doesn't work with flash or have compensation control, the 7D autofocus isn't quite 1D-level, etc.), but perhaps they'll catch up by the time Nikon gets their stuff together. It would be a bit of a hassle to sell all my Canon gear on ebay, so if Canon can step up to the plate then so much the better for me.
Star killer algorithm?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ehcalum
Yeah, it's noise-reduction software that Nikon uses on their raw files for any shots at 1/10 or slower (for recent models). It gets rid of hot pixels and anything that looks like hot pixels, such as stars. That makes Nikon less suitable for astrophotography, which is one of my favorite things to shoot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Browning
Lets see if they can come out with a lens better than the Canon 35 1.4. I guess we'll have to wait to see if the Nikon's 24 is as good as Canon's.
The 16-35 f/4 VR is interesting. I guess they figured VR was more valuable than f/2.8.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith B
Hopefully this just marks the beginning of Nikon's new emphasis on fast primes. It would be great for Canon to finally have some competition in that area.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith B
Yeah, I think it's interesting too. It has the same focal length and f-number as the Canon 17-40 f/4, but with VR and a price that is almost twice as high. I bet that skimping one stop on the aperture let them keep the price down for a given quality.
I'm curious to see how well the VR actually works at this focal length. I bet the benefit is mostly for large print sizes (or extreme crops), and not for normal print sizes.
It would be great to have a new 17-40 f/4 L IS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Browning
Well, good luck to Nikon on that one :)
For me, the reasons are:
1) inertia, plus I'd lose a bunch of $$$ selling Canon and re-buying Nikon
2) "star killer algorithm"
3) MP-E 65
I guess 2) isn't that big a deal- I could always get a dedicated astro ccd, and it would be superior to the 5DII.
TDP is a biggie as well. If everyone else on this list switches, I will too :)