I'm not joking. I actually flipped a quarter, head for Nikon and tail for Canon. Well, tail it was. I truly believe Nikon and Canon are as good as the other, I vowed to myself that once I got a camera I'd try to master it and learn about its weaknesses and strengths. There are moments that I envy the autofocus of the Nikon D300, but that just makes me work harder on my 40D and also the D300 was $500 more than the 40D. []
I started out with Canon and sticked with it. But this alone didn't deside for me what worked better, my father in law first owned the D40 then a D60 and now he's got a D300, all great cameras. I started with a 400D then the 40D and now I'm working mainly with a 5D II. I've worked with all those nikons, there great cameras, sure, and I'm really can't say anymore which are "better or worse".
So in the end it really depents on the little thingies, and this made me stick to Canon. Besides, Nikon doesn't look by far as dashing a Canon doese.
Both companies make good equipment and you won't have made a huge mistake by choosing either brand. You will find each brand and each camera model will do some things better than others. I started with Canon in 1981 with an AE-1 and now have 4 Canon digital bodies at home and three at work. With a hugeinvestment in lenses, I would never really consider changing systems.
I do think Canon has some advantages over Nikon in IQ, especially with the 1Ds MKIII andthe 5D MKII. As I've mentioned a lot on this forum, the 5D MKII simply producesamazing RAW files.
My first SLR was a Pentax K1000. Then I moved to a Canon EOS 650 because it had the built in pop-up flash. I didn't know much about it and just bought it.I hated that camera, it was pretty much a point and shoot SLR. So then I jumped on the Nikon band wagon. I bought the Nikon N4004 which was a pretty decent camera. I hit tough times sold the Nikon went back to the K1000. A couple years later the meter went in that so I bought a Nikon FM10. Which was fine for what it was.
Digital rolled in I bought a Fuji Finepix 2300 which was awful, but hated the Nikon Coolpix twisty thing. Then Nikon came out with the Coolpix 5000 I thought it was interesting enough so I bought it. Still disappointed, but it was okay. So when I was ready for a DSLR I was hesitant to go Nikon but the the Rebels felt pretty small and fragile in my hands and the 30D seemed a little over priced (I was under the MP higher is better spell). So I was going to go with Nikon D80. Then I went into the store and the 40D was there and it just seemed right so there I went.
Originally Posted by bob williams
Can't argue with that. Browse through a photo issue of TWSnow magazine and most of the shooters they interview list Canon 1 series bodies as primary bodies.
However, look up Chase Jarvis or Joe McnNally, and it's always Nikon.. Hmm..
I had a chance to talk to the head of PSU's photo department awhile ago and he told me that typically Canon has better AF performance, while Nikon has better off camera lighting options. Although he did say the gap has closed considerably.
I went Canon because I asked a friend what body to start with and he led me to a 20D.
-Rodger
Very nice and interesting stories there Keith and Nate [
My Canon vs Nikon saga started MANY, MANY (WAAAY TOOO MANY) years ago... Back in 1965 I used a Nikon for some sports shooting (I was the high school newspaper photographer and we had a Nikon [don't remember the model] and a Graflex Speed Graphic for cameras). First, the Nikon lenses at that time (and I see some of them still do) had the aperture ring right next to the body of the camera and my big, fat fingers had problems adjusting it! Second, the other photographer forgot (!) to tell me that the camera had problems with it's shutter... It'd work some times and not others (if it worked, it worked for a full roll of film, if not, well, not!). I took 3 rolls of film @ a football game and got nuttin'! Left a bad taste in my mouth for Nikon! Probably not deserved, but... I concentrated on the Speed Graphic from then on! Got some great pictures and really, really learned the technical aspects of photography (not the artistic ones, but, hey).
When I purchased my OWN 35mm camera I got a Canon Ftb which I used for many, many years! Didn't stop using it until I bought an A1 in '80. Gave the Ftb to my little brother then and he used it for years (until he broke it!)...
Recently I decided to go beyond the "point and shoot" cameras (had a Fuji FinePix 3800, then a Canon A540, then a Canon S5-IS) and get back into semi-serious photography and purchased a 40D with the 28-135 kit lens. Never looked back again! Nikon makes some great cameras, but I've had a soft spot for Canon for all of my adult life! Recently purchased a 70-200 F4.0L and am now saving up for a 10-22 and a 580 EX II flash! The problem with this stuff is you spend WAAAY too much $$$, but I have fun and that's what matters!
Hope this provides, at least, some insight into why SOME people by certain gear!
Yo Rodger, You are absolutely correct.I occasionally take online photo courses from PPSOP and some of my favorite photographers/teachers shoot with Nikon. The funny thing is that thier partners shoot with Canon. I would love to hear some of thier "beer" conversations regarding equipment. I suppose the real issue is a real artist will make art, regardless of thetype of paintbrush they use.
PS. the two BW photos that you have on your web page are outstanding----Nice work!!!!!!!----Especially your title piece.
Bob
Bob
Thanks Bob!
Funny thing about the title picture is that I took it moments before rushing to the SATs this past June. That picture almost made me late haha. Worth it? Without a doubt! haha.
I agree. In the end, it's the shooter that makes the picture, not the camera.
Thanks again.
-Rodger
Emma, as mentioned before I am a die hard Canon fan. But Roger just reminded me that its not the equipment but the artist that really matters. To make my point, please take a look at what Tom Kirkendahl can do with a $30 Holga, medium format film Camera (Fixed Lens)
http://www.kirkendall-spring.com/
http://www.7photographyquestions.com/2009/07/p53-show-notes-for-holga-camera----an-interview-with-tom-kir.html
Its humbling.
Bob
Bob
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote