Nikon or Canon...but with a twist

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by wgr73, Dec 27, 2008.

  1. wgr73 macrumors 6502a

    wgr73

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Location:
    New Mexico
    #1
    Ok, so I currently have the Nikon D60. Its a great camera but I find to change controls its too much menu work. I am looking at exchanging the D60 for the Canon 40D or the Nikon D80/90. I see a lot of people with Canons (went to a Nuggets game and all I saw were white lenses:eek:). I'm very familiar with Nikons, but hear nothing but good things about Canons...I'm stuck. I realize a lot of the decision is based on personal preference/ergonomics, and as far as lenses go...does Canon have as wide of a selection as Nikon? This is a hard pick. I will more than likely pick up a body, and get a lens...not a kit. My max is $900. Thanks guys ;)
     
  2. TheReef macrumors 68000

    TheReef

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Location:
    NSW, Australia.
    #2
    Here's a twist…consider Pentax, Olympus or Sony, each with unique strengths and are generally better value than the big two. Go to the store and try all the brands out, see which one feels best to you.
     
  3. jbernie macrumors 6502a

    jbernie

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #3
    Other than the D60 body, what other kit do you have? If it is just body & kit lens then the change isn't too bad, but if you have a few lenses already we might want to be careful on suggestions especially with the budget you have.
     
  4. OreoCookie macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Sendai, Japan
    #4
    You shouldn't just limit yourself to Nikon and Canon, unless you have something very special in mind, in principle any manufacturer makes very good dslrs. The D80/D90 is a noticeable step up from the D40/D60-class of cameras, ditto for Canon's 40D. The viewfinder in this camera class is worlds better than what you have now. Entry-level cameras tend to be more `buttony', and only more expensive have a more `professional' feel to their user concept.

    Pentax, Olympus and Sony also have great offerings which you should have a look at. All of these companies (Sony bought Minolta) have been in the photography business for a long, long time, they all know what they're doing.

    Furthermore, you should invest in glass and not a body. You'll be much more creative with a Nikon D80/Canon 450D (XSi, I think) + Tamron 17-50 mm f/2.8/Tokina 16-50 mm f/2.8 than a better body (say, the Canon 40D) and a lesser lens.

    However, you should not forget that forget that the most important thing is to `get along with your camera.' Especially in light of threads like this one, I suggest you try the cameras out yourself. Do not choose your camera according to perceived features like megapixels or fps. Or noise charts. Unless you photograph bath room tiles for a living, that is ;)
     
  5. Hmac macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    #5
    Canon makes good cameras, Nikon makes good cameras. There are some Nikon models that are better than their equivalent Canon counterpart, and vice versa.

    If you read the camera web sites, you'll hear plenty of complaints from users of both brands.

    As to "menu work"...changing camera models isn't going to keep you out of the menu system - in fact the more complex the dSLR, the more menu settings you have for both Nikon and Canon. Anyway my experience is that the ergonomics of Nikon cameras are better, in the sense that there are more direct on-camera controls of shooting, compared to Canon which tends to force you into the menu system more often.

    No offense, but it sounds like you are under the impression that you can improve your photography by switching from Nikon to Canon. It doesn't work that way. Got to a camera store, work with the cameras you're interested in, and buy the one you are most comfortable with. If you base that choice on your perception of what everybody else is shooting, you will be more likely to make a mistake in buying YOUR camera.
     
  6. PCMacUser macrumors 68000

    PCMacUser

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2005
    #6
    You're reading into it too much I think. The OP simply said:

    Nothing wrong with the rest of your post though. :)
     
  7. Hmac macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    #7
    Yeah, maybe I over-interpreted.

    Anyway, especially in the $900 range, any differences that exist in two competing cameras are likely to go away or reverse once one company or the other brings out its latest model. Camera offerings from Nikon vs Canon tend to leapfrog each other.

    As to the other brands....the OP is looking at Canon, in part, because he sees more white lenses at a Nuggets game. Think how bad he'd feel about his camera if he had an Olympus...;)

    As to this statement:
    He should read this thread, pros and cons, right here in this forum. How did he miss it?
     
  8. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #8
    I never understood why people would ask questions such as whether or not Canon had a wide variety of lenses like Nikon. A simple visit to Adorama.com or bhphoto.com would show that there are pages of lenses to choose from if you're a Nikon or Canon user.

    Quite frankly, going to a basketball game and deciding that Canon is better because of "all the white lenses" is simply asinine. It shows a true lack of understanding for the art itself. The D60 is a capable camera, you can switch to Canon and still find yourself taking issue with something Canon does. There is no "perfect" camera. There is a camera out there that is most likely near-perfect for you.

    To answer your questions specifically, there are just as many lenses to choose from that are for Canon bodies as there are for Nikon bodies. There are many third party lenses that are made for Canon and Nikon that are sometimes even better in some respects. You will find that both Canon and Nikon will take stellar shots, but you're going to have to give a little in regards to that. You will also find that both Canon and Nikon make use of that menu you seem to dislike.

    Your best bet is to go to the store and see which camera performs best without the use of the menu. Whichever one that is, that should be your choice. In the end, you'll never be short of lens choices.
     
  9. wheelhot macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    #9
    haha, cause maybe he think it was irrelevant.

    Well regarding the Canon vs Nikon thing, here is what I realize, Im sure that even if you get a Canon body, there will still be somethings you will be unhappy about and some things you wished were there.

    I currently own Canon and I can give a few points on why I dont like my Canon and the direction the company is heading but heck, I bet if I change to Nikon, give it a couple of months of use and I will come back with a few points that I dont like about Nikon. So to make it simple, look for the glasses rather then the body. Pros get quality images partly its cause of the lens they use (my uncle is a photographer and he told me this), having only kit lens wont get you far.

    I like Canon lens terminology (never understood how Nikkon name their Nikkor terminologies) and I like Canon current telephoto lens collection so I guess I will stick with Canon.
     
  10. wgr73 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    wgr73

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Location:
    New Mexico
    #10
    Actually thats not what I was saying, but I'm sorry if I came across like that. I meant that the menu work was too much...

    Well I'm pretty sure that vintage lenses arent on these websites....maybe I just can't find them. I see a lot of people using "old" lenses that work with the cameras, and I was really wondering about this...thanks.

    Sorry if you thought I said this about white lenses...what I was trying to say is that cannon is obviously doing something right if everyone is using them...but its def not a deciding factor: 1. Because I would already have one due to the number of cannons I see. and 2. Because I have a D60 over the cannon eqiv.

    In playing with the D60 more and more I would like to have adjustments on the outside without going into the menus. The links to the threads are great though guys...I did miss that one, I'll look it over now. Thanks!
     
  11. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #11
    You failed to differentiate between the two. You asked about lenses, not about the availability of older lenses and the compatibility on the newer bodies.

    I'll remind you of your original question:
    To answer your question again, yes. Canon has as wide of a selection as Nikon.

    I did not think it was about what color lens you see. Canon also has black lenses. Go figure.

    Canon is not doing anything right or wrong because you see more sports photographers using them. I would not even come close to saying "everyone" is using them. This seems like a very misinformed statement. It does seem to be the preferred brand when you watch sporting events, but if you buy based on what you see at one ball game then there's really no reason for you to comparison shop. You're going to buy what you're going to buy.

    Bottom line, I love Canon's lineup, but I made a decision to shoot Nikon years ago and never regretted it. Nothing has made me want to switch to Canon based on the type of photography I tend to gravitate towards. I know I'm not alone when I say just because I shoot Nikon does not mean I am against Canon. Then again I don't tout Canon simply because sports photographers tend to use them more often than not.
     
  12. luminosity macrumors 65816

    luminosity

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    Location:
    Arizona
    #12
    About the only way you can tell a Canon lens for sure is if it has a red ring on it. A Nikon gold-ringed lens most likely means a Nikon body, but there are adapters to let them work on Canon bodies (and this is being done most often with the 14-24 AF-S, I think).
     
  13. Grimace macrumors 68040

    Grimace

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    with Hamburglar.
    #13
    Both are great companies. If you have an investment in Nikon glass already, it may not be worth the leap.

    Canon may have a lot of professional exposure (white lenses, etc.) but that's not the market you're in. Those setups are $10+. That doesn't mean that Canon doesn't make good non-pro equipment, but I just don't think it's relevant.

    Canon's "P" mode lets you shoot RAW, and it's almost an automatic mode. That eliminates most menu work, but I assume that there is something similar in the Nikon camp.

    As a Canon guy, I'd say not to jump ship from Nikon before you know exactly how much easier it might be (ie. go try it out) on a different brand. You may run into the same issues!
     
  14. wgr73 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    wgr73

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Location:
    New Mexico
    #14

    EDIT: I only have the 18-55mm VR AF-S and the 70-200mm AF-S...so investment wise I'm not fully dedicated to a single company.

    Thanks for your help. Sorry, I'll make the lens questions more clear next time ;). But yeah, I just happened to notice that almost every sports photog I saw was using white lenses...which to me says cannon. They really out numbered the black lenses (which could have been cannon too). But its not the first time I've seen this. So I know the support is there...the Canon company/DSLR base is huge. I'm assuming Nikon is probably just as big. This is another factor that should help me decide. One thing I love about Nikon is the wording used in their lineups (thats just me). As far as playing with the cameras, I will def be doing that. I'm in Denver now so I need to find a place that has a nice selection. Maybe Wolf camera downtown. Thanks again, now that I know lenses are widely available for both, that takes a huge weight off of my shoulder. Thanks!
     
  15. luminosity macrumors 65816

    luminosity

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    Location:
    Arizona
    #15
    Grimace: Your gear is making me do your username. That's some mighty impressive stuff you've got there :).
     
  16. OreoCookie macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Sendai, Japan
    #16
    Canon and Nikon both sell approximately the amount of dslrs (careful: graph shows total number of cameras shipped, dslr figures for 2007 are in the text). The market share is comparable, ~42 % for Canon compared to ~33 % for Nikon, both companies won't go anywhere anytime soon.

    Canon seems more prominent professionally (not sure about actual figures there), because for a while, they were the only ones to make their pro glass gray while Nikon's was black. (Officially Canon claims that the gray paint keeps the lenses cooler, thus improving IQ; personally, I think it's a marketing ploy that has worked very well.) Now Nikon also offers some of their pro lenses in gray.

    In any case, the sports shooters market share says very little about whether the camera is any good for consumers (and yes, too high a price is also a negative from a consumer's perspective ;)).
     
  17. butterfly0fdoom macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2007
    Location:
    Camp Snoopy
    #17
    You see more white lenses because the people that have a lot of L lenses have spent too much to change systems; Canon did the right thing with AF was introduced, doesn't mean they're doing the right thing now (clearly, I'm disgruntled with the megapixel war).
     
  18. Hmac macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    #18
    In 2007 Canon sold 3.18 million single-lens reflex cameras compared to Nikon's 2.98 million. That represents a 42.7 percent and 40 percent share, respectively, of the 2007 SLR market.
     
  19. luminosity macrumors 65816

    luminosity

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    Location:
    Arizona
    #19
    Until the D3x, Nikon seemed to ignore the megapixel war. Would that be a mistaken conclusion?
     
  20. toxic macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    #20
    I think your issue with "menu work" is because the D60 is more of a consumer-level camera than an amateur or semi-professional one. Go to a store and handle a D80 or D90, you'll probably like it better. There should be a Canon 40D or 50D for you to compare it to.
     
  21. peapody macrumors 68040

    peapody

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Location:
    baltimore, md
  22. wgr73 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    wgr73

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Location:
    New Mexico
    #22
    I did this and it seems alot easier with the D80. Also the amount of lenses I would be able to use now is going to be a plus. Anyone wanna buy a mint D60 with a 18-55mm VR AF-s and 55-200mm AF-S? ;)
     
  23. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #23
    With SLRs you need to think ahead many years. Sounds like if you keep this up you will be switch brands to buy whatever body was released last. This is not only expensive but you will never get to have any kind of lens collection if you sell everything off and re-buy frequently.

    Choos a brand based on the company's total line up of gear but on the features of one entry level SLR body. Those bodies change frequently.

    Go with Canon if you think you'd like to buy a few Canon lenses and flash units and so on. Stick with Nikon otherwise. Just don't choose a brand based on something so trivial as a menu system.

    What to save some money: Swap your current Nikon for a used D50. I can do just about anything without getting into the menues, I can change ISO, recording format (raw, jpg, fine...) Aperture, shutter. All without menues.
     
  24. AlaskaMoose macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2008
    Location:
    Alaska
    #24
    Although I still have a couple of Nikon film cameras, including a F3 fully loaded with motor drive flash, and lenses, and now use Canon, keep in mind that those "white L lenses" are expensive. Yes, the same can be said about top of the line Nikon lenses. My point is to think about you switch from Nikon to Canon if what you are looking for is top glass, because both are about the same. I agree with others that looking at a D80, D90, or even a D300 is not a bad idea at all.

    Now that I use Canon, I just take my time and carefully schedule the very few Canon lenses I will ever buy, because these are expensive. However, while everyone (including Nikon users) have jumped on the "image stabilization" wagon in relation to lenses, I have decided that for my type of picture-taking I can do very well with a few non-IS L zooms, and even primes, which are much cheaper when the "IS" thing is not included.

    Take a look at the IS versus non-IS lenses (not all listed, but most):
    http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=141406
     
  25. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #25
    Canon's marketing to newspapers and sports shooters has been superior to Nikon's. Their high-ISO was also superior for many years. The latter field is now evened up again, but the former will continue to pay dividends in the US market. How Canon markets to sports journalists and their employers has translated well into sales and obviously you're affected by it as well.

    In general, what you're looking for is on the high-end cameras of both companies, though I believe the higher end Nikons tend to have more dedicated buttons and the high-end Canons tend to have more multi-function buttons.

    Seriously, the D3x isn't a megapixel war camera, it's a niche professional camera which aims to put a D2x-density sensor in an FX body.

    Why would you sell both lenses?

    Seriously though, you sound like you want to switch to Canon- rather than second-guessing yourself- since you're willing to lose on the entire investment you have to date you should price out the switch and try to do it. As others have pointed out, it won't change your photography, but it's better than years of second-guessing yourself.
     

Share This Page