Tekforums

Chat => Photography => Topic started by: Binary Shadow on June 11, 2011, 20:09:14 PM

Title: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Binary Shadow on June 11, 2011, 20:09:14 PM
Well I'm not sure if its just me but I tend to see some friction between nikon and canon owners, maybe some fanboi'ism or something.

I for one have been a canon fan from day one.. and yes a bit of a fanboi, starting debates with nikon owners and the like.

You can imagine then perhaps how annoyed I was when I collected my new pair of glasses today to be told the lenses are nikon (they used to use zeiss).. so now I'm almost permanently experiencing life through nikon glass.. arghhh!!
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: addictweb on June 11, 2011, 20:16:49 PM
Haha. Lift must look pretty good right now!


Ive always been Nikon. I found cheap starter Canons way too toy-like (the 350D at the time) compared to the cheaper more substantial Nikons (D70).


In reality I dont think there is an difference at all.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Mongoose on June 12, 2011, 09:34:02 AM
I don't think comparing the 350D to the D70 is entirely fair, the D70 was more 20D class with the D50 being the base model IIRC.

Personally of course I think you're all wrong because Pentax is clearly the best :D


With a purchase as expensive and difficult to reverse as choosing a camera system, there is inevitably going to be confirmation bias. Everyone wants to believe that they made the best possible choice because the alternative is realising that you'd really like to sell the lot and buy into a different system, which is both expensive and a massive hassle.

In my experience, the very best photographers I've talked to have held the opinion that, baring some very specific applications where one brand has a niche advantage, it doesn't matter a damn what brand is on the strap. If it's an SLR with decent glass then the quality of the image is 99.9% down to who's eye it's held up to.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Russell on June 12, 2011, 11:24:01 AM
I think Mongoose got it about right (bar the Pentax bit of course :P)

People generally buy into a system when they start off for some reason that's sound at the time, I got a Nikon camera because I'd used a Nikon D2H in my last job and they had a couple of lenses I could borrow.  Similarly I bet a lot of people buy into Canon or Nikon because of people they know already having gear they can borrow and learn from, a friend of mine did that, he bought a Nikon D3000 for £200 and has borrowed my 18-55mm kit lens and my 70-300mm.  Its enough to get him going until he can buy his own lenses.  The other major factor is probably cost, I haven't looked into it but I seem to remember people saying that Canon were slightly cheaper especially for lenses.

There's no denying that each system has its positives and negatives, Nikon have the better ISO range at the mo, Canon have higher MP and a larger lens range (especially a good range of F4 lenses) although Nikon are starting to wise up to it and hopefully we'll see a good range from them too.

But really there's not that much in it, I bet you can't look at a picture and say it was taken with a canon or a nikon (or a pentax for that matter) without looking at the EXIF.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Eggtastico on June 12, 2011, 14:47:53 PM
nikon cameras, but cannon lens
but its 99% behind who' pressing the button.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Binary Shadow on June 14, 2013, 12:07:56 PM
Dragging this back from the depths (for giggles)

New glasses today back to Carl Zeiss lenses and everything looks much better now ;)
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: zpyder on June 14, 2013, 15:36:17 PM
I'd agree it's more the lens quality than the camera, and also 99% the photographer, but I've noticed that it seems that Nikons and Canons tend to be more popular in certain applications, and came to the conclusion that it might be to do with price brackets and perceived value for money.

EG, I personally feel that I see more "low end" "first slr" photographers are getting the Canons. But the more savvy amateur/hobby photographer seems to usually have a Nikon. This also includes Nikons prevalance in forensic photography, and I think this is due to being good mid-range price bracket cameras, which I'd imagine would ideally fit the typical budget in the departments I've encountered this. But then, at the uber high end price bracket, it seems to swing back to Canon.

Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: bear on June 14, 2013, 15:49:51 PM
LEICA M9 perhaps they have good lenses :) or perhaps a hasselblad digital back for yer old camera. ( I cannot afford any of them ).
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Sam on June 14, 2013, 17:56:06 PM
I had a nikon D5000. And my pictures were sh*t.
Now I have a Canon 550D.  And my pictures are sh*t.

So it makes no difference if you're sh*t at taking photos.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Adrock on August 17, 2013, 23:37:12 PM
Rather than start a new thread I'd like to ask the people in this place. Any opinions for a starting SLR camera? The missus has said for ages that she wants one and her birthday is coming up in a couple of weeks.

I want something that will last but I have no clue and no desire to learn about photography. So basically I need to be led to a product that'll be good quality and maybe have a decent option with lenses.

As for budget, I always like to go for the best bang for my buck, but I cant spend loads. I have no allegiance to any brands either.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: addictweb on August 18, 2013, 00:59:42 AM
Are you set on a DSLR? 3/4 NEX like cameras are now (imo) more practical and just as good for 99% of non professional applications. They are more expensive though, as are the lenses.

Assuming yourewife doesn't have friends who are into photography who she could chat cameras / lenses (if thats the case then go for what they have) then Canon/Nikon/Sony makes no difference. Canon and Nikon have more 2nd hand lenses around but Sony has better bang for buck as an absolute camera. I bought my younger sister in law a little A60 sony recently and its packed with genuinely helpful instructional guides to ISO / aperture /  shutter speed.

Saying that, depending on her views, a second hand DSLR is more than enough to challenge a beginner. I still use a base model from 2004 (Nikon D70). She may be normal though and only like shiney new things as presents.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: zpyder on August 18, 2013, 08:51:41 AM
What *is* your budget? Are you wanting to buy new or second hand?

What Addictweb said about what friends have, is probably the most important thing. It's soo useful if you just have a "brand x" body and one lens, but your friend has more. It's free lens-rental :D
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Adrock on August 19, 2013, 17:33:51 PM
Her mum has some kind of Canon DSLR. What are these NEX cameras you mentioned?

As for budget, I'm not entirely sure. Entry level DSLR is probably what I wanna go for, mainly because she only wants it for family outings and all that.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: addictweb on August 19, 2013, 17:49:15 PM
Sony NEX 5 / 6 /7 are a range of smaller 3/4 size cameras with detachable lenses. Their performance is much the same as other lower end DSLRs but they're much more compact. A good friend of mine has sold his top end DSLR recently because it became so unused since he bought a NEX 7.

http://www.dabs.com/products/sony-a-nex-3nl---digital-camera---mirrorless-system---16-1-mpix---16-50mm-lens---black-8MQ6.html?utm_source=google&utm_medium=ppc (http://www.dabs.com/products/sony-a-nex-3nl---digital-camera---mirrorless-system---16-1-mpix---16-50mm-lens---black-8MQ6.html?utm_source=google&utm_medium=ppc)
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: M3ta7h3ad on August 19, 2013, 20:29:17 PM
Her mum has some kind of Canon DSLR. What are these NEX cameras you mentioned?

As for budget, I'm not entirely sure. Entry level DSLR is probably what I wanna go for, mainly because she only wants it for family outings and all that.

They are mirrorless, with micro 4/3rd sensors. So small and light but similar capabilities to a crop sensor SLR just without the mirror.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Adrock on August 19, 2013, 22:44:04 PM
Just had a look at those NEX cameras, look very nice. As does the Canon one. The lack of a viewfinder might be an issue though, which would then point me either at the high end mirrorless ones, which are too rich for me.

So DSLR it is, second hand is not a problem. Where should I start looking? As I said before, entry level is where I'm pitching. I have no preference on brands either.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: zpyder on August 20, 2013, 00:38:20 AM
Is a viewfinder really that important?

I bought the GF a second hand Canon 40D for xmas. I looked at the photos on it the other day, and she literally hasn't used it since February. Is the missus definitely going to "get into this photography lark" or is this something where being a bit more user friendly, nice big lcd (possibly touchscreen) and plenty of auto modes, could be preferred?

If it's second hand cameras, My first stop would be your nearest brick and mortar camera shop. They should have a selection of used cameras. From there you can get a feel for what tends to be available, and either buy from them, or take that info and take a gamble and buy for a bit cheaper, either on ebay or an internet camera shop with a used section.

I tend to buy from my local camera shop if the prices are reasonable. They tend to be a little more expensive than the internet, but once you add on postage costs, and consider the ability to test products in a shop etc, I think it makes sense. The local shop would probably be happy for me to take a lens away for a day to test before I buy etc.

I'd also check what her mum has, both body and lens wise. If it is a Canon DSLR, I'd maybe consider Canon. The lens borrowing works both ways. If the missus and the mother are ever at a party or event etc with their cameras, they'll easily be able to swap lenses, if they want.

Canon wise, for reference, their order of "professionalism" (and thus cost) goes (from most expensive):

(these 3 are full frame, mega bucks)
1D
5D
6D

7D (top line cropped sensor) ~£750-850 second hand

Mid range bodies, in order of newness
70D - £1000
60D - £500
50D - £300
40D - £200

Low end (Order of newness) (There's also x50ds inbetween)
700D -£400-£500
600D - £300-400
500D - £250
400D - £150-200

And then there's the 1000, 1100D etc, which are Canons cheapest, smallest, lightest etc. Pretty plasticy. Retail around £250-350 NEW.

(Prices are just pulled quickly from the web and what I've seen around lately. Could be out by a little bit!)

If the camera is going to get a bit of use, and the missus is serious about it, I'd consider getting a second hand 60D, or 600D if the 60 is too much. If it's just going to be an occasional use thing, I'd probably otherwise consider the 1000/1100D new. Though they're very plasticy, this does equate to being lighter weight, and a bit smaller than the other offerings. You'd also likely get as much use out of it new, as you would a second hand, but more expensive model.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: M3ta7h3ad on August 20, 2013, 07:49:03 AM
I have a 400d it's great but does not do videos or have live view. Think 650d is first one that has that.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: zpyder on August 20, 2013, 10:08:13 AM
As far as I know, Canon cameras since the 500D have live view + video. As they've progressed the technology has advanced (I think the 500D for example can only record at most 15 mins video at a time). Things like liveview autofocus are improved in the more recent versions.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Adrock on August 20, 2013, 12:40:52 PM
In laws have a 550d, with a few lenses. According to a bit I've read would the tiltable screen of the 600d be worth considering? The camera is gonna very much be used exclusively for family outings which is why I'm still leaning towards a compact system, I'm just concerned the lack of viewfinder will get on her nerves.

The main problem with our old Panasonic compact thing is its slow. Hmm, I think going off your suggestions zpyder the 1100d could be most suitable.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Mongoose on August 20, 2013, 12:52:06 PM
if your in-laws are likely to be happy to lend lenses and/or photography will take place with them on outings etc so that their kit will be available, then going Canon EOS makes sense. I originally went Pentax for exactly this reason, having the same system as a more established friend or family member makes for a low cost introduction to photography.

I know you probably want this to be a surprise, but speaking for myself I'd say that picking a camera, especially a first system camera, is a very personal decision. If I were you I'd surprise her with "we're going to a camera shop" and have her involved in chosing which one you buy. You might find that things you think are vital don't matter to her at all, and things you don't even notice will matter to her a great deal. For example, she may hate the plasticy feel of the 1100D, or she may think the 60D is too big and heavy.

This is one field where "better" is not necessarily better for everyone.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Mongoose on August 20, 2013, 12:56:33 PM
btw I deffinitely second the earlier comment about a bricks and mortar shop. Make it a proper independant camera shop if you can, and the bigger the better. I don't know where you are, but if you're anywhere near Watford then SRS Microsystems is a very good call, the staff are friendly and knowledgeable and will spend hours with you trying different things. I've never  compared their prices on Canon but on Pentax they are usually within a few pounds of the cheapest internet prices. Basically if I'm buying camera kit I don't go anywhere else.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: zpyder on August 20, 2013, 13:06:06 PM
The tilt screen might be worth it for "family" stuff. I can see it's use for:

Group photos (You can compose the group without having to be behind the camera (use it with a remote shutter release (peanuts on ebay))
Family outings/events. You can hold the camera above everyones heads and still compose the shot
Messing around. Similarly you can have the camera down low, without having to be a contortionist or break your back etc.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Adrock on August 20, 2013, 13:31:15 PM
Mongoose, I live in Watford. I've been looking at that shop's website for a few days.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Adrock on August 20, 2013, 17:01:00 PM
Is it worth spending extra money on the IS lens? Its £20 extra on the 1100D packages I've seen.

Which brings me to memory cards, where do you guys buy your memory cards?

And finally, local shops sound good in principle but if they close at bloody 5:30pm and I get home from work at 5pm then there is little to no chance of me getting there to actually peruse their service. And then weekends are always super busy for me so I never get the chance to go then either. Nightmare.

Think I'm gonna have to go to John Lewis tonight to have a look, see what the missus thinks. At least they're open late.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: zpyder on August 20, 2013, 18:27:59 PM
So you're looking at the 1100D?

Assuming that the IS version has the same maximum aperture, I'd spend the extra £20 for the IS lens. If the DC version has a better max aperture, it's more tricky as you'll have to decide between a faster lens, and IS. I'm actually finding it hard to find info on the DC version. I can only assume it's the old style lens.

Image stabilisation is very handy, and you can always turn it off if you don't need it.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: addictweb on August 20, 2013, 19:15:33 PM
http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/

Might be an option once you decide what you want. Always been very impressed by their second hand stuff.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: Adrock on August 20, 2013, 21:48:45 PM
Thank you all very much for your help. Took her to John Lewis, told her what her options were and she tried a few cameras. Decided in the end that she wanted the Canon 600D. Over budget, but she wanted it.

I really liked the look of the tiny Sony, alas, she likes big ones.

So, SD cards. Gimme some recommendations and where to buy them please. Am I looking for super high speed ones or will any crap do? Also, what size am I gonna be looking towards to get a decent amount of shots out of it?
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: zpyder on August 20, 2013, 21:55:49 PM
32gb Class 10 SD Card would do you right.

I get over 1000 (I think it's about 1400) full resolution RAW 18mp pictures on a 32gb compact flash card.

I don't bother with the expensive brands. I just get the cheapest I can find that doesn't have a load of bad reviews. If it fails, I'd be able to afford 2-3 more for the price of one of the branded proper cards.
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: addictweb on August 20, 2013, 22:12:11 PM
32gb Class 10 SD Card would do you right.

I get over 1000 (I think it's about 1400) full resolution RAW 18mp pictures on a 32gb compact flash card.

I don't bother with the expensive brands. I just get the cheapest I can find that doesn't have a load of bad reviews. If it fails, I'd be able to afford 2-3 more for the price of one of the branded proper cards.

This might be overkill (more than you need) but at these kind of prices there's no point in going smaller / slower:

http://www.mymemory.co.uk/SDHC/Transcend/Transcend-32GB-Premium-SDHC-Card-Class-10-_-UHS-1-45-MB_s
Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: M3ta7h3ad on August 21, 2013, 01:35:47 AM
Class 10 isn't totally needed as the camera had a cache itself while it writes to disk. But for the sake of a few bob, may as well get it.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

Title: Re: Nikon vs Canon
Post by: zpyder on August 21, 2013, 09:12:05 AM
Yeah, but that cache only goes so far. For instance my camera can fill it's 18 photo memory buffer in about 2.5 seconds of burst shooting. A faster memory card means the cache can save the photos quicker, freeing up the buffer.

For family things where you've got kids and dogs running around, or events, having a fast card is a help. Also it'll help with saving any HD video.