Messages

16

Lenses / Re: Why The EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x Delay?

« on: November 14, 2012, 01:09:21 AM »

I was thinking that it would be nice to have the 200-400 f4 an an every now and then use lens, but that's not going to happen if its going to cost $10K. I thought it would be closer to the price of the 70-200 II or 24-70 II.

Speaking of that. I see that these lens types of lens are commonly used for sports, but who pays for these pictures to justify the price of these lens? Especially when it comes to wildlife.

There is a better way to spend that money if I really want this zoom range.
Nikon D800 + Nikon 200-400 f4 VR II + Nikon TC 1.4
= $2,999 + $6,749 + $520 (Amazon price)
= $10,268

17

Canon General / Re: Canon Can't Even Make a Billion Dollars Anymore

« on: November 02, 2012, 01:38:43 AM »

Going on Nikons figures they are not really in a great place either.

381Billion Yen = $4.75 Billion USD Net sales (Up $705 Million USD from last year)
41.8 Billion Yen = $521,629,530.72 USD Operating income (Down $69.8 Million USD from last year)

So does this mean that if Nikon only made $521.6 Million(USD) they too couldn't make a Billion Dollars either?

Canon is a much bigger and diversified company, which not only sells cameras, but printers, scanners, camcorders, copy & fax machines, etc.  If you just consider DSLR cameras that most of us in this forum are interested, the sales of Canon is dropping, while Nikon is rising.  Nikon is quite profitable considering its small product lines.

18

Canon General / Re: Canon Can't Even Make a Billion Dollars Anymore

« on: November 01, 2012, 06:53:36 PM »

canon sales are still strong.. no suprise given the large EXISTING userbase.

but... new DSLR users buy more nikon gear than any time before.

i can only speak from my experience .. sure.

but nikon sells very strong this year for people who are buying new into a DSLR system.

no wonder if you ask me.... though economy... and nikon offers a camera with great public reception for 500-600 euro less (D800 vs. 5D MK3).

the D600 also sells very well.

You have any external resources that actually back up that claim? Or is it just another anecdote intended to skew peoples thinking?

I didn't even know that companies reported that kind of information, or better yet, were even capable of GATHERING it in the first place! How the hell does anyone who might be capable of generating that kind of specific information know if someone buying a Nikon camera is a "new" photographer or not? What about all the people who just buy a camera, and don't tell their reseller ANYTHING about themselves other than that they want a particular camera? Sorry, but I call bullshit. No one could even get enough information about enough buyers to derive specific enough statistics that could actually be used to determine that Nikon, Canon, or any other manufacturer is selling more cameras to "new photographers."

I believe Nikon has gained "switchers", who have dumped Canon in favor of a brand that offers them more dynamic range. I believe that because there are literally people who HAVE switched who've talked about it, blogged about it, and created videos about it. Wherever there is a vocal sample, there is a larger base from which that vocal sample comes from. There is information to back up the claim that Canon has lost some customers to Nikon due to existing Canon customers switching brands (or adding Nikon to their kit rather than getting a new Canon camera.) There is no information about how many such individuals there might be in total, though, and on the flip side there have definitely been people who've jumped off the Nikon ship to get a 5D III or a 1D X as well...so the net change could even be neutral.

Nikon Rumon just released the Nikon financial results, which are quite good in the DSLR market.
http://nikonrumors.com/2012/11/01/nikons-financial-results-for-the-first-half-of-the-year-are-out.aspx/

19

EOS Bodies / Re: Official DXOMark Sensor Score for the EOS-1D X

« on: October 31, 2012, 02:19:18 PM »

But their score is about DR at ISO 100, and I'm sorry, but 99.99% of my images don't need to be pushed 3+ stops and my camera is not always stuck at ISO 100 so this is irrevelent to 99.99% of user.

This is a bit funny – you do very common mistake as many others   - you are extrapolating your own world dimensions to the other worlds which is totally wrong methodologically.
Basically what you are telling is - “ I do not need that so I assume that all other people do not need  that either”. Big DOT.
Here is the question – how do you know  in your confined world  what  I need or other people need 
In this respect your judgment is no better than DXO Scores that you are blaming )))

It's funny maybe because that was my point! DXO makes a huge effort to take all those measurement, making it readable to most, and then deliberately throw most of it to the garbage to produce a pure meaningless score. That makes no sense! That's why I specifically said that they should do an average of all their measurements across all ISO to includes every type of shooters that exist, not just a minority of them... I've never said to exlude something because I don't use it. I said include everything! That's the science of a sensor...

This is really a funny human nature.  There were so many cheers about 1DX being the best camera when the rumor DXO score was posted.  Now the real score is being questioned when it is low.

20

Canon General / Re: Canon Can't Even Make a Billion Dollars Anymore

« on: October 28, 2012, 05:10:48 PM »

I think this year's tsunami crisis in Japan and the fact it heavily impacted r&d and production might have helped with these companies' losses...

You realize the tsunami (earthwuake + nuclear disaster) was well over a year ago right? It did do harm but when so much is made in China/Taiwan no real hits were taken.

Nikon's loss was due to Thailand floods.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/03/nikon-posts-q3-2011-earnings-sees-extraordinary-losses-due-to/

21

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Considering switching to Nikon

« on: October 23, 2012, 12:23:51 PM »

To be honest, I've tought about switching to Nikon too. It almost drives me insane that it seems like Canon isn't doing anything about their (heavily) inferior sensors. With every release of a new DSLR you see Canon getting beated to death by Nikon and Sony when it comes down to DR. The same goes for noise performance at high ISO when you compare similar sensors (megapixels & sensor size) e.g. D7000 vs 7D.

It's also a bit of a sentimental thing. While I don't really have anything against Nikon, I find their bodies rather ugly (shape and red triangle) and I also find it harder to understand their lense lineup compared to the lens lineup from Canon (e.g. I can't tell which lenses are really top of the bill, except for their 70-200 F/2.8 VRII).

It is harder to distinguish between Nikon's lenses because they classify by the type of lens (basically how new it is) rather than the perceived quality, such as Canon's L line. AF-D lenses are the older type - they have aperture rings and focus via an in-body motor-driven screw. AF-S G lenses are the newest and have Nikon's ultrasonic motor (SWM - silent wave motor) and do not have an aperture ring. There are some that straddle the line between the two, but those are the two main groups.

Top of the line Nikon lenses have a gold ring around the front of the barrel: 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, 24/1.4, 35/1.4, 85/1.4. There might be a few more but you get the idea. These lenses are quite similar to the Canon equivalents, with the exception of the 85 being f/1.4 instead of f/1.2. Nikon also doesn't have a 50L competitor; the 50/1.4G is slightly better optically and much better built than Canon's 50/1.4, but nobody would ever confuse it with a 50L.

One step below that is the new f/1.8 lenses: 28/1.8G, 50/1.8G, 85/1.8G, which are really phenomenal and quite reasonably priced. The 85 in particular is my favorite lens and performs extremely well for $500.

Also note that Nikon just today announced a 70-200/4 with a new 5-stop VR (IS for Canon folks). I'm excited! This is one of the two lenses that Nikon hasn't had, along with a good 135/2, that almost made me not switch. Looks like it's one down, one to go

Nikon does have the 135/2 DC.  I have not had a chance to try it, and don't know how it compares to Canon's. Many people listed the Nikon 135 the best portrait lens, while some don't have good control about the DC, which you don't have to use.

22

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Considering switching to Nikon

« on: October 23, 2012, 12:01:26 PM »

To be honest, I've tought about switching to Nikon too. It almost drives me insane that it seems like Canon isn't doing anything about their (heavily) inferior sensors. With every release of a new DSLR you see Canon getting beated to death by Nikon and Sony when it comes down to DR. The same goes for noise performance at high ISO when you compare similar sensors (megapixels & sensor size) e.g. D7000 vs 7D.

I have bought many Canon products in the past (Printers: i560, MP450, MF8030Cn; Digital Cameras: Powershot A40, EOS 550D) and essentially was happy with all of them. However I'm frequently wondering why I choose Canon for my first DSLR (550D/T2i) and not Nikon because they use the superior Sony EXMOR sensors. I also want to buy a fullframe DSLR and the 5D Mark III and D800 are too expensive for me. So I'm looking at the D600 and 6D. I'll probably go with the 6D just because I wouldn't have to sell my gear first (550D, EF-S 18-55 F/3.5-5.6 IS, EF 50 F/1.8 II, EF 70-200 F/4L IS and Speedlite 580EX II).

It's also a bit of a sentimental thing. While I don't really have anything against Nikon, I find their bodies rather ugly (shape and red triangle) and I also find it harder to understand their lense lineup compared to the lens lineup from Canon (e.g. I can't tell which lenses are really top of the bill, except for their 70-200 F/2.8 VRII). The thing that bothers me the most about Canon, is their mentality. They produce inferior sensors so one would assume that therefore their bodies would be cheaper than a similar Nikon model. Nope. At least as expensive or even more expensive. They keep on milking their customers e.g. the totally stripped down 6D (compared to 5D3) is priced about the same as a D600 which has MUCH better specs and a MUCH better sensor.

Canon and Nikon have similar lens lineup.  The following translation might help.
IS -> VR
USM -> AFS
EF -> FX
EFS -> DX
L -> ED

D is the older series, which has an aperture ring.
G is the current series, which is usually sharper and has no aperture ring.

23

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Considering switching to Nikon

« on: October 19, 2012, 11:24:40 AM »

I currently shoot with a 5D2, 5D3 & D800E.

First & foremost, at ISO 100 & 200 the image quality of the D800E blows the Canons out of the water - plain & simple.  DR and detail are stunning.  If you shoot a lot at these low ISOs you can't get better than the D800E's sensor.  At those low ISOs, in a high DR scene, a shot that only needs one exposure with the D800 might very well need 2 with the Canon to capture clean shadows.  At ISOs 400-800 the DR and IQ are generally about equal with the exception of more details for the D800E.  At above ISO 800 the 5D3 starts to pull ahead in DR and maybe noise but I find the noise of the D800E files easier to deal with.

As for AF, I agree with others that the 5D3 has an edge. 

As for ergonomics/shooting comfort overall I prefer Canon but not by much.  The one design feature the D800E has that's inexplicably missing in the 5D series is a built-in viewfinder curtain.  What is Canon thinking?  And why neither cam has a flip out, tilting LCD screen is a real mystery.

Oh, and Canons liveview is way, way better than Nikon's.

As for build quality, the 5d3 is better.  Same too for shutter noise/feel.

As for frame rate, I kinda like the D800 option of using a 1.2 crop to get 5-6 fps (resulting in a 24MP file) but it takes practice to mentally switch from a full frame POV to a smaller crop.

As for lenses, I've seen a lot of 24-105 vs 24-120 talk in the thread with folks saying the 24-105 is a lot better.  I don't agree.  I have & love them both for their usability and IQ and find them comparable.  As for overall lens line-up, I prefer Canon for its amazing TSE lenses and L quality mid zooms like the 70-300 and 100-400 and 70-200 f/4 IS (but it looks like Nikon is about to announce its own 70-200 f/4 VR).  On the wide end, Nikon has the wildly good 14-24 and useful 16-35 f/4 VR.  I've rented a 14-24 to use on my 5D2 and wow, it's nice.  I opted for a Zeiss 21 f/2.8 for the D800E but am still considering the 14-24 or 16-35 VR since I really like AF and handheld stuff.

As others have pointed out, your choice of body has everything to do with how you shoot and what you enjoy shooting.  For ISO 100-200 use, the D800 smokes Canon for image quality and it's about equal up to ISO 800.  The 5D3 might be a slightly better general use DSLR but not by much and only if you use higher ISOs and need a little better fullframe frame rate or slightly better low light AF.

If you can, rent one and find out for yourself how it'll work for your needs.

Good luck!

Oh, and BTW, my D800E does unfortunately have the left side AF problem (still need to send it in for repair).  But on the other hand, my 5D3 exhibits wild light leak thru the viewfinder when I'm using liveview (really bad - not using the annoying/stupid external curtain isn't an option).  Sigh, nothing's perfect.

Great and fair review.  We need more of this.

24

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Considering switching to Nikon

« on: October 18, 2012, 06:10:36 PM »

yes, where is RGF? So much for starting a thread with the words "I want a serious discussion". 

As for friedmud, congratulations on your purchase mate, I hope you have great pleasure in this great hobby with your new kit. 

However, looking at your reasons, you had better be prepared to switch straight back to Canon again the day their products match your needs better -- which could get expensive. And you have just walked away from the best lens kit in the land -- which can easily affect one's photo IQ.

My advice: if you are unhappy with IQ on the Canon side... try Sony! At least they make their own senors, so their product is fully integrated like Canon. And they have a range of AF Zeiss lenses to appreciate. But be prepared for your hobby investment to start spiralling.

Canon is still the best long term investment in terms of total system value and results, looking beyond the short-term leap-frogging of individual camera releases.

You can easily find parts which are made from different vendors in a device, such as PC, iPhone, or car.  Nikon uses some sensors designed by Sony and some designed by themselves but manufactured by Sony.  I use both Canon and Nikon, and I would say they have their own strength and weaknesses but they are comparable.  However, I can't say Canon is the best long term investment, especially they really raised the price for the new pro bodies and lenses this year, but retailers significantly drop the prices, such 5d3, and sell them on eBay at big discount probably due to overstock or demand/supply issues. We are not married to a brand.  Choose the equipment that fits your needs.

25

Canon General / Re: How come Canon never responds to anything?

« on: October 13, 2012, 02:09:21 AM »

Easy -- it would infuriate the 5d3 adopters. Plain and simple. I wasn't aware the d600 had the same sensor as the d4/d800/d3x. Even at 24Mp, it's well known that the d600 sensor is a newer (and better) sensor than the d3x.

Those of you who need all that the 5d2 or 5d3 offers will buy it. Besides, the 5d2 should ultimately still prove to be the better overall dslr than the 6d. I'm Nikon shooter now (having owned the 5d2) but miss much of Canon's system -- like the 35L, 100mm macro, etc. Canon will convince me to buy into their system again as well....it just may be years down the road. I know this is pointless -- but I wanted to state that their TELEPHOTO lens selection is simply unparalleled. This is why they OWN the sports photography market. As far as landscapes....they are still very good. It's a tough time for Canon right now, but i DO HOPE they pull out of this "slump", if you will.

Except for 70-200 f/4, both Canon and Nikon have very similar telephoto lenses.   Nikon even has 200-400 that Canon does not have, and I have seen it many times in the fields.  Why would you say Canon own the sport photography market?

Because Canon's 300 f/2.8L, 400 f/2.8L, etc. are way, way better than Nikon lenses.  Overall, Canon has better sports lenses, and then of course there is the 1DX which is superior to any Nikon camera in existance.

...but they're not?? nikon has a 300/2.8, 400/2.8, 500/4, 600/4 just like canon, and also have had a 200-400 for ages, whereas canon's is still nowhere to be seen. Everyone's superteles are very very good performers and nobody would be disappointed with either brand here.

The perception that Canon destroys Nikon for sports/wildlife stems from the early days of EOS, when Canon's quick jump to AF caught Nikon off guard. Since then both brands have more or less equalized and both perform at very high levels.

Also 1DX better than any nikon camera? Sure, if you don't count the D4 or D3S. Again, both brands offer superb performance once you get up to spending $6k on a body and $5-10k per lens.

+1000

26

Canon General / Re: How come Canon never responds to anything?

« on: October 09, 2012, 04:49:51 PM »

Easy -- it would infuriate the 5d3 adopters. Plain and simple. I wasn't aware the d600 had the same sensor as the d4/d800/d3x. Even at 24Mp, it's well known that the d600 sensor is a newer (and better) sensor than the d3x.

Those of you who need all that the 5d2 or 5d3 offers will buy it. Besides, the 5d2 should ultimately still prove to be the better overall dslr than the 6d. I'm Nikon shooter now (having owned the 5d2) but miss much of Canon's system -- like the 35L, 100mm macro, etc. Canon will convince me to buy into their system again as well....it just may be years down the road. I know this is pointless -- but I wanted to state that their TELEPHOTO lens selection is simply unparalleled. This is why they OWN the sports photography market. As far as landscapes....they are still very good. It's a tough time for Canon right now, but i DO HOPE they pull out of this "slump", if you will.

Except for 70-200 f/4, both Canon and Nikon have very similar telephoto lenses.   Nikon even has 200-400 that Canon does not have, and I have seen it many times in the fields.  Why would you say Canon own the sport photography market?

27

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon EF 500 f/4L IS II & 600 f/4L IS II Showing up in North America

« on: June 02, 2012, 08:00:32 PM »

+1
Both Canon & Nikon have their own fanboys.  However, like 5D Mark III & D800, Canon really needs to think about its pricing strategy.
    Nikon D800 + 600mm f/4G ED VR II is cheaper than Canon 600mm f/4L IS II