[Poll] Canon Reign Supreme Again?

[PeterJ]

I use auto-ISOs so don't see what the fuss is about. All of Canon's gear is rated for ISO 9001 at least, check the following link:
http://www.canon-europe.com/About_Us/sustainability/business/iso_9001/

The fuss is about when you are comparing  high iso ,noise, resolution the parameters must be the same, and Canon has a  tradition to need  longer exposure time even if the ISO and  target is the same. If you are shooting sports, flying birds  it is easy to understand that 1/1600sec gives better results than 1/790sec.

But Canon is guaranteed to ISO 9001, those shots are only 6400? My Canon goes to 25600, although I've never used that setting in case it's against warranty to exceed the guaranteed amount. Plus for birds and sports you can just wait for nesting / half-time etc, so I still don't see your point.

[JR]

Wow lots of really interesting and passionate comments on this thread so far.  My personal take on the original post question is that neither Canon nor Nikon "reign" supreme.  Both company have raised the bar and we should all be happy about this.  Yes on paper Nikon does have better sensor, but Canon has better AF system and better lens.  Metering is very different with both system and so does color rendition.  Shooting with both system myself, tech charts do not take pictures.  I think it is Neuro who keeps reminding us of that:  a camera is more than chart and more then a sensor.  You need to look at the system.

I do find satisfaction is shooting both system depending on the settings.  If it was so simple and only about a technical chart, I would have sold one of the two system long ago (based on spec alone).  But guess what, some of my best ISO 100 shots portrait are not with my D800 but with my 1DX!!!  Why?  Well maybe it is because there is not equivalent 85 1.2L or 50 1.2L with Nikon, skin colors also seem more true with the 1DX.  Maybe it is because the AF system of the 1DX is so fast that I dont miss the moment...My point is I dont really care because it just works...

I hope Nikon and Canon keeps pushing each other to bring better and better camera system.  Yes I do wish Canon sensor would be better, but I still hope the next high MP camera from Canon will address that...crossing my finger...

[jukka]

I use auto-ISOs so don't see what the fuss is about. All of Canon's gear is rated for ISO 9001 at least, check the following link:
http://www.canon-europe.com/About_Us/sustainability/business/iso_9001/

The fuss is about when you are comparing  high iso ,noise, resolution the parameters must be the same, and Canon has a  tradition to need  longer exposure time even if the ISO and  target is the same. If you are shooting sports, flying birds  it is easy to understand that 1/1600sec gives better results than 1/790sec.

But Canon is guaranteed to ISO 9001, those shots are only 6400? My Canon goes to 25600, although I've never used that setting in case it's against warranty to exceed the guaranteed amount. Plus for birds and sports you can just wait for nesting / half-time etc, so I still don't see your point.

The point is that you can newer compare to different cameras and not have the sam time / f-stop and that Canon needs more lights in a given situation as you can se from the pictures before and from I-R
AND when the discussion  started some people claim that  5dmk3 had better high iso qualities, and I said no, not with the same parameters and the pictures are presented in the same size. After 12800iso the d800 start to loose in comparison to 5dmk3
 

[PeterJ]

I use auto-ISOs so don't see what the fuss is about. All of Canon's gear is rated for ISO 9001 at least, check the following link:
http://www.canon-europe.com/About_Us/sustainability/business/iso_9001/

The fuss is about when you are comparing  high iso ,noise, resolution the parameters must be the same, and Canon has a  tradition to need  longer exposure time even if the ISO and  target is the same. If you are shooting sports, flying birds  it is easy to understand that 1/1600sec gives better results than 1/790sec.

But Canon is guaranteed to ISO 9001, those shots are only 6400? My Canon goes to 25600, although I've never used that setting in case it's against warranty to exceed the guaranteed amount. Plus for birds and sports you can just wait for nesting / half-time etc, so I still don't see your point.

The point is that you can newer compare to different cameras and not have the sam time / f-stop and that Canon needs more lights in a given situation as you can se from the pictures before and from I-R
AND when the discussion  started some people claim that  5dmk3 had better high iso qualities, and I said no, not with the same parameters and the pictures are presented in the same size. After 12800iso the d800 start to loose in comparison to 5dmk3

OK thanks I understand now. Probably the first shot was with a Canon 230EX and the the second with a Nikon SB-900. You should try a 600EX at some stage they are quite bright.

[DanielHoofnagle]

I use auto-ISOs so don't see what the fuss is about. All of Canon's gear is rated for ISO 9001 at least, check the following link:

http://www.canon-europe.com/About_Us/sustainability/business/iso_9001/

iso 9001 is a manufacturing standard. It is a book of standards on how to conduct manufacturing. It has nothing to do with camera sensitivity.  If you manufacture goods, and want to convince investers you are doing so responsibly, you mention that you manufacture to iso 9001 standards, or you are iso 9001 certified. You could manufacture tires, or bicycles, or clothes to these standards, it doesn't mean certified camera sensitivity.

[jukka]

Details, noise 5dmk3 and D800. Nikons "6400 iso" = 1/1600sec f-8
Both cameras 5dmk3 and d800  with the same exposure= time and f-stop. RAW and latest camera raw.
Details  can be seen more clearly in the fabric, letters, face, etc. in the  d800 image.


Parempi riesa kuin nenä

[RLPhoto]

Canon continues to make a series of mistakes on they're product lines. Perhaps a lot like Kodak eh?

[NormanBates]

The title makes absolutely no sense. Whoever thinks Canon is reigning supreme now, must by all means think this was so all along (since it is now that Nikon is most competitive), therefore "again" makes no sense, and gives away the fact that you're just kidding yourself or trying to fool others.

Now, the comment about the certification for ISO 9001 was real funny, that alone makes me glad I clicked on this thread 

[hammy]

Why do they compare 22 mp Canon to 36 mp Nikon ? is that even a fair assessment?

[NormanBates]

well, there's all that "but small photosites will make your image noisier" debate, which needed to be disproved with samples such as those posted above

[jukka]

This is 1dx and d800 and the same exposure  1/1600 sec F-8    6400iso


There are a lot more resolution in d800 compared to 1dx  and 6400iso .
The main difference regarding S/N will be after 12800iso (Nikon iso)


eivät suorita ralley vuonna jääkaapissa

[christianronnel]

I use auto-ISOs so don't see what the fuss is about. All of Canon's gear is rated for ISO 9001 at least, check the following link:

http://www.canon-europe.com/About_Us/sustainability/business/iso_9001/

iso 9001 is a manufacturing standard. It is a book of standards on how to conduct manufacturing. It has nothing to do with camera sensitivity.  If you manufacture goods, and want to convince investers you are doing so responsibly, you mention that you manufacture to iso 9001 standards, or you are iso 9001 certified. You could manufacture tires, or bicycles, or clothes to these standards, it doesn't mean certified camera sensitivity.

I was about to explain that.  I'm glad some people knew what they are talking about.

[Fishnose]

how i see the battle between Canon and Nikon:

Canon 1DX vs Nikon D4 - on pear no clear winner in my opinion.

Canon 5Dmk3 vs Nikon D800 - the D800 have a overall advantage over the Mk3

Canon 7d - still without a direct competitor

Nikon d300S vs Canon 50D ( the rightful competitor from canon) - clearly Nikon win.

Canon 60D vs Nikon D7000 - Nikon clearly wins in almost all aspects

Canon 650D vs Nikon D5200 -  by faaaaar Nikon win.

Canon D1200 vs Nikon D3200 - Nikon win again.


Overall Nikon have a clear advantage over Canon....

Missing:
Canon 6D vs. Nikon D600

About 7D - it does have a direct competitor. The Nikon D90 is roughly the same age (1 yr older), meant for the same kind of customer. Less resolution, but better DR and much else. IQ is on par. Otherwise the D700 is a valid competitor as well.

And yes - it is fair to compare 5D3 to D800. These are the respective manufacuters highest res cameras, similar style bodies, similar prices.

[Ivan Muller]

Its quite amusing to read the heated discussions on which brands are better...as a Canon fan I accept that Nikon probably has better sensor technology at the moment and its cameras seem to be well priced. As a pro I also realize that most camera's quality far exceed the quality requirements of my clients...

But all this technology is like a yo yo one year canon is up and the next nikon and who knows maybe the year after that it will be sony!

Will that make me change systems? Definitely not, as a pro I need something far more than just image quality, I need a system...which btw it looks like almost all the big brands provide anyway...so we are spoiled for choice at the moment...but all the mudslinging is really more for camera collectors, the ones that worry about the street cred of their 'male jewelery'...the rest of us really don't worry about things like that.

I am much too heavily invested in canon at the moment to ever consider changing...For now I leave the battle of the 100% pixel peepers to the folks that have the time and the patience and strong eyes...me I am investing in lenses that will improve my vision, like the 24TS, the pancake and certainly the new 35mmf2 IS..also maybe a fourth 430ex2 flash to make my location portraits easier and a panhead for video, radio triggers, upgrade to CS6, more software, etc etc the list goes on and on...me I think I will wait for the 5dmk4 or the megapixel canon that is surely to come...and when it does I will have quality glass to match! In the meantime I am glad that nikon/sony is 'better' than canon, there is nothing like a bit of competition to improve matters

To see my work follow this link....http://www.ivanmuller.co.za/node/2080

[Ivan Muller]

This is 1dx and d800 and the same exposure  1/1600 sec F-8    6400iso


There are a lot more resolution in d800 compared to 1dx  and 6400iso .
The main difference regarding S/N will be after 12800iso (Nikon iso)


eivät suorita ralley vuonna jääkaapissa

...actually what I see here, apart from the obvious is that the 1dx resolution is not that far off from the d800, which just shows you that double the pixels does not quite equate to double resolution...what I also see is amazing quality from both cameras, the D800 is simply suberb, with the 1dx not far behind...we live in exciting times and what all this pixel peeping prove is that you really cant go wrong buying either a canon or a nikon and I am sure the sony is up there too...!(and I am not forgetting Leica)