November 27, 2014, 10:14:41 PM

Author Topic: Crazy... go Nikon?  (Read 40684 times)

kubelik

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 800
    • View Profile
    • a teatray in the sky
Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« Reply #195 on: April 03, 2013, 09:02:47 AM »
I finally got a great deal on trade-in gear and made the switch from 5DII to 5D Mark III ... and I gotta say, if the D800 is any better, then it must be an insanely good camera. did some shooting at 1-stop underexposed at ISO 6400 last night with the new 35mm f/2 IS and yes, while the blacks are a bit crushed (I feel this also has something to do with the lens, the 35 f/2 IS is ridiculously contrasty, maybe almost a little too much so), there is excellent detail in the areas where it matters and the files from the 5D Mark III clean up far nicer than the ones from the II in terms of noise reduction. back when I was comparison shopping, it looked like the 5D Mark III had a 2/3-stop advantage over the 5D Mark II in terms of sensor performance based on web charts (dpreview and the like), but I'm finding in real-world usage, it's functionally a 1, maybe 1-1/3 stop advantage in terms of true usability.

I haven't done enough architectural/landscape work with it yet to tell if the dynamic range is improved over the 5D II, but from the bit of work I have done so far, it looks pretty good. I've shot far more restrictive film formats before so dynamic range, limited or not, doesn't bother me. I do think more is always better, but for those folks on here clamoring that the dynamic range limitations of the Canon are a deal-breaker are definitely exaggerating. please look at the work of Galen Rowell to see how dynamic range is controlled at the point of capture. and if you claim that it's too cumbersome, remember that half the time he was photographing in locations that he either had to ski to get to, hike to get to, or be roped in to get to.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« Reply #195 on: April 03, 2013, 09:02:47 AM »

Albi86

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« Reply #196 on: April 04, 2013, 11:03:04 AM »
Why some of you are so stuck in a camera system is beyond me specially when long are the days where they were the only real choice.
Maybe because we are stuck to a lens system and consider the camera an accessory?

That's hypocrisy. If cameras were accessories, we would all be still shooting with our back-in-the-day-amazing 350D.

The truth is that you need a camera, a lens and a photographer to take a picture - and as a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, the same is true for the IQ. Moreover, with post-processing being now a more and more fundamental step of a photographic workflow, sensors and the malleability of their RAW output are becoming a more and more crucial factor in determining the final result. The days when the comparisons were between cameras' JPG outputs are long gone. The days when Canon cameras and lenses were the absolute best are long gone too. Now the competition is very even - Canon leads in certain areas but lags in others. IQ is an area where Canon right now lags pretty badly - then of course it's up to each individual person to decide how relevant this fact is. But it's still a fact.


NorthDallas40

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« Reply #197 on: April 04, 2013, 11:41:11 AM »
IQ is an area where Canon right now lags pretty badly - then of course it's up to each individual person to decide how relevant this fact is. But it's still a fact.

To say its a fact that Canon lags badly in IQ means your statement can be backed up with facts and data.  What do you base your statement on (not including the Nikon-biased DXO ratings).

Pi

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 937
    • View Profile
    • Math and Photography
Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« Reply #198 on: April 04, 2013, 07:39:53 PM »
Why some of you are so stuck in a camera system is beyond me specially when long are the days where they were the only real choice.
Maybe because we are stuck to a lens system and consider the camera an accessory?

That's hypocrisy. If cameras were accessories, we would all be still shooting with our back-in-the-day-amazing 350D.
Quote
Actually, I was shooting with the 350D until three years ago. It was not the right accessory however because its sensor was 40% of what most Canon lenses can cover.
The truth is that you need a camera, a lens and a photographer to take a picture - and as a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, the same is true for the IQ. Moreover, with post-processing being now a more and more fundamental step of a photographic workflow, sensors and the malleability of their RAW output are becoming a more and more crucial factor in determining the final result. The days when the comparisons were between cameras' JPG outputs are long gone. The days when Canon cameras and lenses were the absolute best are long gone too. Now the competition is very even - Canon leads in certain areas but lags in others. IQ is an area where Canon right now lags pretty badly - then of course it's up to each individual person to decide how relevant this fact is. But it's still a fact.

IQ depends on having  good sensor, no major dust problems, no major vibration problems at 1/30, a body that AF's well, just to name a few, and ... well, good lenses and a large variety of them. I can see Canon lagging in sensors but Nikon has its own problems with all the rest.

Albi86

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 837
    • View Profile
Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« Reply #199 on: April 05, 2013, 05:08:51 AM »
I agree that no system is perfect, but I disagree on your definition of IQ. In my view, IQ depends on sensor and lenses only.

Focusing is of course a primary element too, but do you think anything from Canon below the 5D3 has impressive AF compared to the competition? I don't think so - quite the opposite actually.

When you evaluate a piece of hardware/software you look at what it can do; what you actually do with it depends on you alone and on your personal taste/scopes. We buy gear to expand our possibilities, so a product offering me more possibilities is more attractive to me.

psolberg

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 483
    • View Profile
Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« Reply #200 on: April 13, 2013, 07:48:15 AM »
Why some of you are so stuck in a camera system is beyond me specially when long are the days where they were the only real choice.
Maybe because we are stuck to a lens system and consider the camera an accessory?

That's hypocrisy. If cameras were accessories, we would all be still shooting with our back-in-the-day-amazing 350D.
Quote
Actually, I was shooting with the 350D until three years ago. It was not the right accessory however because its sensor was 40% of what most Canon lenses can cover.
The truth is that you need a camera, a lens and a photographer to take a picture - and as a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, the same is true for the IQ. Moreover, with post-processing being now a more and more fundamental step of a photographic workflow, sensors and the malleability of their RAW output are becoming a more and more crucial factor in determining the final result. The days when the comparisons were between cameras' JPG outputs are long gone. The days when Canon cameras and lenses were the absolute best are long gone too. Now the competition is very even - Canon leads in certain areas but lags in others. IQ is an area where Canon right now lags pretty badly - then of course it's up to each individual person to decide how relevant this fact is. But it's still a fact.

IQ depends on having  good sensor, no major dust problems, no major vibration problems at 1/30, a body that AF's well, just to name a few, and ... well, good lenses and a large variety of them. I can see Canon lagging in sensors but Nikon has its own problems with all the rest.

funny that hasn't been my experience shooting both systems  ::) canon lacks some glass Nikon has, and vice versa. In this day and age, both systems are so well stocked, you're really just buying your camera choice  8)

Quote
To jump the ship just for that seems unwise to me. There are many other factors.
I've done it. no big deal. It is actually quite trivial specially because both sides are so comparable. you give up some, you gain some. When the D900 vs 5Dmk4 game starts 3-4 years from now, I'll revaluate my choice.

I have no loyalty to a brand that has no loyalty for me. and don't suffer from gear divorce regrets. I'll use what I consider superior. That doesn't mean I'll switch every month, but once I need to upgrade, all brands are fair game. The canon monopoly was broken long ago. Heck I shoot a m4/3 Olympus when I don't use my big DSLRs. couldn't care less that it doesn't have Nikon/canon logos on it  8)

Quote
When you evaluate a piece of hardware/software you look at what it can do; what you actually do with it depends on you alone and on your personal taste/scopes. We buy gear to expand our possibilities, so a product offering me more possibilities is more attractive to me.

totally agreed. when I decided to switch to the D800, it was not because of what it can't do. I did it because of what it could do which I couldn't (and still can't) find on the canon system. For me, the D800 was what I hoped the 5DmkIII was and given how awesome the 5DII was, the choice was simple for me since I was upgrading anyway. The D800 upgraded everything I loved about the 5DII when I had the original 5D. 5DII & D800 will remain legendary in my book. I just don't understand why people just don't get over the fact not everybody is after the same qualities in a camera. I certainly understand why 1Dx shooters won't touch anything else even if such camera is utterly meaningless for some of us.
« Last Edit: April 13, 2013, 07:59:02 AM by psolberg »

Pi

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 937
    • View Profile
    • Math and Photography
Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« Reply #201 on: April 13, 2013, 08:04:37 AM »

Quote
To jump the ship just for that seems unwise to me. There are many other factors.
I've done it. no big deal. It is actually quite trivial specially because both sides are so comparable. you give up some, you gain some. When the D900 vs 5Dmk4 game starts 3-4 years from now, I'll revaluate my choice.

Trivial? How many lenses do you own? I have five L's and one non-L. All those carefully researched. I have to sell all of them, deal with unknown people on ebay with all the risks involved, spend a lot of time to research the new system, spend more money to get new lenses (and Nikon lenses are more expensive, even though Canon is trying hard to get a lead); just to discover that my new Nikon body cannot focus as well as, say, my old Canon - for example. And just when I do all this, Canon comes up with a new body, and I start selling lenses again.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« Reply #201 on: April 13, 2013, 08:04:37 AM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • **********
  • Posts: 14984
    • View Profile
Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« Reply #202 on: April 13, 2013, 09:34:28 AM »
canon lacks some glass Nikon has, and vice versa. In this day and age, both systems are so well stocked, you're really just buying your camera choice

If you're shooting weddings or 'generalist' stuff, maybe.  But those gaps in the lineup are significant, and I think Canon has the lead there. The MP-E 65mm for macro shooters and the TS-E 17mm for architecture/interiors are unmatched.  For landscape shooters, the Nikon 14-24mm is nice, but Canon has a 14mm prime and a zoom starting at 16mm.  For wildlife, Nikon's real and purchasable 200-400/4 is nice, but I'll take my handholdable 600/4 over that any day.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

psolberg

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 483
    • View Profile
Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« Reply #203 on: April 18, 2013, 07:50:53 AM »

Quote
To jump the ship just for that seems unwise to me. There are many other factors.
I've done it. no big deal. It is actually quite trivial specially because both sides are so comparable. you give up some, you gain some. When the D900 vs 5Dmk4 game starts 3-4 years from now, I'll revaluate my choice.

Trivial? How many lenses do you own? I have five L's and one non-L. All those carefully researched. I have to sell all of them, deal with unknown people on ebay with all the risks involved, spend a lot of time to research the new system, spend more money to get new lenses (and Nikon lenses are more expensive, even though Canon is trying hard to get a lead); just to discover that my new Nikon body cannot focus as well as, say, my old Canon - for example. And just when I do all this, Canon comes up with a new body, and I start selling lenses again.

I sold over 10 high end canon lenses and two bodies. private sales are best. specially if you find a Nikon shooter who wants to go the other direction. I will not say it is no effort, but considering how much I use the gear, the fact I need to post a classified and deal with paypal is actually a minor issue. I don't do it every month and if the release cycles are any indication, the D900/5Dmk4 won't be around for a LONG time meaning the hassle is a twice in a decade occurrence, at best.

Newer lenses tend to be more expensive. the 70-200 and 24-70 canon revisions are more expensive than just about anything. Yet I fully expect the Nikon refreshes of that to come in about 5 years to reach even higher. Is this not expected? off course it is. It's called inflation, dollar devaluation, and simple feature creep.

I will never marry my gear.  8)

Quote
If you're shooting weddings or 'generalist' stuff, maybe.  But those gaps in the lineup are significant, and I think Canon has the lead there. The MP-E 65mm for macro shooters and the TS-E 17mm for architecture/interiors are unmatched.  For landscape shooters, the Nikon 14-24mm is nice, but Canon has a 14mm prime and a zoom starting at 16mm.  For wildlife, Nikon's real and purchasable 200-400/4 is nice, but I'll take my handholdable 600/4 over that any day.

You can do more than *weddings* on a Nikon system. 17mm TS as well as the MP-E65mm are nice yes. And those very specialized shooters will likely not move. In my case I find the 24mm TS to be more suited to me on both systems. But I'll count them as loss for the sake of argument. Landscape wise, the 14mm canon prime which I owned is no match for the 14-24 zoom, in fact no even close. So I count that as a gain. The 1mm difference on the 17-35vs16-35 wide zoom is not holding anybody back. When I switched, I found that Nikon has a 16-35 IS f/4 zoom that goes down to 16mm vs the non IS 17-40 Canon that is also quite old so that was a gain. I'm much happier with the wide landscape offerings than I ever was before, but I can see how both camps can get hung up on justifications for either side as long as they can makeup some shooting situation. Overall for me, it was a net gain on landscapes even neglecting the sensor advantage. The rest of my switch was more of a flush trade. Nikon has a modern 80-400 which canon absolutely lacks so I gained that and so far have been extremely impressed with it. And as you said the 200-400 which *someday* will ship on the canon side at likely greater cost (not that such zooms remotely peeks my interest for now). My other stuff transitioned easily all the way to 400mm.

600f/4 hand-holdable? I'll take your word for it. You're stronger than me and steadier than me for an 8 1/2 lb lens is not something I'd use without good support but it will save your donkey, I'll give you that :)

Ultimately, there is not much point justifying our own choices. Going to any system, you gain some, you loose some, which is my point. I certainly see plenty of the same tales in Nikon land. In most cases however it is just the usual nonsensical loyalty photographers have for mere tools which is both hilarious and sad at the same time.

I know that there are people on both sides of the fence stuck on some lens or camera and erect a shrine to it and overblow its significance based on some anecdotal evidence or personal experience. I'm just glad, long gone are the days were it was canon or nothing and we should all celebrate it and hope it only gets to better. The trend certainly indicates the future is very heterogeneous and there will be plenty of choice. AWESOME.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2013, 10:47:04 AM by psolberg »

Aglet

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1081
    • View Profile
Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« Reply #204 on: April 20, 2013, 12:10:17 AM »
Ultimately, there is not much point justifying our own choices. Going to any system, you gain some, you loose some, which is my point. I certainly see plenty of the same tales in Nikon land. In most cases however it is just the usual nonsensical loyalty photographers have for mere tools which is both hilarious and sad at the same time.

I know that there are people on both sides of the fence stuck on some lens or camera and erect a shrine to it and overblow its significance based on some anecdotal evidence or personal experience. I'm just glad, long gone are the days were it was canon or nothing and we should all celebrate it and hope it only gets to better. The trend certainly indicates the future is very heterogeneous and there will be plenty of choice. AWESOME.

+1

I still don't understand the either-or mentality of some people, especially gearheads like myself.
Some of us have so much invested that it really doesn't matter much what brand it is, as long as it does the job it was purchased for.

E.G. Telling yourself you need to stay with brand X because you have all the flashes and strobes that match is not a very compelling argument when what you need is a better wide angle lens and higher DR body to do landscapes.  Get the better landscape gear, use your other brand with your strobes.

Not all my wrenches and shop tools come from Sears or Snap-On.  I see no compelling reason not to think the same way when spending on photo equipment.  Get what's best suited for the task or whatever you prefer to use for a certain task.

Dare I say, having multiple camera brands on hand, for their different strengths, is NOT tantamount to puritanical views on polygamy.  Yet some people seem to be wedded to their one brand of gear, for better or worse.
I prefer polycamy far more since I've experienced it.  ;D

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Crazy... go Nikon?
« Reply #204 on: April 20, 2013, 12:10:17 AM »