July 31, 2014, 12:17:16 AM

Author Topic: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon  (Read 20384 times)

simonxu11

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 233
    • View Profile
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #60 on: September 24, 2012, 07:39:52 PM »

Thats funny you mentioned entry level FF users, as i can get a 28 1.8, 50mm 1.4, 100 f/2 & a 5Dc for close to the price you'll be paying for just the D600. ::)
28/1.8 ~17 years old, 50/1.4~19 years old, 100/2~21 years old
compare to
28/1.8G~5 months old, 50/1.4G~4 years old, 85/1.8G~8 months old
No, thanks~

7 year old 5D compare to D600??
No thanks~

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #60 on: September 24, 2012, 07:39:52 PM »

Tammy

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 110
    • View Profile
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #61 on: September 24, 2012, 07:55:48 PM »
The grass is NOT greener on the other side.
It may look like it from a distance, but when you get there, you can often find it is only painted on.

Friends of mine with D800's complain bitterly about their greenish coloured screens, the poor auto focussing, especially when you pick a point on ther left side as well as other problems.
I have a 5D3 (as well as a 60D with around 150,000 shutter actuations), and I've never had a problem with them at all. In fact, I am still amazed at what a great all-around camera the 5D3 is.
It really isn't lacking anything.

While the spec sheets and DXO tests may say otherwise, in side to side testing, you'd be very hard pressed to see any differences between the D800 and 5D3.
I shoot everthing from weddings, to parties, carpets, products,interiors, portraits, landscapes - you name it, and the 5D3 always does a great job.
I initially went with the Canon system, because of the their lenses and their lower costs compared to Nikons.
The quality is maybe slightly better with Canon, but as most of us spend more on lenses than we do on bodies, the variety, quality and cost of the lenses is what really swayed me to go Canon, and why I stay with Canon.


This thing of D7000 and D800 having a poor AF is a legend. It's just less noob-friendly or noob-proof than most Canon models, but they work great.

No one says the 5D3 is not a capable camera, but the D600 looks pretty much like 90% of it for 60% of the price. If you shoot low-iso you even have some serious advantage.



If you are unaware you should not spread ignorance. There are autofocuses issues (reported by Nikon users) with the Nikon D7000, D800 and D4. Google D800 autofocus issues or search on youtube. There IS a definite and undeniable problem and it is not a few random isolated owners. There are numerous threads on nikon or photography forums. There are countless D800 owners whose D800's have been sent to the nearest Nikon service center for the issue, some multiple times, with many coming back the same as if they were never touched or in worse condition. Imagine you pay $3,000 for a camera or any piece of equipment and it malfunctions in a way that honestly hinders the purpose you bought it for. You would be more than quite a bit upset about the matter.

Here is a well respected Nikon photographer who documents in detail his supposedly fictionary account of his problems with his D800. Photos of what his camera was taking etc. What is even sadder is he sent his camera to Nikon services, they "fixed" it and it came back with the left autofocus points being somewhat accurate but having zero accuracy in the center and right!

In the second link, he does research on the matter and he is finding that approximately HALF the Nikon D800 bodies he has been inspecting etc may be afflicted with AF issues.

http://mansurovs.com/anatomy-of-a-nikon-d800-fix

http://mansurovs.com/nikon-d800-asymmetric-focus-issue

I go to photography school and one of my best friends happens to shoot with a D7000. He is currently affected by the legend-ary D7000 autofocus issues. He is not a noob who should be blamed for obvious user error. His camera misfocuses and misfocuses quite frequently. He mainly shoots portraits, for a living as his occupation, and when he intends to lock focus on the closest eye and achieves focus confirmation, his shots may come out inches out of focus. He does not find this funny one bit. This is already after he has applied AFMA etc. He sent his camera to Nikon services, where they inspected it, claimed they fixed it, and returned it to him. He says it is ever so slightly better but he currently descirbes his beloved camera as one equipped with 39 autofocus points that help him capture 16 megapixels of blurriness! He laughs about the matter, only because right now there's not much else he can do. He will be sending his camera back to Nikon in hopes that maybe they will fix it, if they can, before his warranty expires. He now has a vastly greater appreciation for the basic things like autofocus. A camera that autofocuses properly is a priority in the next camera he purchases. We all don't fully appreciate things until we don't have them anymore.

On another note, I also have another friend who shoots with a D7000 who reports inconsistent focus issues.

So, please, do not spread false information. It misleads others into disbelieving those who are experiencing the reported problems, as if they were liars.
« Last Edit: September 24, 2012, 08:03:02 PM by Tammy »
5D Mk III - 24-70L Mk II - 24L Mk II - 100L - 135L - 50mm F/1.4

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3293
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #62 on: September 24, 2012, 08:09:04 PM »
Thats funny you mentioned entry level FF users, as i can get a 28 1.8, 50mm 1.4, 100 f/2 & a 5Dc for close to the price you'll be paying for just the D600. ::)

Nice try comparing an ancient, used camera to a brand new one.

You could also get a used d700 and get 51-point, highly capable AF and a bulletproof body for around $1500 nowadays... The 5Dc is a venerable camera for sure and produces stunning files in the right conditions but it's definitely not enough to be a versatile camera in this day and age. Some of us like using points other than the center, etc. Even the D600, despite being too plastic for my tastes, has that sexy sony sensor goodness everyone around here is going gaga over.

Also the canon 28/1.8 is not very good, the 50/1.4 is very fragile (AF motor issues, anyone?) and loses lots of contrast at/near wide open, and the 100/2 is ancient (straight aperture blades, busy bokeh, etc).

If you want to compare to those lenses, then look at Nikon's AF-D line, which is still widely available new for the same or lower prices than the canon equivalents you mentioned. The D lenses were made around the same time as Canon's current midrange primes and are very similar; it's just that Canon has not updated theirs yet and Nikon has since replaced many of them with new G lenses, which is my entire point as to why Nikon's lineup is great for me.

I would just lol at your d600 body and no lenses while i Cruse about with a solid body and a set of solid primes that I've used firsthand. It's funny because it took Nikon 20 years to Finally put out decent primes.

Don't be so naive in believing bodies are more important that a set of good lenses.  ::)

weekendshooter

  • Guest
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #63 on: September 24, 2012, 08:37:24 PM »
I would just lol at your d600 body and no lenses while i Cruse about with a solid body and a set of solid primes that I've used firsthand. It's funny because it took Nikon 20 years to Finally put out decent primes.

Don't be so naive in believing bodies are more important that a set of good lenses.  ::)

What?? Jesus, it's like you're reading something else entirely and just responding with whatever springs to mind. When did I say I wanted to pick a body and no lenses? The only time I've heard of people shooting with their lens caps on was on this very forum during the 5D3 light leak debacle. The ENTIRE point that I'm trying to get across is that Nikon has a fantastic range of well-priced NEW primes that put great results within reach of someone who isn't willing to spend $2k per lens, unlike Canon's decrepit offerings in this segment. Thanks for the entertainment though; it was nice to hear that you can't come up with a single relevant point in your favor  ::)

If anyone else would like to put this train back on its tracks and have a civil discussion, I'd love to offer a perspective from the "dark side"  :)

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3293
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #64 on: September 24, 2012, 09:10:03 PM »
I would just lol at your d600 body and no lenses while i Cruse about with a solid body and a set of solid primes that I've used firsthand. It's funny because it took Nikon 20 years to Finally put out decent primes.

Don't be so naive in believing bodies are more important that a set of good lenses.  ::)

What?? Jesus, it's like you're reading something else entirely and just responding with whatever springs to mind. When did I say I wanted to pick a body and no lenses? The only time I've heard of people shooting with their lens caps on was on this very forum during the 5D3 light leak debacle. The ENTIRE point that I'm trying to get across is that Nikon has a fantastic range of well-priced NEW primes that put great results within reach of someone who isn't willing to spend $2k per lens, unlike Canon's decrepit offerings in this segment. Thanks for the entertainment though; it was nice to hear that you can't come up with a single relevant point in your favor  ::)

If anyone else would like to put this train back on its tracks and have a civil discussion, I'd love to offer a perspective from the "dark side"  :)

Entry level FF nikon options only include d600 & 700. Which both are around 1500-2000$. With that same cash i could buy an entire canon FF kit for that price. I mean afterall, it wasnt me who mentioned entry level FF value.  ::)


simonxu11

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 233
    • View Profile
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #65 on: September 24, 2012, 09:43:09 PM »
It's funny because it took Nikon 20 years to Finally put out decent primes.

What a fanboi~~
LOL
« Last Edit: September 24, 2012, 09:49:46 PM by simonxu11 »

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3293
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #66 on: September 25, 2012, 09:58:09 AM »
It's funny because it took Nikon 20 years to Finally put out decent primes.

What a fanboi~~
LOL


Thats a pity as I assumed that you would have the mental capacity to do the research by youself but since that is beyond your grasp, I stand behind my statement.

The Nikon 28 1.8G, 50mm 1.4G, and 85mm 1.8G are good lenses, But they are 20 years late to the party.
While IQ is important, its not as important as getting the shot in the first place. Canon has had these very useful features while nikon was still fiddling with screws in there bodies.

1. Full Time manual Over-ride - Also Not having to fiddle with AF-MF switch and leave my hands clear of the focus wheel.
2. Silent & Fast USM Focusing
3. Complete compatability with all EOS bodies, Even Rebels AF with all lenses. Not just the ones with screws. ::)
4. Pricing

Canon 28mm 1.8 - released with all these features in 1995 - Nikons 1.8G was released in 2012
Canon 50mm 1.4 - released with all these features in 1993 - Nikons 1.4G was released in 2008
Canon 85mm 1.8 - released with all these features in 1992 - Nikons 1.8G was released in 2012
Canon 100mm F/2 - Released with all these features in 1992 - Nikon has not matched.

Nikon didn't have a fast 28mm period in the budget range until now and its only marginally better than the canon.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=253&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=802&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Nikon's 50mm 1.4G barely surpasses the canon 1.4 in IQ, and that lens is from the 90's.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=636&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Nikons 85mm 1.8G is the same story, Infact it has more CA's than the old canon.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=106&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=791&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Canon's 100mm F/2 is still better than any nikon budget tele-prime.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=118&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=791&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

If you look at the nikon AF-D series which competed against canons prime's up until the recent nikon primes, they're just horrid little lenses.

As for fanboyism, I'm anything but that. I agreed that Nikon's current bodies are better but they're prime lens selection isn't even fully caught up to canon yet. I even held a poll showing that alot of users agree with this.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=9212.msg165848#msg165848

If nikon has better primes, I wouldn't be shooting canon.  ::)


« Last Edit: September 25, 2012, 10:11:32 AM by RLPhoto »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #66 on: September 25, 2012, 09:58:09 AM »

simonxu11

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 233
    • View Profile
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #67 on: September 25, 2012, 11:11:02 AM »
It's funny because it took Nikon 20 years to Finally put out decent primes.

What a fanboi~~
LOL


Thats a pity as I assumed that you would have the mental capacity to do the research by youself but since that is beyond your grasp, I stand behind my statement.

The Nikon 28 1.8G, 50mm 1.4G, and 85mm 1.8G are good lenses, But they are 20 years late to the party.
While IQ is important, its not as important as getting the shot in the first place. Canon has had these very useful features while nikon was still fiddling with screws in there bodies.

1. Full Time manual Over-ride - Also Not having to fiddle with AF-MF switch and leave my hands clear of the focus wheel.
2. Silent & Fast USM Focusing
3. Complete compatability with all EOS bodies, Even Rebels AF with all lenses. Not just the ones with screws. ::)
4. Pricing

Canon 28mm 1.8 - released with all these features in 1995 - Nikons 1.8G was released in 2012
Canon 50mm 1.4 - released with all these features in 1993 - Nikons 1.4G was released in 2008
Canon 85mm 1.8 - released with all these features in 1992 - Nikons 1.8G was released in 2012
Canon 100mm F/2 - Released with all these features in 1992 - Nikon has not matched.

Nikon didn't have a fast 28mm period in the budget range until now and its only marginally better than the canon.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=253&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=802&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Nikon's 50mm 1.4G barely surpasses the canon 1.4 in IQ, and that lens is from the 90's.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=636&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Nikons 85mm 1.8G is the same story, Infact it has more CA's than the old canon.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=106&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=791&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Canon's 100mm F/2 is still better than any nikon budget tele-prime.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=118&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=791&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

If you look at the nikon AF-D series which competed against canons prime's up until the recent nikon primes, they're just horrid little lenses.

As for fanboyism, I'm anything but that. I agreed that Nikon's current bodies are better but they're prime lens selection isn't even fully caught up to canon yet. I even held a poll showing that alot of users agree with this.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=9212.msg165848#msg165848

If nikon has better primes, I wouldn't be shooting canon.  ::)

Whatever~fanboi always win
« Last Edit: September 25, 2012, 11:13:39 AM by simonxu11 »

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2558
    • View Profile
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #68 on: September 25, 2012, 11:13:26 AM »
Nikon may have better bodies overall, except the 1DX, which whips the crap out of any DSLR right now.
2 x 1DX
Big Ten, GLIAC, NCAC

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3293
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #69 on: September 25, 2012, 11:26:06 AM »
It's funny because it took Nikon 20 years to Finally put out decent primes.

What a fanboi~~
LOL


Thats a pity as I assumed that you would have the mental capacity to do the research by youself but since that is beyond your grasp, I stand behind my statement.

The Nikon 28 1.8G, 50mm 1.4G, and 85mm 1.8G are good lenses, But they are 20 years late to the party.
While IQ is important, its not as important as getting the shot in the first place. Canon has had these very useful features while nikon was still fiddling with screws in there bodies.

1. Full Time manual Over-ride - Also Not having to fiddle with AF-MF switch and leave my hands clear of the focus wheel.
2. Silent & Fast USM Focusing
3. Complete compatability with all EOS bodies, Even Rebels AF with all lenses. Not just the ones with screws. ::)
4. Pricing

Canon 28mm 1.8 - released with all these features in 1995 - Nikons 1.8G was released in 2012
Canon 50mm 1.4 - released with all these features in 1993 - Nikons 1.4G was released in 2008
Canon 85mm 1.8 - released with all these features in 1992 - Nikons 1.8G was released in 2012
Canon 100mm F/2 - Released with all these features in 1992 - Nikon has not matched.

Nikon didn't have a fast 28mm period in the budget range until now and its only marginally better than the canon.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=253&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=802&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Nikon's 50mm 1.4G barely surpasses the canon 1.4 in IQ, and that lens is from the 90's.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=115&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=636&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Nikons 85mm 1.8G is the same story, Infact it has more CA's than the old canon.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=106&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=791&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Canon's 100mm F/2 is still better than any nikon budget tele-prime.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=118&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=791&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

If you look at the nikon AF-D series which competed against canons prime's up until the recent nikon primes, they're just horrid little lenses.

As for fanboyism, I'm anything but that. I agreed that Nikon's current bodies are better but they're prime lens selection isn't even fully caught up to canon yet. I even held a poll showing that alot of users agree with this.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=9212.msg165848#msg165848

If nikon has better primes, I wouldn't be shooting canon.  ::)

Whatever~fanboi always win


Haterz Gonna Hate.  ::)
« Last Edit: September 25, 2012, 11:37:59 AM by RLPhoto »

AmbientLight

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 490
    • View Profile
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #70 on: September 25, 2012, 02:31:09 PM »
Ramon, in my humble opinion you are quite correct, but this appears to be a pretty one-sided conversation.

Is it just me or is someone in this forum only to spread funny looking emoticons?

simonxu11

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 233
    • View Profile
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #71 on: September 25, 2012, 02:51:11 PM »
Nikon's cheaper primes are not better because they are too late to the party? So this party has closed? Any new comer will always be considered not as good as canon because they are too late? That's why canon don't update these primes because their loyal followers still think they are the best even one of them has some QC issues for a long time.

I also chose canon in your poll because their long white L lenses. We are talking about cheap prime lenses for budget users here, so your poll results is meaningless.

BTW, please don't post your self portrait ;D

CatfishSoupFTW

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
    • View Profile
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #72 on: September 25, 2012, 03:36:18 PM »
imo, both companies make great stuff and I dont think you would be disappointed with either. for me, I just happened to pick up canon first.
5DmrkII, 40D, 24-105 F4L, 50mm 1.8, 17-85, 70-300

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #72 on: September 25, 2012, 03:36:18 PM »

RLPhoto

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3293
  • Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #73 on: September 25, 2012, 03:52:10 PM »
Nikon's cheaper primes are not better because they are too late to the party? So this party has closed? Any new comer will always be considered not as good as canon because they are too late? That's why canon don't update these primes because their loyal followers still think they are the best even one of them has some QC issues for a long time.

I also chose canon in your poll because their long white L lenses. We are talking about cheap prime lenses for budget users here, so your poll results is meaningless.

BTW, please don't post your self portrait ;D

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why I'm not jumping to Nikon
« Reply #73 on: September 25, 2012, 03:52:10 PM »