Considering switching to Nikon

[AlSand]

Hi, have been reading these forums for a while.
After reading topics like this, i cant give in to the thought that my 5D mark II is overclassed by the D800.
Today i was in the opportunity to take some comparison shots in and outside of a store.
I had my zeiss 21, the nikon the 14-24; both respected lenses.
The nikon salesman asked for 400 iso, so we shot at moderate iso.
I didn't expect it, but no way the d800 showed better DR.
Sharpness is better on the zeiss/canon combo. Resolution of course the d800.
I learned my lesson today, i'll stick with my 5D for the next couple of years...

 

[friedmud]

Hi, have been reading these forums for a while.
After reading topics like this, i cant give in to the thought that my 5D mark II is overclassed by the D800.
Today i was in the opportunity to take some comparison shots in and outside of a store.
I had my zeiss 21, the nikon the 14-24; both respected lenses.
The nikon salesman asked for 400 iso, so we shot at moderate iso.
I didn't expect it, but no way the d800 showed better DR.
Sharpness is better on the zeiss/canon combo. Resolution of course the d800.
I learned my lesson today, i'll stick with my 5D for the next couple of years...

Ummm - I don't really understand.... why were you shooting wide angles outside at ISO 400? I hate to say it, but you missed an opportunity by not going down to ISO 100... that's where the Nikon's shine.

If you look at the tests the current Canon sensors basically "top out" at ISO 400... not offering anything extra going down toward 100... but the Nikon's keep adding DR and dropping noise.

Also this doesn't make sense: "Sharpness is better on the zeiss/canon combo. Resolution of course the d800."

What is sharpness to you if not resolution? How can the D800 have better resolution but worse sharpness? Is it because you're comparing 100% at their native resolutions or are you comparing how "sharp" jpegs are? You should downsample the D800 shots to the same resolution as your 5D and do that comparison again.

Not trying to be argumentative here... I just thought your test scenario and outcomes were a bit odd.

 

[tnargs]

...Basically, this whole thing is just trying to let some of you see that there are reasons to switch. The world is not black & white. There are many people in all sorts of different situations and with different needs and in different financial circumstances. It's not as easy as "X reviews better than Y!"... there are more variables...

So..........
There are reasons to switch and reasons to stay,
So make a choice and go away.

tadaaaaaa!

Seriously, guys.

 

[friedmud]

So..........
There are reasons to switch and reasons to stay,
So make a choice and go away.

tadaaaaaa!

Seriously, guys.

Well we have talk about _something_ instead of actually shooting photographs ;-)

But seriously... when I was thinking of switching these types of threads were extremely valuable... they let you see all the different lines of thinking that can be taken into consideration when making this type of decision. For many of us multi-thousand dollar decisions with no RoI other than great photos are difficult, prolonged decisions with many variables to factor in....

 

[verysimplejason]

...Basically, this whole thing is just trying to let some of you see that there are reasons to switch. The world is not black & white. There are many people in all sorts of different situations and with different needs and in different financial circumstances. It's not as easy as "X reviews better than Y!"... there are more variables...

So..........
There are reasons to switch and reasons to stay,
So make a choice and go away.

tadaaaaaa!

Seriously, guys.

Actually it's good to have somebody who can look at the other side of things. Perspectives like these should always be welcome. Being knowledgeable isn't bad and competition is also good. End users like us will always benefit from competition. I like Canon primarily their lenses and ergonomics and I'm hoping to have a better camera body in the future.

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Hi folks - new to this forum - but not photography or Forums. 85 replies and no answer from the OP - does he live under a bridge? (see troll stories).
If the current Nikon cameras are so good then why does Andy Rouse beg or borrow 1 DX's and 5D3's as well as Canon lenses when he has a D4 and D800 + plus a pile of Nikkor glass in his house?
If you can't take good shots with your chosen brand the it's you not the kit.
I must be sad as I actually researched this thread!

 

[marekjoz]

Hi folks - new to this forum - but not photography or Forums. 85 replies and no answer from the OP - does he live under a bridge? (see troll stories).
(...)

Maybe he finally switched?

 

[Deleted member 91053]

Hi folks - new to this forum - but not photography or Forums. 85 replies and no answer from the OP - does he live under a bridge? (see troll stories).
(...)

Maybe he finally switched?

Maybe so.

 

[RGF]

I would like to have a serious discussion. I am not going switch in haste, I am justing thinking about this issues. So please, no flames, etc. Well thought out comments are welcomed.

Comparing Nikon and Canon bodies here are my thoughts

5D M3 no match
D800 no match, when/if Canon comes out with a high MP body, it is likely to be expensive.

Canon 1.3 crop in a 1 series body is great, Nikon's FX/DX lacks this feature. The 1.3 crop makes my 500 a bit longer

Not sure how I would compare the 1D X versus D4 (correct body?), but not terribly important since the 1D X is out of my price range.

Canon vs Nikon lenses

Nikon wins in wide angle.
Canon and NIkon both have great mid range lenses (24-70, 70-200). Canon's 24-105 is probably better than Nikons 24-120.

On the long end, similar quality though with the new super telephotos Canon may have an edge in optical quality and definitely on weight. But at what cost?

Nikon has 200-400, Canon has an interested lens in development, not out yet, costs $3000 (?) than Nikon's.

Speciality lenses - Tilt shift I think Canon wins at least for wide angles. Macro - both are great.

Conclusions

Canon - more expensive, lighter weight Super telephotos, weak in the wide angles expect for Tilt Shift
Nikon - less expense, stronger in wide angles,

Anything else?

Thanks for everyone for their serious thoughts.

Since my passion is wildlife, I will be sticking (at least for the moment) with Canon.

Reasoning:

- New 200-400 is rumored to be great, built-in 1.4x converter may allow me to get the shot I would lose will taking the lens off the camera and adding the converter. Plus I have heard that Canon's version will be lighter than Nikon's. Definitely more expensive, though with the weakending Yen, perhaps the lens will not be that pricey.

- With a 200-400, I will sell my 500 F4 and get a 600F4. Again here Canon wins on weight, if not sharpness.

- In the mid-ranges (24-70 and 70-200) the version II Canon lenses are superb.

- Nikon beat Canons in wide angle lens/

- Bodies: AF Nikon wins but Canon is doing better.

I will make my final decision after the 200-400 is introduced.

Thanks again for all the discussion.