Anyone own both Canon and Nikon

[RGF]

In particular I am considering the new D810 with 14-24 and 24-70 for landscapes.

The Canon 16-35 F4 is good but the 14-24 is great!

The 5DM3 is a nice camera but lacks the DR of the D810.

Hate to spend the extra $ for another body and duplicate lenses.

Does anyone shoot both Canon and Nikon - Canon for long lens and Nikon for wide angles? Experience? Thoughts?

I am not trolling nor trying to start a flame war, but look for well thought out positions based upon experience.

Thanks

Rich

 

[eml58]

I've owned a few Nikons over the Years, the best by far being the D3x, I sold that & bough the D800, not so successful.

In terms of producing Images either works fine, without getting into the DR BS, the D800 has only two major flaws in my view, 4fps, of course not an issue for Landscape, and the 2nd flaw is the Menu system, compared to Canons it's like it was designed by a Gibbon on crack cocaine.

Both the D3x & D800 in my situation have been used for Underwater Photography, with the occasional foray into Above water Imaging, for this I bought the 14-24f/2.8, in my view still the best Medium Wide Zoom available today.

Perhaps the single biggest issue of two system ownership is simply that, two systems, two different Lens packages, two different Menu systems, if you can get around this issue, I don't believe the other minor issues around Canon/Nikon are really that big a hurdle.

I had a poor experience with the D800, I had ALL the early issues with this Camera and finally sold it, the D3x is still in my Bag & get's pulled out only to shoot the 14-24f/2.8, if Canon eventually bring out an equivalent I'll sell both no problem.

I did go to the Sony a7r a few months back, like the size, Menu system better than Nikons, great Sensor (similar to the D800), but the whole package let down by Sony poor after sales, not enough Lenses to make the system anything like a replacement for with the D800 or the 5DMK III.

My thoughts for what they're worth.

 

[expatinasia]

designed by a Gibbon on crack cocaine

Haha, good one!

 

[drummstikk]

This is different from your use case, but I recently became "bi-cameral" myself. Been switch-hitting for about 8 months.

I own a 1980's vintage Tamron Adaptall 300mm f/2.8 lens. For those unfamiliar, the Adaptall series of lenses were sold "mountless" and were purchased with whatever auxiliary mount was needed for your system (Canon, Nikon, Minolta, Olympus, whatever). I tried a couple of their lenses in the 80's and found them optically quite good, but the deal breaker was that they focused "backwards." At the time, I was a Nikon shooter. Since I am now a Canon shooter, it's no longer backwards to me, and when I saw a mint condition copy of this lens for about 700 bucks, I waffled for a few weeks, but finally bit on it.

Of course, it's a manual focus lens. But I'm old, so I can do that.

To make a long story slightly shorter, the so-so quality of the "fourth-party" lens adapter (Tamron never made one for EOS), plus the need to stop-down meter due to the Tamron's lack of electronic aperture, made the user experience a bit dicey. So finally, I broke down and bought a Nikon D7000 and Tamron Nikon AI Adaptall mount. Since even a relatively new Nikon "understood" the old non-electronic AI mount, stop-down metering is avoided, and there were none of the little electronic glitches I got with the no-name Canon adapter.

So, I effectively have a 450mm 2.8 and one body that never separate from each other. The unit has become quite a workhorse for me for basketball (a little tight, but got some good stuff), indoor track, golf and softball/baseball. Looking forward to soccer this fall.

Since I had a Nikon in my hands for the first time in over 20 years, I made myself take a good look at switching systems. Manual focus direction is a pretty big deal breaker, but even if I surmounted that somehow, I would second the motion that the menu system previously mentioned is torture to use. Since this d7000 is basically a single-use camera for me, I don't need to dig into the menus much, but when I do, well…I can't say it any better than "Gibbon on crack," so why try?

I won't brag on Canon's menus either, since they look like MS-DOS compared to present-day iOS or Android app menus, but Canon's mostly logical layout and the quick control dial at least make it usable.

A lot of people can reach a point when dipping into the "other" system is the best way to solve a problem. Obviously, RGF is an avid landscape shooter. I'm an avid sports shooter, as well as cheapskate, recycler, and old equipment nostalgist. If your personal passion leads you to consider "crossing the line," don't let brand loyalty stand in the way. I guarantee the brand isn't loyal to you.

 

[Sporgon]

Rent a D800 and try before committing to the purchase and all the problems of investing / operating two different systems.

I think you will find that the constant sermons preached by the Exmor missionaries over state the 'landscape' advantages of the D800. 36 mp is not as much more resolution as you might at first think compared with 23, and the "2 stop" dynamic range seems to be extreme shadow rather than highlights.

Also putting to one side that fact that the Nikkor has a one stop advantage, I thought the new 16-35 was similar performance.

I tried one; I didn't find enough difference to make me want to change. I do think it is an easier camera to get results in difficult lighting conditions, but the Canon can match it with more skill / understanding of exposure etc. Also I have absolutely no need to dodge shadows by four stops or shoot with the lens cap on.

 

[Niki]

i have a nikon film camera…and canon 5dm3...

 

[Don Haines]

This is different from your use case, but I recently became "bi-cameral" myself. Been switch-hitting for about 8 months.

I own a 1980's vintage Tamron Adaptall 300mm f/2.8 lens. For those unfamiliar, the Adaptall series of lenses were sold "mountless" and were purchased with whatever auxiliary mount was needed for your system (Canon, Nikon, Minolta, Olympus, whatever). I tried a couple of their lenses in the 80's and found them optically quite good, but the deal breaker was that they focused "backwards." At the time, I was a Nikon shooter. Since I am now a Canon shooter, it's no longer backwards to me, and when I saw a mint condition copy of this lens for about 700 bucks, I waffled for a few weeks, but finally bit on it.

Of course, it's a manual focus lens. But I'm old, so I can do that.

To make a long story slightly shorter, the so-so quality of the "fourth-party" lens adapter (Tamron never made one for EOS), plus the need to stop-down meter due to the Tamron's lack of electronic aperture, made the user experience a bit dicey. So finally, I broke down and bought a Nikon D7000 and Tamron Nikon AI Adaptall mount. Since even a relatively new Nikon "understood" the old non-electronic AI mount, stop-down metering is avoided, and there were none of the little electronic glitches I got with the no-name Canon adapter.

Are you sure Tamron never made an EOS adaptor? I have one......

 

[AcutancePhotography]

I shoot both Canon and recently, Nikon. I like Nikon and I like Canon. Each camera system has its advantages and disadvantages.

However, if you are an established Canon shooter with a good glass kit, I would recommend only switching to Nikon if you are convinced that Canon can't provide you what you need.

The 5dmIII is an excellent camera and Canon makes really good glass. My advice (free and well worth it) is to really investigate what Nikon *will* provide you... Not what you think or have read Nikon will provide you.

And then really investigate Canon and what they offer you. I think you will find that the differences between Nikon and Canon don't justify the need to switch systems and buy new glass.

Now, if your Canon glass kit is cruddy, like mine was, it makes switching systems a litter easier. But if you already have a 5dmIII and good Canon glass, I would look real hard at what Nikon will do for you and see if, in your case, switching is worth it.

Good luck with it. There are a lot of shooters out there who go both ways. I am not convinced that is approprate for all types of shooters. Being "bi" does raise logistic concerns.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I bought a Nikon D600, along with 24-70 2.8G, 200-400mm f/4, 80-200 f/2.8, 50mm f/1.8, and I already had a few older lenses.

The D800 was a good body, but the lenses were not up to the quality of Canon lenses, the 24-70 had horrible CA, even Lightroom could not correct it all.
Nikon is slowly upgrading lenses, but if they need cleaning, they are glued closed, so they can only be cleaned by Nikon, and their service is S_L_O_W.
The saving grace is that Sigma makes some good lenses for Nikon, I do not know how they AF, but they are often better and cheaper than Nikon.
I sold my D800 as did a couple of other photographers I know. One tried to trade his D800E for my Canon 5D MK III. There is a reason why the D800's were priced around $2100, few wanted one.

The bottom line is that resolution for a average photographer is not much higher. The high resolution ratings you see in lab reviews are the result of very tedious efforts with heavy tripods bolted to the floor, and even then, many attempts may be made to get the best images. You don't have a chance of getting that resolution hand holding one.
Even so, it will be better if you understand that the smaller pixels are more sensitive to vibration, just as 7D owners have learned. A high shutter speed makes a big difference, but using a high shutter speed in low light is difficult.
Post processing is another gotcha, you need a powerful computer to run NR on the noisy high ISO images, they can open to 150MB, and take a long time to process. Every time you move the NR slider, it can take a long time.

 

[drummstikk]

Are you sure Tamron never made an EOS adaptor? I have one......

Hmmm…

All I'm sure of is I've never seen one on eBay.

Are there any electronic contacts on the other side, or is it just a "cold" adapter? The one good thing about my no-name adapter is that it enables focus confirmation (when it works). The lens does focus on infinity, by the way, even though the adapter I have is quite a bit thicker than yours appears to be.

 

[eml58]

RGF, couple more comments.

Like Mt Spokane I also purchased the Nikkon 24-70f/2.8 Lens, along with the 14-24f/2.8, 14f/1.4 & 24f/1.4

The 24-70f/2.8 was, for the price, heavy & results were disappointing, having owned & used the Canon Mk 1 24-70f/2.8, now the Mk II 24-70f/2.8, the Nikkon is far from an equal to either of these two Canon Lenses.

The 14-24f/2.8 though is sublime, but is that one Lens worth taking on a second system ??

If your wanting more resolution to work with, try buying a RRS Panorama Kit, take 4 to 8 Images of the Landscape (they generally don't move too much), put the Images together with some good Stitching Software, and you've got yourself an Image with way more resolution than anything short of an IQ180.

If Landscape is the thing you want a 2nd system for in particular, and your looking to try a few systems before buying, look at the Pentax 645z, new CMOS Sensor @ 51MP, some excellent Glass in the Range your looking for, yes it's more expensive, but not Phase One expensive, this is where I'm currently sitting, waiting to get my hands on the 645z and try it out, see how it compares to a 5DMK III and 6 stitched Images.

 

[Atonegro]

I have both Canon 1DS3 and a Nikon D800E.
I bought a Nikon set because I am tired waiting for a decent landscape and studio camera.

And here is my few cents...

If you now have Canon and only want more resolution, buy the 17mm tiltshift, shift, and stitch the pics.
You will get realy great pictures.
It has its flaws though... clouds, water and leafs will move and make stitching difficult.

I only have a few Nikon lenses, but the 14-24 is realy a great lens.

Don't mind the extra pixels, 21mp and 36mp is NOT a big difference.
What you get with a Nikon is a lot more dynamic range, and that is very important for landscape (and studio)
Post-production of high-contrast foto's is so much better !

Hmm... Some Canon fundamentalists will be foaming at the mouth about this....

If you want the best digital landscapes, consider a mid-range camera.
The Pentax 645, EML58 mentioned, is a very good camera.

For my realy big landscapes I use my Cambo Wide and scan the negatives 3600 dpi for an almost 260 megapixel result.

 

[Aglet]

Usually this query garners fervent rhetoric from those faithfully wedded to Canon.

I actually divorced my 5d2 and hooked up with some D800s and plenty of other Nikon gear specifically for landscape purposes, tho not the 24-70mm.

I had a very early production 5d2 and it was very noisy, complete with perceptible vertical banding in midtones like clear blue sky and it got worse as you went into the shadows. Metering was randomly off, but it behaved consistently in full manual. That camera was certainly not up to spec for serious landscape work and was a very disappointing experience for me after all the positive ones I had with my earlier Canon bodies.

Nikons with Sony sensors eliminated banding noise problems completely from my workflow, what a pleasure!

As some state, the DR difference between canon and d8x0 is not that big a deal, and for the most part that's true, altho I'll take all the DR I can get.

What's related to DR, however, but not yet mentioned in this thread, is the Fixed Pattern Noise issues (vertical stripes) that Canon is only recently making incremental improvements on. The 5d3 is not significantly better than the 5d2 in this regard. The 70D is probably the best crop body from Canon in this regard but still no match for the cleaner files you'll get from any Sony Exmor equipped body (nikon, pentax, Fuji?)
Now I likely had a lemon of a 5d2 but the early production 5d3 I tested still wasn't much better. If you need the best low ISO performance, get an ABC camera (anybody but canon).

Summary; if you currently shoot Canon for landscape, and you are satisfied with the results, then a D810 is not likely to impress you all that much more. If you need to heavily process your raw files, the D8x0 will provide considerably more leeway to do so, especially in the shadows. The extra MP of the D800 may be useful if you're printing larger than 36" wide but you do need good glass and technique to get the best results from it.

As for Nikon's 14-24mm lens, I use it. It's very nice, but it's far from perfect. It's fun to use, provides fantastic ultrawide images but can have significant CA in the corners. But, so far there's really nothing else like it.

An effective alternative is Samyang's 14mm prime + Canon's new 16-35 f/4L combo.

Edit: condition altered on leading statement.

 

[Orangutan]

As usual, this query garners fervent rhetoric from those faithfully wedded to Canon.

I just re-read the entire thread and didn't see any "fervent rhetoric;" would you mind pointing it out? What I see are measured, thoughtful responses about different offerings.

 

[horshack]

If you're not in a rush I would wait for Photokina and see if Canon comes out with a body that tickles your fancy.

 

[Aglet]

As usual, this query garners fervent rhetoric from those faithfully wedded to Canon.

I just re-read the entire thread and didn't see any "fervent rhetoric;" would you mind pointing it out? What I see are measured, thoughtful responses about different offerings.

yup, missed that on my proof-read
should be
Usually this query garners fervent rhetoric...
tho it's still early and the original version could turn out correct after a while.

 

[RGF]

If you're not in a rush I would wait for Photokina and see if Canon comes out with a body that tickles your fancy.

Thanks everyone for their thoughtful comments. No, I will wait until Photokina.

If Canon introduces dual pixel (as expected) with improved DR and a strong competitor to the Nikon 14-28, I will be very happy. 7D M2 (or what ever it is called) will be the beginning of a new sensor series. I would like to see the 5D M4 soon with dual sensor but that is a dream right now.

 

[Lawliet]

Does anyone shoot both Canon and Nikon - Canon for long lens and Nikon for wide angles? Experience? Thoughts?

With the D800 I can get better image quality , but there are a few caveats: minor vibrations are a problem (that in my case doesn't occur that often because of flash useage. Which highlights something important to me: I only need about 60% of the flash power compared to the 5D3) and you need lenses that make actually use of the resolution. The 24-70/2.8s and 70-200/2.8s of both brands get me about equal detail, with the tilt/shift lenses its 3:1 for Canon. That and the RT system make the D800 a special purpose tool, unless you're hitting hard limits that cut into revenue with the 5D3 I'd see what we get for a 5D4 - either its the long term economical choise or the D810 has settled to a market determinated price instead of MSRP.

 

[sdsr]

Like others, I tried a Nikon D800e and was driven nuts by the ergonomics/menu system. Of course, one can get used to that, but I might be inclined to suggest a rather different solution if you don't need AF: get a Sony A7r instead. Aside from costing much less than the D810, it can be used with all your Canon lenses as well as the Nikon 14-24 (does anyone suggest that the Nikon 24-70 is as good as, let alone better than, the Canon 24-70II?). Some who have used both the Sony A7r and the D800e report that the Sony has even better image quality, though of course there's no way of knowing yet how it compares with the D810. Either way, I think those who warn about how difficult it is to obtain very high image quality with these 36mp sensors overstate their case - you can get great results hand-held, and while the very best lenses may be necessary for ultimate performance, you can get impressive results with other lenses too (I recently took a series of photos with an old Pentax Super-Takumar 50mm 1.4 lens on my A7r - very pleasing results).

 

[NancyP]

I am bicameral, tri-lens: Canon DSLRs, Sigma DPMerrill fixed-lens compacts, and a mix of Canon lenses and old manual M42 and AI/AI-S Nikkor lenses on adapters. Note that you can't root around in the back of the closet for old non-Nikkor lenses to put on Nikon DSLR bodies. Canon flange to sensor distance is 44.5 mm, Nikon F2S distance is 42mm, so there is a space for a Nikkor F or G to EOS adapter but not vice versa. So far, my inherited Nikkors getting most use are the 105mm f/2.5 and 50mm f/1.2. They fill a gap between my native Canon full frame lenses 35mm and 180mm. Are they "better" than Canon offerings? Who knows? They ARE cheaper, being free.

I am thrilled with the 6D and for the time being I am not feeling pixel-deprived. I have heard that Canon does live view better than Nikon, and I use live view a lot (essentially for all landscape and most macro).