Consolidation for Canon Users that shoot Wildlife/Sports

[Apop]

The recently reignited debate about sensors performance and Nikon's superiority have led me to post this to make the canon users feel better!

If you shoot sports/wildlife you might want to take consecutive shots, FPS is important.
If you shoot raw, buffer may be an issue .

Here is 3 seconds of action

3 seconds of action

d800 : 12 shots
d7100: 14 shots(at best, the buffer is terrible)
d600 : 16 shots
6d : 14 shots (AF might be an issue)
5dIII: 18 shots
7d : 24 shots
1d4 : 30 shots (if you want to buy, it must be second hand)
d4 : 30 shots (high price)
1dx : 36 shots (high price )

The only affordable nikon ( so excluding 5-6K$ cameras like d4) that has a decent enough frame rate and buffer IMO is the d600. Well the d600 lacks the AF system that the d7100 and d800 have..., it's autofocus is far inferior to those....

In the canon segment, I think the 7d, 5dIII and 1d4 are all wonderful alternatives (the 70d should have 16 shot buffer, so you might get 19-21 shots in 3 seconds).

The 5d3 focus system is better than that of the d600, the 1d4 focus system is also better.
I am not sure if the 7d/70d focus system trumps the d600.


All in all you have a lot more choice for sports/wildlife on the canon side!

 

[captainkanji]

I had the 7D right up until the firmware update that practically doubled the RAW buffer. It was fantastic!

 

[distant.star]

.
After puzzling through this, I concluded you probably mean "consolation."

 

[rpt]

.
After puzzling through this, I concluded you probably mean "consolation."

Ah! Thanks. I was wondering about the relevance.

 

[scottkinfw]

Thank God.
Knowing this, now I won't have to sell all my gear just for the far superior dynamic range of the Nikon sensors (sarcasm there). My 5D III frame rate is fine whatever it is for me, and I shoot wildlife.

My way of thinking, even if Nikon was a superior system, and I got that system, I would still be the weak link in the entire system. All things being what they are, I'm sticking with Canon, and working on getting better at the craft. regardless of fps, and dr.

The recently reignited debate about sensors performance and Nikon's superiority have led me to post this to make the canon users feel better!

If you shoot sports/wildlife you might want to take consecutive shots, FPS is important.
If you shoot raw, buffer may be an issue .

Here is 3 seconds of action

3 seconds of action

d800 : 12 shots
d7100: 14 shots(at best, the buffer is terrible)
d600 : 16 shots
6d : 14 shots (AF might be an issue)
5dIII: 18 shots
7d : 24 shots
1d4 : 30 shots (if you want to buy, it must be second hand)
d4 : 30 shots (high price)
1dx : 36 shots (high price )

The only affordable nikon ( so excluding 5-6K$ cameras like d4) that has a decent enough frame rate and buffer IMO is the d600. Well the d600 lacks the AF system that the d7100 and d800 have..., it's autofocus is far inferior to those....

In the canon segment, I think the 7d, 5dIII and 1d4 are all wonderful alternatives (the 70d should have 16 shot buffer, so you might get 19-21 shots in 3 seconds).

The 5d3 focus system is better than that of the d600, the 1d4 focus system is also better.
I am not sure if the 7d/70d focus system trumps the d600.


All in all you have a lot more choice for sports/wildlife on the canon side!

 

[serendipidy]

.
After puzzling through this, I concluded you probably mean "consolation."

I came to the same conclusion ;D

 

[yyz]

Around 5-6 years ago I finally decided to sell my old film Pentax SLR and go completely digital. At that time I ended up buying D40, 17-55 f/2.8, 24 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135 f/2.0, 400 f/4, 1.4 teleconverter and a 580 flash plus two 430 flashes. The plan was to upgrade when a good ff arrived and now 5D III plus 24-70 II is added.

When making my decision I was completely open to both Nikon and Canon and found the two options very equal. That is still my opinion - neither brand seems significantly better. Among the key buying decisions for me at the time was Canons IS in the 400 mm, but there were other parameters. One consideration was to put more emphasis on the lenses than on the presently avaliable camera bodies as technologi in bodies develop very fast.

Assessing the decision now I have no regrets: As stated in this thread action is Canons stronger side (also in lenses in my assessment) and when I go over my stock of probably 20.000 kept shots I have a hard time finding any where one extra stop of dynamic rage would have made the difference (then ususlly I would need 3-4 extra stops and HDR would be needed) but I have an infinity of motives where faster frame rate and better autofocus would have made a world of difference (and even more deleted or missed shots for the same reason). I have been using borrowed 7D and 1Dx in some of my sports shootings as well.

But both brands are truly excellent and I as a photo entusiast I am thrilled to have this hobby in a time where there is technology and competision driving these wonderful cameras and lenses. It is amazing how much more can be done better and more convenient than in the 80-ties when I was equally eager with my Pentax film camera. So let's enjoy this wonderful equipment and be pleased that many camps can be satisfied.

 

[mrsfotografie]

FPS isn't everything, for most fast moving things I use "Continuous L" on the 7D which is about 3-4 fps I believe. Especially for motorsports you don't need the highest FPS; and it saves on shutterlife and sorting through millions of pictures that are almost the same...

When high FPS is needed I find the 8 FPS of the 7D more than sufficient.

 

[Apop]

.
After puzzling through this, I concluded you probably mean "consolation."

Ah! Thanks. I was wondering about the relevance.

Oops, sorry my english is rather poor , I thought I had the right word in my head , something like make canon users feel stronger/more secure or something

Next time I better use the dictionary for words more complicated than Hello/Goodbye

 

[serendipidy]

.
After puzzling through this, I concluded you probably mean "consolation."

Ah! Thanks. I was wondering about the relevance.

Oops, sorry my english is rather poor , I thought I had the right word in my head , something like make canon users feel stronger/more secure or something

Next time I better use the dictionary for words more complicated than Hello/Goodbye

I admire anyone who can speak more than one language...(I don't)

 

[bholliman]

I would still be the weak link in the entire system. All things being what they are, I'm sticking with Canon, and working on getting better at the craft. regardless of fps, and dr.

Well said.

The same applies to me. The Canon equipment I currently have is far better than my photography skill (even with its limited DR! : ). I need to worry less about acquiring equipment and more about improving my skills as a photographer.

 

[RGF]

The recently reignited debate about sensors performance and Nikon's superiority have led me to post this to make the canon users feel better!

If you shoot sports/wildlife you might want to take consecutive shots, FPS is important.
If you shoot raw, buffer may be an issue .

Here is 3 seconds of action

3 seconds of action

d800 : 12 shots
d7100: 14 shots(at best, the buffer is terrible)
d600 : 16 shots
6d : 14 shots (AF might be an issue)
5dIII: 18 shots
7d : 24 shots
1d4 : 30 shots (if you want to buy, it must be second hand)
d4 : 30 shots (high price)
1dx : 36 shots (high price )

The only affordable nikon ( so excluding 5-6K$ cameras like d4) that has a decent enough frame rate and buffer IMO is the d600. Well the d600 lacks the AF system that the d7100 and d800 have..., it's autofocus is far inferior to those....

In the canon segment, I think the 7d, 5dIII and 1d4 are all wonderful alternatives (the 70d should have 16 shot buffer, so you might get 19-21 shots in 3 seconds).

The 5d3 focus system is better than that of the d600, the 1d4 focus system is also better.
I am not sure if the 7d/70d focus system trumps the d600.


All in all you have a lot more choice for sports/wildlife on the canon side!

About 6-9 months ago I looked at switching from Canon to Nikon. I did this since I was considering adding a 200-400, 1Dx or 4D, and upgrading my 500. All this is lots of $ so that was the time to consider the switch.

In a nutshell I decide Canon won one the long end, at least a tie if not a win for the bodies except for the D800 high MP but Canon's 5D M3 won on ISO, at least a tie if not a win for intermediate focal lengths such as the 70-200, 24-70 (Nikon's 80-400 is superior to Canon's 100-400, at least for a while), and Nikon won by a fair bit on wide angles. Add T/S in Canon's favor and it is a no brainier - stick with Canon