Crazy... go Nikon?

[9VIII]

I thought the megapixel race was over. And what happens when Canon inevitably releases a body with a higher megapixel sensor? Will all the switchers switch back? That's a lot of money to just throw around for such a minimal difference every time a brand leap-frogs the competition in one spec. I wish I had that much moolah.

I've thought about getting a digital Nikon a few times (love my F3), and then every time I pick one up I remember why I never bought one- I just don't like the feeling in my hand. They feel squishy and there are buttons and dials on top of other buttons and dials, and the menu systems... I can adjust every Canon setting I need to without taking the camera away from my eye.

Canon, more than a sensor.

The megapixel race was over, and then someone made a higher megapixel camera and it didn't explode on contact or spray graffiti on every picture you take.
I have to wonder if all the terrible things people say about small pixels was actually true five or six years ago, and we just had to wait for technology to improve enough to make them decent.
I also assume that it was/is file size holding things back as much as anything. A 100 megapixel picture will take up a lot of space. Your 32Gig memory card would only hold about 128 shots and the processor would need to be 3-5 times more powerful than anything on the market today. A camera like that basically couldn't have existed more than a few years ago, and even today it would be asking a lot. The sensor is only one part of a big system, it's the rest of the system that needs to catch up, and I think we're only a few years away from that happening (flash prices are plummeting, mobile processors are advancing by leaps and bounds, 5x larger hard drives should be coming down the pipe).

Given the way the Bayor filter works, I actually wouldn't mind seeing cameras output 4x lower resolution than they currently do and actually call individual colour elements "sub pixels" the way everything else in the electronics industry does.

 

[TexasBadger]

Personally, I prefer that Nikon keeps improving their system and lenses. This forces Canon to continue to improve their products. A few years ago, Canon was kicking Nikon's backside because they had a better autofocus lens system (EOS). After that, they came out with the full frame 5D which Nikon had no answer for. Now Nikon has raised the bar with the D800/E and the 14-24 f/2.8. Canon is a much bigger company than Nikon and you had better believe that they have reverse engineered the Sony Exmor sensor and are developing their own alternative. As far as the 14-24 f/2.8 goes, not only will they have to develop one. They will have to make it as good or better than the Nikon. Otherwise Canon shooters will just buy the Nikon and use an adapter. Thank you Nikon, in the long run, you will only make Canon better!

 

[sanj]

Wait, I thought gear didn't matter.

It doesn't.

Delusion.
I think it just sounds cool to say equipment does not matter...
Of course it does!! One needs the right equipment for the specific job.

Sighhhhhhh. One thing you people on here lack is humor, or recognition of humor.

I know it does. To say that it doesn't is insane. Maybe not in the film era, but I'm getting shots now that there is no way possible in the past. Some of them the ONLY reason I get them is because of my camera. Nothing else. No amount of technique or creativity or whatever would get me some of the shots I'm getting. So to say gear doesn't matter is objectively wrong.

Which brings me to my point. Nikon makes a lens that takes advantage of the full resolution of a D800/E and now you have something. Until then, you don't.

Ah. Did not realize there was humor here.

 

[sanj]

Personally, I prefer that Nikon keeps improving their system and lenses. This forces Canon to continue to improve their products. A few years ago, Canon was kicking Nikon's backside because they had a better autofocus lens system (EOS). After that, they came out with the full frame 5D which Nikon had no answer for. Now Nikon has raised the bar with the D800/E and the 14-24 f/2.8. Canon is a much bigger company than Nikon and you had better believe that they have reverse engineered the Sony Exmor sensor and are developing their own alternative. As far as the 14-24 f/2.8 goes, not only will they have to develop one. They will have to make it as good or better than the Nikon. Otherwise Canon shooters will just buy the Nikon and use an adapter. Thank you Nikon, in the long run, you will only make Canon better!

Yep.

 

[nicku]

can a mod please check the IP´s of all these one-post-posters poping up here lately?

it kind of struck me that there are so many new users here who have nothing to tell beside how great nikon is. :

i smell a troll....

It's just how awesome Nikon cameras are. Face it: There are situations (Landscape, Studio) where Canon can't compete anymore and Nikon has taken the lead. If only the lenses would be compatible or Nikon would produce a camera with EF mount...

+1

 

[M.ST]

After waiting for a long time to see a real 1Ds Mark III replacement I now add a new Nikon camera and a few lenses to my equipment.

I don´t change completely, but I want the best from both sides.

 

[J.R.]

You're right, I suppose I could run out onto the football field with my f/1.4 lens .

Oh wait ... you could maybe use a D800 + a 14-24

Edit: I don't think this needs the /sarcasm /humor tag to it but just in case

 

[Rienzphotoz]

Wait, I thought gear didn't matter.

It doesn't.

Delusion.
I think it just sounds cool to say equipment does not matter...
Of course it does!! One needs the right equipment for the specific job.

Sighhhhhhh. One thing you people on here lack is humor, or recognition of humor.

I know it does. To say that it doesn't is insane. Maybe not in the film era, but I'm getting shots now that there is no way possible in the past. Some of them the ONLY reason I get them is because of my camera. Nothing else. No amount of technique or creativity or whatever would get me some of the shots I'm getting. So to say gear doesn't matter is objectively wrong.

Which brings me to my point. Nikon makes a lens that takes advantage of the full resolution of a D800/E and now you have something. Until then, you don't.

Ah. Did not realize there was humor here.

But there is, read once again.

 

[Albi86]

Shooting both system is a mind-opening experience.

I bought a D600 with a 85/1.8G and I couldn't be happier. There are a lot of false prejudices about both systems widespread mostly from people who shoot one of them and happened to play around with the other for 5 min or a couple of days. They mostly derive from the absurd assumption that a Nikon camera has to feel and work the same as a Canon - otherwise it's wrong and weird. And viceversa of course.

Shoot with a Nikon camera and a good lens and you'll see for yourself. As many others have said, if you're into landscapes a D800E is the best thing you can buy.

 

[expatinasia]

I think it is silly to shoot with two systems as that means you need two sets of lenses, two menus and controls to get to grips with, and critically, mix up at the wrong moment etc.

Personally, I chose Canon and have been very happy with the results their cameras have helped me to deliver over the years.

I rarely look over the fence at what Nikon is doing, in fact I seem to have more time for Sony rumours than I do with regards to Nikon.

 

[meli]

Shooting both system is a mind-opening experience.

I bought a D600 with a 85/1.8G and I couldn't be happier. There are a lot of false prejudices about both systems widespread mostly from people who shoot one of them and happened to play around with the other for 5 min or a couple of days. They mostly derive from the absurd assumption that a Nikon camera has to feel and work the same as a Canon - otherwise it's wrong and weird. And viceversa of course.

Shoot with a Nikon camera and a good lens and you'll see for yourself. As many others have said, if you're into landscapes a D800E is the best thing you can buy.

Couldn't agree more. I'm a dual user since last year and couldn't be happier. Plus you dont really care what Canon or Nikon put on the market; one way or the other, one of them will present something that fits you. It feels good not to be tied in with one platform.

 

[psolberg]

get what works for you and screw brand loyalty. they are just tools.

I switched after the 5DmkIII failed to live up to expectations of a landscape/portrait/studio dream camera that is predecessor was. In my case the D800 was an easy choice although having owned it for a year now, makes me wish they would scale up their 24MP APS-C sensor into a 50+MP full framer. As the benefits of oversampling will become a key factor for buyers in DSLRs of the future. Nikon could have had an even bigger home run.

The Nikon lens system has also improved very fast to the point where even the 800mm and 100-400 lenses from Nikon make their canon equivalents look out of date. this isn't Nikon from the last decade any more. Therefore, lens wise I'm perfectly happy with Nikon, and they seem to have the right patents in the pipeline to fill even more gaps, namely a 17mm TS. But anyway, back the point, Nikon has the ball for now. that may change, and I may re-evaluate cameras in 3 years when the 5Dmk4 and D900 are out. But for now, and for my purposes, I'm all set. Canon is seem set on chasing the high ISO game of the late 2000's. That's fine for some, but I shoot light, not darkness, which is the lack of light.

And lets be honest, I spend a lot of money getting to location, hauling gear, waiting for the light to be just right and then snapping the shot. Why on earth would I settle for 22MP canon sensors? If anything, I wish somebody would start bringing the medium format digital market down in price to have 80MP+. Every moment in landscape and wildlife photography happens only once. I want to capture it with the best sensor I can afford, and for now that is the D800.

For compact, I've ditched Nikon/canon and I've gone m4/3. the EOS-M is a non event and all the good action is happening with m4/3 outside of the canon/Nikon duopoly.

I'm loving what sony is doing. they are very distruptive and heck they should buy Nikon for all their glass. The point being, stop being the victims of Stockholm syndrome guys. shoot with what works for you. The world has changed. we got options other than canon and thank god for that! nothing sucked more in the last decade than being hostage to one company.

 

[RLPhoto]

You're right, I suppose I could run out onto the football field with my f/1.4 lens .

That's the spirit.

 

[Albi86]

Couldn't agree more. I'm a dual user since last year and couldn't be happier. Plus you dont really care what Canon or Nikon put on the market; one way or the other, one of them will present something that fits you. It feels good not to be tied in with one platform.

Exactly. Photography is an expensive hobby, one that is possible to plan on the long term.

For many people - including me - it makes more sense to have 1 Canon body and 3 lenses + 1 Nikon body and 3 lenses instead of 2 Canon bodies and 6 lenses.

 

[Aglet]

I’m glad to see more people speaking up in a positive way about using systems other than Canon.
Golly, the way some Canon die-hards react to this idea is comparable to the voiciferous objections one might expect when publicly inviting a highly pious individual to partake in an orgy of debauchery. Sure is a lot of denial and nay-saying but I bet if the denier got the chance to have their way with one of “the others” for a week, in private of course, and actually discover its values and merits, opinions would likely change in a more accepting direction.
Canon certainly does not have ALL of the best photographic solutions and if you don’t mind learning a bit more by using other mfr’s equipment you may acheive something closer to photographic equipment nirvana.
Of course this may not work for everyone, there’s gonna be some who will stubbornly maintain their faith in monocamy while others of us have no hesitation of belonging to a bicamy or even a polycamist group.
(Aint that right my darlings Pentaxia, Nikonia, Olympia, Sony-Sue and Pana-Lee? You can all get along with my first, Canonella, just fine.)

 

[RS2021]

You're right, I suppose I could run out onto the football field with my f/1.4 lens .

That's the spirit.

Actually Nikon D800 plus the 14-24 can be the second coming... that is all there really is...nothing like it since sliced bread... Canon's telephotos...superteles... f/1.2 portrait lenses...they don't matter...screw all that...but the 14-24...now you are talking... it does it all. Sharp all the way from this deluded corner to the other greener pasture.

 

[charlesa]

You're right, I suppose I could run out onto the football field with my f/1.4 lens .

That's the spirit.

Actually Nikon D800 plus the 14-24 can be the second coming... that is all there really is...nothing like it since sliced bread... Canon's telephotos...superteles... f/1.2 portrait lenses...they don't matter...screw all that...but the 14-24...now you are talking... it does it all. Sharp all the way from this deluded corner to the other greener pasture.

Actually there is a heaven on both sides.. a D800E with a 14-24... and a 1DX with a 400 mm f/2.8 II on the other side...

 

[ksagomonyants]

I'm far from being a pro photographer and I definitely lack a lot of photography knowledge. But I'm quite surprised that many of you guys are ready to switch to Nikon just because of the 14-24 lens. I mean, it's a remarkable lens but it has its own flaws, such as very strong lateral chromatic aberration and strong rearward focus shift, as well as great difficulty finding a filter for it. Why wouldn't you use Zeiss, Canon's TS or Schneider PC-TS prime lenses instead of a remarkable but still a zoom lens? These days you can quite easily make panoramic images if these lenses aren't as wide.

 

[RS2021]

I'm far from being a pro photographer and I definitely lack a lot of photography knowledge. But I'm quite surprised that many of you guys are ready to switch to Nikon just because of the 14-24 lens. I mean, it's a remarkable lens but it has its own flaws, such as very strong lateral chromatic aberration and strong rearward focus shift, as well as great difficulty finding a filter for it. Why wouldn't you use Zeiss, Canon's TS or Schneider PC-TS prime lenses instead of a remarkable but still a zoom lens? These days you can quite easily make panoramic images if these lenses aren't as wide.

You seem pretty knowledgeable to me.

I would not say "many" are willing to switch...there is a bit of swarming by the same fanboys on topics like this. Some of the most adamant can't probably sustain two camera platforms but will still spout it as a certainity... others are well meaning and are stating a point of view.

Most sensible Canon and Nikon users that hold on to, and invest heavily in, their primary platform may not wish to dirty themselves by participating in a thread like this. While these good folk are classy, they also abandon the field to the more rabid and the committed (oh what a pun! ) to give the impression that there are a lot of dual users out there who may eventually leave their camp in disgust, be it Canon or Nikon.

I am sure dual users exit, but it is a fair guess that they are a small minority.

The sane recognize Nikon and Canon leap-frog eachother constantly and one will go broke if one switched everytime Nikon or Canon came up with something nice. So I wouldn't draw broad conclusions based on what one sees on this single thread.

Having said that, I will point to the fact that the title ironically, and aptly, includes the word "crazy"

 

[birdman]

I switched completely over to Nikon because of shadow noise and both the 16-35VR and 14-24mm. I own the 16-35 but have used the 14-24 several times. 14mm is WIDE, and not needed much. The 16-35 is much, much better than the 17-40L that i formerly owned.

You can't go wrong with Canon or Nikon. It all depends on your needs. I know the AF of the D800 (I have it) is astounding. Can't comment on the 5d3, but I'm sure it's equal or better. To me it's all about which lenses you need. If I shot a lot of telephoto, it'd be Canon for price/performance/availability. As such, with wide angles it's mostly Nikon with the advantage. And forget manual focus primes for all but the most static of situations. AF zooms are much more useful, even if they're "NOT QUITE" as sharp.