- Status
This has been very entertaining 
I have learned over the years (and the number is getting alarmingly high) that there are very few things in life you just don´t change. You can change car brand, you can change your wife, but you can´t change your football/soccer team (been a Liverpool FC fan since 1971) and, (after reading the 6556 entries in this thread) obviously can´t change your camera brand (been with Canon since the AE-1 was released in -76 (I think it was)).
Looking back at nearly 40 years with Canon, I believe I can say that if I had to do it all over again, I probably would have ended up with the same. Today, with the 5DIII and 1DX in hand and the biggest collection of high quality glass available, it´s a no-brainer to me.
I wonder what the second most provoking theme for this forum could be, because this must have been No.1
I have learned over the years (and the number is getting alarmingly high) that there are very few things in life you just don´t change. You can change car brand, you can change your wife, but you can´t change your football/soccer team (been a Liverpool FC fan since 1971) and, (after reading the 6556 entries in this thread) obviously can´t change your camera brand (been with Canon since the AE-1 was released in -76 (I think it was)).
Looking back at nearly 40 years with Canon, I believe I can say that if I had to do it all over again, I probably would have ended up with the same. Today, with the 5DIII and 1DX in hand and the biggest collection of high quality glass available, it´s a no-brainer to me.
I wonder what the second most provoking theme for this forum could be, because this must have been No.1
Upvote
0
i used Canon and Nikon concurrently last year. A 5D2 and D700. D700's AF & ISO performance are amazing. The DR latitude while editing RAW on Lightroom is stunning. I am no professional photographer, hence did many simple exposure mistakes. Using D700 reduce my worries on this department a lot. One example is ISO/DR related issues I encountered on Canon:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gundul/7957608758/#sizes/l/
Camera Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Exposure 0.01 sec (handheld)
Aperture f/1.4
Focal Length 35 mm
ISO Speed 100
Exposure Bias 0 EV
I put a gradual exposure compensation on LR started about one third of the frame to the top. The noise is unpleasant.
On the other hand, the colors from D700 turned me off. Yes I use Lightroom, but I don't want to depend on it to the the color that I like. Hence I sell the D700 out, along with the lenses (50/1.4 AFD, 85/1.8AFD, T24-135 and a 70-210), and buy a used 1D2.
My conclusion now is, I am not going to buy another Canon camera unless its sensor has 14 DR. 5D4? 5D5? I dont know. But Canon definitely wont see my money on Camera department.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gundul/7957608758/#sizes/l/
Camera Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Exposure 0.01 sec (handheld)
Aperture f/1.4
Focal Length 35 mm
ISO Speed 100
Exposure Bias 0 EV
I put a gradual exposure compensation on LR started about one third of the frame to the top. The noise is unpleasant.
On the other hand, the colors from D700 turned me off. Yes I use Lightroom, but I don't want to depend on it to the the color that I like. Hence I sell the D700 out, along with the lenses (50/1.4 AFD, 85/1.8AFD, T24-135 and a 70-210), and buy a used 1D2.
My conclusion now is, I am not going to buy another Canon camera unless its sensor has 14 DR. 5D4? 5D5? I dont know. But Canon definitely wont see my money on Camera department.
Attachments
Upvote
0
Yep, it's getting clearer a the time: those who have an overwhelming desire to under expose should by Nikon.
Upvote
0
gundul said:
You can clean up the banding, both horizontal and vertical, with Topaz DeNoise. You can also recover DR with its black point adjustment feature as well. The unsightly dark background in your sample photo could become incredibly clean and very appealing with about five minutes of work or less in DeNoise 5.
Upvote
0
gundul said:
but why underexpose? I'm not a big fan of "expose to the right" but it has its place.
Its always best to get a shot as good as you can in camera.
Some people seem to think that LR or PS will make up for a poor quality photographer.
Upvote
0
Skulker said:
Why underexpose ?
There are numerous scenarios where this may be required, but by far the most useful one is when:
You want to make a Canon sensor look bad.
It is a key weapon in the armoury of wandering Nikon Missionaries.
;D
Upvote
0
Skulker said:
+1 on your thought, "some people seem to think that LR or PS will make up for a poor quality photographer"... i sometimes use ETTR technique, but not in number of cases such as following image linked from my-face
Upvote
0
gundul said:
not always sooc since it is normally flat anyways except when having a location with good angles of light. however, the image i posted it up there could be considered as sooc since what i did was noise reduction, sharpen and adding grain back after that if i remember correctly (processed 250 images after getting back from a trip; therefore, no joy to do the details.) want a proof? let me know so that i can post it somewhere when i am getting back home on thursday (note: this image was shot in raw with 5d mark iii and 24-105mm, not only this but there are few of them were shot at the same location...)
note: my camera is set to faithful picture style, rgb color space, no setting on any enhancements, etc... so what i see in the lcd is very very close to what i get. for histogram information, i use rgb histogram to monitor white balance... as if you wonder how i shoot.
here is another image from the same trip that i was trying to edit (after on the right. i think this image was shot with 7d and 70-200mm IS II) and posted it up to look for opinions from friends...
Upvote
0
tyho said:
I went through this decision about 6 months and decided to stay with Canon. In many cases Canon won by a small margin. Strongest areas for Canon - long glass, strongest areas for Nikon - Wide Angles and to less extent flash
Now before everyone starts telling me I am wrong, these are my opinions. Opinions are personal, like religion, and since I don't want to start a holy war here, please respect my opinion. If you have a different opinion, please share it as your opinion. After all, some of us like Chocolate more than Vanilla while others prefer vanilla.
Bodies: 1Dx vs D4. Slight edge to 1Dx.
5D3 vs D800. Unless you need ultra high MP, 5D3 is the winner.
Glass: Long glass - Canon is winner
TS - Canon
Intermediate zooms: 70-200 Canon, 70-300 Canon, 24-70 toss up (maybe),
WA: without question Nikon
Flash: Nikon
Upvote
0
RGF said:
When I jumped from Olympus to Canon, I looked at Canon and Nikon. I went Canon because I liked thier long glass and greatly prefered thier user interface. At the time I thought that differences in IQ, DR, and ISO were minimal and besides, as soon as another camera comes out, yours is out of date..... but the glass is forever. To me, the camera is a consumable item that will eventually be worthless and the glass is an investment.
Upvote
0
gundul said:
If this is supposed to be a reply to my post.
1) I never said you were a "poor quality photographer"
2) I never said a "good one will do SOOC only"
I have no opinion on the first, I'm not aware of having seen one of your photo's, and certainly don't agree with the second.
Upvote
0
The whole switching systems thing is damn funny to me. When I shot film there really wasn't an issue, you shot Nikon F bodies. With digital, I have seen the back and forth technology battle between the two and imho, there really hasn't been a winner as soon as Nikon got FX. Canon is a really great system and so is Nikon, and switching is just wasting money.....
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
