The (un)official I'm switching to Nikon thread

[takoman46]

So maybe Canon is holding back their APS-C sensor tech back a little... so what? You can put the blame on Canon's marketing department for that. They choosing to de-tune their crop bodies to a level that is below Nikon's strategy. It doesn't conclusively prove that Nikon is smashing Canon in sensor tech.

So, you're saying that Canon may have an awesome sensor tech that they aren't releasing due to marketing... okay, may be, but how does that BENEFIT us? The fact that the released sensor from Nikon smashes Canon.

I'm saying that the comparison chart you posted only shows that the sensor tech that has been passed down to APS-C sensors is lacking from Canon. This does not benefit crop body users at all, and that sucks. But you're just looking at the APS-C level and and making a generalization about who is ahead of who in terms of sensor development. What I'm getting at is that both Nikon and Canon put their "best" foot forward with their full frame flagship bodies. So by comparing their sensor tech at the flagship level; you will gain a better understanding of where each company stands in terms of sensor technology.

 

[sublime LightWorks]

Nikon USA provides terrible support and has bad ratings with the BBB unlike Canon.

And they eat children!!!

Not only that, but they're Democrats too!! Or Republicans.....I forget who's the bad guys these days.

;D

 

[Grum]

So maybe Canon is holding back their APS-C sensor tech back a little... so what? You can put the blame on Canon's marketing department for that. They choosing to de-tune their crop bodies to a level that is below Nikon's strategy. It doesn't conclusively prove that Nikon is smashing Canon in sensor tech.

So, you're saying that Canon may have an awesome sensor tech that they aren't releasing due to marketing... okay, may be, but how does that BENEFIT us? The fact that the released sensor from Nikon smashes Canon.

Wow look a graph! You can show that to people to make excuses for why your pictures suck. No-one could possibly take decent pictures with a Canon given how they're being 'smashed' by Nikon could they. Get a grip.

(and oh look it comes from dxomark, the measurebators paradise)

Honestly, this site really attracts some losers (and I'm really not a Canon fanboy btw).

 

[wickidwombat]

I figured I'd save everybody some time and valuable internet space by going ahead and opening up this thread.

Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.

By opening this thread now, it will also allow persons to begin the whining before the Mark III is officially announced.

On Saturday, this can be followed by the "Should I buy the Mark III or Wait for the Mark IV?" thread.

Hahaa great thread! and brave man I had to give you an applaud for this, i nearly started a thread like this yesterday but was scared of being smited into oblivion....

 

[sarangiman]

Here I'll add some fuel to the fire

Nikon lenses have a 5 year warranty vs. Canon's 1 year warranty. $200 to fix your misalignment/decentering problem on Canon lenses, in my experience.

Nikon pro lenses all have 9-blade apertures. 18 point sunstars FTW! Smooth circular OOF highlights, as opposed to octagons above f/1.8 on, say, the 85mm prime.

77mm filter threads on most of their pro lenses... as opposed to 67mm, 72mm, 77mm, 82mm filter threads across Canon's top lenses.

All that being said, I'm still trying to stick with Canon, as I'm looking forward to cross-type AF points being spread out across the frame (Nikon doesn't have this)... and I still haven't seen a scientific/rigorous study that shows that Nikon's AF is any better than top-of-the-line (1-series) Canon AF. In fact I'd be very curious to see how Canon's 'high-precision' [f/2.8] sensors stack up against Nikon's sensors (Nikon doesn't differentiate higher vs. lower precision AF points).

As has been said before -- they're just tools. Whichever gets the job done best.

 

[Grum]

There are certainly some advantages to Nikon and before the D800 came out I was quite tempted to switch. But for what I mostly shoot (weddings), the D800 has gone in the wrong direction (though I'm sure it would be perfectly capable).

I just think people writing off a camera before it comes out, based on rumoured specs, is beyond ridiculous.

 

[briansquibb]

Do I use this thread to say I'm switching to the Nokia 41mp phone??

 

[Ryusui]

Here I'll add some fuel to the fire

Nikon lenses have a 5 year warranty vs. Canon's 1 year warranty. $200 to fix your misalignment/decentering problem on Canon lenses, in my experience.

Well Nikon needs to offer a 5 year warranty on their products. Have you ever sent in anything to Nikon service? It damn near takes about 5 times longer to get an item back from them than it does Canon. On average, Canon repairs/warranty items have a 2-3 week turnaround time - and this is from when UPS takes it out of our hands to when they bring it back. Nikon however, usually takes 6-8 weeks, and it's not unusual for something to be gone for 3 or 4 months.

 

[psolberg]

so what nikon developed sensor your are speaking about

fyi nikon develops sensors and they share manufacturing with sony to share some costs. Nikon throws their own IP and know how to produce the IQ people have come to expect from them. They have said it repeatedly in every interview. the myth they use pre-fabbed sony sensors doesn't hold to reality. just look at the D3x vs A900. similar? yes. same? no. The D3x had easily the upperhand in IQ and it was all in nikon's design even if sony made the thing.

and besides, who cares who makes the thing. everybody just cares about the results it produces!

... I'm a landscape guy and I'm planning on buying just the D800e. I plan to test it against my 5Dmk2 or whatever Canon is delivering at whatever time Nikon actually delivers the D800e. I'll use my friends Nikon lenses and share with them my Raw NEF files. If I like what I see, I'll order the 14-24 and conduct further tests against the Canon 14mm, the 16-35mm and the 17 and 24 tse lenses.

Nikon wides are top notch.

the 14-24 nikon is a beast. it destroys anything canon has at the wide end and it's a zoom!
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/canon14l2_nikon1424/nikon1424_canon14l2_a.html

canon 16-35 gets equaly eaten alive
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/nikon1424_17mm/nikon1424_17mm1.html
although If I were to switch I'd go for their 16-35 f/4 with image stabilization.

their 24 1.4 prime is another stellar performer better than the canon equivalent IMHO. It is even better than even their own 14-24. Their 24mm T/S is also supposed to be a hidden jem.

If I shot wide, I'd let nothing hold me back from the N.

 

[sarangiman]

their 24 1.4 prime is another stellar performer better than the canon equivalent IMHO.

Yes, it has much less vignetting on a full frame than the Canon 24/1.4 II. Something like 1.5-2 stops less vignetting... so... not insignificant.

See here:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?FLI=0&API=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&Lens=480&Camera=453&LensComp=690

 

[hoousi]

Crazy! ;D
I switched to canon but only because I knew from Nikonrumors that the D800 will be a mp-monster, the 5dii had an awesome price tag and a nice resolution and none of my lenses were FF so that's it. At heart I am a nikonian but I much prefer the canon lens line-up concerning affordable lenses FF and aps-c. I am now lucky enough to afford the expensive stuff so I'd be a happy Nikon camper, too but go look for F/4 zooms, a decent newish 17-55 (IS...), oh and did I forget the lack of AF-S in the last years (finally they are catching up) which ditched you if you were below D7000/D90 level? The only friendly outreach was the 35 F/1.8 2-3 years ago, oh my, thank you very much (I could go on like this, that was often the tone on the Nikon forums, canon grass just so much greener)

I now am a happy Canon camper, my pics please my eyes (though others may bleed, sorry) in spite of the maybe pharaonian/roman whatever tech in the sensor. And if ever I feel a need I get a Nikon with the lens needed/suitable and hope that I can work myself around two camera systems in parallel. But I'll never part from the 85Lii

 

[sarangiman]

But I'll never part from the 85Lii

Funny. Different strokes for different folks, as the 85/1.4 Nikon is another reason I'd consider a switch... The ergonomics of the 85/1.2, which I own, are silly. If you take the lens off extended, you can't un-extend it, since it needs to power the motor to retract. Watch out for that rear glass element that sticks all the way out; you don't want to scratch it/hit it as you're mounting it to your body.

Furthermore, the CA on the sides is bad enough to make even in-focus objects on the sides appear soft. Then the 8-blade aperture means that out of focus highlights are no longer a pleasing circle at apertures smaller than f/1.6 (yes-- they're only really circular at f/1.2-f/1.4). Canon knows 9-blades is the way to go -- something they updated in their new 24-70 zoom. It gives you more circular OOF highlights AND 18 point sunstars... seems win-win to me. Yet all their professional primes only have 8-blades.

At f/1.2 though, it does let in a LOT of light. For any given f-stop, it actually appears to let in 1/3 stop more light than any equivalent aperture on the Sigma 85/1.4. Also has shallower DOF for any given f-stop than the Sigma, hinting at the possibility that it actually just opens up wider at any given f-stop in comparison to the Sigma. These are really its only redeeming factors, IMHO. But it is in sore need of an update.

 

[distant.star]

Hey, everybody!!

I hear Nikon is buying used Canon lenses at 50 cents on the dollar. At least we can get something for them before they lose all their value!

 

[sarangiman]

Oops, haha, I guess I forgot there for a moment I was on CANONrumors

Regardless of the shortcomings of either system, I'm really looking forward to the next two days! An AF system that can actually focus properly outside of the center point & integrated radio wireless in a flash would be spectacular (I've experienced all the horrors of E-TTL Pocket Wizards with Canon flashes...).

 

[V8Beast]

How about the (un)official "I've been following all the 5DIII rumors for years, pretending like I was going to buy one, but never really had the money to buy one, and just enjoyed talking trash online, so I'll stick with my Rebel," thread?

 

[Circles]

Hey, everybody!!

I hear Nikon is buying used Canon lenses at 50 cents on the dollar. At least we can get something for them before they lose all their value!

???

 

[smirkypants]

Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.

This is just insulting. I choose a camera and lens based upon what best serves my photographic needs and my budget constraints. When the last generation of cameras came out, it was a close call, but I went with Canon.

I have very specific needs met perfectly by the 1Dx + 200-400/f4 1.4. Unfortunately, that combination looks like it's going to cost me... I can't believe I'm saying this, $18,000 after getting a couple of the accessories. Eighteen large!

My needs are also perfectly met by a refurbished 200-400/f4 + D4 +1.4 TC. This combination is $5000 less. That's a lot of money. I can buy a lot of things with $5000, like 80% of a backup D4, or a D800 and a 70-200/2.8 VR II lens. See where I'm going with this?

Add to this that I have an extremely important event to cover in April and another in May. Do I know that the Canon 200-400/f4 will be in my hands by then? Or even the 1DX? No. But I already have the Nikon lens and the D4 is still on track for mid March delivery.

I am going to keep all of my Canon gear just in case the Nikon system doesn't work out. I will lose $0 on the refurbished lens and maybe $1000 tops on the D4. If it doesn't work out, it was cheaper than renting the combination for the summer.

But please don't snottily tell me that I'm being frivolous or crybaby because this has been a very hard decision. People have needs and certain cameras and lenses fulfill those needs better than others. It's as simple as that.

 

[dedrick427]

Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.

This is just insulting. I choose a camera and lens based upon what best serves my photographic needs and my budget constraints. When the last generation of cameras came out, it was a close call, but I went with Canon.

I have very specific needs met perfectly by the 1Dx + 200-400/f4 1.4. Unfortunately, that combination looks like it's going to cost me... I can't believe I'm saying this, $18,000 after getting a couple of the accessories. Eighteen large!

My needs are also perfectly met by a refurbished 200-400/f4 + D4 +1.4 TC. This combination is $5000 less. That's a lot of money. I can buy a lot of things with $5000, like 80% of a backup D4, or a D800 and a 70-200/2.8 VR II lens. See where I'm going with this?

Add to this that I have an extremely important event to cover in April and another in May. Do I know that the Canon 200-400/f4 will be in my hands by then? Or even the 1DX? No. But I already have the Nikon lens and the D4 is still on track for mid March delivery.

I am going to keep all of my Canon gear just in case the Nikon system doesn't work out. I will lose $0 on the refurbished lens and maybe $1000 tops on the D4. If it doesn't work out, it was cheaper than renting the combination for the summer.

But please don't snottily tell me that I'm being frivolous or crybaby because this has been a very hard decision. People have needs and certain cameras and lenses fulfill those needs better than others. It's as simple as that.

Why is it that everytime I've asked (not on here) about advice on what 'the best' camera/lens is for a given situation I always ALWAYS get the "The camera doesn't matter, a good photographer can take great pictures with any camera... blah blah blah... it's more about to locations and blah blah brag..." But then when we are excited about a new camera it's always "RABBLEABBLERABBLEPOPUPFLASHGIGAPIXELSANDFAIRIES!!!! I can't do my job with this!!!! It's Crap!!! RABBLERABBLERABBLEFILMCAMERAPROFESSIONALSBUNRTHEMALIVE!!!!"

 

[wickidwombat]

Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.

This is just insulting. I choose a camera and lens based upon what best serves my photographic needs and my budget constraints. When the last generation of cameras came out, it was a close call, but I went with Canon.

I have very specific needs met perfectly by the 1Dx + 200-400/f4 1.4. Unfortunately, that combination looks like it's going to cost me... I can't believe I'm saying this, $18,000 after getting a couple of the accessories. Eighteen large!

My needs are also perfectly met by a refurbished 200-400/f4 + D4 +1.4 TC. This combination is $5000 less. That's a lot of money. I can buy a lot of things with $5000, like 80% of a backup D4, or a D800 and a 70-200/2.8 VR II lens. See where I'm going with this?

Add to this that I have an extremely important event to cover in April and another in May. Do I know that the Canon 200-400/f4 will be in my hands by then? Or even the 1DX? No. But I already have the Nikon lens and the D4 is still on track for mid March delivery.

I am going to keep all of my Canon gear just in case the Nikon system doesn't work out. I will lose $0 on the refurbished lens and maybe $1000 tops on the D4. If it doesn't work out, it was cheaper than renting the combination for the summer.

But please don't snottily tell me that I'm being frivolous or crybaby because this has been a very hard decision. People have needs and certain cameras and lenses fulfill those needs better than others. It's as simple as that.

sure you dont want to sell me your 1D4?

 

[hoousi]

But I'll never part from the 85Lii

Funny. Different strokes for different folks, as the 85/1.4 Nikon is another reason I'd consider a switch... The ergonomics of the 85/1.2, which I own, are silly. If you take the lens off extended, you can't un-extend it, since it needs to power the motor to retract. Watch out for that rear glass element that sticks all the way out; you don't want to scratch it/hit it as you're mounting it to your body.

Furthermore, the CA on the sides is bad enough to make even in-focus objects on the sides appear soft. Then the 8-blade aperture means that out of focus highlights are no longer a pleasing circle at apertures smaller than f/1.6 (yes-- they're only really circular at f/1.2-f/1.4). Canon knows 9-blades is the way to go -- something they updated in their new 24-70 zoom. It gives you more circular OOF highlights AND 18 point sunstars... seems win-win to me. Yet all their professional primes only have 8-blades.

At f/1.2 though, it does let in a LOT of light. For any given f-stop, it actually appears to let in 1/3 stop more light than any equivalent aperture on the Sigma 85/1.4. Also has shallower DOF for any given f-stop than the Sigma, hinting at the possibility that it actually just opens up wider at any given f-stop in comparison to the Sigma. These are really its only redeeming factors, IMHO. But it is in sore need of an update.

As often with a special lens with extreme aperture there are shortcomings, rather big ones in consideration of the price tag, but wow, until now many of the shots and that aperture are worth every penny, it makes the Nikon cream machine look like an ice crusher (wide open) (tongue in cheek). I actually only took one single photo above 1.4, for more DOF I think the 70-200 is the way to go indeed. Sometimes a certain love cannot be explained....