Nikon Vs. Canon

[kgcayenne]

Correction on the Nikon price, body only is $579, $679 is the body plus the Nikon 18-55 lens, which for a kit lens, is pretty decent. My daughters Canon kit lens has much more flare and ghosting.

[Retrosnap]

The advice any photographer should be giving, with respect to equipment, should be to get the best lenses you can afford, not necessarily the best camera. Also, if brand is important to you, choose a brand that your friends and colleagues use. That way, it offers the possibility to share equipment.

Lenses is the main reason I am a Pentax user. Their DSLR offerings are compatible out of the box with any K mount lens produced since 1975. If you use an M42 adapter, you have access to thousands of 42mm screw mount lenses produced since 1938.

But this isn't about me or my preferences. Even with the advice to get the best lens you can afford, the rise of mirrorless cameras is going to change the industry. There are two photographers in particular that I follow:

Trey Ratcliff and David DuChemin

Trey was a Nikon shooter, who now uses Sony mirrorless exclusively.

David went from Canon to Nikon and is now making his way to Fuji and Leica mirrorless.

Someday, I expect that I will go to a mirrorless camera, and when that day comes it will mean a significant cash outlay to replace my lenses. Which is also true right now if you shoot Canon or Nikon, and decide to go mirrorless. If high quality and portability are what you are looking for now, and you don't have an investment in lenses already, look at Fuji, Panasonic or Sony.

[Phoenix Within]

I've used Canon's in the past and have been happy with them.

I talked to a buddy of mine who's a professional Photographer. He told me that "you'd have to pry my Canon lenses from my cold, dead fingers". Because the quality of a lens can make or break your shot, that was the determining factor for when we bought our own camera.

[OREZ]

Someday, I expect that I will go to a mirrorless camera, and when that day comes it will mean a significant cash outlay to replace my lenses. Which is also true right now if you shoot Canon or Nikon, and decide to go mirrorless. If high quality and portability are what you are looking for now, and you don't have an investment in lenses already, look at Fuji, Panasonic or Sony.

I'm curious as to why you expect to go to a mirrorless if you already have a significant investment in SLR lenses. (Other than portability) I still think the single lens reflex design was one of the most important advancements in photography ever and I can't see any compelling reason to switch.

For my two cents in reply to the op: My first camera was an old Canon (film body) which I liked but then I switched to Nikon ( I picked up a couple of nice older film bodies and a few great lenses) and it's been Nikon ever since, mostly because I love my Nikon lenses which my wife and I are still using on a modern DSLR. Gotta love Nikon for that.

[Dizzy1]

Very very informative posts - thank you. Will have to read the links when I get home

[Dizzy1]

The advice any photographer should be giving, with respect to equipment, should be to get the best lenses you can afford, not necessarily the best camera. Also, if brand is important to you, choose a brand that your friends and colleagues use. That way, it offers the possibility to share equipment.

Lenses is the main reason I am a Pentax user. Their DSLR offerings are compatible out of the box with any K mount lens produced since 1975. If you use an M42 adapter, you have access to thousands of 42mm screw mount lenses produced since 1938.

But this isn't about me or my preferences. Even with the advice to get the best lens you can afford, the rise of mirrorless cameras is going to change the industry. There are two photographers in particular that I follow:

Trey Ratcliff and David DuChemin

Trey was a Nikon shooter, who now uses Sony mirrorless exclusively.

David went from Canon to Nikon and is now making his way to Fuji and Leica mirrorless.

Someday, I expect that I will go to a mirrorless camera, and when that day comes it will mean a significant cash outlay to replace my lenses. Which is also true right now if you shoot Canon or Nikon, and decide to go mirrorless. If high quality and portability are what you are looking for now, and you don't have an investment in lenses already, look at Fuji, Panasonic or Sony.

Awesome links ... I especially liked the workflow pieces.

Also, I agree its the lens that can really make or break a shot, but the body still has some importance to it, whether it be image quality or ease of use. If you put a very nice L lens on a Rebel, would you really get the same image quality as on a 5D?

Also, I'm quite curious as well. Why go mirrorless if you already have a large investment in glass? Mirrorless, is the next step in the evolution, no doubt, but I don't think it'll end up being the only option. I think there will still be a large group wanting a natural viewfinder and not an EVF. I'm in the natural viewfinder group, I still prefer it over an EVF. Also, one would think that the likes of Canon and Nikon would design a mirrorless to be 100% compatible with their current lenses.

[Dizzy1]

I've used Canon's in the past and have been happy with them.

I talked to a buddy of mine who's a professional Photographer. He told me that "you'd have to pry my Canon lenses from my cold, dead fingers". Because the quality of a lens can make or break your shot, that was the determining factor for when we bought our own camera.

That's really the thing though, both brands do have high quality glass, as do other brands. In all honesty, I don't think you'll find much difference in any high end camera and lens combination. One thing I don't like about Canon lenses is the white/greyish body on some of the L series ... kinda just irks me LOL! Pretty sad, huh? Its like I'm worried about if my shoes go with my pants whilst taking a picture LOL!

What model did you end up buying?

For my two cents in reply to the op: My first camera was an old Canon (film body) which I liked but then I switched to Nikon ( I picked up a couple of nice older film bodies and a few great lenses) and it's been Nikon ever since, mostly because I love my Nikon lenses which my wife and I are still using on a modern DSLR. Gotta love Nikon for that.

I thought it was Nikon that had some compatibility issues, at least with *bleep* lenses. Could you share your experiences on that?

[Phoenix Within]

In all honesty, I don't think you'll find much difference in any high end camera and lens combination.

You go argue with the Pro then. lol

What model did you end up buying?

Canon T3. I would have liked the T3i instead, but it was out of our budget at the time. For what we need right now, the T3 works well. Maybe one day I'll keep my eyes open for a used body.

[Dizzy1]

You go argue with the Pro then. lol

:p lol

Canon T3. I would have liked the T3i instead, but it was out of our budget at the time. For what we need right now, the T3 works well. Maybe one day I'll keep my eyes open for a used body.

How do you find the ease of use? Specifically changing certain settings easily?

[Phoenix Within]

How do you find the ease of use? Specifically changing certain settings easily?

For the most part no issues, but it's also trying to remember what button to push for what. In my case that's more the failure of the user. :-) This is also the only DSLR we've used, so I don't have much else to compare it with. I think you'll find with any electronic device there' something that could have been designed better, it's a matter of living with the options they gave you.

[Dizzy1]

For the most part no issues, but it's also trying to remember what button to push for what. In my case that's more the failure of the user. :-) This is also the only DSLR we've used, so I don't have much else to compare it with. I think you'll find with any electronic device there' something that could have been designed better, it's a matter of living with the options they gave you.

Very true LOL! It gets more frustrating when you start spending some serious money and end up with somethings that just don't make sense or are just down right annoying LOL!

Been looking at the Nikon D710 and the Canon 70D and 6D and the Canon's just seem to have a bit more of a logical set up with buttons and functions, at least I find it does. Still not giving the shoulder to Nikon or even a mirrorless yet, still have months to decide but with that kind of money, I really want to keep my options and mind open.

[Retrosnap]

Also, I'm quite curious as well. Why go mirrorless if you already have a large investment in glass? Mirrorless, is the next step in the evolution, no doubt, but I don't think it'll end up being the only option. I think there will still be a large group wanting a natural viewfinder and not an EVF. I'm in the natural viewfinder group, I still prefer it over an EVF. Also, one would think that the likes of Canon and Nikon would design a mirrorless to be 100% compatible with their current lenses.

Time may prove me wrong, but I think with the advent of mirrorless, it's only a matter of time before the only SLR cameras available will be professional models, with a corresponding price tag. Canon and Nikon have the pro market covered, and there's no room for newcomers in a shrinking market. Pentax is agressively going after the medium format (4x5) with a digital model that is many thousands cheaper than existing manufacturers, but at $8,500 USD, it might as well be made of gold.

I, too, like SLRs, knowing that when I look at a subject, I am seeing the subject with my own eyes, not that of the sensor. If I am wrong, and Pentax continues to manufacture DSLRs, then I won't be going mirrorless anytime soon. If they stop, then I'll hold on as long as I can until my camera wears out, and then decide which manufacturer works best for me.

It will be interesting to see if Canon and Nikon can come up with mirrorless models that can leverage a person's investment in their lenses. Pentax did this with the K-01, but because of the physical requirements of the lens, the resulting model was not much smaller than a DSLR, and has subsequently been discontinued, except in Japan. A good camera, but ahead of it's time.

Enjoy your search!

[OREZ]

I thought it was Nikon that had some compatibility issues, at least with *bleep* lenses. Could you share your experiences on that?

Sure. I think I was pretty vague in my post actually. What I should have said is that I have always shot in fully manual with film and digital. In that sense, my old lenses are compatible with some new Nikon bodies (The 3000 series, 5000 series, and now the Df to name a few that I know of) because I’ve never used the auto features anyways. Some camera makes are not compatible with their old lenses at all but the ones which are, for instance Pentax (as mentioned in a previous post by someone else) and Nikon can be used but obviously if they were never auto-focus lenses to begin with they can only be used manually for focus and in most cases (if the lenses are old) even for exposure. There’s going to be some guess- work involved or relying upon experience. They’re not going to interface with your new camera like a new lens will so if this is not for you I would invest in only new equipment therefore the backwards compatibility issue is not really relevant.

If you’re starting from scratch you might even want to check out the new mirroless format. Fuiji and Sony look pretty good to me and have some great reviews but I have no experience with them. But truthfully, they all seem very expensive for what they are. I expect that the price will come down somewhat eventually.

From what I’ve seen the Nikon 3300 is a great DSLR for the money and does pretty much everything most people will want to do. Just my opinion (and yes, I have a bit of a Nikon bias). Hope that helps.

[Dizzy1]

Time may prove me wrong, but I think with the advent of mirrorless, it's only a matter of time before the only SLR cameras available will be professional models, with a corresponding price tag. Canon and Nikon have the pro market covered, and there's no room for newcomers in a shrinking market. Pentax is agressively going after the medium format (4x5) with a digital model that is many thousands cheaper than existing manufacturers, but at $8,500 USD, it might as well be made of gold.

I, too, like SLRs, knowing that when I look at a subject, I am seeing the subject with my own eyes, not that of the sensor. If I am wrong, and Pentax continues to manufacture DSLRs, then I won't be going mirrorless anytime soon. If they stop, then I'll hold on as long as I can until my camera wears out, and then decide which manufacturer works best for me.

It will be interesting to see if Canon and Nikon can come up with mirrorless models that can leverage a person's investment in their lenses. Pentax did this with the K-01, but because of the physical requirements of the lens, the resulting model was not much smaller than a DSLR, and has subsequently been discontinued, except in Japan. A good camera, but ahead of it's time.

Enjoy your search!

It will be very interesting to see what happens in the coming years. We've seen many enhancements and nifty features over the years with digicams, but I'm still hoping we'll still be seeing some affordable (at least in the mid-level range) camera's to cater to more tranditionalists. :)

[Dizzy1]

Sure. I think I was pretty vague in my post actually. What I should have said is that I have always shot in fully manual with film and digital. In that sense, my old lenses are compatible with some new Nikon bodies (The 3000 series, 5000 series, and now the Df to name a few that I know of) because I’ve never used the auto features anyways. Some camera makes are not compatible with their old lenses at all but the ones which are, for instance Pentax (as mentioned in a previous post by someone else) and Nikon can be used but obviously if they were never auto-focus lenses to begin with they can only be used manually for focus and in most cases (if the lenses are old) even for exposure. There’s going to be some guess- work involved or relying upon experience. They’re not going to interface with your new camera like a new lens will so if this is not for you I would invest in only new equipment therefore the backwards compatibility issue is not really relevant.

If you’re starting from scratch you might even want to check out the new mirroless format. Fuiji and Sony look pretty good to me and have some great reviews but I have no experience with them. But truthfully, they all seem very expensive for what they are. I expect that the price will come down somewhat eventually.

From what I’ve seen the Nikon 3300 is a great DSLR for the money and does pretty much everything most people will want to do. Just my opinion (and yes, I have a bit of a Nikon bias). Hope that helps.

I wouldn't say I'm starting from scratch, at least from an ability level, but yes from equipment, if that makes any sense lol. I do like the Fuji XT1 from the pictures I've seen, but I've yet to actually find one to hold and embrace LOL! The Sony a7 is very nice, it has a very sturdy feel to it but it just seems a tad to small in my hands and I'm still not warming up to the idea of an EVF.

I do quite like the Canon 70D and 6D as well as the Nikon 7100D ... while they are bigger, they have a very comfortable feel to them. I'm still considering something a bit smaller such as the Canon T5i and spend the difference on a couple of decent lenses just to get started to see how things go and eventually upgrade. The only problem with that is, at least in the past, I found if the camera isn't as easy/fun to use as I had hoped, it seems to sit in the office more often that I hoped LOL.

I am hoping to get a couple of jobs here and there just for something to do and maybe be able to make a bit extra money, so I really need to pay attention to get exactly what I need.

And yes, your post, and everyone else's have been extremely helpful and I am looking forward to more insight from the camera's you're all using :)