Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2011 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon
  
 
EverLearning
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


A colleague at work knows I am into photography so he has asked for some guidance in buying a new camera. He was just getting into it a few years ago and wanted a good point and shoot. Now he wants to get into it more (not pro or anything like that though). He has asked me what he should buy.

I am a Canon guy and have been since my first DSLR in 2003. Before that I shot Nikon SLR but I am not overly familiar with Nikon's DSLR offerings. Since he is looking to make a bigger investment, I don't want to be bias and just point him to Canon. I want to give him a few Canon options and a few Nikon options and let him pick which he likes best (feel/interface, pictures, price). I'm hoping somebody here can provide some insight to the Nikon side of things.

He is looking to shoot his 7 year old's basketball games. That's the current primary use. He also sees using it for his kid's soccer this summer, family events (Christmas, birthdays, etc.) and future vacations. He will mostly show the pictures digitally, but will also print 4x6s. He doesn't anticipate printing enlargements.

He has indicated his price range is $2,000 to $5,000, total (camera, lens(es), batteries, cards, bag and taxes).

It has been my observation, at least on the Canon side, that the bodies improve frequently, but the lenses don't change much at all. So it seems to me it would be better to invest in quality glass now and a lesser body with the intention of upgrading it in 3 years or so when he is more experienced and knows more about what he wants to do with a camera.

Since he wants to shoot things somewhat further away (basketball, soccer) as well as moderately close (family gatherings) but not pro portrait photography, I was thinking something from Nikon's 1.5 crop bodies. For low light indoor shooting something similar to Canon's 17-55 f2.8 with future consideration to Nikon's 80-200 lens as he builds his kit out.

Canon has a few variations of their 70-200 (f2.8 or f4, IS and I believe non IS). Does Nikon have something similar? What would be a good outdoor sport lens and complement the range provided by a fast indoor lens? What would be a good, fast indoor lens?

Your input is greatly appreciated!



Dec 01, 2011 at 03:22 AM
runamuck
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


D7000 for starters. Sigma 50-150 f2.8 lens for basketball. This is roughly the equivalent of the full frame 70-200, only much lighter and smaller. Or even a Nikon 50MM f1.4 will work well. Nikon 70-300 VR for soccer.

Bodies change often. Just as "Diamonds are a girl's best friend" so good glass is a photog's best friend.



Dec 01, 2011 at 03:42 AM
krickett
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


As much as I joke to my friends about the rivalry, I think I'm actually pretty agnostic.

I think a good approach, like you are thinking, is to look at the lens classes you want to buy, and compare how Nikon and Canon will cover them. There are some key differences that could sway you one way or another. It's also important how the camera feels in the hand, although first impressions can be deceiving, and you have to compare comparable cameras.

17-55/17-55 differences: Nikon's 17-50 f2.8 is a pricey ($1100'ish) lens. It's more a more solid build, and at least reputedly sharper than Canon's 17-55 2.8. *BUT*, Canon's lens has IS while Nikon's does not. I myself consider IS very important in zooms. However, if you're shooting action, you want to keep shutter speeds up anyways, so IS is less important.

fast telephoto zooms: Nikon has an 80-200 (non-VR) 2.8, and two versions of the 70-200 2.8's (VRI and VRII). The 80-200 is kind of for people on a budget, since it's $100 and doesn't have VR. There's also the 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR. Out of all these, the 70-200 2.8 VRII I think is the clear leader here, but it'll eat up a huge chunk of that budget.

The crop telephoto zooms (Sigma 50-150 2.8, Tokina 50-135 2.8) are good budget options, but none of them have IS/VR/OS, etc. Sigma may come out with an OS 50-150 2.8, but we've been waiting for it for 9 months now with no announcements.

There is a big differentiation with other lenses: Nikon's 35mm 1.8G, at $200, is a very compelling option for a Nikon starter. It's roughly a 50mm equivalent. Canon's 35 f/2 is like $350, and the Sigma 30 f/1.4 is $350 or more. But there's also issues: All Canon bodies can autofocus their 85 1.8, 135 2, etc. Nikon's cheaper bodies (D3100, D5100) cannot autofocus Nikon's 85 1.8. Since your friend seems to be very interested in a lens platform, it's generally recommended that he goes no lower than a D90, and opt for a D7000 if he can swing the bill ($1200).



Dec 01, 2011 at 07:23 AM
EverLearning
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


Thanks for your thoughts Runamuck and Krickett. It sounds like the D7000 is a good choice for the body. Had a quick peek at dpreview.com on this body and their only real criticism of it was in bright, high contrast situations it tends to overexpose. Given that dpreview always has at least one negative for every body and that this one can be easily compensated for, it seems the way to go for Nikon. $1100 or so is pretty good for a good quality DSLR body.

What has surprised me so far is that Nikon lenses are pretty consistently more expensive than Canon.

It's one thing to recommend a point and shoot. It's a different game when you start talking several thousand dollars! And of course, there are so many choices when it comes to lenses (make, focal ranges, speed, IS/VR/OS, etc.).

Further input would be greatly appreciated folks!



Dec 01, 2011 at 12:57 PM
Baywing
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


What I usually suggest is to go to a store and handle a few different bodies. Often, a person will just take to a particular user interface (I like Nikon which is why I'm here!) but there are those folks who prefer the Canon menus and controls work. To me, that's a bigger issue than the glass as both players (as well as the aftermarket guys) have similar lens offerings.
In the Nikon camp, the D7000 is the body I'd choose and then compare that to a similar Canon body as to how it feels and handles. Once the body choice has been made, lens options can be explored in depth.



Dec 01, 2011 at 01:38 PM
HerbChong
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


if you study DXOMark and the different components that make it up, you will see that Nikon and Sony have passed Canon for image quality by several important measures now and, more importantly are increasing their advantage over Canon. not that Canon is standing still but its image quality improvements at the sensor level are smaller than Nikon's and Sony's and not showing any signs of changing the rate of improvement, excepting possibly the newly announced 1DX but then at 18MP, that may not be adequate no matter what its other performance numbers are like. Nikon and Sony's improvements in noise and color accuracy across the line of cameras is such that they are quite a bit ahead of Canon now and show every sign of increasing their lead. again, this is only if the qualities measured by DXOMark matter to you.

Herb...



Dec 01, 2011 at 05:34 PM
mrgetalife
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


I'm somewhat agnostic. But IMO stick with the pack unless you have the cash to be different.

IMO you'll be doing him a favor by sticking with a system you know and equipment he can "test" maybe once before plunging down a lot of cash for something because he doesn't have the equipment support group.

Nikon equipment because of the NEW mandatory minimum pricing they put on dealers has put Nikon in a bad position IMO. So that's why you'll see prices so much more than Canon. I don't see Canon following this route. And we'll see how long Nikon can keep this up. The only thing going for them is that there is an equipment shortage they can use as an excuse. The reputable dealers sorta love it because they don't have to discount to win over the new guy offering it for $10 less.

The 50-150 Sigma OS is being released but if i recall the price tag would be like $1200 on the street and almost as heavy and big like their 70-200. So that's a major turnoff.



Dec 01, 2011 at 06:58 PM
Baywing
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


Have you looked at the price increases for the new (well, announced with no firm delivery date) Canon big glass? It's at Nikon levels, and may just be a sign of future Canon pricing policy.
BTW, Nikon's new MAP policy is selective and applies mostly to the higher end pro gear.



Dec 01, 2011 at 07:20 PM
Mark_L
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


Web size and 6x4s? He could use any p&s camera and save thousands.


Dec 01, 2011 at 08:30 PM
lxdesign
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


Mark_L wrote:
Web size and 6x4s? He could use any p&s camera and save thousands.


Fuji x100 will do the trick



Dec 01, 2011 at 08:35 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



cputeq
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


Im 100% agnostic and i would recommend canon only because of the glass choices. The various iterations of the 70-200 are a compelling argument for the system, assuming he will be close enough to the action with a cropper. Canon offers an affordable 70-200 2.8 non is (i turn is off for most sports). Throw in a good 1.4x tc and you have a lot of situations covered, though no IS.

On the wider end, its basically a wash.

If youre considering 3rd party, its all pretty much a wash...tell him to get whatever camera he feels best shooting with.

You say family events, though, so if hes a big strobist, go nikon.



Dec 02, 2011 at 12:39 AM
static808
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


this topic leads me to something i regularly encounter. i shoot nikon, and previously shot canon. 90% of my friends/family shoot canon. a few of them, when they see my pictures, decide to dump their canon gear and go nikon. to their surprise, their IQ doesnt change at all. its later on that they learn its not the gear, but the person behind the viewfinder that makes the biggest difference.

when people ask me about which direction they should take with their gear, i typically tell them that the IQ difference across brands is pretty negligible, and they should make their decision based on how the camera feels in their hand and how they like the menus.



Dec 02, 2011 at 02:28 AM
EverLearning
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


Thanks for all the feedback everybody. I really appreciate it. Some good points to consider.

A quick thought for those who said a P&S would do. That is what he has now. Due to sensor sizes (and other considerations) they aren't exactly a good choice for indoor sports action photography. Also, he has had the P&S for a few years now and it is clear to me that he is interested in taking the next step. Lots of people take that next step. Some of those take the step after that and a few of those take the step after that. I don't want to recommend that he spend a bundle on the off chance that he is one of those few but I don't want to recommend stuff that limits his flexibility in the future either. So I want to recommend something that meets his needs today but also gives him the ability to grow with this hobby; basically however much he may want to.

Out of curiousity, can anybody tell me what the D7000 most closely compares to in Canon? Would it be a 50D, 60D or 7D? I know it is a 1.5 crop vs. a 1.6 crop with Canon, but basically the same thing in that regard.

Thanks



Dec 02, 2011 at 03:27 PM
Baywing
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


The D7000 is the high end entry offering from Nikon. Canon's 50D, 60D are in the D300s class. With the leaps in technology many today consider the D7000 to equal or exceed the D300s. In some ways, it exceeds, but the D300s still has better AF tracking and features not found in the entry level cameras. The D7000 would be in the same marketing class as Canon's top of the line Rebel xTi.


Dec 02, 2011 at 06:23 PM
EverLearning
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


Can anybody tell me what is Nikon's closest equivalent to the Canon 7D? Build quality, resolution, high ISO, burst mode, video, AF, etc.

Thanks



Dec 02, 2011 at 07:37 PM
penpro
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


I had the 60D and then traded in for the D7000. Personally, I don't see the 60D in the same class as the D7000. It felt cheaper and didn't have many of the features that the D7000 has. I also didn't care if I went with Nikon or Canon as it has been a long time since I owned any SLR gear and it was all Olympus when I did. The D7000 is a solid camera and I think that I will be able to grow into it as I get better. Lenses, as it has been said are the more important end of the system.


Dec 02, 2011 at 08:23 PM
LeifG
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


EverLearning wrote:
He is looking to shoot his 7 year old's basketball games. That's the current primary use. He also sees using it for his kid's soccer this summer, family events (Christmas, birthdays, etc.) and future vacations. He will mostly show the pictures digitally, but will also print 4x6s. He doesn't anticipate printing enlargements.

He has indicated his price range is $2,000 to $5,000, total (camera, lens(es), batteries, cards, bag and taxes).


For such small prints he does not need to spend a fortune. He might want to look at micro 4/3. He will have smaller lenses (larger crop factor means lenses have more reach), and smaller bodies. But he should check to see if the bodies are responsive enough, probably the latest ones are. If he ends up with huge amounts of heavy gear he end up getting cheesed off, and leaving it at home.

It is possible the Nikon 1 would do the job. The big advantage would be small size. No large lenses, and shoulder bags needed, just a small bag with one or two lenses and a body. The J1/V1 is not THAT expensive, so it would not be a huge risk to try.

Otherwise I'm sure he'd be happy with either Canon or Nikon. If he has friends and/or relatives who use a particular brand, then it might pay to choose that one, so he can try their gear, and swap experiences.



Dec 02, 2011 at 08:52 PM
Tim Ashton
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


EverLearning wrote:
Thanks for all the feedback everybody. I really appreciate it. Some good points to consider.

may want to.

Out of curiousity, can anybody tell me what the D7000 most closely compares to in Canon? Would it be a 50D, 60D or 7D? I know it is a 1.5 crop vs. a 1.6 crop with Canon, but basically the same thing in that regard.

Thanks


Most people compare the D7k to the 7D although it is marketed / priced against the 60D.

what about the Oly 3? Very (very) fast auto focus and the 45 mm (effective 90) is brilliant

Tim



Dec 02, 2011 at 09:14 PM
krickett
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


EverLearning wrote:
Can anybody tell me what is Nikon's closest equivalent to the Canon 7D? Build quality, resolution, high ISO, burst mode, video, AF, etc.

Thanks


The closest is the D7000 is probably he closest.

In reality, the D300S is priced against the 7D, and the D7000 is priced against the 60D, but if you're going by resolution and high ISO, and video, the D7000 is closer.

If you go by AF and burst, some would argue the D300S is closer.



Dec 02, 2011 at 10:38 PM
elkhornsun
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · Trying to be agnostic: Canon and Nikon


Your friend is likely to be happy with either the 7D or the D7000. With Nikon the lenses have a 5-year warranty and from a shooting perspective autofocus accuracy is much better and no need to send lenses and cameras in for recalibration. Exposure accuracy with flash is better with Nikon and it is very easy to use the internal flash on a camera like the D7000 to trigger a remote flash, or hand held flash, wirelessly.

I shot wedding for two years with Canon pro level cameras and lenses for a couple years (5D, 1D Mark II and Mark III) and then switched back to Nikon with the introduction of the D3 and the 14-24 and 24-70 zooms which were much better than the comparable zooms from Canon.



Dec 03, 2011 at 01:52 AM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password