Upload & Sell: Off
| p.2 #14 · Nikon or Canon for wildlife |
Well "Wildlife and Macro" is about as specific as it gets IMO. Either camera can do macro equally well. The Olympus 38mm f/2.8 is same or better quality than the MPE. And there are other bellows lenses with the same sort of qualities at same high magnifications for about the same price ($600 - $900). Very few people who have gone around the block a few times seeking the ultimate macro lens would disagree I think.
So I'm guessing the over 3:1 votes for Canon have to do with one or more of the specific Canon model's AF and tracking performance. At least I can't think of another reason for the poll to be in this state.
I sure would like to hear those who voted Canon explain why they did so.
Myself, I totally don't think it matters as I don't think there is an AF system nor an AE for that matter, currently in existence that's any good for wildlife - nor macro actually, come to think of it. Both those IMO are areas where manual focus and manual exposure really cut the cake! Still, I'd like to read what others have to say and why they voted the way they did (Nikon or Canon). So far the discussion doesn't match the poll results.
You can't go wrong with either brand if you have their best stuff. But I would say Canon have a small advantage in the long lenses. They have just released all their new MKII versions of the long tele lenses. Which are a little bit better than any other brand. They also have a longer lens than the other brands (800)
Most reviews and tests also say the Canon 1DX have even faster AF than the Nikon bodies