Cubfan Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
p.1 #1 · D40 and 70-200 VR - Impressive! | |
OK, color me impressed. As a former Canon user, I'm in the process of waiting/switching to the Nikon D300. I've been keeping my Canon stuff, and quietly acquiring some Nikon lenses and such.
One lens I got was a used 70-200 VR, and I had to try it. So, I picked up a simple D40 and gave it a try at my son's football game on Sunday, not expecting much from such a cheap body. Was I ever wrong.
I've tried a lot of Canon cameras for sports... have shot the D30, 10D, 20D, 30D, 40D, 1D, 1DMk2N all with the 70-200L (both f4 IS and f2.8 non-IS). And nothing gave me results like this... even the high-priced 1D bodies. I'm sure it was mostly the lens, but I didn't expect to be this impressed with the difference.
I've always been a little frustrated with Canon. Using their best glass and their best pro bodies, I should have gotten better results. The detail just hasn't been there. On vacations shooting RAW, I've tried to get my images to look like what I saw in the viewfinder. Something has always been missing. Eventually, the specs of the D300 autofocus and the better flash system (Canon's flash exposure is random and awful) caused me to pull the trigger and switch.
I've shot the same way on all systems. Canon had AI-Servo with the center point active. Same with the D40. I got more keepers with the D40 than I did with the 1D bodies. How is that possible?
The best part was the detail. Try as I may, I couln't get facial expressions or the crisp details with the Canons, but I saw it immediately with the Nikon. All images have that Velvia-like film quality that I couldn't get with the Canon... or couldn't discover in PP.
Here are a few notable samples from the weekend using the D40 and the 70-200 VR at f2.8:



My Canon 70-200L I had to turn down to f3.5 or f4 to get the sharpness I wanted. The f4 IS, I shot wide open. Still not as good with facial details and always got blown highlights/dark shadows that were hard to clean up in PP.
Here's the best of the 40D shots in similar conditions, similar lens (40D with 70-200 f4 IS):



And of course, the 40D didn't have as many "keepers." Thinking the sun conditions might have hurt me in the past, I shot with the Nikon on both the sun and shade sides of the field, and got really good ones both places. With the Canon, if you shoot on the shade side, you get no faces at all... just a mask of shadow.
Anyway, initially I felt kinda bad dumping Canon, but the results I'm seeing in the images I'm getting have convinced me that I made the right move.
|