I could never really grasp this argument between Nikon and Canon users and equipment. They both are tools of photographers and when people pay too much attention to the BRAND, I think they are losing grasp of what's really important, YOU the photographer behind the camera. You and I see so many posts of the same stating how much better one brand is from the other or I will be a better photographer for using X brand and I will be switching to the next best brand cause I don't know how to use this camera. So what happened to going out and taking pictures? I've been with Canon for over 18 years, doesn't matter that I'm getting a d700, a Hasselblad (on the way) a Horseman and whatever tools I need, I could care less about the BRAND itself, but overall I care what it delivers.
The other week I was talking to another old timer and when I stated my current setup is mostly Canon he responded "Oh, I'm so sorry!", I found that rather humorous and disappointing in the same. You want to talk technical then yes Canon has more resources which is why they are in the lead and Nikon still has to wait for Sony's sensor technology to improve before it can take benefit. But the fact still remains that the photographer themselves is the most important piece of equipment.
Amen! When asked what kind of camera someone should buy, I tell that I use Canon because I've always used Canon, and never been let down in terms of image quality and general operational function, as well as being pleased with the SYSTEM they offer, not just one body or another. I also make sure that I tell them that it's the eye behind the camera, and the glass in the front, that make the image in the end. The body is just what brings all of the important parts together.
It is quite curious though, a couple of decades ago on most sidelines I frequented, there were very few Canon shooters, now it is the brand of the NFL. With the advent of the D3 and D700, there was a noticeable increase of the number of black lenses in Beijing for the Olympics. There will always be an ebb in flow of desired and available tools in every line of endeavor. Nothing to get all hyped up about, pro or con. I'm just glad we have two major brands competing for our hard earned cash ... keeps them honest and hard working as well. Then we ALL benefit.
Brand zealotry is such a funny thing...you see a ton of it in the lighting forum here, you see a ton of it in any given tech forum, I'm sure you see a ton of it in car communities. I think a large part of it, especially in the world of hobbyists, is people needing to reassure themselves that their money was spent wisely...but they express that by preaching the gospel of the brand they've chosen to invest in. They spend so much time teetering on the edge of the buyer's remorse abyss that it feels like any dissenting opinion could send them right over that edge.
I can't help but notice that the the higher you rise in the ranks of success in any given field, the less brand loyalty you hear and the more you'll come across responses like, "I use whatever does the job." I've yet to meet the truly successful pro photographer who really cares what brand is on their camera or lights - it's just about which tool fits their needs in any given moment. The loyalty is to the function, to the problem solved, to the client pleased, not to the multinational corporation that happily took their money.
I primarily shoot Nikon now, partly because I started out shooting Nikon. I tried shooting Canon for a while, but found that I just wasn't as comfortable with it...my brain didn't work the way the gear worked, which was a shame, because at the time I really lusted after that "Canon look". But I also shoot Mamiya, Leica, Rollei...and I'll shoot anything a client is willing to pay for. I also own both Macs and PCs, several of each. I even own more than one brand of clothing, fly more than one airline, dine at more than one restaurant, visit more than one website. These things are meant to serve me, not vice versa. And these companies can pay for their own advertising, I don't need to do it on their behalf for free.
It's nice to hear some like minded people are still out there. I was about to sell all my Canon gear and switch to Pentax!
It is certainly an ongoing thing, the Windows vs Mac groups always put pro wrestling matches to shame. The funny thing is this thread will soon die while the rumor and the brand rivalry posts will thrive! Well at least this community is not as bad as the dpreview crowd.
Brands can be a proxy for predictable results. They reduce a buyer's transaction costs by permitting a them to associate prior positive experiences or results with a name or logo. It's obviously imperfect, since one manufacturer or brand line may manufacture product lines of differing quality and temperament.
In a very technologically sophisticated discipline, brands make the process of selecting equipment easier in some cases; a brand indicates interoperability of like-branded components, consistency in interface, and a unified support infrastructure. Again, this clearly isn't true in all cases, but that's the theory.
Given that photography is so rooted in both technology and timing, I do think that certain equipment and interface designs may allow you to get a shot you wouldn't otherwise get. I can certainly attest to situations where cumbersome design cost me a shot, simply because I could not get my gear ready in time.
To say that the photographer is the key determinant of great photography is a truism; a great eye is necessary but not sufficient. The role that a camera plays in a photographer's success or failure can't be easily dismissed. While I agree that brand identity shouldn't restrict a photographer, I don't see it as an unqualified evil.
That said, much of what happens on the Canon forum is exemplary of the problems of brand, or equipment, obsession at the expense of practicing the craft.
I usually tend to be a contrarian when possible. I bought Canon F-1 when everyone was shooting Nikon, Atari when everyone was going Commodore, Betamax when everyone was going VHS...well, one of them is still in the running.
But if I have a picture of myself taken with a camera, it will be with my Horseman 4x5 or one of my Mamiya RZs. I like people saying, "Wow. What is that? Is that a film camera? Does it shoot color?"
At least Canon and Nikkon shooters can, in some occasions, show each other respect.
I shoot with a Pentax K10D and am waiting to hear what Pentax has in the line for new bodies before upgrading to the K20D. Reason I shoot with Pentax is because when I first got it a little over a year ago, I never thought I would get into it so much, never expected to make money off photog, and was a very well reasonably priced SLR for entry level. I've been snobbed at a seminar once by a Nikkon user that had less experience than I had and shots that had nothing to impress.
Now I've invested in high end Pentax glass. I also have an extinct Voigtländer 125mm/f2.5 APO-Lanthar Macro lens with a K mount. Paid 700$, was offered 1600$ two weeks ago for it. I have probably spent 4000$ on lenses. Funny thing is, most of my lenses now are worth more than the body.
So what do I do? Sell all my gear to go Nikkon and Canon? Perhaps one day.
For now I'm stuck with the K10D and must endure the snobbing of Canon and Nikkon photogs
What I usually comment on all this C vs N threads is that they both produce excellent results, especially when used for shooting brick walls, furry toys or people's living room furniture.
These are usually the shots used to prove the superiority of the "other" system, complete with hand shake and bad white balance.
"I could never really grasp this argument between Nikon and Canon users and equipment"
Personally I think what we are really doing is not trying to prove that OUR kit is better then someone else's. Its just that talking about Canon and Nikon gives us an opportunity to talk about cameras, something alot of us think about a great deal. I don't know about you, but if I talk about cameras at home my wife gets a glazed look in her eyes, and she promptly looks in one of her interiors magazines!
I doubt I am the only one with this experience on FM! I also come here to FM when I can't go out and take photos.
Personally I changed from Nikon to Canon last year, doesn't mean that Nikon are no good, just means I personally felt that Canon were more committed to my kind of photography than Nikon were at that time. I could have been wrong, or that someone else's kind of photography might be better served by Nikon.
We all pay our money and take our choice, I doubt many FMers really want to convince owners of competing camera systems that their kit is inferior. We just want an excuse to chat.
I think some people's brains are just geared more towards, well, the gear itself rather than the outcome. They just can't help it, they are wired that way. They like to get down to the nitty gritty of the functionality, the perceived quality and how they think one brand is 'better' than another and the sometimes detailed analysis of it all. Many of them can no doubt produce a stellar image from time to time, but the mind drifts back to the gear itself and thus you have the countless threads mentioned above.
The other side of the coin I guess would be the pure image maker. They are only really satisfied with the image itself and how it makes them feel and how it makes other people feel that view it. Is it satisfying/pleasing? The last thing that would enter their mind when viewing the image, most likely, is what brand of gear they took the picture with because THEY made the picture...not the gear.
I have seen the benefits of using gear (glass in particular) of a higher quality and I like the output I get. I can make a better image more often with my 1D than I could with my Rebel, particularly with anything moving fast. Put a faster lens on the end of the 1D and I'm usually even more pleased with the result because I can get what I want more reliably. But its the result itself that makes me happy.
But as was mentioned above, any set up has limitations and you know that going in so you just do your best with what you have available or chose the best cam/lens combo for the job at hand. I will hand it to those who are very very skilled and can produce jaw dropping results with just about anything at all.
Most pro's don't even care about it. can't remember one being serious.
Unless it's a 'debate' for fun, a bet for a pot of beer or teasing a 'newby'....
In the end it's the picture that's count.
@ Daniel:
Have fun with Hassy. You will love the 'CLUNK' with the shutter release.
To spoil your fun a litlle bit...you get used to the image quality and the weight.
The truly telling thing is that no one ever looks at a picture and thinks what a great nikon shot.
If I ever want to know technical details about a shot, it is usually about the lighting or the esposure information not the brand of the camera. Myself, as well as most pros I know, would rather have an older camera with killer glass, than a new camera with crap for glass.
shatterkiss wrote:
Brand zealotry is such a funny thing...you see a ton of it in the lighting forum here, you see a ton of it in any given tech forum, I'm sure you see a ton of it in car communities. I think a large part of it, especially in the world of hobbyists, is people needing to reassure themselves that their money was spent wisely...but they express that by preaching the gospel of the brand they've chosen to invest in. They spend so much time teetering on the edge of the buyer's remorse abyss that it feels like any dissenting opinion could send them right over that edge.
I can't help but notice that the the higher you rise in the ranks of success in any given field, the less brand loyalty you hear and the more you'll come across responses like, "I use whatever does the job." I've yet to meet the truly successful pro photographer who really cares what brand is on their camera or lights - it's just about which tool fits their needs in any given moment. The loyalty is to the function, to the problem solved, to the client pleased, not to the multinational corporation that happily took their money.
I primarily shoot Nikon now, partly because I started out shooting Nikon. I tried shooting Canon for a while, but found that I just wasn't as comfortable with it...my brain didn't work the way the gear worked, which was a shame, because at the time I really lusted after that "Canon look". But I also shoot Mamiya, Leica, Rollei...and I'll shoot anything a client is willing to pay for. I also own both Macs and PCs, several of each. I even own more than one brand of clothing, fly more than one airline, dine at more than one restaurant, visit more than one website. These things are meant to serve me, not vice versa. And these companies can pay for their own advertising, I don't need to do it on their behalf for free....Show more →
amen to you
That's hitting the nail on the head
Actually I always wanted to be a Nikon shooter
but each time i tried to get one, Canon has a more alluring option
ie: D200 vs EOS 10D with 17-40mmL for the same price
and now, D700 vs EOS 5D with 24mmL1.4 for the same money (almost )
RDKirk wrote:
I usually tend to be a contrarian when possible. I bought Canon F-1 when everyone was shooting Nikon, Atari when everyone was going Commodore, Betamax when everyone was going VHS...well, one of them is still in the running.
But if I have a picture of myself taken with a camera, it will be with my Horseman 4x5 or one of my Mamiya RZs. I like people saying, "Wow. What is that? Is that a film camera? Does it shoot color?"
At least some of the members are RETRO tech.I'm still playing my laser disc with more than 500 titles, my mini disc, my audio tapes, my many collection of VHS,some LP's.My old cameras from Minolta to Canon 35mm ,Canon (SLR APS) sony(pocket digital) and Canon (Digital) , why i still back to Canon is just after sales service.
I've been shooting now for around 24 years on a variety of equipment, but always when asked 'what camera do you use' my reply has been the same.............
+1 and well said. The brand cliques, even on the (at one time) agnostic 'Alt Forum' is getting nauseating.
shatterkiss wrote:
Brand zealotry is such a funny thing...you see a ton of it in the lighting forum here, you see a ton of it in any given tech forum, I'm sure you see a ton of it in car communities. I think a large part of it, especially in the world of hobbyists, is people needing to reassure themselves that their money was spent wisely...but they express that by preaching the gospel of the brand they've chosen to invest in. They spend so much time teetering on the edge of the buyer's remorse abyss that it feels like any dissenting opinion could send them right over that edge.
I can't help but notice that the the higher you rise in the ranks of success in any given field, the less brand loyalty you hear and the more you'll come across responses like, "I use whatever does the job." I've yet to meet the truly successful pro photographer who really cares what brand is on their camera or lights - it's just about which tool fits their needs in any given moment. The loyalty is to the function, to the problem solved, to the client pleased, not to the multinational corporation that happily took their money.
I primarily shoot Nikon now, partly because I started out shooting Nikon. I tried shooting Canon for a while, but found that I just wasn't as comfortable with it...my brain didn't work the way the gear worked, which was a shame, because at the time I really lusted after that "Canon look". But I also shoot Mamiya, Leica, Rollei...and I'll shoot anything a client is willing to pay for. I also own both Macs and PCs, several of each. I even own more than one brand of clothing, fly more than one airline, dine at more than one restaurant, visit more than one website. These things are meant to serve me, not vice versa. And these companies can pay for their own advertising, I don't need to do it on their behalf for free....Show more →
The more dominant suppliers ususally develop their own jargon, causing us to think a certain way which may be somewhat different than those using the competition's products. The excellent marketers are usually better at this game than others.
They also do this by creating their own "standards" and not following industry accepted practices. It invariably creates religious wars where we are talking past each other, often using the same words to mean somewhat different things.... or different words to mean the same.
Is IS the same as VR? Av mode = Aperature priority?
The model was perfected by the folks in the computer industry. VB script vs Java script. ASCII vs EBCIDIC, byte vs character, ethernet vs token ring (reaching back a bit), etc...
Most pro's don't even care about it. can't remember one being serious.