Ray's recent thread about a 2nd shooter needed (with the strict requirement of 5D or 5DMK2) got me thinking.
I notice most of the pro wedding/people photographers on this board seem to shoot Canon. Am I at a disadvantage for shooting Nikon? I don't do anything besides People and Landscapes at the moment (with desires to get into Weddings down the road). I have a pretty good setup in Nikon (D700, 24-70, 70-200, 50 and 85 1.4, 105 2.5, etc) and I have had no regrets so far. All of my friends shoot Canon as well, so I could easily pawn some nice glass (one of them has all the L primes up to 500mm).
I guess I'm just wondering if it makes sense to switch. I would hate to be the odd man out with Nikon and I know I'll have to do a lot of 2nd shooting before I start shooting weddings on my own and well I would just hate to be discriminated against for shooting Nikon when everyone else shoots Canon.
Is this actually something I should look into or am I just being paranoid?
For what its worth I never see my self shooting Sports or Wildlife.
Canon and Nikon both have amazing gear! If you can tell the difference that you are smarter than me! Are these Canon, or Nikon (without looking at our gear list)?
I know the end result doesn't matter much. I was thinking more from the point of compatibility with other pro wedding shooters. RAW files, workflow, etc.
Does anyone know if any of the main pros from this forum shoot Nikon?
The most likely reason they have those stipulations is so that their workflow won't be disrupted and their images will have the same attributes. I often hire people who shoot Canon to be my second. I don't mind a little extra work on my end if they're good photographers.
I wouldn't sell your Nikon gear (unless you're prepared to sell me your 24-70 for about $500 ). Based on Nikon's recent successes, I would hazard a guess you may see more Nikon shooters on the wedding forum in the future.
I know the end result doesn't matter much. I was thinking more from the point of compatibility with other pro wedding shooters. RAW files, workflow, etc.
Does anyone know if any of the main pros from this forum shoot Nikon?
Crud! If someone does not like your Nikon they are nuts! I will be your friend no matter what!
Dave,
You are fine. More wedding photogs shoot Canon because the 5D has been the camera of the masses for 3 years. Now Nikon is competing and the playing field is leveling.
Most pros won't care what you shoot as long as you're good. However Ray (and I can't blame him) probably just wants someone who's look will match his or who's files will fit his workflow. Unless you REALLY want to work with him, you're fine with what you've got.
Canon rules the pro ranks - canon supports pros in many ways that nikon does not is one reason. Canon is cheaper is another (for the same pile of gear, lenses in particular). And canon has ruled on high-ISO noise, an important feature for weddings, until recently.
With LR I don't think I'd care if you have me NEF or CR2 files - I'd not see the difference or have any change in my workflow.
But then all the photogs I shoot with, second for, etc all shoot Canon bodies of one kind or another. That's 8 photogs BTW. I know two pros that shoot Nikon.
I shoot with both and can tell you there are some differences. You are correct. This is a Canon board. But, much of that has to do with available equipment at the time of purchase. For a long time, Canon owned high ISO and FF. With the exception of the Kodak SLRn, Nikon shooters only had 1.5 crop. With the exception of the D2Hs, ISO800 was pushing the envelope. Add to that some of the great Canon prime 1.2 and 1.4 lenses and it was an easy decision for many wedding photographers.
Now though, the D700 [by many accounts] sets a new benchmark for high ISO, dual FF and 1.5 crop shooting, in a wonderful body. About the only thing you give up are the 1.2 primes. The D300 is what the 40D is to Canon.
Having used 3 systems [Kodak, D2hs, 1DIIn], I will tell you the Nikon is the best at low-light focus. I find their flash system much easier to work. And, there really is a "feel" to the Nikons that I find easy.
There are some talented photographers on this board. I'm certain they all like their cameras for their own reasons. But, my guess is their images would be just as impressive if they shot another brand.
Here's a motto I follow. When I start thinking a technique or look isn't getting accomplished because of a camera, it is time to take a break from forum talk and shoot some more.
I have used both systems. My advice is to use the best that there is in either system.
For example, it just hurts my sensibilities when Nikon shooters with a Nikon 85mm f1.4 dreamily swoon over the Canon 85mm f1.2 .. when both will deliver pretty much the same result.
btw ... I have just moved from a primarily Canon set up (based on three mk3 bodies with all the lenses), to a Nikon setup with a D3 and D700.
ie .. you can make either system work. Just use the best there is.
canon or nikon... it doesn't really matter. however, what matters are specific models. i was shooting with the 20d for the longest time, then we upgraded to the 40d... HUGE difference. now we're shooting with the markIII... OMG!
so i guess the point i'm really trying to make is, you're asking the wrong question. nikon vs. canon isn't going to get you anywhere. instead you should be asking, 5D or D700? =)
Neil vN wrote:
I have used both systems. My advice is to use the best that there is in either system.
For example, it just hurts my sensibilities when Nikon shooters with a Nikon 85mm f1.4 dreamily swoons over the Canon 85mm f1.2 .. when both will deliver pretty much the same result.
btw ... I have just moved from a primarily Canon set up (based on three mk3 bodies with all the lenses), to a Nikon setup with a D3 and D700.
ie .. you can make either system work. Just use the best there is.
Neil!!! You're here too! I'm one of your biggest fans! Your blog is a weekly must read for me!
That tends to be rough on the pocket book though!
