25 minutes ago, (Sunday morning) I woke up with a thought that I should switch from Canon to Nikon and become one of the Nikonians. I am a wedding photographer and it is still early and I am kind of pissed! It seems to me that Nikon cameras and also lenses outperform the Canon system. As a matter of fact, I have the top of the line gear; Canon 5D, Canon 85mm 1.2L, 35mm 1.4L, 70-200 2.8L, etc… AND I am not really impressed by the new Canon 5D Mark II either! It seems to me that Nikon cameras are much better (ALREADY!!!) and Canon is just catching up…. All the photographers I adore SEEM to have NIKON SYSTEM! Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to blame Canon for my pictures but it seems to me that photographers with Nikon cameras and lenses more easily create the unique special look (beautiful sharp, crisp, fresh images with dreamy look, and colors which pop!) on their images which distinguishes them from the REST of us. To be honest I am a bit hesitant to do it. Do you think it is ME or what My site and blog: www.haringphotography.com Be honest! I am good with criticism. I need to find out! Please advise me! Has anybody actually changed after already having the top of the line Canon lenses? Was there an improvement As you know this would be an expensive switch.
Thanks!
Otto
Otto, You're suffering gear envy. It's not like you've got crap equipment.
However, having faith in your equipment is enough to give you confidence that what you're doing is actually good work. If you read too many forums you might feel like you don't have the faith in your equipment.
It's expensive to switch to find you're taking exactly the same photos (or near to it).
Otto: you're in a situation that strikes both camps from time to time. There are days of frustration with one's gear that hit every photographer no matter what gear is owned ... whether it be Olympus, Leica, Pentax, Sony, Nikon or Canon.
I shoot both platforms. I've held onto my Nikon D2x and now also own a Canon 5D II. I previously shot with a Nikon D200, Canon 10D, 40D, 5D and 1Ds II. I see the same things in my Nikon files that you're seeing in Nikon files ... color, pop, detail, etc. But I also see qualities in my Canon files ... smooth tones, sharpness, excellent color transitions, wide dynamic range, lack of noise at high ISOs (although Nikon has obviously caught up).
The one area where one system might be "better" for you is in the handling. Some like the way the Nikons are built and the way they handle. Some prefer the Canon's handling. I happen to prefer the handling of the Nikons myself, but that doesn't preclude me from shooting Canon.
I would never go back to shooting one platform and one platform only. I enjoy what each platform has to offer and sometimes pick one camera over another based simply on whim or my mood at the moment because ... in the end ... either camera and lens system is going to give me great pictures.
That being said ... and because my Nikon is a D2x ... if I know I'm going to be shooting low-light stuff, I reach for my 5D II. If I know I'm going to be in good light and might need high-speed capture, I reach for the D2x. If I know I'm going out for a day just to shoot "stuff" and want to take my time and be methodical, I take the D2x and my older AIS manual focus lenses. If I'm going out for a day to do street shooting in New York City, I'll take the Canon and 35mm f/2.
I think the Nikon vs. Canon debates are really quite baseless. Being brand loyal is fine, but insisting that one system is better than another really has no basis in reality. If someone put a gun to my head (heaven forbid!) and forced me to choose one system over the other, I'd do it via eenie, meenie, meinee, moe ....
Being a full time wedding photographer myself, I found the Nikon system to be much better for my needs than Canon. Also, I started off with Canon. The 5D2, aside from the incremental iso increase that all upgrades are expected to have, really doesn't do anything for the wedding scene. The 21MP upgrade is useless as we have to deal with thousands of pictures and that resolution is just unnecessary and difficult to deal with. The video is a nice addition, however, if we are looking at it as a business purchase, the video doesn't help me be a better photographer.
The D700 is awesome - it's a truly COMPLETE camera. The D3 is absolutely EPIC. Nikon makes better zooms and better bodies. From the rumors going around, we MIGHT be able to see fast wide primes in the near future also. If that happens, there is absolutely nothing on the Canon side that really makes it worth being with Canon. Right now, the only thing Canon has going for it is the 24L and 35L, imo at least.
the 35L was/is one of my most favorite lenses of all time. The original 5D was in a class all its own. I'm not a Nikon fanboy, but I just got really frustrated with Canon. I hated recomposing, hated jacked up focus, and hated the limitations of the 5D. I would have loved to have a 1DS series, but couldn't find a good deal on one at the time of switching. Nonetheless, the rest is history.
I just switched from Canon to Nikon and I couldn't be happier. Nikon has much better AF in low light and much better metering. Also, if you buy a new lens from Nikon, you get 5 years warranty, as opposed to one year offered by Canon. That's a big incentive for me to pay a little bit more to buy new than used.
I switched too, a year ago. One thing you'll miss is Canon's superb lineup of f4 L lenses. There are simply no Nikon equivalents. On top of that is the use of many variable aperture consumer grade zooms. Nikon bodies and f2.8 pro zooms are all up to (or beyond) what Canon offers, but don't expect the same prices on glass.
Yeah, flame me if you want, but my 24-105IS, 100-400IS and 70-200/4IS was one sweet lineup of pro quality lenses. Together, they cost less than a 200-400/4VR Nikon and perhaps 25% more than the new 70-200/2.8VR. For most of us, cost is a consideration.
That said, am I going back? Hardly. Canon has lost their vision when it comes to bodies. I was thinking the 7D was a return to sanity, but once again QC seems to be a serious problem. Until and unless Canon jumps off the MP bandwagon and uses Canon employees - and not paying customers - to test their equipment first, I'll be sticking with Nikon and my wonderful D300.
I am not a wedding or pro photographer.Though, I have used the 85mm f1.2, 135mm f2, 70-200 f2.8 IS, 300mm f2.8 IS on a1dsmrk2. Though i got some great photos with that combination, i also missed alot lot of potentially great images because of the auto focus system, shooting at f1.2 was difficult, and myself.
Recently i bought the Nikon D700 and Nikon 200mm F2 VR. All I can say is, I wish i had done it sooner. I get a very high percentage of keepers compared to my old Canon system. My photos are much sharper and colourful.
If you do come over to the darkside, you will miss maybe the speed of the 35mm f1.4. prime. But you will have wished you would have done it sooner.
Also, the Nikon flash system is much better than Canons.
It may very well be your gear--Canon has a problem with autofocus, even on their pro bodies. I switched because I lost too many shots to Canon's lousy, open loop auto focus system. Canon AF seems to work for most people, but a significant number of people have probems--count me among them. Once I moved to Nikon, I no longer had near as many OOF photos, so it was not my technique.
You also may need to go thru several copies of even their "best" lenses to find a good one--I never was able to find a decent Canon 24-70 f/2.8 even after 3 tries. Wound up have to stick with my Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 (old version), though AF speed was not as good.
Nikon is much more consistent, but you generally pay for it.
The Canon 35L is overrated--at f/1.4 it's decent in the center but not in the corners (not sure how important that is for weddings). Plenty of independent test sites confirm this. Same with the 24L, but it's even worse in the corners. What good is f/1.4 if the corners are only sharp at f/2.8, unless your doing portraits (and who does portraits with a 35mm?)
I'd rather have a D700 and Nikon 35 f/2 with clean ISO 3200 than a Canon 5D and 35 f/1.4L with clean ISO 1600 at 4 times the price for the lens + another $400 for the camera.
I've always shot Nikon, since 1975, and wouldn't change since my main investment is always in expensive glass. Once you start buying glass in any camera system brand, I'd stick with that brand. Glass being the most critical element IMO.
The biggest plus in Nikon is the F mount. Most old lens still work on my current bodies. I really only have current Nikon bodies since Nikon finally produced FX bodies.
If you don't need Video, don't need more than 12MP or the specific lenses that are in the Canon lineup and not matched in the Nikon lineup then the D700 (possibly with the grip) and D3 are awesome performers.
I switched from Canon to Nikon a while back having owned both the 1D2 and 1Ds2 for a few years. The D700 beat both the 1D2 and 1Ds2 for both auto focus and metering.
Note however that the D700 is only a 95% viewfinder - though this may not be a problem for you.
The one thing I love and hate at the same time is the processing via NX2. Yes you can process via the usual LR2, Aperture etc, but NX2 can produce some special files, and the control points are awesome to play with when you are trying to get that extra something from a shot that LR2 et-al can't seem to replicate.
Having said that - I miss my 70-200 f2.8L IS, and have not got around to picking up the latest Nikon version. One day ...
I don't miss the primes I had - and I've found the Nikon 24-70 and 14-24 awesome.
Also note that Nikon lenses tend to be more expensive than their Canon counterparts and also seem to be harder to find in stock.
The flash system is much easier to use than Canon's offering.
I just switched from Canon to Nikon and am extremely happy. I owned most of the Canon cameras and lenses and yes, the switch did not cost me extra. I would say I broke even with the switch. The D700 is way better than the 5D II IMO and the zoom lenses are great as well. The CLS system, metering, ISO performance......oh yeah, the D700 can actually focus I am so glad I switched!
I switched too and got a good amount of money to get me started in NIKON. ~You'll like it, AF ismuch better on the `d700 than the 5d. Built is better and the lenses.....ahhhhh....:-)! I fel nikon is more competitive edge than ever before....
I switched and it wasn't that bad of a hit... I own a D3, D700, D300 and a bunch of lenses, flashes etc. I prefer Nikon's ergonomics and focus so much more it is unreal. In all honesty I personally feel much more confident with my equipment and it allows me to focus on other things while shooting.
I am still a Canon shooter but I just traded a 7D for a D300S and have been playing around with 5D and 40D and D300S for a few days. I don't plan to switch entirely, but to sell some of my Canon stuff and use the best of each world. I am hoping (!!!) that Nikons quality control is better than Canon's, and that one copy of a lens will be enough instead of two (three times with different lenses) or more. I want equipment that I'm confident in out of the box, and I hope Nikon proves to be that equipment. Or at least closer to it than Canon. In my less-than-a-week of experimentation the D300S has not disappointed.
My site and blog: www.haringphotography.com Be honest! I am good with criticism. I need to find out! Please advise me! Has anybody actually changed after already having the top of the line Canon lenses? Was there an improvement
