molson wrote:
Of course, the Canon lens is a professional-quality full frame lens. The Nikon lens is only designed for DX bodies, and is a poor choice for full frame use, so it's hard to understand why Nikon thinks it should be worth as much as a professional-grade lens. I guess enough people clued in that Nikon finally had to discontinue it, and the new FX version will be another $400 or so more expensive when it eventually becomes available.
molson,
Oh stop with the horse pucky! Canon's 70-200 Vignettes too and I have seen plenty of posts to prove it. And Nikon's lens is desinged for FX and works perfectly fine on FX. Vignetting is more than what SOME people want, but many other users find the issue is being blown way out of proportion. So, now Nikon has made a new lens that solves that issue and thus is superior to the Canon offering. Besides, if it's anything like other Nikon zooms of recent years, it will be kick-ass for sharpness and bhoken. And throw in the extra warranty, I'll take the Nikon offering.
It seems to me, that nikon has less problems with theri bodies then canon, and perhaps nikon is even leading the best camera race, dunno and dont even care
What is attractive to me about canon is, they have a larger portfolio of AF lenses and primes.
Nikon on the other hand, produces better 2.8 zooms, and we can still mount old MF lenses.
so i would say that if you use primes only, go for canon
saaketham wrote:
I sure wish Canon lenses would work on Nikon bodies. I'm sick of Canon's DSLR offerings .. the idiots seem to have gone megapixel crazy and are determined to stay there no matter what. I don't need 18 MP .. I just need 10 or 12. But, I don't want to pay the hefty prices for Nikkor lenses either. Wish there was an adapter from EF and EF-S to Nikon mount, preserving all functions. I'd so get a D300 or D300S and use my Canon lenses.
Then use sRAW if you don't want large file sizes.
Right now, the only thing Nikon has to offer is the D700, 14-24 f/2.8 and 200-400 f/4 as an advantage over Canon. Everything else is a wash and you'll lose money. No reason to switch for a D300s.
rsg_1 wrote:
Then use sRAW if you don't want large file sizes.
Right now, the only thing Nikon has to offer is the D700, 14-24 f/2.8 and 200-400 f/4 as an advantage over Canon. Everything else is a wash and you'll lose money. No reason to switch for a D300s.
Yep, you can always shoot at a lower rez...but it is sure nice to have the higher rez if and when you need it.
h_2_o wrote:
IIRC the focusing distance for lenses does not work putting canon on nikon. However i know for sure you can go the other way. You lose all AF control and IMHO is not the best idea to do this. both canon and nikon make good stuff and if you are dealing with prosumer cameras then i doubt you will notice it.
I believe you are referring to Focal Plane to shutter distance. The rear element is set up to be closer to the sensor on a Nikon than Canon which means that Nikon Lenses can be used on Canon (as you can easily increase that distance with a conveter) but you cannot effectively reduce that difference without completely redesigning the lens to mount a Canon lens on a Nikon body.
Greg M wrote:
Quite misleading don't you think?
Compare the cost of the 24-70 lenses, Canon is much less expensive.
Compare the VR II version to Canon in the 70-200. The VR II version is the one to compare because it matches up with Canon. The first VR version stinks in comparison.
How is this misleading? Rhyder is comparing lenses from the same era. Also $400 more for the latest technology AND a five yr. warranty is woth it, plus you only have to buy one copy to get a lens that works.
Oh stop with the horse pucky! Canon's 70-200 Vignettes too and I have seen plenty of posts to prove it. And Nikon's lens is desinged for FX and works perfectly fine on FX. Vignetting is more than what SOME people want, but many other users find the issue is being blown way out of proportion. So, now Nikon has made a new lens that solves that issue and thus is superior to the Canon offering. Besides, if it's anything like other Nikon zooms of recent years, it will be kick-ass for sharpness and bhoken. And throw in the extra warranty, I'll take the Nikon offering.
