Regarding IQ the current state of bodies has reached a point where there's not much to differentiate them, so IMO the differentiating factors should be lens selection, ergonomic preference, and perhaps what your friends have so that you have access to lens/accessories to share.

Regarding f/1.8 lens selection, Nikon has refreshed most of their primes and do perform better than the Canon equivalents, which naturally will equalize once Canon finishes refreshing their line. Nikon has been very aggressive on their f/1.8 pricing though (particularly the 85mm f/1.8, which is a great value), and I'm guessing Canon will be less so based on the introductory pricing of their recent lenses. For me the biggest lens differentiator has been the Canon 70-200mm f/4 non-IS, which is an absolute steal at $450 used. Until recently Nikon had nothing to match that or the IS equivalent, but they've since introduced their 70-200mm f/4 VR, which looks good but carries premium pricing esp vs the non-IS Canon. The 85L is a system-defining lens with no exact equivalent from Nikon.

snapsy wrote:
Regarding IQ the current state of bodies has reached a point where there's not much to differentiate them, so IMO the differentiating factors should be lens selection, ergonomic preference, and perhaps what your friends have so that you have access to lens/accessories to share.

Regarding f/1.8 lens selection, Nikon has refreshed most of their primes and do they perform better than the Canon equivalents, which naturally will equalize once Canon finishes refreshing their line. Nikon has been very aggressive on their f/1.8 pricing though (particularly the 85mm f/1.8, which is a great value), and I'm guessing Canon will be less so based on the introductory pricing of their recent lenses. For me the biggest lens differentiator has been the Canon 70-200mm f/4 non-IS, which is an absolute steal at $450 used. Until recently Nikon had nothing to match that or the IS equivalent, but they've since introduced their 70-200mm f/4 VR, which looks good but carries premium pricing esp vs the non-IS Canon. The 85L is a system-defining lens with no exact equivalent from Nikon.

It is a 350$ premium to the 70-200 4.0 L IS Canon here in germany, too (+33%)

Ralph Conway wrote:
It is a 350$ premium to the 70-200 4.0 L IS Canon here in germany, too (+33%)

Yeah, it's about the same differential in the states, $1099 for the Canon and $1399 for the Nikon, plus the Canon is around 90g lighter.

And the Canon already is by far one of the best lenses I ever used. The Nikon copy (it looks like a one two one copy painted in black to me) first has to show, how good it is ...
Nikons 70-200 2.8 VR II lose competition with Canons L equivalent. The 4.0 L IS is as good. It loses one stop only.

For the 70-200 f4 there is already a threat out on the nikon side showing how well it compares to the 2.8.
I'm not getting an f4 lens, so uninterested in both the f4s.

vchowdhary wrote:
For the 70-200 f4 there is already a threat out on the nikon side showing how well it compares to the 2.8.
I'm not getting an f4 lens, so uninterested in both the f4s.

Thank you. Did not see this thread.

My personal testing shows the Canon f/2.8 IS II is noticeably sharper than the Nikon equivalent across the frame at f/2.8. And I agree, the 70-200mm f/4 IS is a spectacular lens and the Nikon will need to prove itself against it. The one failing of the Canon f/4 is MFD IQ - will be interesting to see how the Nikon compares. Canon has always excelled in long glass design.

I haven't used any of the NEWEST AF-S Nikkors on any bodies newer than D700, but the AF-S lenses I did try (14-24, 24-70, 300/2.8, 50/1.4), all had much slower AF in similar situations to my experience with Canon's awesome ring-USM.
I LOVED my D700's. LOVED them. If Nikon just put out a D700S, that would be what I'm shooting today.... BUT they didn't.

Canon and Nikon's lens lineups don't directly correlate in very many areas.
Canon has a great (expensive) 50, their low and mid-range 50's aren't as nice of offerings as Nikon's (for value/AF).
Canon has the 85/1.8, which is cheaper than the Nikkor- and I bet has faster AF.
Canon's wide offerings might not be as exotic as Nikon, but I do think they're more affordable.
Canon's teles are all more affordable than their Nikkor counterparts, correct?

I think that overall, Canon has a more complete lens selection, and more reasonable pricing. A few EF's need updating, but all the new Nikkors that have been coming out are expen$$$$ive!

The 6D feels great. I am very happy with mine. I have not held a D600, but just looking at pictures and reading reviews, I'm getting the impression that it feels like a happy meal toy.
I haven't used it yet, but I'm very excited about the built-in GPS.... which previously was a few-hundred $$ add-on.

If the rumours are true, and the D600+24-85 lens is selling for 1999. I would consider that into your decision making.

The lens can get you around 300 worst case.

ISO1600 wrote:
I haven't used any of the NEWEST AF-S Nikkors on any bodies newer than D700, but the AF-S lenses I did try (14-24, 24-70, 300/2.8, 50/1.4), all had much slower AF in similar situations to my experience with Canon's awesome ring-USM.
I LOVED my D700's. LOVED them. If Nikon just put out a D700S, that would be what I'm shooting today.... BUT they didn't.

Canon and Nikon's lens lineups don't directly correlate in very many areas.
Canon has a great (expensive) 50, their low and mid-range 50's aren't as nice of offerings as Nikon's (for value/AF).
Canon has the 85/1.8, which is cheaper than the Nikkor- and I bet has faster AF.
Canon's wide offerings might not be as exotic as Nikon, but I do think they're more affordable.
Canon's teles are all more affordable than their Nikkor counterparts, correct?

I think that overall, Canon has a more complete lens selection, and more reasonable pricing. A few EF's need updating, but all the new Nikkors that have been coming out are expen$$$$ive!

The 6D feels great. I am very happy with mine. I have not held a D600, but just looking at pictures and reading reviews, I'm getting the impression that it feels like a happy meal toy.
I haven't used it yet, but I'm very excited about the built-in GPS.... which previously was a few-hundred $$ add-on.


Having held both the cameras, my experience was the opposite. The lighter 6D almost had a creaky feel to it once fitted with a heavier lens like the 70-200.

The D600 has an uncomfortable grip for my hands.. wide and long, the 6d is not tall enough to provide grip for my entire hand, the D600 is not deep enough to provide grip for my fingers (similar problem with the 5d mark III). The D800 grip is the best of the 3, but ofcourse this is a personal preference for my hands/perception.

Surprisingly, the Sony a99 so far has been the best camera to hold (weight is lighter than the other 2 comparable bodies), the build stiff and yet the grip is the best for a non gripped camera.

As for teles being affordable, that is a myth and as of the current offerings no longer true.

The AF speed of the 85 1.8G isn't blisteringly fast, but isn't noticeably slower than the Canon 85 1.8. Not enough to make a difference to me anyhow.

vchowdhary wrote:
If the rumours are true, and the D600+24-85 lens is selling for 1999. I would consider that into your decision making.

The lens can get you around 300 worst case.


They aren't just rumors, but I don't know how long it will last.

http://www.adorama.com/INKD600K1KE.html?utm_term=Other&utm_medium=Affiliate&utm_campaign=Other&utm_source=rflaid62905

For $2k, shipped, with lens, controller, 32gb card, bag, etc. it's an absolute no brainer IMO.

I wish this was in the Christmas budget because I'd jump on it. Seems like Nikon is serious about the market and putting technology into photographer's hands. Canon OTOH, is well.... less so.

PS - D800 is on sale too..

ISO1600 wrote:
I haven't used any of the NEWEST AF-S Nikkors on any bodies newer than D700, but the AF-S lenses I did try (14-24, 24-70, 300/2.8, 50/1.4), all had much slower AF in similar situations to my experience with Canon's awesome ring-USM.
I LOVED my D700's. LOVED them. If Nikon just put out a D700S, that would be what I'm shooting today.... BUT they didn't.

Canon and Nikon's lens lineups don't directly correlate in very many areas.
Canon has a great (expensive) 50, their low and mid-range 50's aren't as nice of offerings as Nikon's (for value/AF).
Canon has the 85/1.8, which is cheaper than the Nikkor- and I bet has faster AF.
Canon's wide offerings might not be as exotic as Nikon, but I do think they're more affordable.
Canon's teles are all more affordable than their Nikkor counterparts, correct?

I think that overall, Canon has a more complete lens selection, and more reasonable pricing. A few EF's need updating, but all the new Nikkors that have been coming out are expen$$$$ive!

The 6D feels great. I am very happy with mine. I have not held a D600, but just looking at pictures and reading reviews, I'm getting the impression that it feels like a happy meal toy.
I haven't used it yet, but I'm very excited about the built-in GPS.... which previously was a few-hundred $$ add-on.


the 6D is rockin' in many departments including ISO performance - even more than the 5D3 !

Pop-up flash - apparently you guys have never taken a photo with some needed-yet-unplanned fill flash? great to have a body having it for a bit of "emergency" use instead of hunting down a speedlight.

That's not to mention the fact it's a built-in flash commander, and a pretty good one at that.

The Adorama (and Amazon, actually) $2000 D600 combo deal is extremely alluring right now - I'm just saying, were I interested, I'd look hard at this.

I haven't actually used either the D600 or 6D, so I'm unsure how they stack up - I still like Canon's overall colors and lenses better, though Nikon's newer 1.8 primes are certainly tempting too.



And since I'm brand-agnostic, I'd also have to say ultimately they're all capable machines - really, the photographer is going to be the limiting factor in most circumstances. I'd certainly take a look at other factors besides sensor performance, which would actually be the least of my worries.

jamesf99 wrote:
They aren't just rumors, but I don't know how long it will last.
http://www.adorama.com/INKD600K1KE.html?utm_term=Other&utm_medium=Affiliate&utm_campaign=Other&utm_source=rflaid62905
For $2k, shipped, with lens, controller, 32gb card, bag, etc. it's an absolute no brainer IMO.
I wish this was in the Christmas budget because I'd jump on it. Seems like Nikon is serious about the market and putting technology into photographer's hands. Canon OTOH, is well.... less so.
PS - D800 is on sale too..

Nikon is going all out to grab market shares.

BUT read what this Nikon expert, Thom Hogan, wrote on his blog dated Nov 30, 2012:

"Nikon will (barely) hit their Q3 estimated sales (Q3 for them is Oct/Nov/Dec), and mostly by heavy promotion and discounting. Basically everything will be on sale by the end of 2012, and backed with expanded coop advertising and spiffs. That's what it will take to make the numbers. Q4 (Jan/Feb/Mar) will be a tough slog, but given a few new product intros they probably will make their final projected numbers for their fiscal year.

However, I'm now predicting this: in Nikon's next fiscal year (starts in April), they will have flat unit volume, not growth. In the fiscal year after that, they will have unit volume decline.

Before some start writing that Thom's predicting the demise of Nikon, no I'm not. I'm predicting that flat sales and declining average selling price are going to make it difficult for Nikon to make a profit next year, and if that continues, they could swing to a loss position."

All this heavy discounting in their desperate bid to pip Canon in the market shares race is going to cost Nikon. Is it sustainable and worthwhile in the long run? We shall see...

But I hope Canon responds accordingly with heavy discounting too.... :Surely their 6D, 5D3 and recent lenses can be sold at much lower prices...

It isn't helping Nikon that for all their superiority in many areas at present, their repair is at an all time low for customer satisfaction. Must be very frustrating for many, the choice is crippled feature set but better lens selection and reliable service with parts readily available or supremely featured cameras for the price but a very thin lens pipeline (we haven't been able to get one lens for our D800e in the studio for far too long) and praying that you won't have to use their repair services. Or of course Sony with a tiny lens selection and non existent pro service. Sometimes you just want to hit your head against the wall, or like so many, just stick to the last generation or two cause you can't afford barely needed new features anyway, especially at current pricing.

If you believe in DxOMark this might help.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Canon-EOS-6D-The-best-value-for-money-in-the-EOS-range/Comparisons

I am going with the Canon 6D. I am a person who mostly shoots alternative lenses. I have no canon or nikon lenses at all. I mostly do manual focusing only. I am not a big fan of either canon or nikon lenses. I am a big fan of Zeiss lenses. To me they are both jap bodies camera and come closes to the same in many aspects. I had the D600 in my hands yesterday at Costco and was checking it out. I personally didnt like the (buttons) too many in my opinion from first holding it in my hands and first impression. I was like WOW look at all the damn buttons - WTF. What the hell are they all for was going thru my head. What the hell - do I have to go to school to learn all this button thing? I took some shots with it and said whatever - no biggie. Do you want good images, then that's your lenses producing that IMO. Garbage lenses gets you garbage pictures. I like the Canon 6D since its not so buttony - a lot less buttons to look at or try to figure out. The 6D has the ability to control it from my iPhone 5 as well, thats a plus, but not the determining factor. It has the same processor as the Mark III. Thats important to me. The controlling and maneuverability is important to me as well and is my focus on whats important. I dont want to sit there for 2 hours trying to figure out how to do this or that with the camera. I have a camera - its a Leica that I currently own and its easy to use and takes phenomenal pictures and very minimal buttons to deal with. I don't need to be a rocket scientist to take a picture with it either. Thats my biggest issues with the d600 - its too buttony and to gadgetry looking. I do believe if you put the two cameras up against each other and put on the same exact lenses (zeiss) (not a canon lens or nikon lens but a zeiss lens to be fair on IQ for both) then you would see no difference in IQ from either camera. Its in my opinion all about use and maneuvering thru the menus and controlling features of the cameras. I think and believe the Canon is more easier to work with.

Whatever you choose - be happy shooting and learn a lot from your photography arena. Its brings out the creativity in us all.

Good luck and thanks for reading.

The bundle deal from Nikon is hard to resist. Much more attractive than Canon D6 price.

samfowler wrote:
Its in my opinion all about use and maneuvering thru the menus and controlling features of the cameras...

That's a joke, right?

jamesf99 wrote:
vchowdhary wrote:
Seems like Nikon is serious about the market and putting technology into photographer's hands.



Thats a joke right?