Good point LMT1972, they are all newer lenses. I guess if I purchase all new Nikon stuff now it will be the latest and greatest, whereas Canon it will be somewhat older technology.
Thats good work spotting that tranhtn
They've been good to me too, although I order my 100 L 2.8 macro from d-d-electronics because they had a pre-order function at the time.
Current Nikon prices in Australia are definitely higher than Canons.
I agree Bonjour43MA, one of the reasons I switched to Canon was for the high ISO noise performance. Canon no longer have the lead in this area like they once did and if anything Nikon may be better.
If the rumours are true and there really is a new 24 1.4, 35 1.4 and 85 1.4 coming I'll be one happy Nikon owner. My plans are to get a Nikon D700 at the moment plus 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 to start the collection off....Show more →
For those lens prices, you do get a longer warranty period (5 years), and at least here in Canada, the bodies have a 2 year warranty. So think of it as an extended warranty cost
Nov 16, 2009 at 11:14 AM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Avi B wrote:
For those lens prices, you do get a longer warranty period (5 years), and at least here in Canada, the bodies have a 2 year warranty. So think of it as an extended warranty cost
jasin wrote:
Two words!
Nano Crystal!
One word, AMAZING...
I'll second that. I don't know what it is but with any of my Nano coated lenses the exposer is just dead on. I might be shooting out of te box but it's just my experience.
The only advantage Canon has at the moment are its Tilt-Shift lenses: the Canon offerings allow the use to adjust tilt and shift axes at will; these are fixed on the Nikons.
Apart from that, it's Nikon all the way. Thanks for the heads-up for DWI, too; I have always bought from B&H or BrightScreen.
Do DWI-sourced Nikons get an Australian warranty—and, if so, of what duration? TIA, kl
pahrens, if you're intent on returning to Nikon and buying a high-end kit then you might as well do it properly and get yourself a new D3s with the added dynamic range at higher ISOs. The extra price is a small part of the total you are about to spend.
Nikon does not have the market presence that Canon has and so prices are higher.
Kit Laughlin wrote:
The only advantage Canon has at the moment are its Tilt-Shift lenses: the Canon offerings allow the use to adjust tilt and shift axes at will; these are fixed on the Nikons.
Apart from that, it's Nikon all the way. ....l
Really?
How about the (more or less affordable) F4 zooms?
How about the fast (AF-S) wide-angle primes?
Nikon still has a lot of work to do in these segments.
Chris: true, but the lack of these (in comparison to Canon) definitely does not hinder may work in any way at all; this is what I meant. And I hope Nikon *does* progress these segments.
pahrens wrote:
sjms I haven't had reliability issues with the Canons yet, maybe I've just had good luck though. But I have heard the Nikons are a more reliable camera and I value that very highly, it's why I use a mac.
i can't say that. under a workload their products tend to need more "care" just out of the box
Then w/canon over a period of 5 years
1Ds- DOA
1Ds2- imager failed within 1.5 months of purchase and just before a 3 week trip to NZ which it was purchased for. canon cps promised repair before trip as they had no hot spares and i received it a week after i returned from said trip.
1D2- just never liked it so thats my issue
1D3- AF AF AF AF AF AF AF
24-105/4 flare issue and replacement
70-200/2.8 lens com issues
Now w/nikon going on 2 years
lost my BS-1 accessory shoe cover for my D700. my issue and replaced for $5
