Nikon F100 or F5 or Canon EOS1V

I'm about to do a major upgrade in equipment and I've been trying to

decide between the Nikon F100, F5 or the Canon EOS1v. While the F100

is in financial reach, I would have to streach a bit for the other

two. I figure I can certainly get the F100 but would probably end up

upgrading again in a year. Am I better off getting the F5 or the

EOS1v and if so should it be the F5 or EOS1v?

 

I've thought this out several times and came up with a different

decision each time. HELP!

Kemachat,

 

Any of the bodies you mention would be a good choice. If you are sure that the F100 would need to be upgraded so soon, you should probably eliminate it from consideration and continue with you current kit until you can get either of the others.

 

As to a choice between the F5 or the EOS1v, you need to take a look at the entire "system" from Nikon and Canon.

 

Take a good, hard, look at what each system offers. Does one offer something you want/need that the other does not?

 

Since you will be switching systems (your profile indicates that your current system is Minolta), you need to look at the what each system can do for you and what you do.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Vernon

what lenses do you have? A good rule of thumb is that your lenses should cost 3 times as much as your camera bodies.

What equipment do you have now? If you're leaving Nikon the EOS 3 and 1V are both excellent cameras backed by an excellent system, however the Nikon system may suit you more or the ergonomics may be better to you. That's all taste mainly.

Ke

 

I own a Nikon F5, and it is a heavy camera and wears on my arms after a days use. I would suggest the F100 for it's lighter weight, and better viewfinder. The viewfinder of the F100 indicates the focus point by highlighting it in red, and for the life of me I can't figure out why Nikon doesn't make a better viewfinder for the F5 as it does not have a highlighted indicator. The F5 viewfinder is DARK, something I have not experienced using the F100.

Whatever you do buy the one that you won't have to upgrade in a year, that's very expensive, cameras tend to depreciate heavily. I upgraded twice in the last two years, N65 to N80 to F100, I probably could have got an F5 for the money I lost on trade ins.

Thanks for the advice everyone!

 

The biggest issue I�m struggling with is trying to decide between buying something more economical and getting more lens then trading up or making the investment now, buying one good lens (which I could totally survive with for now) and then add lenses as I go along. It sounds like it a smarter plan to upgrade so I don�t have to trade up in any short amount of time.

 

That said� anyone have any ideas on the opinions between Nikon and Canon of the same trim?

 

Thanks again!

if it were me i would get better lenses and get a cheaper body. in your other thread you mentioned $1500 for a lens. I am assuming you can currently afford about $2500 for the lens and camera combined by combining these two threads. If so, i recommend a Canon EOS 3, with a 17-40/f4 and a 70-200/f4, plus a decent tripod if you can afford it... and then whenever you have the money i would add a 85/1.8 for portraits. you might want to read: <a href="http://www.photo.net/equipment/35mm/canon-v-nikon">http://www.photo.net/equipment/35mm/canon-v-nikon</a>

In the Nikon line, the major differences between the F5 and F100+MB15 are primarily 8fps vs 5fps, mirror lockup (F5 only) and for non-collared lenses, less stability (two pieces F100+MB15 aren't as solid as a one piece body). If these don't matter for your usage, I don't understand why the F100 wouldn't be viable for several years.

 

In the Canon vs Nikon debate, there is considerable overlap in capabilities; however, there are areas where the current offerings in both systems are better than the other.

Huey: Your F5 viewfinder should not be dark. And you can get an EC-E screen that has the points that light for your F5. The points are black rather than red, but they are very easy to see.

 

I sent my F5 in for a CLA and I was surprised at how much brighter my viewfinder got.

Conni

EOS 1V over F5. The EOS 1V is heavily weather-sealed with gaskets and O-rings (F5 not as well sealed), offers a detacheable booster drive/vertical grip for lighter weight and smaller size (the F5's is permanently affixed), has illuminated focus points that tell you when and where the camera is focused (the F5 focus points don't illuminate). EOS 1V HS comes with the detachable booster drive/vertical grip.

 

EOS 3 over F100. EOS 3 has mirror lock (no mirror lock on F100), spot/partial/center-weighted/matrix/multiple-spot metering (F100 has no partial or multiple-spot metering), Eye Control Focus (no Eye Control Focus on F100), customizable focus array that you can set for 45-point spread/11-point spread/9-point circle/1-point spot/7-point fat spot/13-point fatter spot focus (F100 just had static 5-point focus). By the waym the EOS 1V also has this customizability, too.

 

Overall, the EOS 1V HS/F5 and EOS 3/F100 are comparably priced and deliver excellent performance. But you might as well get the one that offers a little more for your money. Plus, consider their lens systems, too.

This will cause trouble.

First. I'm pro. Agency photographer. Working with Nikon cameras. Best Nikon camera of all times is F5. But it is not digital!! So,, D1X or D1H is an answer. F100 is an amateur camera!!! That is the fact! It is light and cheep but it is much, much slower than F5. Canon 1V is even better camera, faster and with better sistem (lenses etc). If You are an perfectionist 1V is the best camera U can buy but F5 is great too.

I thought I read the F5 and the F100 have the same AF sensors and drive, so the F5 can't really be faster focusing than the F100??

F5 and F100 have the same autofocus sensor (CAM1300), but it is not clear how much the of rest of autofocus hardware and software are shared. F5 moves screw driver lenses distinctly faster than F100, Some say F5 tracks movements better as well.

Ahhh, yes, Peter Phan, who still insist the best car is the one with the most cup holders.

All things being equal, and indeed there is much that is equal between the EOS 1V/F5 or EOS 3/F100, it certainly makes sense to take a look at the differences to break the tie. That's all that I've done.

 

Taking a look at how the lens systems compare can also break the tie. With the Canon EOS system, you have USM throughout the range. This includes USM on consumer and pro lenses, short primes and long primes, as well as zooms. With Nikon, AFS is still found only on some zooms and their long telephoto lenses. Also, Canon has about a dozen or so Image Stabilizer lenses. Nikon is catching up though. They currently offer three Vibration Reduction lenses. Canon also offers three tilt-shift lenses: a 24mm, 45mm and 90mm. I have the 24mm and 45mm which I use regularly for landscapes, environment, and architecture. The 90mm never made it into my bag because I find that longer focal length a bit limiting for my regular subject matter for which I use tilt-shift movements. Nikon offers only an 85mm tilt-shift. And finally, Canon's latest L lenses (16-35/2.8L, 17-40/4L, 24-70/2.8L, 70-200/2.8L IS, plus all the super-teles) are weather-sealed to go with the downpour-resistant sealing on the EOS 3 and EOS 1V. Nikon's are not. So overall, I do think you get more for your money with Canon and have a broader selection to choose from. This goes well beyond who has the better cup-holder ;-) When you're making such an important-- and potentially long-term-- decision, it certainly doesn't hurt to take a look at the details.

Indeed, it goes well beyond cup holders. It involves hood ornament and inspirational sales promotion slogans as well. Everyone knows Canon has more "Waterproofness" cuz it is built like, huh, a rock?

Chuck, you should take phantastic Peter more seriously, he is a seasoned pro, even has written a book. Some respect for the master please.

LOL, yeah right. No mastery here. Maybe a tiny bit of photographic skill, but for the most part I ride on sheer blind luck. Oh, and the valuable info I've accumulated from photo.net over the years. Thank goodness for that!

Don't be that modest Peter, you deserve.<br><br>

 

Btw <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0814659411/qid=1053498052/sr=1-4/ref=sr_1_4/104-9079948-6875941?v=glance&s=books">here</a> is the book Peter has written, I knew he'd see the truth in someday.

A thousand apologies. I forgot to be stunned by such awesome erudition, most unforgivable. (Bowing before an EOS-1v under a running faucet)

My $0.02.

 

Go to a camera shop, and ask to hold each camera. Now add the longest, fastest

zoom you *ever* intend to afford. Be sure to try camera with the optional vertical

grips on and off. Pick the one that feels best to you.

 

All the features in the world can't help you if you won't load your gear up because it's

too heavy. I like the F100 becaude there is the choice of leaving the vertical grip

behind. But some lenses need the extra size and weight of the grip to counter-

balance them.

 

I hate carrying lots of heavy gear around, and the F5 would prevent me from taking

my camera everywhere, all the time.

 

I know Nikon, so please forgive the bias. I'm sure most of the comments are equally

valid for the EOS1v/EOS 3.

I think you will find (as has been discussed here and elsewhere over and over again), both of these systems consist of high performance, professional quality gear. None of this stuff is going to disappoint you, so as the wise have suggested, learn the art and pick what suits you best. Hold the bodies, look though the veiwfinders, try the lenses for feel, and flip some switches. Most of the prominent nature photographers seem to prefer Nikon. The sports people seem to like Canon. There are many exceptions in both camps. As far as these extensive systems go; what are you really going to use in reality? If you usually shoot on a tripod, VR/IS may not be a factor for you. If you shoot macro and lanscapes, you may want interchangable viewfinders. Do you plan on using tilt.shift lenses? How many do you think you'll really need? More than two? Go with Canon. Shoot wildlife and landscapes in changing light? The F5's RBG metering and dynamic autofocus may be what you need. If you want the convenience of not carrying a battery pack around, use the Canons or try the F-100. Consider for field work that the interface will introduce a "weakness" to the environment compared to a one piece body (the trade for lighter weight and flexibility). One comment on a previous post: to say that the F5 is not sealed against the elements goes against everything I've ever heard or read from anyone, amateur or professional. Even people who don't like the camera itself say that the only thing they do like is that is is built like a tank and is impervious to weather.

So, there's my opinion for what it is worth. Hope someone finds it helpful somewhere.

I agree with these last two comments. Both brands will get the job done. I have used and assisted Nikon shooters as well as Canon shooters. It ultimatly comes down to which camera feels right in your hands and puts that little crooked smile on your face. For me it was Canon. I like the logic they use in their layout and displays. I like the fact that there is no appature ring on the lens and no mechanical connection between the lens and camera.

 

The funny thing is that I get my better shots from my Canon A1. I think I have a stronger attachment to that camera and it's simplicity. Oh, I love my Holga too!