EOS EF L - Lenses vs. Nikon lenses

[ky2]

"A pro is not going to use substandard or even average equipment. Hondas and Toyotas are average, another reason why I drive a 325i." -- a Pro would use whatever does the job. Average, or otherwise. I know several pros who consider DSLRs inadequate and sub-average. 2 of which shoot sports. If you're driving a 325i-- then good for you, but it doesn't make you a pro driver, does it?

 

"I dare you to match up the Canon 1D system unfavorably with Nikon, even the 20D for that matter, for which Nikon really has no answer. Nikon does not even make their own sensors." -- actually, the D2x is a pretty good machine, definitely up and beyond the 1DsMk2 in the telephotoshoot department. But does it really matter? I haven't seen the latest and greatest cameras producing something that is superior to film cameras of 20 years ago, AF and all.

[daryl_sullivan]

I started with Canon, years ago. In the early '90's I switched to Nikon when I went to autofocus, as the EOS line was still in it's early stages. But it wasn't long before I switched back. In the FD line, the Canon lenses could be hit or miss, testing two identical lenses could give different results (in the standard line, as I was young and couldn't afford L lenses at that time). But when Canon went to their AF system, the optics and consistancy on all lenses improved. As far as sharpness, Nikon and Canon both make great optics, and I wouldn't say one is better than the other. What brought me back to Canon was the bodies, the way they operated, and their ergonomics. I just like the Canon bodies better. I shoot my Canon lenses wide open all the time, and get great results. And as far as I'm concerned, the Canon DSLR's provide superior results over Nikon. My staff is split 50/50, Nikon and Canon. One photog (who shoots Nikon) consistantly turns in photos that are on the red side, including flesh tones. Would you want to see a friend or relative in the newspaper who looked like they were badly sunburned? Or wearing a pink shirt instead of a white one? One poster said the Canon optics are cooler, I think its the Nikon bodies are too warm. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder, some like it one way, some like it the other. But I can tell you this. Most who shoot Nikon in the newspaper business do so because that's what the paper supplies them with, and a lot of papers are switching to Canon. Most freelancers, newspaper, magazine and AP, shoot Canon. And they are buying thier equipment. Sports Illustrated stopped using photos from Nikon DSLR's, except the D1x, some time ago, because "the Nikon bodies didn't have the resolution they needed". Yakim says the D2x will be better than the 1Ds MKII, because it will shoot faster. The D2x still has the 1.5 field of view crop, compared to the 1Ds full frame, and will only shoot faster when it's at 6 mp, using even less of the sensor. Good glass is good glass, and is usually more important than the body it's attached to. But what's better? Attaching high dollar glass to a camera with 3200 ISO film, or a slightly less dollar lens attached to a body with 100 ISO film? There are some variables, but in the end it works out to what you have, how well you know how it works, to give the best results.

[daryl_sullivan]

Sorry, its Yaron instead of Yakim who said the optics were cooler.

[rob_lipton]

I've been reading that while photojournalists and sports photographers have been switching to Canon, that for a lot of other uses, Nikon is more than holding its own. Specifically, stock, wedding, fine art, etc. I've used both systesm, mostly do stock photo stuff, low light things that take time. Anyways, if you have specific uses in mind, than you need to go with the most optimal system for your purposes, particularly if it impacts your livelihood. At this point in time, it looks like canon has a slightly better approach for shooting action stuff, who knows how long this will be the case. Nikon just released some very fast and very large resolution cameras, so, even this could change rapidly. Otherwise, it really is a waste of breath to worry the details on the differences.