Canon or Nikon

[matthew_dale]

I am about to buy a new camera and as I am going to get new lenses as well it doesn't matter what brand. What I

want to know is if the canon 70-200mm 2.8/L IS USM and the nikon equivalent are as good as each other and also

the canon and nikon 17-55mm 2.8 IS USM.

 

Cheers

[tdigi]

Test drive a body from each and see what feels better. I use both and I like both but for my personal gear I use Canon.

[JDMvW]

Six of one and half a dozen of the other. Try the bodies to see which works better for you and then worry about

the lenses. As no doubt you will be told, it is hard to beat the L glass for quality, but Nikon's best are as good.

 

If you're going to buy a "crop body" (roughly 15x22mm sensor) as it seems, then look at Photozone.de for reviews

of the various lenses available.

[Matt Laur]

Indeed, this all comes down the bodies, and how you like the ergonomics. All of those lenses are great. Both make excellent bodies. But they feel (to many people) very, very different in the hand... and the control positioning and menu structures each have fans and detractors.

 

We could do some hair splitting by asking specifically what you'll be shooting, and when you need to buy, and what your budget is. That might help make a small case for drifting one way or the other. For many people, Nikon's more flexible CLS/iTTL flash system is, all by itself, the thing that puts them in that camp.

 

This really does come down to your style and ergonomic preferences. At the hairy edge of some types of shooting, each manufacturer will have an edge in some areas. The lenses are, for practical purposes, interchangeable - especially if you're talking about a cropped-sensor body.

[elmroc]

Mathew,

One of the most important thing as Tommy indicates is that you hold each brand and specifically, the different models. They will fit differently in your hands. ALso, another thing to consider is the controls.

 

Both brands have similar and not so similar features, and how you arrive at those features probably will be different. THis is just as important as the glass, as you must be comfortable shooting the camera you pick. As far as the lenses, i only have experience with the Nikon 70-200 VR and the NIkon 17-55.

 

Both of these lenses are super sharp! and among the best lenses Nikon has ever made.

I have heard excellent reviews of their Canon counterparts also, so it's probably a toss up.

 

But really, i think it's going to come down to how they feel and function in your hands.

 

Good luck

 

Cheers

[j_smith6]

You're asking in canon forum so probably responses are going to be a little bit biased. I've never compared these

lenses with nikon versions but nikon's 17-55/2.8 is better built (I'm not 100% sure about it though). Canon's lenses

use USM motor - I know that nikon cameras use this weird motor which is in camera body, so you could also check

which one you like more. I guess my response isn't that much helpful... There are some users on photo.net who use

both - canon and nikon so maybe they'll share their opinions.

[matroskin]

you should definitely handle both bodies first, but if you still can't decide flip a coin. <br>KN

[elmroc]

Michael,

 

Actually, Older Af-D Lenses is the screwdiver/in camera AF.

The new AF-S lenses such as the 17-55 and the 70-200 VR use in-lens motors, which is Nikon's version of USM

[elmroc]

BTW AF-S =Silentwave motor

[rich_hayhurst]

As a proud Nikon owner for 30+ years, and a pro photographer, let me state that having switched to Canon within the last 18 months, that

everything is better over here. I started with a 40D, several flashes, and lenses and they I am never disappointed with the quality as I was

with my D2x's and SB800's. And, the stuff is easier to use.<div></div>

[g dan mitchell]

Folks switch both ways. Great photographers make great photographs with gear from both companies. Both companies

make great equipment.

 

Pick one and start building your system. :-)

 

Dan

[ben_pincus]

As others have said, you have to start out with a body you like. It has to feel right in your hands and the controls should be intelligible and to your liking.

 

Having said that, its fairly common knowledge that Nikon ergonomics and menu systems on their cameras is vastly superior. Sure, anyone will get used to either system in time but straight out of the box, the Nikon doesn't annoy the hell out of you and seems very very logical and 'right'.

[Matt Laur]

That does it, Rich. We're going to have to insist that you mail your Nikon lapel pin back to headquarters, right

<i>now</i> mister!

[alan_myers]

Everyone else is just being nice...

 

Fact is, Canon is the only way to go! Forgetabout Nikon!

 

(Hey, you asked on a Canon forum... What did you expect! ;-)

 

But seriously, Nikon's recent offerings have shown some vast improvements, certainly in the higher end models:

D300, D700 and D3.

 

(D90 has movie mode, which ranks up there on the list of "things I'd never use" with the Direct Print button on

Canon, as far as I'm concerned.)

 

I don't know if the new D90 or older D80 can handle all the lenses in their line-up or not. But, the D40s and D60

for sure can only fully utilize the AF-S lenses which have built in AF motor. The latest pro zooms and super

teles are AF-S, as are most if not all of the consumer zooms. However, last time I counted, it was about 27 out

of a little over 50 Nikkors that were AF-S.

 

Contrast this to Canon where over 50 lenses can be used on all cameras in the EOS line, and a few (EF-S) are

specially made for crop sensor cameras.

 

This basically means that anyone who is a fan of prime lenses has to either buy the higher end Nikons, or shop

elsewhere. Many of the prime Nikors are among those that don't yet have AF-S.

 

Meanwhile, a Canon shooter has a much wider selection of lenses from which to choose, whether they are using the

entry level XS or the top of the line 1Ds MarkIII

 

Now, with the high end cameras its somewhat the opposite. Canon's can't use the EF-S lenses, of which there are 8

or 10. Nikon, on the other hand, designed their two full frame FX Nikons to be able to use their "crop sensor"

lenses, too, by sensing the lens and automatically switching to a crop sensor mode. Pretty neat, but it does

reduce image file size quite a bit.

 

Another thing... All the Canon utilize a CMOS sensor. These give longer battery life, and, in theory at least,

lower noise at higher ISOs.

 

Nikon has switched to CMOS too, but only in the D300 and up, so far. In some respects, though, they have taken it

farther in a relatively short time than Canon has in all the years they've been using CMOS (ever since the D30,

if memory serves... so about 8 years now).

 

The newest Nikon models have ultra high ISO capabiilties, very high frame rates and some other cool features,

partly thanks to their switch to CMOS in these cameras. Canon's recently announced 50D is the first to have ISO

12800. We'll just have to wait and see how it compares with the competition.

 

Canon makes their own sensors and processors. Nikon outsources to Sony for sensors, I don't know about their

processors.

 

Others suggested you go handle the cameras in a store. I strongly agree. I'm sure I could get used to the Nikon

in time, but the Canon prosumer and up models are somehow just more intuitive and comfortable for me to use.

(currently 40D and above, soon to be 50D, and tomorrow we will probably hear about a new 5D model)

 

A lot depends upon what price level camera you intend to buy, and what lenses you want to use with it. Think

about these factors before you decide. I think both Canon and Nikon are at the head of the class and here for the

long run, so are safe bets.

[hiro]

I like having a dual format system for lens utilization. At my current budget that has made my decision for me.

 

Canon.

 

I do miss my Nikons.

[yakim_peled1]

Apart from the ergonomics issue that was rightfully stressed, please note that Canon's version of the 17-55/2.8 has IS while Nikon's version does not have VR. I don't know what about you but for me this is very important.

 

Happy shooting,

Yakim.

[John Crowe]

I have used both and enjoy both. Currently I am on the Nikon side since their offerings in used equipment happended to make sense for me at this time. In a very general sense Canon camera bodies are less expensive than Nikon. Now that Nikon have a full frame product their sensor development will catch up to Canon and even out the price positioning. Note also that every digital SLR is quite different so study the features of each carefully and base your selection on the particular features that are important to you.

[m._scott_clay1]

I was faced with the same decision a little over a year ago. We have a very good store in Orlando to compare good quality equipment. Most of my film equipment over the years had been Minolta and Mamiya. I went to the store to buy a digital Nikon, but when I compared them side by side, the Canon EOS system won. The reviews on the "L" glass were very impressive and I've not been disappointed with any that I own. I've looked at the latest Nikon offerings and they are impressive to be sure, but I still think I made the right decision. I'm very happy with my 40D and 5D. I doubt I'll upgrade any time soon.

 

Good luck and go Canon.

[shuo_zhao]

>> "I've never compared these lenses with nikon versions but nikon's 17-55/2.8 is better built (I'm not 100% sure about it though). Canon's lenses use USM motor - I know that nikon cameras use this weird motor which is in camera body, so you could also check which one you like more."

 

Nikon actually build their small sensor lenses up to "pro standard", while Canon chose not to make any of the EF-S lenses a L. Nikon actually has the SWM technology, which is essentially the same thing as USM. Their problem is not "not having the technology", instead their problem is the "limited application" of new technologies (for example, most of the Nikon primes are quite outdated). The in-body motor Nikon bodies have is generally similar to Canon's micro motors. They are/could be noisy and alow at times, but they are OK.

 

>> "I don't know if the new D90 or older D80 can handle all the lenses in their line-up or not."

 

They work with all AF lenses made since the 80s. Older AI lenses can also be mounted on them, but you'll need a Dxxx grade body to meter with those old non-AF lenses. This could mean nothing to certain types of photographers, but obviously using FD lenses on EOS bodies is not exactly a simple thing to do.

 

>> "Canon's recently announced 50D is the first to have ISO 12800."

 

The D3 actually goes up to ISO 25600.

 

>> "Canon's can't use the EF-S lenses, of which there are 8 or 10. Nikon, on the other hand, designed their two full frame FX Nikons to be able to use their "crop sensor" lenses, too, by sensing the lens and automatically switching to a crop sensor mode."

 

The rear end of EF-S lenses "sticks out" more than EF lenses, while Nikon's regular and DX lenses are physically identical when it comes to the configuration of their mounts. The auto-crop feature is neat, but what's better is that some DX lenses will cover the full frame at certain FL. So one can essentially use them like regular lenses.

[14mm 2.8l]

I'm pretty sure Nikon D3 Sensor is manufactured by Nikon.

 

A plus to me is Nikon lenses thesedays come with 5 year manufacturer waranty.

 

But I choose Canon Eos for affordable full frame 5D, a 70-200mm 2.8 that is sharp into the edges, a system that has

full functioning extension tubes to turn my 70-200mm 2.8 IS into an autofocusing image stabilized macro.

 

I've added both 1.4x and 2x II's for $120 a piece less than nikon made ones, again for the same 70-200mm 2.8L IS.

Inspite of what I was told on this forum I am quite happy with af performance with 2x attached to the same telephoto

zoom. 1.4x is great as advertised and I am satisfied with 2xII too. I had to see this for myself and the $290 I spent on

2x II was very well spent last week.

 

I have more friends who shoot nikon dslrs than canon. Both are great choices, great brands with lots of options. You

really need to drill down and decide what you want to achieve your imaging goals. For me, Price of full frame 5D a

few months ago and the ability to use my old 1980's Nikon AiS lenses and mid 1970's Olympus OM System lenses

on eos mount tilted the choice towards Canon Eos. I had only read how nice pro quality eos lenses were so I took a

leap of faith and I'm happy with the lenses I bought this year: 16-35mm 2.8L II, 50mm 2.5 macro, 100mm 2.8 USM

macro and 70-200mm 2.8 IS. Pretty complete kit for my shooting needs considering I've got old nikon and olympus

glass and a really sharp 14mm Tamron f2.8 to use.

 

I'm pretty sure no one else makes fully fuctional extension tubes like canon crafted for eos system which yields me

an Image Stabilized macro zoom that only eos system can provide.

[Jerry_]

Unlike a sax player standing still, please check

 

 

 

http://www.photo.net/photo/7615076

 

 

 

for one image taken with a ol' Nikon. For higher ISO work, Canon may not be quite there yet....

 

 

 

Either camera will produce a good image: you, the photographer, will have some impact on how well your camera creates images.

[e_bergman]

I was faced with this choice only a few weeks ago. I spent (too many!) months researching, lurking on Photo.net,

using friends cameras (Canon and Nikon). Ultimately I got a Nikon D300. It is a close call, some things each

manufacturer does better. You can't lose with either. What did it for me was a combination of the ergonomics and

the camera just feeling "right", so as others have suggested, you have to get the camera in your own hands to

decide.

 

One thing I really like on the D300 is the auto-ISO function. You an set your camera to (for example) change shutter

speed down to some limit when in aperture priority mode, but then start changing the ISO value if necessary so you

don't miss that great shot (and you can bounds for ISO as well). If I'm shooting in good light and then step into a

dim building and see a great opportunity I can just lift the camera and shoot and if it needs to move ISO from 200 to

3200 it will do it. I get the shot. Canon has a feature like this, but it is not at all as flexible. I've used that feature so

much I almost can't imagine a camera without it.

[Landrum Kelly]

"I am about to buy a new camera and as I am going to get new lenses as well it doesn't matter what brand. "

 

If these lenses are more or less equivalent, maybe it does come down to bodies after all--not a small matter considering the press release today of the Canon 5D Mark II.

 

--Lannie

[Landrum Kelly]

"For higher ISO work, Canon may not be quite there yet...."

 

It looks like Canon is there, if the latest press release on the 5D Mark II is any indication.

 

If Nikon hit a home run with the D3, it appears that Canon has now done it with the 5D II.

 

They are now both so good that I doubt that it matters too much anymore.

 

--Lannie

[hashim a]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=WY57jGNCN8Q