# Canon or Nikon?



## Keith Gebhardt (Nov 26, 2007)

My D200 is coming back in and im really not sure if im happy with it. I was taking a look into canons but i am having a hell of a time deciding if its worth switching. 

If i get a canon id get the Canon 1d Mark III with out any questions. 
If i get a new nikon ill be getting the Nikon D3. 

Ive been comparing, contrasting, pro and conning both of them. Researching them on camera reveiw site and i cannot make a decision. 

If you were to buy a new DSLR which would you buy?
And why are you buying that one over the other?

I wanna know true reasons and not just "because i like nikon or i like canon". 

Another thing i know somones gonna bring up is it depends on how many lenses or accesories ive already blew a **** load of paychecks on. But it doesnt matter. Ill wind up selling it all if i switch to canon.


----------



## Sideburns (Nov 26, 2007)

I like the 1Ds Mark III....but the D3 does have great high ISO performance...

I guess it depends on what you're shooting.  In the studio, or for nature photography, or outdoor daytime sports....I'd take the 1D.  For night-time or indoor sports...the D3 MAY get the upperhand...

But I dono...I think I'd still like the 1D
I'd personally go for the 1Ds if I was getting a new camera, but that's not gonna happen anytime soon with my cracker jack budget.


----------



## Keith Gebhardt (Nov 26, 2007)

Sideburns said:


> But I dono...I think I'd still like the 1D
> I'd personally go for the 1Ds if I was getting a new camera, but that's not gonna happen anytime soon with my cracker jack budget.




Ya same here, i plan on saving all my paychecks from my 1 job for about 5 months and i should have enough for either one.

But what camera do you shoot now sideburns? and do you like it? Whats your reason for having the canon over nikon


----------



## JIP (Nov 26, 2007)

Why bring up  this old sill discussion again.  Just buy whatever you like whatever feels good to you.  Do you really think other people should tell you how to spend _that _kind of money.  That is a heck of alot of money for you to put the decision on the hands of people you don't even know.


----------



## Big Mike (Nov 26, 2007)

Coke vs Pepsi....Ford vs Chevy vs Dodge...Red vs Blue...

There are some differences between the two brands...but in the big picture (sorry for the pun), the differences don't put one brand significantly above the other.

I think one of the biggest differences will be the way that you interact with the equipment.  If one of them feels better in your hands...or even if one brand makes you feel better about your gear...then that is enough to tip the scales.


----------



## Alex_B (Nov 26, 2007)

I would get the 1Ds Mark III or the D3

However, since I like Canon, can handle them better, and got some nice lenses, I would get the 1Ds Mark III.

However, since I cannot afford it, I will not get any of the two anyway


----------



## airgunr (Nov 26, 2007)

If your not heavily invested in Nikkor lenses then go to a store and see which one you like.

I would lean towards the D3 but they are both excellent cameras.


----------



## subimatt (Nov 26, 2007)

If I was starting fresh, I think Id go the D3 route, the specs and shot examples are incredibly impressive. Since I am where I am, Id go with a 1DmIII. No point in rebuying all my equipment for a body that will be replaced again in 2 years. If you have decent $$ invested in Nikon gear, go with the D3.


----------



## Keith Gebhardt (Nov 26, 2007)

ya thanks guys. thats what i was thinking.. but wanted other opinions.


----------



## skieur (Nov 26, 2007)

It really depends on the type of photography you do.  In a studio or for product work a Canon Mark III is great if you know how to make the most of it.  Leica is ideal for nature work and scenics.  Nikon with WiFi is great for pro sports photography.  The Sony Alpha A700 has some innovative features and lenses..even one for the best bokeh and the Zeiss lenses, as well as being great value in the medium range.  Journalistic, public relations, and photography for television and electronic presentations can be done successfully with a variety of cameras.

skieur


----------



## jstuedle (Nov 26, 2007)

Just curious, what is your issue with the D200. Several pro wedding photogs around our area are shooting the D200 and love it. In fact, most wedding shooters in the area are shooting these rigs, and most have converted from MF film. Just piqued my interest as to why.


----------



## photogoddess (Nov 27, 2007)

Canon vs Nikon??? Yes!


----------



## craig (Nov 27, 2007)

Again. This should be a personal decision.

Love & Bass


----------



## Alex_B (Nov 27, 2007)

craig said:


> Again. This should be a personal decision.



No, we should fight!













:lmao:


----------



## luis_relampago (Nov 27, 2007)

I think that the Japanese are just cracking up at the rest of the world on this subject. If you have invested on nice glasses from Nikon stick to the brand, because it makes perfect financial sense and remember that the world might never know the answer to the mystical question Nikon or Canon?


----------



## usayit (Nov 27, 2007)

I've actually never had anyone who has significant experience behind high-end camera ever ask the question... "Should I switch??"  Usually their experience gives them the answer once they hold either camera and everyone's opinion suddenly just doesn't matter.  They are often the only one that can determine what fits their needs and they know it!  If a photographer came up to me at the counter asking 1d markIII versus D3, I'd have big question marks (and $$$) pop into my head.... usually they are simply lookin to burn cash for no good reason.

Kinda like a pro-golf player going to Dicks sporting goods for advice.

very strange....

I think "jstuedle" is the only one who asked the right question... what is it with the D200 that has you considering the switch.

I've met several extremely qualified and successful wedding photographers that shoot with 20Ds and 5Ds.  The best tool for the job was specifically chosen by them and they realized that the most expensive line of cameras wasn't the right tool they needed.... it just made sense (to them) from a business standpoint.


JIP pretty much summed up my feelings on these threads.... just because we are talking about expensive stuff doesn't make the debate any different.  


Oh yeh.. one more thing... Kinda strange that 1Ds MarkIII got some recommendations since it hasn't been released yet....


----------



## usayit (Nov 27, 2007)

skieur said:


> Leica is ideal for nature work and scenics.



I know this is off topic but just curious why you would choose Leica for Nature and scenics...


----------



## Greatwhite (Nov 27, 2007)

All my pro 35mm gear is Canon, the F-1, the A-1, etc.....

When I decided to go digital, screaming and kicking, last year, I analyzed on every feature, scenario, prices, prices of accessories/lens', etc...layed out spread sheets, etc....wanted an entry level DSLR to try digital with....and against my grain, I swallowed hard, and walked over to the 'dark side'....I bought a Nikon d50.

The Nikon D50 is my first DSLR, first camera w/auto focus, etc....

I outgrew that one in about 6mos, but bought some glass for it, and kept it til the new generation arrives.

EDIT:  I have used a Canon DSLR when working w/ASU here in AZ, and am glad I got the Nikon, if for no other reason, the feel and ergonomics in the field.

That said, I got my tracking number for my new D300 today....

Why? The Nikon DSLRS felt better in my hand, beefier, heavier (more solid), etc...the lightness and 'plastic' feel of the Canon Rebel's I just didn't get warm fuzzies from.

That is my story....lifelong Canon freak....now a digital Nikon freak....

But the reality is, both (and others) are great cameras!


----------



## Alex_B (Nov 27, 2007)

usayit said:


> I know this is off topic but just curious why you would choose Leica for Nature and scenics...



some say since they are small and light ... so ideal for nature travel.


----------



## Keith Gebhardt (Nov 27, 2007)

ya, my professor told me kinda the same thing. i probably will just stick with nikon now that i come to realize i dont need to blow the extra cash just to say i have canon when its the same thing.

Ill just stick with my d200 and d40 for a while, get some good glass and maybe upgrade to the d300 or d3 in another year or so.

I guess, just like everyone else who asked the same question as i did, you always want what everyone else has. Me being a new photographer not even out of school yet just needed to get that through my head. and i come to think the very first thing my teacher from grade school told me was, its not the camera that makes a good photo...and its the truth.

I think i just got overwhelmed when always seeing photographers shooting canon and nobody i knew had nikon. haha.

The only thing that does suck is i cant share lenses with my buddies.. =/


----------



## skieur (Nov 27, 2007)

jstuedle said:


> Just curious, what is your issue with the D200. Several pro wedding photogs around our area are shooting the D200 and love it. In fact, most wedding shooters in the area are shooting these rigs, and most have converted from MF film. Just piqued my interest as to why.


 
No issue with the D200 but interesting that Popular Photography indicated that the the D200 has about 2000 lines of resolution at ISO 100.  The same number of lines as the Sony A700 has at ISO 1600.  

skieur


----------



## skieur (Nov 27, 2007)

usayit said:


> I know this is off topic but just curious why you would choose Leica for Nature and scenics...


 
I have the magazine somewhere that I remember reading.  A lab analysed the images from a Canon Mark II with the top Canon lens and the same camera with a Leica lens.  The Canon lens provided better sharpness and quality with geometric man-made shapes and the Leica provided better sharpness and quality with treees, rivers, rocks, ...nature shapes etc.

skieur


----------



## Patrice (Nov 27, 2007)

I've never bought a camera based on other people's opinion as stated in reviews and forums. I use these things everyday, somtimes for money, sometimes for pleasure. My first Nikon was a FM-2n which was purchased because I liked how it felt in my hand. Started getting some glass and it went from there. Second one was a F-601, a cheap plastic thing that got me into autofocus. I quickly replaced that with a F4s which was used constantly for more tha a decade. First digital was a D70 which I'll never let go. I now use a couple of D200's. Throughout the whole line, I just got used to the Nikon feel. Others have similar experience with Canon. Never buy a camera because someone else tells you you should - you decide because you're the one using it. It's your dime - you pick, both are excellent.


----------



## Keith Gebhardt (Nov 27, 2007)

ya thanks everyone.. and skieur, thanks for that bit on the lenses. 

ill probably wind up sticking with nikon.. beacause im already invested d200, d40 and 2 ok lenses. but.. when i get by d200 im definately gonna go to the photostore and compare canon and nikon to every feature, and feel and comfort. see which one feels better side by side.

i went to my local shop, but they dont carry anything significant. 

they had the D80 and 40D, between the two i liked the 40D much better as far as comfort. but the D200 is a tad bigger then the D80 so ill have to see with that two.

The only disadvantage i find with canon is that you have only one dial and have to push a button to change shutter/aperarture. with nikon you have both at your fingertips.

wouldnt it be awsome if they both merged into one amazing company haha. 1 amazing camera. afordable.

i guess thats what keeps it interesting.


----------



## raider (Nov 28, 2007)

i too have both nikon and canon.  i was always a canon guy, then started loving the nikon - but i still love the canon in certain situations.  i think the best camera will always be the newest one you have.


----------



## jstuedle (Nov 28, 2007)

Both brands are excellent. I choose Nikon a long time ago and simply prefer the balance and feel of Nikon. And truthfully, I have way too much invested in the Nikon "system" to change. I have always been pleased and satisfied with what I have and have never been tempted to change. However I am sure for every story like mine, you will find a Canon or Pentax shooter that will tell you the same thing.


----------



## Keith Gebhardt (Nov 28, 2007)

I agree with everyones statements above after thourough research and going to the shops and getting a hands on feeling for the cameras themselves. 

Here is an article i have received in an email. Its extremely interesting. Its a photographer who has shot nikon, canon, blads, fuju and others and he describes his experience with each.

Its also interesting how he talks about the D3, being he shoots canon and has for the past sevral years, and how it relates to his cameras.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/mada-iiis.shtml

Non the less, i have some time to think it through before i decide which camera system ill be shooting. 

Nikon still sticking with me, but theres somthing about canon i just cant stop thinking about<< Yea im weird i guess haha.


----------



## Sideburns (Nov 28, 2007)

Keith Gebhardt said:


> Ya same here, i plan on saving all my paychecks from my 1 job for about 5 months and i should have enough for either one.
> 
> But what camera do you shoot now sideburns? and do you like it? Whats your reason for having the canon over nikon



I shoot a Canon XT.  I find it very easy to use now that I've learned it, and it's very intuitive.  The only thing I would change other than main features which makes it a more expensive camera altogether...
A one touch button for whitebalance...


----------



## Jeff Canes (Dec 2, 2007)

Alex_B said:


> some say since they are small and light ... so ideal for nature travel.


 
I agree, that is reason Ive been think about the M8 or R-D1 for amost year


----------

