Nikon vs Canon

[Steve Williams]

As a longtime photo enthusiast (and technically, as I recently sold a photograph that was used for the album cover for a friend's recent album, a professional) who has followed the product lines of both Canon and Nikon over the last 10-15 years, I'd say the answer is... "either". On a number of occasions, Canon has come out with a new technology or breakthrough in price or function FIRST, but Nikon would follow up 6-10 months later with a better implementation. My perspective is, you can't go 'wrong' with either one and many of the differences at this point come down to approaches to ergonomics and or personal preferences for controls and layout of the camera.

I have used Canons since the mid-1980's when my photography hobby became serious. I use Canons now, not because of a specific difference in my view of Canons vs. Nikons, but rather because of my investment in Canon lenses would be difficult to replace if I were to jump ship to Nikon or another brand of DSLR.

I currently have two Canons, my primary is the Canon 5d Mark II, which has, to an old hand like me, unbelievable low-light performance, and my secondary is a Canon 40d. I also have a small Canon s570is point and shoot that I keep handy just in case when I am not carrying my camera bag around with me.

Here's one of my first shots I took with the 5d Mk II. It was in a dark club, handheld in extremely low light.
http://www.chefjuke.com/GALLERY/PHOTOS/slides/IMG_0184.html

In my film days, to take a shot like this, I believe I would have ended up with grain the size of pingpong balls.

Thanks for your excellent comments. I am leaning towards the Canon 5D Mk ll as well

 

[SORAsound]

Some very good information on this forum. You may also want to check out http://www.kenrockwell.com/
I am primarily a leica man. I bought a leica M8.2 around 9 months ago as M9 was coming out. I returned it in a few days (couple of hours use) and lost $1,000 on it. I ordered an M9 which I will FINALLY receive on Monday May 17th.
In the meantime, i got impatient and bought a Nikon D700 with a 24 to 70 mm lens. Nice. impressive. Bulky unfortunately but much less bulky than D3X and much cheaper. It is loud. Maybe quieter than canon but still noisy. The noise and the size draws too much attention to it. On a recent trip to Iran (my second in the last 9 months after being away 32 years), i got stopped by the police wanting to see my pictures. Not so comfortable to carry. If you put the hood on which i recommend, it just draws too much attention which i do not like.

the pictures are great...so good that i bought two more lenses 70 to 200mm and 14 to 24mm...both great lenses.
Roger of RCM Audio (whose products i distribute) is one of the major forces in encouraging me to get this camera. I just met him in Munich. He had his D3X with him. ....and man, did i love that? I had shaved my face that morning and his pictures of me could show every hair missed on my face. it is abotu 24megapixel ...
It is a slow camera though...so if you need speed D3S is a better one for you.
i will let you know of leica...but overall financially i think either nikon or canon are better choices in particular if you want the convenience of a zoom lens, and also you foresee buying some fancy lenses...leica lenses each cost much more than a high model nikon and then some...
bottom line, you do not go wrong...if video does not matter to you, and you do not have a big investment in either brand's lenses, personally i would go with the nikon D700 or above...

 

[amirm]

Are Leica digicams still rebranded Panasonics?

 

[Steve Williams]

Wow

I would never have imagined that Leica is rebranded

 

[amirm]

Wow

I would never have imagined that Leica is rebranded

It is the problem with digital. It requires so much expertise with electronics that if you are a smaller volume company like Leica, you just can't afford to do it in-house. So they decided to focus on lenses and such. Problem I had with it though was that they hiked up the cost so much above Panasonic's own version. If the unit was exclusive to them it would be one thing but knowing how little Panasonic charged for them, make it a tough sell. Something may have changed recently though as last I looked at this was a couple of years ago.

BTW, the problem of camera sticking out in a crowd is real. But it also works both ways. I have on more than one occasion managed to get people smile and work with me because they thought I was a pro. A few times I have been stopped but have always gotten through them.

 

[SORAsound]

I already replied but my posting does not appear...so i do a quick reply now (sorry for the duplication).
Amir, I believe what you are referring to is the Leica point and shoot cameras like D-Lux 4 which is an offshoot of a panasonic, and some say price difference does not justify the functionality/feature difference.
I read all that and still got D-Lux 4 which I like very much. It is a toy though but a lot more convenient than big cameras and takes very good pictures.

Based on what i know, aside from a good Kodak chip, Leica M8, M8.2 and M9 are not offshoots of a Panasonic.
Best regards,
Mehran
SORAsound.com

 

[SORAsound]

Received my Leica M9 yesterday...very nice, simple, light weight, etc. feels like a toy in comparison with my nikon D700.
after the reading the above threads, and the good pictures posted here, i have been tempted to go for a nikon D3S... but overall leica M9 is more mehranian....

 

[naturephoto1]

Received my Leica M9 yesterday...very nice, simple, light weight, etc. feels like a toy in comparison with my nikon D700.
after the reading the above threads, and the good pictures posted here, i have been tempted to go for a nikon D3S... but overall leica M9 is more mehranian....

Hi Mehran,

The Leica M9 is a beautiful camera. I have been a Leica R series camera user since 1984. Leica cameras and Glass are Legendary. Enjoy the camera.

Rich

 

[JackD201]

Are Leica digicams still rebranded Panasonics?

The D Lux 4 is a dead ringer for the LX3. The Ms I believe are more Leica than they are Lumix.

 

[DonH50]

I was weaned on Nikons (wedding photography, something I DO NOT miss -- and yes I meant to shout! ) but am considering a new Canon 7D. I like the interface, the s/w package, and the feel of the camera. The Nikon D300s does a little better in low light, but I like the features and resolution of the 7D. I can't bring myself to step up to a 5D, much as I'd like -- the net investment with lenses is just too steep (kid in college and another in a couple of years). I will probably get the kit lens and pick up a Tamron 18 - 270 "vacation" lens for starters, upgrading the glass later.

That said, the 5D is a huge step in performance above the 7D. Check out some of the camera review sites, like Imaging resource ( http://www.imaging-resource.com/ ). There's nothing that will touch a full-frame and a good lens...

I have used Hasselblad but it is way out of my price range now.

Interesting thread! - Don

 

[rblnr]

Though I'm a Nikon man, I can tell you that the 5DmkII shoots fabulous video even in very low light in a way the 7D cant match That said, in what picture taking scenario with final output in mind do you foresee the 5D giving you better results?

 

[SORAsound]

so, i broke down and bought the nikon d3s after all the good pictures i saw here...overall i think d3s is a professional camera whereas leica m9 is probably more for a hobbyist like me...from almost every aspect i prefer leica m9, and leica lenses....also the camera is small and is not an attention grabber... if you need speed, shooting moving objects/kids, sports, or need big zoom lenses, then nikon (or canon) would be your mate... you do not go wrong with any of these three cameras...key is the capability to forget about other cameras once you select one.

 

[Jay_S]

I'd argue that you can go wrong if the camera and lenses are too big or heavy to carry around. I just got back from a week in Rome. I used a Nikon D40 and a couple of lightweight lenses. I carried my camera everywhere, walking 11 or 12 miles a day, and the weight never bothered me. I know I got better images than from any of the lighter-weight point and shoots with their tiny image sensors. I'm certain the full frame Nikon would do better but it is a heavy device and I know from experience that I wouldn't have lugged it around. Here's where I date myself: The last time I was in Rome, my heavy Nikon F2A spent much of the trip in the hotel room and I took my Olympus XA everywhere.

 

[DonH50]

Though I'm a Nikon man, I can tell you that the 5DmkII shoots fabulous video even in very low light in a way the 7D cant match That said, in what picture taking scenario with final output in mind do you foresee the 5D giving you better results?

I am not taking pro-level pix anymore but a lot of family pictures. Many of those are from far in the back of an auditorium to catch one of my boys on stage. It's low-light, high-iso shooting and I want a lot of detail so I can crop later vs. using a longer tele that eats up even more light. I can't afford the good tele's now, or at least can't justify something like an f/4 LS series lens with college going up 9% (!) this fall. I also shoot a lot of nature/outdoor shots where again mucho detail for blow-ups and wide dynamic range is required. I would really like to pick up a 5D, but no longer having the glass (sold mine ages ago, was film Nikon and Olympus not Canon, and it wouldn't have the new IS and better lens coatings anyway) I am looking at probably $4k-$5k out the door vs. maybe $2500 for a 7D with lenses I can live with.

My wife usually has camcorder duty, and I am lusting after a new TM700 so that;s another reason to stay with the 7D. They have a $100 rebate now that has me thinking, plus I could upgrade my old i9900 printer and get another $300 or $400 towards a new wide printer as well. Of course, I also need skidplates for the Jeep, decisions... If only those darn lotto numbers would hit!

 

[LesAuber]

I can't imagine going wrong with either one, though both are out of my league. I heartily second the suggestions that you go with the one that fits your hand and is light enough that you'll actually carry it. The old adage is true. The best camera in the world is the one you have to hand when you need it. Thus the total POS camera on your phone can trump the Canon/Nikon back home in the closet. Though when you see the results you'll wish you had the other with you.

 

[amirm]

Les reminds me of a story. We used to have a professional photographer working for us who used to have images printed in Time magazine and such. But had decided to change careers. Anyway, we had an offsite meeting at one of the resort hotels on the lake. My boss who called the meeting was an early bird so he dragged us out of the bed before sunrise. By the time I got near the lake, the sun was just starting to come out. The lake is usually picturesque but on this day, the light was beyond special. I get to the marina and the boats were being bathed in that magnificent light and I kept thinking I should really keep a camera in my car for such occasions.

I go to the meeting room and about 10 minutes later, my photographer colleague showed up. I asked him if he had caught the amazing light. He sad, "you bet." I turn away and a couple of minutes he said: "look" while turning his laptop toward me. The image he had shot was even more amazing than what I had imagined I would shoot. I asked him where he got a camera to take that picture. He responded, "I always have my camera with me. You never know if a UFO lands right in front of you!"

Learning that lesson, I bought a Canon G10 last year which I almost always carry with me in my computer backpack. That way, I have no regrets about being some place with no way to capture an image. The G10 weighs nothing and takes little space and so, is good for this use. I have caught a few "UFO" shots of the type above with it.

 

[rblnr]

A great UFO camera is the Canon S90. Biggest chip avail in the smallest package that I know of. Truly pocketable Fast, sharp lens with good image processing and full manual control. I don't leave home w/o it. Panasonic LX3 is another -- a bit larger w/a bit more zoom range I think.

 

[Steve Williams]

A great UFO camera is the Canon S90. Biggest chip avail in the smallest package that I know of. Truly pocketable Fast, sharp lens with good image processing and full manual control. I don't leave home w/o it. Panasonic LX3 is another -- a bit larger w/a bit more zoom range I think.

my daughter just returned from a month in Australia and I bought her an S-90 as her UFO camera. She took over 700 photos and I must say they were magnificent. This plus the fact that the S-90 takes video to boot.

FWIW, I just bought the Canon 5D Mkll

 

[rblnr]

Enjoy the mkII -- just shot some video pickups with it at night on the streets of LA -- tremendous low light capability and resolution.

I need Nikon to catch up on the video front. The D3s is much more cam than I need or want.

Bopped around Chile recently -- had my D200 + lenses, but a good chunk of the trip was just the S90 in my pocket -- nice vid and made a couple of nice 8x12s -- fantastic to be able to do that from a cam that size.

 

[vinylphilemag]

Congrats on your new camera, Steve! Next stop (no pun intended), some nice L series lenses!