Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: hassiman on August 26, 2011, 03:17:31 am

Title: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: hassiman on August 26, 2011, 03:17:31 am
I do fine art work, print large...  Landscapes, street photography.
Just wondered what FF shooters here used and liked. ???

Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on August 26, 2011, 03:36:39 am
I do fine art work, print large...  Landscapes, street photography.
Just wondered what FF shooters here used and liked. ???

Here we go again. Oh dear. Tin hats on, boys and girls.

Jeremy
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: pegelli on August 26, 2011, 04:57:07 am
Here we go again. Oh dear. Tin hats on, boys and girls.

Jeremy

ROFLMAO, Jeremy, you're right and we haven't even mentioned Sony yet, because then we would also need bullet proof vests ;)

To the OP, Let me give you Ansel Adam's advice: the most important part of the camera is the 12" behind it.
Seriously, go out to a shop and handle them all and choose the one that feels most comfortable and intuitive to operate. There are no bad DSLR's made anymore, and certainly no bad FF DSLR's.
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: lowep on August 26, 2011, 08:03:53 am
the question is like a phoenix that rises from the ashes every time a new generation of DSLRs bites the ankles of the previous generation of MFDBs and gives anyone who uses this technology frequently and is not asleep three options: ignore the flashing ads at the top of this page and stick with what one has got (warts and all), do what they say and escape the ankle biters by scaling up to the latest and greatest MFDB offering (by mortgaging your house) or allow yourself to be convinced now is the time to jump back into the DSLR pond after an extended detour in MF land (often starting from years ago when the jump was made from DSLR to a MF film camera). To make matters worse this malady is no longer triggered by the release of a new camera but by a constant stream of marketing hype that like presdential elections starts years before the actual event and never stops. I guess for those who are just coming into "serious" digital imaging the answer is no easier than for existing users.
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: Gigi on August 26, 2011, 09:44:59 am
the question is like a phoenix that rises from the ashes every time a new generation of DSLRs bites the ankles of the previous generation of MFDBs and gives anyone who uses this technology frequently and is not asleep three options: ignore the flashing ads at the top of this page and stick with what one has got (warts and all), do what they say and escape the ankle biters by scaling up to the latest and greatest MFDB offering (by mortgaging your house) or allow yourself to be convinced now is the time to jump back into the DSLR pond after an extended detour in MF land (often starting from years ago when the jump was made from DSLR to a MF film camera). To make matters worse this malady is no longer triggered by the release of a new camera but by a constant stream of marketing hype that like presdential elections starts years before the actual event and never stops. I guess for those who are just coming into "serious" digital imaging the answer is no easier than for existing users.

Wonderfully said. Can one add another option: all of the above? That they are mutually incompatible only makes the machinations that much more interesting!
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: Ellis Vener on August 26, 2011, 03:06:06 pm


To the OP, Let me give you Ansel Adam's advice: the most important part of the camera is the 12" behind it.

While it is true that most of the visual centers in the brain are in the very back and near the base  of both hemispheres,  unless you have  a brain  that is freakishly larger that normal or a skull that has been greatly  elongated, 12" behind a camera's eyepiece is about 5 inches beyond  the back of most homo sapien skulls.
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: pegelli on August 26, 2011, 03:12:38 pm
While it is true that most of the visual centers in the brain are in the very back and near the base  of both hemispheres,  unless you have  a brain  that is freakishly larger that normal or a skull that has been greatly  elongated, 12" behind a camera's eyepiece is about 5 inches beyond  the back of most homo sapien skulls.

Ha, ha, I don't think he assumed every photographer had a hydrocephalus
Unfortunately we cannot ask Ansel anymore, but my guess is he meant everything included in the 12" behind it  ;)
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on August 26, 2011, 03:34:07 pm
Ha, ha, I don't think he assumed every photographer had a hydrocephalus
Unfortunately we cannot ask Ansel anymore, but my guess is he meant everything included in the 12" behind it  ;)
Then again, maybe he was anticipating "live view."   ;)
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: lowep on August 26, 2011, 04:14:01 pm
He had a beautiful zillion x zillion ground glass and a super hero's cape over his head - why would he bother with corny live view?
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: hassiman on August 27, 2011, 04:39:07 am
Okay... I deserved that... 8-)  I was hoping to get a response which might give me an idea of which brand might be better assemble... be more reliable... have marginally better optics.  So far I have gleaned that Canon full frame cameras are better for large landscape prints... but Nikons might have better in-viewfinder displays...  I have a friend with a 5D whose mirror fell off in the middle of an assignment....  I realize what is really important... but I hate wasting my money and I can NOT afford a MF digital... my MF work will remain with my Hasselblads and film...

So any tips?
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: pegelli on August 27, 2011, 06:04:57 am
Hassiman, reliability is luck of the draw I think. Reliability statistics are averages so there is no guarantee that if you buy the statistically more reliable brand you're camera won't fail, and also the reverse, if you buy the less reliable brand it's still very possible to get 5 years of trouble free operation from your own camera.

Also every brand has some jewel lenses and some average pieces of glass. So it depends if you're looking prime or zoom as well as focal length range to select the best set.

I come back to my original advice, as I think handling is the most important factor, go and try and buy what feels good. You won't be dissapointed I think.
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: Ken Bennett on August 27, 2011, 08:59:52 am

So any tips?


I've been shooting Canon for a long time, and I must say I'm not totally thrilled with any of the wide angle lenses that I have used, especially the zooms. The one good wide zoom I own is the Sigma 12-24, and that really needs a tripod as it's best around f/11 or so. My 16-35/2.8 II lens is fine for most of my work (photo-J), but I find it difficult to get corner sharpness for landscapes and architecture. I have not used the Zeiss wide primes, but the results I have seen online seem excellent - but of course one gives up AF with those lenses.

Other than that, I've been very happy with the overall image quality and build quality of the Canon cameras I have used, from my original AE-1 through my current 1D Mark IV bodies.
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: BernardLanguillier on August 27, 2011, 09:28:28 am
So far I have gleaned that Canon full frame cameras are better for large landscape prints...

That was true until the D3x was released 2.5 years ago.

If you like wide, lenswise nothing comes close to the 14-24 f2.8.

Cheers,
Bernard
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: John Camp on August 27, 2011, 02:24:19 pm
To answer the original question, Nikons are far better than Canons.

[Re. previous sentence: Sarcasm Alert.]

I've noticed that in the Digital Photography Review forums, the Nikon and Canon advocates have almost entirely stopping slagging each other. That action has moved to the NEX/m4/3 forums, even though NEX and m4/3 have little to do with each other.

I've been using Nikons since the 70s, and they simply seem to fit my hand. I can pick up almost any Nikon, film or digital, and be happily using it in a couple of minutes -- I just understand Nikon thinking. Canons always feel odd to me. Long time Canon users will tell you the same thing, the other way around. I think if I were starting fresh, I'd look around and see if one system or the other were dominant in my area; if one was, I'd go for that one, because there are probably better repair options available, and a better supply of equipment, both new and used. If both systems are common in your area, I guess I'd do a lot of research and then buy based on what kind of photography I was most interested in. I know a few years ago, most architectural photographers went with Canon because of the better Canon shift/tilt lenses. People who did a lot of macro work went with Nikon because of the better micro lenses, and also the more flexible flash system. (I believe if you plan to use a lot of camera-based flash, Nikon is the better system. For some reason, Nikon has always seemed to pay a lot of attention to flash.) Most sports photographers tend to use Canon, because Canon achieved an early digital dominance in that field. Nikon has caught up from a technical aspect, and some would say they've gone Canon one better, but still, at major sporting events, most of the sports pros still use Canon. As far as "feel" is concerned, I think you become accustomed to what you have, and that after a while, either will begin to feel natural. They are somewhat different, though.   

But, basically, with current cameras, the choice between Nikon and Canon is fairly trivial -- almost everything else to do with your photography is more important.
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: DaveCurtis on August 27, 2011, 07:25:40 pm
For the record I shoot Canon. However it is common knowledge that Nikon has their nose in front with the D3x. It it a small step above the Canon 1Ds3 in all departments including price. I have compared large prints made with both and the difference is rather small but it is there and visible.

With new cameras expected from both I would personally wait.

Wides for landscapes. Zooms - Nikon.
                               TSE Canon
                               Primes  - I prefer Zeiss over both.
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: HarperPhotos on August 27, 2011, 08:05:36 pm
Hello,

It has been reported that Nikon have filed for a patent for a removable Anti Alias filter system. So for landscape the next generating of Nikon’s could be a better system over Canon.

I use a Nikon D3x and with the Nikon G lenses I am very happy with it. I very really use my Mamiya/Leaf Aptus system outside the studio now.

Cheers

Simon
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: douglasf13 on August 29, 2011, 04:00:07 pm
Okay... I deserved that... 8-)  I was hoping to get a response which might give me an idea of which brand might be better assemble... be more reliable... have marginally better optics.  So far I have gleaned that Canon full frame cameras are better for large landscape prints... but Nikons might have better in-viewfinder displays...  I have a friend with a 5D whose mirror fell off in the middle of an assignment....  I realize what is really important... but I hate wasting my money and I can NOT afford a MF digital... my MF work will remain with my Hasselblads and film...

So any tips?

The Sony a850/900 cameras are durable and relatively cheap, too, and, outside of maybe the D3x, they'd be tops for landscape IQ.
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: Digital_photog on August 29, 2011, 07:45:33 pm
I shoot Canon 5D with 17-40 for landscapes the 24-70 works well for portraits. That said I am sure that Nikon FF is equally good with similar lenses. I like the handeling of Canon, others have said go try each of  your choices to see which fits best for you. You and Only you can make this choice. I have found the price for many Canon lenses cost less than the Nikon counterparts. Just my observation. I shoot Nikon and Canon film cameras  the EOS 1N-HS and Nikon F100 both great cameras.  I actually purchased a Fuji S2 for short money so I can use my Nikon lenses on a digital camera. 

Good Luck with your choice!

Fred
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: SecondFocus on August 29, 2011, 11:10:18 pm
As to Canon or Nikon...

I can without any reservations say Yes!
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: Tulear on August 30, 2011, 07:05:25 pm
Agree with the comments about what makes you feel good when you hold it and handle it.   If you are good enough that every shot or even any shot you take can be graded by the specific lens performance and whether that 14-24 f2.8  is a  bit sharper than that 16-35 f2.8 Canon - then  God bless you.   It's a lot like golf clubs.....will you play better with one brand or the other.  Well, you know brand A has great short irons but brand B has the best mid irons.   Really, this stuff is so close these days technically, that the feel and the GUI are more important considerations than brand reputations.  Ask yourself,  how did all those amazing images taken so many years ago on so much more inferior gear ever happen!!!!   Ansel was right.
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on August 31, 2011, 12:05:16 am
As to Canon or Nikon...

I can without any reservations say Yes!
Alternatively, a good bet would be either Nikon or Canon.  ;)
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: meyerweb on September 08, 2011, 03:12:06 pm
I've shot Canon for years, and have a modest array of Canon glass, which is motivation not to switch systems. I chose Canon when I moved from MF to AF because, at that time, I felt Canon's L lenses, overall, were superior to what Nikon offered, and Canon's AF technology was notably superior.

But were I starting over today, I'd be very tempted to go Nikon.  Although it would take me some adjustment now, I think I prefer the control layout of their bodies to Canon's more button / menu oriented approach, and I think Nikon offers better metering options. (Not necessarily better metering, but more flexibility). In terms of AF, Nikon has at least caught up with Canon, and perhaps bettered them in some respects.

But, as others have said, visit a good camera store and spend some time with bodies from both systems.  If you're not familiar with the control structure, let a salesmen walk you through basic operations. See what feels right to you. Either system is capable of producing very high quality photographs; the limiting factor is not likely to be the body. When I first started in photography in the 1970s, a mentor gave me sage advice. He said pick up the camera and play with it.  If it feels uncomfortable to you, walk away.  It's NOT going to get better.
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: joneil on September 08, 2011, 05:09:38 pm
  I've met many photographers over the years, going "way back the old days of film" :), who based their choice of a camera brand or system based on the glass and the lenses first, and the body second.   I don't see why with a digital SLR that should be any different. 

 Along that theme, my flippant, tongue in cheek answer is this:  Since Zeiss makes superb lenses in both Canon and Nikon mounts, who cares?
 ;D

Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: fotometria gr on September 08, 2011, 06:32:30 pm
Alternatively, a good bet would be either Nikon or Canon.  ;)
NOOOOO!.....I totally disagree!! .....He should buy a Canikon instead, or perhaps it would be better to reach for a Nikanon!  ::) Certainly the glass should be .......plastic! ??? Cheers, Theodoros www.fotometria.gr
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: JohnHeerema on September 08, 2011, 10:45:44 pm
Nikon and Canon are more similar than different, but the companies each have particular strengths. A few somewhat gross generalizations might help you to figure out which matches your personal preferences & shooting style:

Glass
Nikon is known more for their short focal length lenses, while Canon's strength is more at long focal lengths.
The Canon mount is a bit wider, which allows Canon to use some lens designs which Nikon can't.

Technical Innovation
Technical features often appear in Canon a few years earlier than in Nikon. Some examples:
- Full frame DSLR
- Eye-controlled focus (later dropped by Canon)
- Piezoelectric ultrasonic focus motors in lenses
- Pixel count is typically a bit higher for Canon

Flash
Nikon has historically been thought to be ahead here, although Canon is now pretty comparable

Eyeglasses
Nikon has historically been more eyeglass-friendly

User Interface
While the subject of considerable debate, Nikon is often held up as being more photographer-friendly

Software
Neither Canon nor Nikon can write decent software.

As always, your mileage may vary...

Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: BernardLanguillier on September 10, 2011, 12:13:17 pm
Nikon and Canon are more similar than different, but the companies each have particular strengths. A few somewhat gross generalizations might help you to figure out which matches your personal preferences & shooting style:

Glass
Nikon is known more for their short focal length lenses, while Canon's strength is more at long focal lengths.
The Canon mount is a bit wider, which allows Canon to use some lens designs which Nikon can't.

I would argue that the gap between the performance of long glass is a lot less than the gap between wides. A lot smaller and a lot less relevant. :)

Speaking about what I know first hand, frankly I am not sure how a lens could be significantly better than the Nikkor 300mm f2.8 VR to give just one example. It is tack sharp from corner to corner at f2.8 on a 24Mp sensor, little light fall off, no obvious aberrations. According to Thom Hogan, it isn't even the best Nikkor super tele.

Focus accuracy is IMHO an order of magnitude more important that possible small differences in optical quality.

I am aware about the theoretical possibility that the EOS mount might authorize more extreme lenses, but today the only extreme lens that Nikon has not been willing/able to match is the 17mm T/S. On the other hand, Canon has also not been willing/able to match the performance of the Nikkor 14-24mm f2.8 for 4 years.

So I am not sure whether the smaller mount is an actual issue.

Cheer,
Bernard
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: stever on September 10, 2011, 07:10:27 pm
one of the main practical differences for many people is that Nikon still doesn't have a price/performance match for the 5D2

i agree that Canon's strength is in long lenses - not that the best of one is better than the best of the other, but in Canon's greater variety of long glass for different purposes - from the 70-200 f4 to the 800

for most people Nikon is probably better on the wide end, but if you need a wide TS, you need to go to Canon
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: JohnKoerner on September 11, 2011, 07:26:43 am
one of the main practical differences for many people is that Nikon still doesn't have a price/performance match for the 5D2
i agree that Canon's strength is in long lenses - not that the best of one is better than the best of the other, but in Canon's greater variety of long glass for different purposes - from the 70-200 f4 to the 800
for most people Nikon is probably better on the wide end, but if you need a wide TS, you need to go to Canon


Not only does Canon have far more long lens choices, but Canon also has better macro lenses.

Canon's new 100mmL IS macro is the new 100mm leader ... and the MP-E 65mm 1x - 5x is in a class by itself.

And I would imagine that a new and improved 180mmL IS is not too far away ...

Jack



.
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: fotometria gr on September 11, 2011, 11:28:49 am
I would argue that the gap between the performance of long glass is a lot less than the gap between wides. A lot smaller and a lot less relevant. :)

Speaking about what I know first hand, frankly I am not sure how a lens could be significantly better than the Nikkor 300mm f2.8 VR to give just one example. It is tack sharp from corner to corner at f2.8 on a 24Mp sensor, little light fall off, no obvious aberrations. According to Thom Hogan, it isn't even the best Nikkor super tele.

Focus accuracy is IMHO an order of magnitude more important that possible small differences in optical quality.

I am aware about the theoretical possibility that the EOS mount might authorize more extreme lenses, but today the only extreme lens that Nikon has not been willing/able to match is the 17mm T/S. On the other hand, Canon has also not been willing/able to match the performance of the Nikkor 14-24mm f2.8 for 4 years.

So I am not sure whether the smaller mount is an actual issue.

Cheer,
Bernard

So... if he buys Nikon.... it will make him a .....better photographer! I suggest ....Canon!
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: fotometria gr on September 11, 2011, 11:31:04 am
one of the main practical differences for many people is that Nikon still doesn't have a price/performance match for the 5D2

i agree that Canon's strength is in long lenses - not that the best of one is better than the best of the other, but in Canon's greater variety of long glass for different purposes - from the 70-200 f4 to the 800

for most people Nikon is probably better on the wide end, but if you need a wide TS, you need to go to Canon
So....., if he buys Canon.... will make him a ....better photographer! I suggest .....Nikon!
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: fotometria gr on September 11, 2011, 11:42:12 am

Not only does Canon have far more long lens choices, but Canon also has better macro lenses.

Canon's new 100mmL IS macro is the new 100mm leader ... and the MP-E 65mm 1x - 5x is in a class by itself.

And I would imagine that a new and improved 180mmL IS is not too far away ...

Jack



.
Jesus.....! I'm sure that "nonsense" is not enough to characterize this ...."advice". Buy Canikon or Nikanon or NONican instead! Chears, Theodoros www.fotometria.gr
 P.S. Have you considered.... photography, for a change?
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: JohnKoerner on September 11, 2011, 02:15:39 pm
Jesus.....! I'm sure that "nonsense" is not enough to characterize this ...."advice". Buy Canikon or Nikanon or NONican instead! Chears, Theodoros www.fotometria.gr
 P.S. Have you considered.... photography, for a change?


No need to have a hissy-fit pal; I am simply stating the truth.

The simple fact is, if a photographer specializes in taking ultra-close macro shots, then Nikon doesn't really have the tools for the job readily available. By contrast, Canon offers the MP-E 65mm lens, which goes from 1x to 5x magnification superbly. Whereas if a Nikon shooter wants to get into this kind of magnification with his camera, he is going to have to invest in a cluster-**** of bellows and extension tubes by comparison to achieve the same results.

You might not believe this, but it really is a whole lot easier bringing a single specialized tool for the job out into the field, to shoot ultra-close macros, than it is to bring extension tubes and bellows along with your camera and lens (http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/lol.gif)

Which means that, yes, sometimes having better tools will make you a better photographer ... same as having a power saw will make you a more effective carpenter than if you try to do a big job with a manual hand-saw ;)

Jack



.
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: fotometria gr on September 11, 2011, 02:50:02 pm

No need to have a hissy-fit pal; I am simply stating the truth.

The simple fact is, if a photographer specializes in taking ultra-close macro shots, then Nikon doesn't really have the tools for the job readily available. By contrast, Canon offers the MP-E 65mm lens, which goes from 1x to 5x magnification superbly. Whereas if a Nikon shooter wants to get into this kind of magnification with his camera, he is going to have to invest in a cluster-**** of bellows and extension tubes by comparison to achieve the same results.

You might not believe this, but it really is a whole lot easier bringing a single specialized tool for the job out into the field, to shoot ultra-close macros, than it is to bring extension tubes and bellows along with your camera and lens (http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/lol.gif)

Which means that, yes, sometimes having better tools will make you a better photographer ... same as having a power saw will make you a more effective carpenter than if you try to do a big job with a manual hand-saw ;)

Jack



.
It just doesn't worth a reply!
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: JohnKoerner on September 11, 2011, 07:14:11 pm
It just doesn't worth a reply!

And yet you did reply (http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/lol.gif)

The truth is ... you had no rebuttal to the facts I stated ... but still felt you needed to "say something" (http://www.johnkoerner.org/Emoticons/lol.gif)

Jack


.
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: RobertJ on September 11, 2011, 10:19:33 pm
It's not what camera you choose, it's what RAW converter you use! :)
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: michael on September 12, 2011, 07:27:54 am
OK kids, let's wind it down.

Michael
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on September 12, 2011, 11:01:20 am
OK kids, let's wind it down.

Michael

But Michael! I can't find the rewind knob on my Canon 5D!  :D

Eric
Title: Re: For a Full Frame DSLR... Nikon or Canon????
Post by: fotometria gr on September 14, 2011, 06:37:38 pm
But Michael! I can't find the rewind knob on my Canon 5D!  :D

Eric
Oh! that was included ....in the original packing!  :) You must have forgot it there  ::) find it and keep it in your.... pocket. 8) At least that's the case with my D700! :-X Regards Theodoros www.fotometria.gr