Topic: Possible Nikon Convert (Read 4916 times)

jklotz · « **on:** February 17, 2009, 10:38:38 pm »

I've been a Canon guy for a long time. I've really enjoyed my 5d, it's been a good camera, but Nikon seems to be a better platform at the moment. Not just the bodies, but the lenses, particularly the wides. (never been a big fan of Canon wides.) Seeing as how a large portion of my work is using wide lenses, combined with the problems I'm reading about with the new 5dmkII, I'm thinking it might be time to jump ship. (I also prefer the ergonomics of a buddies D3 I shot recently to any Canon gear). So, my question is this:

I've currently got the:

24-105L 2.8
24-70L 2.8
24 ts/e
14 fisheye
70-200L 2.8 w/ IS
ex 580 flash
50 1.4
100 macro
lensbaby

At this point, I'm in pretty deep. I do ok, but I'm not a wealthy man. In your opinion, am I in too deep with Canon to sell out and go Nikon? I'm guessing I'd loose my a** at this point, no? I was about to buy the 16-35L and 5D mkII, but before I did, I thought I'd throw this out there. Opinions?

Dustbak · « **Reply #1 on:** February 18, 2009, 01:26:13 am »

There are people that use the 14-24 with an adapter on their Canon bodies. That might be a cheaper solution that works. You loose AF but that tends to be of lesser importance with wide-angles.

You are never too deep in to swap if you really want/need to. Fortunately lenses are fairly easy to sell and generate decent prices.

BernardLanguillier · « **Reply #2 on:** February 18, 2009, 01:32:56 am »

Quote from: jklotz

I've been a Canon guy for a long time. I've really enjoyed my 5d, it's been a good camera, but Nikon seems to be a better platform at the moment. Not just the bodies, but the lenses, particularly the wides. (never been a big fan of Canon wides.) Seeing as how a large portion of my work is using wide lenses, combined with the problems I'm reading about with the new 5dmkII, I'm thinking it might be time to jump ship. (I also prefer the ergonomics of a buddies D3 I shot recently to any Canon gear).

Wouldn't the newly announced T/S lenses change the situation a little bit?

It seems very likely that the 17mm T/S non shifted will be very close to the Nikkor 14-24f2.8, and probably even slightly better (assuming that perfection can be topped ).

Cheers,
Bernard

erick.boileau · « **Reply #3 on:** February 18, 2009, 02:18:26 am »

I see no interest to jump to Nikon , and to jump again to Canon in 6 months, I'll take a 5D mark II to wait for the next 1Ds Mark IV

rethmeier · « **Reply #4 on:** February 18, 2009, 02:29:26 am »

17mm T/S non shifted ?
Please explain?

francois · « **Reply #5 on:** February 18, 2009, 03:59:22 am »

Quote from: rethmeier

17mm T/S non shifted ?
Please explain?

I think that Bernard makes reference to the new Canon EF-17mm TS/E lens that has been annouced today (along with a new 24 TS/E).

BernardLanguillier · « **Reply #6 on:** February 18, 2009, 06:33:14 am »

Quote from: francois

I think that Bernard makes reference to the new Canon EF-17mm TS/E lens that has been annouced today (along with a new 24 TS/E).

Correct.

Cheers,
Bernard

rogan · « **Reply #7 on:** February 18, 2009, 10:43:48 am »

Quote from: BernardLanguillier

Wouldn't the newly announced T/S lenses change the situation a little bit?

It seems very likely that the 17mm T/S non shifted will be very close to the Nikkor 14-24f2.8, and probably even slightly better (assuming that perfection can be topped ).

Cheers,
Bernard

You are assuming this lens will be sharp.....thats a huge assumption.
I wish they would make a straight 17 as well. I have no need for the t/s

blansky · « **Reply #8 on:** February 18, 2009, 10:55:33 am »

Trying to get the "best system" these days is just an expensive game of "whack the mole". These companies are leapfrogging each other every couple of years and jumping from system to system is a futile pastime.

Michael

rethmeier · « **Reply #9 on:** February 18, 2009, 04:27:47 pm »

I can't believe it!
I just switched to Nikon only for their PC-E lenses and of course the D3x,however those new Canon TSE's look pretty good as well!

I had a 5DmkII with a 24+45+90 TSE lenses,but wasn't happy with the quality of the 24 and the 45.
The 90 was great.

Back to the drawing board.

jmwscot · « **Reply #10 on:** February 18, 2009, 05:34:32 pm »

You would be quite mad to switch unless you had convinced yourself with extensive testing that there is an improvement with Nikon. I'm using the Canon 1Ds III with 70-200 F2.8 which is outstandingly sharp, the 24-105 almost as sharp and the 16-35 II (which is very sharp in the centre at wide apertures but needs to be stopped down to F11 and backed off to 17 or18mm for really good edge to edge sharpness).

I came from Hasselblad lenses (which were not perfect by any means) on a 2000FC and a 202. The quality of work I am producing now is significantly better using the Canon gear. The 5D MkII has the same image quality as the big Canon. If you are not getting good results with the Canon gear you have I would question your technique. But also beware of what is said on forums. It is getting like the old days of Hi-Fi equipment when subjective comparisons were being made with amplifiers and speakers etc. Please don't take offence but do try before you change.

Regards John

russell a · « **Reply #11 on:** February 18, 2009, 06:34:25 pm »

Having thought about the issue of switching horses, I posed two questions to myself: would such a move really improve my photography? No. Am I suffering from "technolust"? Yes.

pss · « **Reply #12 on:** February 18, 2009, 07:19:40 pm »

i am sure for every nikon lens that beats the canon equivalent you can find a canon lens to do the same with to a nikon....it really depends on which lenses you need....

the new T/S lenses look amazing, we all know the older ones were a little soft, but you have to remember that they were built a long time ago for 35mm film....and i am sure they were fine for that....but at 100% from a 12, 16, 22mpix body they probably don't look so hot anymore....

the new ones are made for these high density chips, so i am sure they will be much better....otherwise what is the point...these lenses are for such a small minority, one bad opinion can ruin the lens reputation....

anyway....i really would like to know what "all these problems with the 5DII" actually are....for every body that failed at the end of the world (and we still don't know why so many failed there and don't seem to fail anywhere else really...) there are many in circulation that beat the hell out of everything ever produced in terms of image quality/price (unless you are thinking of switching to sony...)

in other words: get 2 5dII (if you can, because regardless of the "many problems" you still can't get them easily) and one of the new canon T/S lenses (splurge and get the 17, sell your 24) or just get one D3x.....not counting the cash you get from your 24 sale....that leaves you with a little extra....

the 3Dx might get you a very slightly better image at 100 (i am being realistic) i guess it depends how much the extra tiny bit of quality is worth to you....

btw: i am not in anyway a canon or nikon fanboy....and i am lucky...i only use 3 lenses, so i can switch anytime to anything....but i don't see the extra price of the d3x reflected in quality compared to the 5DII....and i have owned and shot DMF almost exclusively the last couple of years...and paid a lot for better quality....

if nikon had a D700x for 3000$, i would probably own that.... but regardless, there will be something from canon which will top the d3x, and then something from nikon and so on....the grass is always greener....

Gemmtech · « **Reply #13 on:** February 18, 2009, 07:44:45 pm »

I think a lot of it has to do with karma! I was a Nikon-Guy for my entire photographic life (30 years), always preferred them over everybody else. Then I started reading the LL and I switched to Canon (you can imagine why ) because I went digital (I was using an F5). I had my fair share of problems with the Canons and finally said the hell with it, sold ALL my Canon gear and went back to Nikon, I purchased a D300, I had that for about 10 months and decided to buy a D700. I couldn't be happier, I use them with the 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 and I just ordered a 200-400. I walk around with the 24-70 on the D700 (yes I wish it were 24-200) and I use the 14-24 quite a bit because of my work. I love shooting the D300 with the tele-zooms at sporting events which I believe the Nikons excel in. Obviously you can't go wrong with either Nikon or Canon, it comes down to what feels right in your hand and which you have the best luck with. You do have a lot in lenses and you will lose your ace financially, but take it for a test drive first. Let's face facts, they both are great systems but some people have better luck with Nikons and some better with Canons. Everybody that I know who owns a MAC loves the darn things, they have Ipods, Iphones, IMACS, Mac-Pros etc. I finally decided to get an Ipod, 2 of them died, I then liked the IMacs so much I bought 3, ALL 3 of them DIED 2 hard drives died and one video card. I have always been a PC guy and I always build my own systems, never a problem, I added 3 Macs and all hell broke loose. I didn't buy the Iphone because I've had incredible luck with Verizon and they now have a world phone so it works in Europe when I travel there. I'm done with Apple products, I will never buy another, I even sold all my stock in the company! Save the flames!

terence_patrick · « **Reply #14 on:** February 21, 2009, 05:06:03 am »

To the OP, why don't you just rent a Nikon when you need it? Unless of course, you've got a wad of cash burning a hole in your pocket.

davewolfs · « **Reply #15 on:** February 22, 2009, 12:15:56 am »

Being a Nikon owner I actually want to switch to Canon. I really don't see how you think Nikons lens line up is any better. The only advantage is the 14-24mm which does not support filters. If you are doing landscape what are you doing to use in the 70-200 range? A 70-300 VR? As for the Tilt/Shits that Nikon had the advantage with, Canon just took care of that with the 17mm and 24mm.

Paulo Bizarro · « **Reply #16 on:** February 22, 2009, 12:29:50 am »

It's your money, you do as you like. I think it is always a bad move to swap systems, unless you have a very specific reason to do so. As if you need some sort of exotic lens or camera function that your current system does not provide.

A few years ago, there were many nikon shooters that complemented their system with EOS 1 cameras, just to be able to shoot the 24 T/S lens. If you are considering nikon for their presumably better wide angles, think twice. Canon have recently updated their wide angle lenses, with the new 24 f/1.4 L MKII, and now the two new T/S wide lenses. Plus the recent 16-35 L f/2.8 MKII zoom. So the gap is closing, if you can actually see the difference.

As for the 5D MKII problems, by now I am convinced that the sampling is not representative, and the uncertainty on what exactly happened down there is too large.

reissme · « **Reply #17 on:** February 22, 2009, 03:08:47 pm »

[quote name='jklotz' date='Feb 18 2009, 03:38 AM' post='260885']
I've been a Canon guy for a long time. I've really enjoyed my 5d, it's been a good camera, but Nikon seems to be a better platform at the moment. Not just the bodies, but the lenses, particularly the wides.

I have the the Canon 1DS Mark III, Canon 17-40, f:4 and Nikon 14-24 f:2.8, with an adaptor (mf). I can tell you for sure that the nikon has a little sharper corners, but the canon 17-40 was perfect for all the jobs I have done with it.
You don't need in my opinon to buy the Nikon. just buy yourself a Canon 5dII, Canon 17-40, f:4, Nikon 14-24 f:2.8, with an adaptor and you will be very happy.

best regards
Menachem Reiss www.reiss.co.il

Author Topic: Possible Nikon Convert (Read 4916 times)