Nikon vs Canon
- Thread starter mulester7
- Start date
mulester7
LIVE from Lake Ouachita
.....Dave, I appreciate what you've said in this thread.....
.....it has been pointed out the TOTL camera bodies of Canon and Nikon do individual things better than the other....I also suspect 90% of those who buy these TOTL bodies won't ever use the distinguishing features anyway, they'll just put it on full-auto with 100 iso....shame.....
.....good thread....thanks to those who participated.....
pioneervato
Lunatic Member
Hey, I didn't hear the fat lady sing. Who said it was over? Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
So, we won?
niklasthedol
Super Member
Today I needed to take a shot with multiexposure of nine frames put together first with average light measurement and then with individual light measurement.
The shots needed to have three slave flashes in corners of the room and the controller flash should be the build in flash in the body but the build in flash was NOT supposed to fire off.
The focus points had to be changed in between shots within the multi exposure.
The flashes should fire in trailing curtain syncro mode.
Thing is that nobody of those Canikon guys had any hints about how to deal with this.
Any of you Canikon guys in here able to use your fantastic super TOTL Canikon plastic bodies this way?
Well my camera did a good job doing exactly what I needed.
Later on I needed to do some interval shooting with 68 photos over a 3 hour period. Just so easy.
Could the Canikon entry level cameras do that.
And then I too my camera with me the tank of my motorcycle and then there was this balloon landing close to me..I really needed to take a lot of photos there.
But it was very much raining.
Now my motorcycle clothing is for sure water proof.
And so is my entry level camera.
So no problems there either.
How would Canikon entry level manage that?
YEAH right....................someone pointed out that Canikon is on top.
Funny thing is that I am very happy that it was not Canikon I was forced to use today.
"dolph"
The shots needed to have three slave flashes in corners of the room and the controller flash should be the build in flash in the body but the build in flash was NOT supposed to fire off.
The focus points had to be changed in between shots within the multi exposure.
The flashes should fire in trailing curtain syncro mode.
Thing is that nobody of those Canikon guys had any hints about how to deal with this.
Any of you Canikon guys in here able to use your fantastic super TOTL Canikon plastic bodies this way?
Well my camera did a good job doing exactly what I needed.
Later on I needed to do some interval shooting with 68 photos over a 3 hour period. Just so easy.
Could the Canikon entry level cameras do that.
And then I too my camera with me the tank of my motorcycle and then there was this balloon landing close to me..I really needed to take a lot of photos there.
But it was very much raining.
Now my motorcycle clothing is for sure water proof.
And so is my entry level camera.
So no problems there either.
How would Canikon entry level manage that?
YEAH right....................someone pointed out that Canikon is on top.
Funny thing is that I am very happy that it was not Canikon I was forced to use today.
"dolph"
Last edited:
dpastern
Well-Known Member
TOTL? What does that mean?
YW on the appreciation. I've been using Canon for 20 years, EOS, and I'm quite tech minded when it comes to cameras. DSLRs are NOT going in a good direction imho. I wish the big guns would stop doing the megapixel pi$$ing contest and start working on better DR, 24 bit cameras, improving noise even more, etc. Digital still has a VERY weak DR when compared to film.
Dave
YW on the appreciation. I've been using Canon for 20 years, EOS, and I'm quite tech minded when it comes to cameras. DSLRs are NOT going in a good direction imho. I wish the big guns would stop doing the megapixel pi$$ing contest and start working on better DR, 24 bit cameras, improving noise even more, etc. Digital still has a VERY weak DR when compared to film.
Dave
dpastern
Well-Known Member
Dolph...
No, Canon's are limited in the number of multiple exposures that they can do, even the top line ones. Canon has made a decision to stick to X amount for whatever reasons. It's crap, I'd prefer having more power like the Nikon bodies off (up to 9 from memory). Like most manufacturers, Canon will only make changes when it sees a significant number of people switching to an alternative brand and sales dropping (like with what happened with the Mark III fiasco). Canon flashes can do rear curtain sync.
Canon's cheap entry cameras have built in flash units, their pro units do not. Canon has a certain philisophy in regards to in built flash. Again, I don't agree with Canon's philosophy, but since I have a reasonable flash gun, I don't really care. And for my genre (macro) a separate flash is really preferred anyways. I could easily buy a wireless flash transmitter, hook it into the hotshoe on my canon, and then get 3 flashes and put them on stands and control them. It costs money, and I, and many many many others simply do not need this feature.
What you have to understand that today, people are concerned with megapixels, noise performance, AF performance. That's the majority of people. Things like remote flash are used only by a small percentage of users. Like anything, majority rules. I'm not saying that having that ability is bad, but it's simply not required by most of the masses.
Dang, I just figured out that totl = top of the line lol. Yes, I could do what you've done today if I wanted to, but I don't need to. Nor does 99.999999% of users I suspect. If you want to do some very specialised stuff, more power to you, but that doesn't mean that other cameras are bad. Camera manufacturers make their products for the masses. Hell, I wish every car manufacturer would have semi auto gearboxes (with paddles on the steering wheel of course, a la F1) and fly by wire throttles, along with 4ws and active suspension. It's not really needed, but I'd like it. Nor does the majority of the driving population require or even want such technology. My point is, you can add specialist features to a camera, but if people aren't going to use them, it's really just a pi$$ing contest imho. There are key areas of performance with modern DSLR which I've mentioned above and that's where manufacturers are rightly focusing on (pun intended).
I mean, hell, we could go to a F1 race and I guarantee that my 1D Mark IIn (let alone later cameras like the Mark IV or D3s) would get a LOT more keepers than your Pentax due to the superior AF performance. I've seen the results of the Pentax units at higher ISOs, and they are left wanting. Canon probably has a 1-2 stop. As an example:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk7/page16.asp
I have to say that the Pentax K-x is a LOT better and equals or betters the Canon 500D and Nikon D5000 units at higher ISOs. This is the first Pentax camera that I've seen that can take on the big boys in noise performance, so kudos to Pentax.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/page15.asp
That said, the Canon has 50% more pixels or thereabouts. That's a big deal to many people (not really to me, but I'm not your ordinary user).
If you look at the noise test results for the 550D, it improves greatly over the older 500D model it replaces, and equals or betters the Pentax K-x - even with 50% more pixels (12 vs 18).
It's all horses for courses. What you think are useful features etc are different to what other people think (or want). From my experiences, more people seem to match my desires than yours Dolph.
I tend to try and take the shot in the simplest way. There's an old UNIX saying:
less is more
it's like hi fi - the more fancy features you have in a component, the worse it'll usually perform, and the more that can break and require fixing down the track.
Each to their own I guess.
Dave
No, Canon's are limited in the number of multiple exposures that they can do, even the top line ones. Canon has made a decision to stick to X amount for whatever reasons. It's crap, I'd prefer having more power like the Nikon bodies off (up to 9 from memory). Like most manufacturers, Canon will only make changes when it sees a significant number of people switching to an alternative brand and sales dropping (like with what happened with the Mark III fiasco). Canon flashes can do rear curtain sync.
Canon's cheap entry cameras have built in flash units, their pro units do not. Canon has a certain philisophy in regards to in built flash. Again, I don't agree with Canon's philosophy, but since I have a reasonable flash gun, I don't really care. And for my genre (macro) a separate flash is really preferred anyways. I could easily buy a wireless flash transmitter, hook it into the hotshoe on my canon, and then get 3 flashes and put them on stands and control them. It costs money, and I, and many many many others simply do not need this feature.
What you have to understand that today, people are concerned with megapixels, noise performance, AF performance. That's the majority of people. Things like remote flash are used only by a small percentage of users. Like anything, majority rules. I'm not saying that having that ability is bad, but it's simply not required by most of the masses.
Dang, I just figured out that totl = top of the line lol. Yes, I could do what you've done today if I wanted to, but I don't need to. Nor does 99.999999% of users I suspect. If you want to do some very specialised stuff, more power to you, but that doesn't mean that other cameras are bad. Camera manufacturers make their products for the masses. Hell, I wish every car manufacturer would have semi auto gearboxes (with paddles on the steering wheel of course, a la F1) and fly by wire throttles, along with 4ws and active suspension. It's not really needed, but I'd like it. Nor does the majority of the driving population require or even want such technology. My point is, you can add specialist features to a camera, but if people aren't going to use them, it's really just a pi$$ing contest imho. There are key areas of performance with modern DSLR which I've mentioned above and that's where manufacturers are rightly focusing on (pun intended).
I mean, hell, we could go to a F1 race and I guarantee that my 1D Mark IIn (let alone later cameras like the Mark IV or D3s) would get a LOT more keepers than your Pentax due to the superior AF performance. I've seen the results of the Pentax units at higher ISOs, and they are left wanting. Canon probably has a 1-2 stop. As an example:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk7/page16.asp
I have to say that the Pentax K-x is a LOT better and equals or betters the Canon 500D and Nikon D5000 units at higher ISOs. This is the first Pentax camera that I've seen that can take on the big boys in noise performance, so kudos to Pentax.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/page15.asp
That said, the Canon has 50% more pixels or thereabouts. That's a big deal to many people (not really to me, but I'm not your ordinary user).
If you look at the noise test results for the 550D, it improves greatly over the older 500D model it replaces, and equals or betters the Pentax K-x - even with 50% more pixels (12 vs 18).
It's all horses for courses. What you think are useful features etc are different to what other people think (or want). From my experiences, more people seem to match my desires than yours Dolph.
I tend to try and take the shot in the simplest way. There's an old UNIX saying:
less is more
it's like hi fi - the more fancy features you have in a component, the worse it'll usually perform, and the more that can break and require fixing down the track.
Each to their own I guess.
Dave
Last edited:
pioneervato
Lunatic Member
Well Dolph, I think that was the intent of this thread when mulester started it and your reasons for choosing one camera over the another. Not everyone here would ever use their DSLR in the way you described with the remote flash setup. Heck, their are features on my D200 I don't even use and don't know if I ever will. As it is, it currently serves my purpose as yours does for you. That's it!
dpastern
Well-Known Member
That's right, we all use our cameras differently, and have different photographic styles to boot. That said, the vast majority of the market only uses the most basic of features on their DSLRs. To be entirely honest (and blunt) - few people buying DSLRs even know the basics of photography, they're using them as glorified point and shooters. I'd rather they buy DSLRs, because, ultimately, they are far better quality than point and shoot cameras (12mp in a sensor that's 8 x 6mm? Crikey that's shite!).
Dave
Dave
VinylHanger
Navigaret ex ironia
That's only because the Canon folk are out taking pictures and the Nikon folk are here talking about it.
pioneervato
Lunatic Member
Good one, VH! So I take it you have a Nikon?
dpastern
Well-Known Member
That's only because the Canon folk are out taking pictures and the Nikon folk are here talking about it.
rofl!!!! Poor noinks!
Dave
That's only because the Canon folk are out taking pictures and the Nikon folk are here talking about it.
The Nikon people are only indoors because the low light performance is better :thmbsp:
mikeybc
Listener
Our TOTL (top of the line) Canikon bodies are not made of plastic but of Magnesium alloy with extensive weather sealing and yes the built-in flash can be used to control multiple slaves without it going off when it's not supposed to. I can also select one of 51 different focus points between each shot....so there:butt2: Ha Ha
Last edited:
mulester7
LIVE from Lake Ouachita
.....guys, I don't know, it might be just ignorance gone to seed, but I have "yet" to figure out the word Canikon....are we talking Canon or Nikon?.....
mikeybc
Listener
Canon and Nikon blended into one word so were talking about both
mulester7
LIVE from Lake Ouachita
.....aah.....
mulester7
LIVE from Lake Ouachita
.....MikeyBC, are we sure the word Canikon is the blending of the words Canon and Nikon?.....
dpastern
Well-Known Member
Yes, it's a common term (usually used in a deriding manner) for Canon and Nikon as a whole. So is noink for that matter (I used it in a good fun sense earlier on in the thread). I'm not one of these Canon users that says Nikon sucks etc. I quite like a lot of Nikon gear. I'm a free agent, but sadly, my wallet isn't, since I'm tied to 13K or so of Canon pro lenses etc. I'd love to switch to a Nikon D3s, but alas, I'd be financially shooting myself in the foot.
Most modern DSLRs are more powerful and featured than the average person will ever need. I love my Mark IIn, I can be out in the field and not really have to worry about rain, at least the lighter and medium stuff. If I can get shelter, I usually do, since Canon and Nikon do NOT offer waterproof cameras, but water resistant to some degree.
Many smaller cameras just feel wrong in my hands, so I prefer the larger body and weight of the pro series units. The smaller units seem to small for me, and I have smallish hands, weird!
Dave
Dave
Most modern DSLRs are more powerful and featured than the average person will ever need. I love my Mark IIn, I can be out in the field and not really have to worry about rain, at least the lighter and medium stuff. If I can get shelter, I usually do, since Canon and Nikon do NOT offer waterproof cameras, but water resistant to some degree.
Many smaller cameras just feel wrong in my hands, so I prefer the larger body and weight of the pro series units. The smaller units seem to small for me, and I have smallish hands, weird!
Dave
Dave
niklasthedol
Super Member
Save your sorry :butt2: because in that case you probably paid around 3-4 times more for your Canikon body than I did mine even though I have same or more features in a equaly or more sturdy and weather/dust sealed body.
Anyway, as I stated earlier in this thread; all modern dSLR cameras are great quality and featured out rich.
Not all, but some, are even weather/dust sealed and protected against shakey and rough use.
What really matters to the composition, to the artistic and technical quality of a photo is the glass in front and the person behind the of the camera body.
Enjoy the hobby and see if you can make it into an art.
"dolph"
Last edited:
dpastern
Well-Known Member
hahaha. OK. Whatever. You can live in your dream fantasy world Dolph.
I do agree with other comments though:
Dave
