Anyone actively use Canon AND Nikon ??

FetchMeMyTools

FetchMeMyTools

Messages
298
Edit My Images
No
Hello all,

In my search to find a more suitable second body than the one i have i have been looking at the 50D now, but after reading reviews of it lined up against the D300 the Nikon comes out on top in almost every area, so would i be silly to buy a 50D (when in a few months im planning on getting another 5D2 anyway).

So im wondering if it would be too much of a pain to buy a second body Nikon to go with my 5D2.
I wouldnt be swapping lenses all the time, i would just have one WA lens on it and be done with it.
The only problem i can see is the editing of 2 different RAW formats.

I dont want to start a Nikon is better because this this and this argument, i just want opinions on having 2 brands of body for shooting.

Anyone help me out ??

(y)
 
I have used canon and Fuji S5s together. You could tell which brand the photographs came from. I would stick to one or the other
 
I'd stick with one brand - just for lens interchangability if one fails. The other considerations that would worry me are cost of lenses and also getting to knowe to different menus and systems inside out

Hugh
 
Good point.
Hadnt thought of if i NEED to swap, because of course all jobs go without hitch !!!!

An ideal for me would be nikon D3 and d300/700 but its just too costly to swap.
 
An ideal world, as ive tried the d3 and it is a joy to use.

Really want the sigma 10-20 on it so might plum for thd 50d for the points mentioned above.
 
FetchMeMyTools said:
Hello all,

In my search to find a more suitable second body than the one i have i have been looking at the 50D now, but after reading reviews of it lined up against the D300 the Nikon comes out on top in almost every area, so would i be silly to buy a 50D (when in a few months im planning on getting another 5D2 anyway).

So im wondering if it would be too much of a pain to buy a second body Nikon to go with my 5D2.
I wouldnt be swapping lenses all the time, i would just have one WA lens on it and be done with it.
The only problem i can see is the editing of 2 different RAW formats.

I dont want to start a Nikon is better because this this and this argument, i just want opinions on having 2 brands of body for shooting.

Anyone help me out ??

(y)
Click to expand...

Not knocking the Nikon D300, but a friend has said he has to do alot of post processing to get his images up to a standard with the D300, then again the 50D also has problems with ISO due to the number of Mpixels if heavily cropping into the image.

The question is why are you going for a second body, especially a cropped sensor and from another brand when your going to buy another FF camera in the short term futher. Save you money for the FF camera.
 
pete.rush said:
The question is why are you going for a second body, especially a cropped sensor and from another brand when your going to buy another FF camera in the short term futher. Save you money for the FF camera.
Click to expand...

Cheers for the reply.

I have a second body at the moment and when i had a 40D the difference wasnt to bad. Now i have the 5D2 the difference in quality is quite a lot !!!
SO, i want to shelve the second body and get one closer in comparison to the 5D2 (50D is better). I really cant afford another 5D2 at the moment (nearly 3 times as much on second hand prices of a 50D) but need one in the interim.
Plus I can stick a 10-20 on it for £300 compared to the 16-35 for £1200 !!

Back on topic though. It was just an ideal world to think that both brands can be used together, but from reading the posts the points made justify keeping with Canon or Nikon.
 
have you looked at a 5dmk1? should be cheaper than the mk11
 
FetchMeMyTools said:
Cheers for the reply.

I have a second body at the moment and when i had a 40D the difference wasnt to bad. Now i have the 5D2 the difference in quality is quite a lot !!!
SO, i want to shelve the second body and get one closer in comparison to the 5D2 (50D is better). I really cant afford another 5D2 at the moment (nearly 3 times as much on second hand prices of a 50D) but need one in the interim.
Plus I can stick a 10-20 on it for £300 compared to the 16-35 for £1200 !!

Back on topic though. It was just an ideal world to think that both brands can be used together, but from reading the posts the points made justify keeping with Canon or Nikon.
Click to expand...

I assume your talking about the ISO performance of the 5D MKII compared with you 40D. You can't really compare the 2 camera's, both are designed for different things. 5D for landscapes and studio work, 40D for wildlife, motorsport/aviation. Yes the 5D would out strip the 40D on ISO performance, but I would say the 40D would would beat the 5D on autofocus speed.

You are always going to get that technology gap with the lastest shiney thing, but is there a vast difference or are you being over critical. I use a 1D MkIIn, but still happy with the images I get from my 20D.

Peter
 
I used Canon and Nikon for a while and there are some downers. All is well if you can remember where the buttons and menu items are on each, don't mind having no effective back up for either body, don't mind learning a whole new lens line up, and having to concern yourself with different RAW formats. I'd be happy with either brand but would be loath to go back to both at the same time. Just too much hassle. these days most mid range bodies are highl;y capable and while I know the D300 is 'better' overall than the 50D you are splitting hairs and 'better' will depend on your own weighting of priorities. Stick with Canon. Way less hassle. I just prefer Nikon from extensive experience handling both.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top