Canon to Nikon

Lukey

Lukey

Messages
227
Name
Lukas
Edit My Images
Yes
Hey everyone, I've had my 400D for nearly 2 years now, and I really am feeling the need for an upgrade to be honest, don't get me wrong I do love my little 400D but I just really want a change!

I've had a play with a nikon D300, and what can I say :love:, it feels beautiful to hold and use, and the IQ seemed better than my 400. I've only got the kit lens and 50mm 1.8 for my canon, so worrying about swapping isn't really an issue.

However the one thing putting me off, and which I'm seeking advice about, is that some of my friends, who are avid canon users have been telling me that nikon lens' are inferior to canon and I'd be better off getting a 40D/50D and using canons superior lens'. Is this true or just a load of old tosh?:thinking:
 
Lukey said:
Hey everyone, I've had my 400D for nearly 2 years now, and I really am feeling the need for an upgrade to be honest, don't get me wrong I do love my little 400D but I just really want a change!

I've had a play with a nikon D300, and what can I say :love:, it feels beautiful to hold and use, and the IQ seemed better than my 400. I've only got the kit lens and 50mm 1.8 for my canon, so worrying about swapping isn't really an issue.

However the one thing putting me off, and which I'm seeking advice about, is that some of my friends, who are avid canon users have been telling me that nikon lens' are inferior to canon and I'd be better off getting a 40D/50D and using canons superior lens'. Is this true or just a load of old tosh?:thinking:
Click to expand...

Nikon are an optics company.....Canon make photocopiers :shrug: :LOL:

Seriously though, try using both the D300 and the 40 or 50D and then decide which you prefer, it's you that has to live with it, not your friends ;)
 
Sounds like you want a new toy. But no harm in that bud ;)

Nikon and Canon both make fabulous lenses. If there is a difference, Canon has two or three lenses with specifications that Nikon doesn't currently list; that could change any time though. Depends what you want, otherwise no difference at all.
 
Lukey said:
However the one thing putting me off, and which I'm seeking advice about, is that some of my friends, who are avid canon users have been telling me that nikon lens' are inferior to canon and I'd be better off getting a 40D/50D and using canons superior lens'. Is this true or just a load of old tosh?:thinking:
Click to expand...
It's tosh. Both companies make some cheap and nasty lenses, and both companies make some superb ones. Head-to-head, there generally isn't much in it. For pro lenses Nikon tend to be a bit more expensive, but not always. For consumer lenses they've both got the likes of Sigma to keep them honest.

Canon's range is wider. They offer more options for ultra-fast primes and for telephotos, amongst other things. But unless you're thinking of spending >£500 on a lens, that won't be an issue for you.
 
What utter crap.

Please listen to the advice given to you by Stewart.
If he doesn't know what he's talking about then nobody does.......
 
I agree. Both manufacturers offer excellent lenses, at a price, and a consumer range. Nikon tend to be more expensive at the upper end, and Canon have a wider choice, including the four 70 - 200mm zooms (just about affordable to very pricy) that a lot of Nikon user seem to envy!

One more thing. The D200 and D300 will meter with the old manual lenses, if this interests you. I don't know about the UK, because I've only be back here for a few months, but the South African market was flooded with good, very cheap, manual lenses at one point. These disappeared quickly when the D200 came out.
 
don't forget about the other camera manufactures Pentax, Sony, Sigma e.t.c.
 
Both manufacturers make great lenses - the ONLY consideration when buying at any price-point is camera-features and ergonomics - if it feels right, then it is right, regardless of who makes it...
 
Arkady said:
Both manufacturers make great lenses - the ONLY consideration when buying at any price-point is camera-features and ergonomics - if it feels right, then it is right, regardless of who makes it...
Click to expand...

All I would add to that is, "it feels right to YOU", you are the one holding it not your friends.
 
Don't forget the huge range of second hand pre digital nikon lenses around that will work perfectly well on a D300 or Even the D300s and D700! There is every opportunity to pick up a stunning piece of glassware at a bargain price.
 
Lukey said:
However the one thing putting me off, and which I'm seeking advice about, is that some of my friends, who are avid canon users have been telling me that nikon lens' are inferior to canon and I'd be better off getting a 40D/50D and using canons superior lens'. Is this true or just a load of old tosh?:thinking:
Click to expand...

StewartR said:
It's tosh. Both companies make some cheap and nasty lenses, and both companies make some superb ones. Head-to-head, there generally isn't much in it. For pro lenses Nikon tend to be a bit more expensive, but not always. For consumer lenses they've both got the likes of Sigma to keep them honest.

Canon's range is wider. They offer more options for ultra-fast primes and for telephotos, amongst other things. But unless you're thinking of spending >£500 on a lens, that won't be an issue for you.
Click to expand...

Totally agree with Stewart, he's summed it up perfectly.

As others have said try the cameras that you are considering and see which suits you best.
 
Don't repeat my mistake and get D300s

Canon poor autofocus kills the images badly at wider apertures. You will only realize this when you get better glass. Also try tracking someone coming to the camera! BTW some pros claim nikon glass resolves much better although I can't confirm it.
 
Thanks a lot for the responses guys.

I have used a 40D and 50D and I prefer the D300, to use it just feels right! Thanks for clearing up the issues of lens´!

I think I might be going to get one soon :D. Just one more question if I´m not annoying anyone, what´s a good price for a used D300, thanks!
 
daugirdas said:
Don't repeat my mistake and get D300s

Canon poor autofocus kills the images badly at wider apertures. You will only realize this when you get better glass. Also try tracking someone coming to the camera! BTW some pros claim nikon glass resolves much better although I can't confirm it.
Click to expand...

Eh? Never had any issued with Canon autofocus on the 400D, certainly shouldnt on a 40D! My 400D and 250 IS tracks perfectly to the camera, and I cant see how a glass upgrade makes that more obvious? Pin sharp on a 250 IS should also mean pin sharp on a 200L surely?
 
odd jim said:
Eh? Never had any issued with Canon autofocus on the 400D, certainly shouldnt on a 40D! My 400D and 250 IS tracks perfectly to the camera, and I cant see how a glass upgrade makes that more obvious? Pin sharp on a 250 IS should also mean pin sharp on a 200L surely?
Click to expand...

f/5.6 has plenty of DOF. While it is a good consumer lens, it is not exactly "pin sharp". Try that with maybe 24-85mm range and f/2.8 or f/1.4 for example. It becomes blatantly obvious with very sharp glass and narrow DOF that something else is in focus.

40D has only slightly better AF over 400D which is the same as 30D. You need to get 1D series to have a chance with anything moving.
 
daugirdas said:
f/5.6 has plenty of DOF. While it is a good consumer lens, it is not exactly "pin sharp". Try that with maybe 24-85mm range and f/2.8 or f/1.4 for example. It becomes blatantly obvious with very sharp glass and narrow DOF that something else is in focus.

40D has only slightly better AF over 400D which is the same as 30D. You need to get 1D series to have a chance with anything moving.
Click to expand...

I disagree with that - I take plenty of motorsport shots (about as quick moving as you can get) and I get very sharp images, both panning and 'freeze frame' images from the 400D and the 250IS, and thats with a 'budget' zoom wide open. I get the same results from my equine photography. To say you need a 1D series camera to get sharp and quick AF from a Canon is madness, lol!

Also, it can be lens dependant, even on Canon lenses as although Canons have AF motors in body, the addition of USMs in a lot of lenses speed the AF up considerably, more so than on most Nikon gear.
 
odd jim said:
I disagree with that - I take plenty of motorsport shots (about as quick moving as you can get) and I get very sharp images, both panning and 'freeze frame' images from the 400D and the 250IS, and thats with a 'budget' zoom wide open. I get the same results from my equine photography. To say you need a 1D series camera to get sharp and quick AF from a Canon is madness, lol!

Also, it can be lens dependant, even on Canon lenses as although Canons have AF motors in body, the addition of USMs in a lot of lenses speed the AF up considerably, more so than on most Nikon gear.
Click to expand...

Diagonally moving objects across the frame do not count, as the focus distance stays nearly constant. Also panning negates any advantage of the extra sharpness of L lens due to motion blur. So what matters there is your technique and the colour reproduction.

Try shooting a runner (or any other subject) heading towards the camera! And really I am talking about f/4 and wider apertures, mostly f/2.8. If you are using f/5.6 or f/8 then there is no need for 1D or D300 at all.
 
daugirdas said:
Diagonally moving objects across the frame do not count, as the focus distance stays nearly constant. Also panning negates any advantage of the extra sharpness of L lens due to motion blur. So what matters there is your technique and the colour reproduction.

Try shooting a runner (or any other subject) heading towards the camera! And really I am talking about f/4 and wider apertures, mostly f/2.8. If you are using f/5.6 or f/8 then there is no need for 1D or D300 at all.
Click to expand...

Ah I see what you mean. There is however a technical problem with that which is inherant to any camera. If you have a subject moving towards a lens, a runner, car, train, whatever, and you have it set wide open to get a fast shutter speed, the settings you will have are relative to the position of the subject, which in manual mode can be a real bugger, as the closer it gets the less ambient light passes through the lens, especially if you are using a long lens, meaning the camera will want to go wider when it simply cant. It should still AF ok though?

Personally I dont shoot wider than 5.6 for anything moving anyway, as with anything, the wider you go, the softer you get.
 
the D300 will be lovely, if the D200 and the D3 I've played with are anything to go by

from a bit of a newbie point of view, the D300 is semi pro and miles ahead of the 400D which is entry level kit
from high end lens specs, I've heard that nikon have the edge on wide zoom optics and canon have superior telephoto lenses

to be honest, unless you're using these things at the most extreme of environments and situations I doubt most people would know.

with regard to the daugirdas' post, the nikon focusing system seems lovely!
 
I have to admit, I have no faults with my 1D but I've been smitten since I've tried the D3. I suspect I'm buying more canon glass in an attempt to wean myself off using that D3 as opposed to selling everything and spending far too much dosh on a d3 and a bunch of lens set up. :D

I'll reserve judgement until when (or if?) a 1D MK IV (or IIIn) comes out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top