A question to those that moved to the dark side...

JohnN

JohnN

Messages
6,359
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

Firstly I will point out that this is a serious question as I'm considering it but cannot pinpoint why other than a friend of mine just picked up a Nikon D5100 with a bog standard 18-55mm VR and I'm liking what he gets straight of out the camera - now it probably is just he's better than me but I still want to know:

If you have moved over from Canon (especially a 60D or 7D as I've owned both) to Nikon can you explain why and what you moved to and most importantly was it a good move and why?

Now I'm off to grab my flame retardant suit just in case someone skips teh first paragraph :suspect:
 
Last edited:
I would recommend getting a couple good books on photography. You may move to nikon, then to leica then hasselblad, then what? Your current gear, particularly glass is very capable. I can see it is 'fashionable' to move to nikon these days, and certainly helps them to keep afloat on the market but thats about it.
 
When you say unprocessed, do you mean compared to a RAW file out of your camera? The RAW file will nearly always look dull compared to the in camera processed Jpeg, unless you're using the manufacturers own software.

If using Adobe Camera Raw you can set up camera presets to get the image closer to what you expect when you first open it if you like a certain look to your images.

If shooting Jpegs, sharpness can be altered in camera. And you can set the brightness, contrast and hue and saturation to get much closer to what you want as a Picture Style or something similar.

I don't know about 'feel'. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
I think we got a little sidetracked, has anyone any tales from the darkside? :)
 
Sorry, just trying to ascertain what the problem may be, as the cameras you have are pretty good quality so I've read. I thought trying to find that out may be an easier option than considering the possible expensive route of changing camera brands. :shrug:

So again, sorry, I have no experience of changing from Canon to Nikon as I've been Nikon all the way so can't help you with that. :shrug:

Hopefully someone will be along to help you with your question.
 
Have you taken the same photo side by side and compared?

There are so many variables from camera settings, processing, composition or light before you get to the camera itself
 
JohnN said:
We both use raw, all he did was upload to Flickr
Click to expand...

But he will have done conversion to JPG to upload, he might just have nice presets on the software he's using.

Personally, I think if you friends shots are getting a nice look to them you should look more at the techniques he's using before looking at his equipment. If he's just picking angles with slightly nicer light or exposing a bit differently it can have a big impact on the immediate impression the shots will give SOOC.

Can't help R.e. what it's like switching, but people are often only to happy to swap cameras for a little while to let you try stuff out. Everyone else is usually curious to see what other brands and cameras are like as well.
 
Last edited:
Sorry redhead17, I didn't mean to come across ungrateful, I was typing from a phone hence the curt replies!

I've no doubt my kit is fine, just working with newspapers I hear all too often I should have gone Nikon then a friend did and got SOOC images very sharp from a kit lens where I ended up playing more for the single lens than his kit - its just a little annoying.

I can't go side by side easily as he's a few hundred miles away otherwise I'd have a proper go with his kit and know for sure.

I've no doubt its a passing whim (although I did have my 5D up for sale tonight but have withdrawn it on advice form the better half) and that whim seems to keep coming back up, whether right back to when I first heard of trap focus.
 
Strong The Force is with this one but The Dark Side calls it does:D
 
This - interesting article - I know its the D700 and if I did more over I would only probably go to the D7000, but I don wonder at some of the points about lens sharpness.
 
If you had only owned the 60D and 7D I'd say go for it, but seeing that you also have a 5D I think you'll be disappointed by Nikon DX cameras and unless you make a serious investment on top of the sale of your 5D you're not going to get a FF Nikon.

If you can't get a sharp image sooc with the 5D and that 100mm macro you own then either you have knackered kit or there's something very wrong with you.
 
Amazingly I have yet to put the 100mm on the 5D!!

I really must try.

I have just noticed second hand prices for the 5D & D7000 are pretty much the same and as I was considering selling it anyway I could dabble. I know the 5D if FF & the D7000 crop, but that hasn't been a concern to me so far.
 
Hmmm, going from a single digit series camera to 4 digit series camera. I'd struggle with that.
 
I went from a 7D to a 60D and lost very little that mattered to me despite including birds in flight as one of my areas of interest.
 
Last edited:
That's one step down and iv not owned one but I imagine the 7D is on a bit of a lower lever build quality wise than the 5D anyway. 5D to D7000 is like 2 or 3 tiers down the quality ladder isn't it? Maybe just 2 since Nikon don't have a double digit range anymore.
 
If I recall correctly the D7000 is the equivalent of the 60D but often compared to the 7D
 
my experience with Canon is the feel of the camera is good, camera is well constructed and look bulky so gripping your hands on the camera always feels good and right. Nikon is abit smaller i feel but it maybe just me but that does not convince me to use canon.

Another thing i went for Nikon is the buttons and layout of buttons on the canon system always confuss me and it just doesn't feel right for me, where as the nikon everything is obvious and i can find button and dail setting very easy. Again this is personal perference.

Image quality wise is also personal preference, hard to say which one is better .....
 
Yeah, I have to say the more I read the more I could swap, or at least sell the 5D and try one out for a longer stretch, I can always sell it on again and I'll only be out of pocket a little - hopefully just postage.

That said I'm going to head out to a PC world, apparently they have one in stock fairly near to me so with any luck I'll be able to try one out.

I could find its all great on paper but not in my hand.

I have to say though I love the dial on the Canon and even though I don;t use 90% of its features Magic Lantern is great on the 60D - but I only have to worry if I swap 100%.

One thing I am starting to think more about now is lenses, my main BiF lens is the 400mm prime, which is fast as hell and sharp, whats the (non-mortgage) equivalent over at Nikon (not bothered about prime as such - if there were a magical zoom that was as quick and as sharp I would use that!)
 
Last edited:
When you say swap to Nikon i guess you mean changing to a D700? The D700 is amazing camera

If not the D7000 and D300s is bloody great too.
 
I used to have a canon a couple of years ago. Just a 450d. Whilst I still got decent images, and appreciated its capability as a camera, it just never felt quite right to me if you get what I mean?

May have been part ergonomics, part user interface, I dont know, there was just something I couldnt quite get on with.

Had to sell that gear due to financial difficulties.

Fast forward a couple of years, I wanted a new dslr, so popped into a local store to have a look at some models. Main comparison for my budget at the time was d5100 vs 600d. After playing with both I went for the d5100 as it just immediately felt right to me, I liked the menu system more, could find different things more easily. It just felt right, as opposed to the canon I tried in the store, which still didnt quite feel 100% to me.

Im now much happier with Nikon, and I have found myself using my slr more than when I had Canon :thumbs:

We also have cookies and milkshake on the dark side...just saying...
 
Cheers guys, initially it would be the D7000, almost as a sampler.

Now Alex... thats just not fair - I love cookies & milkshake!!

By the way as well as this forum I frequent Photography on the Net - a Canon forum, other than Nikonians (which wants money to email!) what is the Nikon forum as I'm now thinking about lenses and am looking for something like PotN's lens archive, which is great for checking out images on a specific lens so as to judge sharpness and quickly find out about focus speeds.
 
badboy1984 said:
my experience with Canon is the feel of the camera is good, camera is well constructed and look bulky so gripping your hands on the camera always feels good and right. Nikon is abit smaller i feel but it maybe just me but that does not convince me to use canon.

Another thing i went for Nikon is the buttons and layout of buttons on the canon system always confuss me and it just doesn't feel right for me, where as the nikon everything is obvious and i can find button and dail setting very easy. Again this is personal perference.

Image quality wise is also personal preference, hard to say which one is better .....
Click to expand...

Just to be contrary - I often work with both Canon (mine) and Nikon (at work) and I just don't get on with Nikon. I suppose its just what you get used to. Some people say Nikon is better at high ISO than Canon, but I'm not about to sell all my gear just to find out if that's true. If you are comfortable with your kit stick with it. If you use your friends and find it better for you, then consider swapping. I initially went Canon because most of the people I knew had Canon. I think there really is nowt between 'em.
 
Like i said is all about personal preference. Is just like saying I like BMW more then Mercedez. Nothing to compare really.

I guess the people went for Nikon or Canon is they feel the camera feels right for them.

End of story really lol
 
badboy1984 said:
Is just like saying I like BMW more then Mercedez.
Click to expand...

BMW, Mercs break down too much apparantly according to what cars reliability test, Mercedes came quite low down compared to all manufacturers whereas BMW were very high :razz:
 
This thread started to with OP not happy with the image quality compared to his friends Nikon cameras straight out of camera, even though they both shoot RAW and some processing will have needed to be done. Thinking of moving brands without trying to find out whether the images can be processed closer to what you want is a bit silly to say the least imho.

And now to read that you have a 400mm lens for the Canon cameras you have. :eek: To replace that is I assume, going to be expensive.

Apart from the 400mm, without knowing what other lenses you have, it is impossible to say why the images are not sharp. Sharpness has more to do with the lenses, focusing by the user and processing (either by the user or in camera), the camera has little to do with it. :shrug:

There was also the 'feel' which I assumed was to do with the images. If it is to do with the cameras themselves then that is another thing. :shrug: If it is the camera, then to buy so many Canon cameras while not liking the 'feel' seems a bit weird. If the missing 'feel' is in the images, then you may not like the unprocessed Nikon images either. :shrug: That's is why I was mentioning the set up in camera.

If money is not a problem then change. I would try to do some tests to see if the grass is greener on the other side first, with some real world tests before making that huge change. Maybe get your friend to send you a RAW file of an image you've liked to see whether you get the same results. :shrug:
 
Sharpness isn't everything. Sometimes lenses can give a 3D quality to images that is hard to quantify. Alpha users often wax lyrical about the 'special Minolta colours', and I have indeed got some very nice images myself from old Minolta lenses.
Having said that, I heard a true story once from a Sony user who had tog friends who had both Nikon and Canon. They were always impressed with the results that he got from his Sony, so much so that they were considering jumping ship, as you are.
He swapped cameras with each of them in turn for a short while, and guess what? Whichever camera he used, his shots came out better. His shooting technique and/or post processing skills were what made the difference and it would have made no difference to his friends' results had they spent a fortune on changing their cameras and lenses.

Redhed17's has given great advice, also send some of your raw files to your friend to see what he can make of them.
 
Not a bad idea on getting the raw sent over.

Now I could defend being silly and you appearing to think I buy products I don;t like but it would just get daft so I'll skip over that lot, but only say I was very happy with my CRT monitor till I saw a TFT. (Not that I'm actually saying the differences are that big).

When I got my first SLR I didn't have that much cash and had only held a visiting friends (another one - yes I have at least two :)) 450D and liked it, not having any camera shops anywhere near nor the ability to travel without resorting to public transport I went Canon.

The reason I mentioned the 400mm specifically is that Nikon don't appear to produce a cheap version of the prime - just the £6400 one, which is just too much, however they do have a 80-400mm, which if the quality is comparable to the 100-400 is fine.

Anyway rushing back to now, I gave the D7000 as much of a go as I could, given that it had one of those annoying security cables attached to the bottom which got in the way of holding it right and also had no power to I couldn't check out the menus - that aside it felt okay, I think I seem to be pretty adaptable as I can swap between a 500D, 60D, 5D, Sony SLR (I forget the model), 7D and a couple of point and shoots!

Oh, and it would be a dabble, sell the 5D & Tamron 28-75 and get a D7000 + lens (to be researched), that wouldn't actually be that harmful on the pocket and if I get second hand I wouldn't loose that much even if it doesn't work out.
 
Last edited:
lol, a little sarcasm ;)

I wish I could use his kit but being a couple of hundred miles away is a bit of a hindrance!
 
Swapping similar RAW and Jpeg files sounds like a good first step to try, which can be done quickly, and more importantly cheaply. ;) :lol:
 
Switched from Nikon to Pentax. I had the D7k for a little while and it was a fantastic camera even if not as fantastic as the K-5 I have now. However I found both cameras to provide fairly dull RAWs but I think that is kinda normal. I do like the JPEGs the K-5 produces a bit more but the point is that it is a JPEG so it is processed. I am sure if I had kept the D7k a bit longer I could have set the JPEG output up to provide similar if not identical JPEGs as the K-5!

Regardless play with the D7k you might just love the camera for all sorts of reasons other than its RAW output which might be just as 'bad' as the one from your Canons.
 
Last edited:
Cheers - I know how dull RAWs look, in fact when I read always shoot with RAW I just didn't get it for a while as they are so naff SOOC, however once I got used to it understood why.

I'm looking forward to the RAWs from my mate, especially to see how the noise works out at higher ISOs vs both of my cameras, although the tests could be skewed as I'm looking at the D7000 and he has the D5100 - with any luck they'll be close enough to give me an idea.

Mike said easier that sharpness isn't everything - true, however its much easier to introduce blur (and noise for that matter) than it is to take them away - so if some some unknown artistic reason I chose to produce a soft image I'd sooner have the choice to do it my forcing focus out or in PP than to have that choice made for me by the equipment.

Actually as I think about that I recall recently a friend saying you really should check out this famous photographer's work - its great and not always sharp - I looked and disliked all images I found bar one... Different horses and all that I guess.
 
Last edited:
The D7000 has the exact same sensor as the D5100 (same sensor used on Sony's own 580 and the K-5). By many accounts this is the best cropped sensor produced at the moment in regards to IQ especially high ISO noise levels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top