Anyone use Nikon and Canon?

The23rdman

The23rdman

Messages
13,582
Name
Dean
Edit My Images
No
I'm seriously considering using both systems. I currently use Nikon, but have ummed and ahed (as you well know) about switching back to Canon simply because I love the files from the 5DII. I was going to get rid of one of my bodies in favour of another D700 for the crop/FF combo, but then thought that I'd quite like the resolution of the 5DII. Just a thought...
 
If I can be blunt Dean ... :D

Use whatever you feel comfortable in your head with, that constant nagging voice telling you "it would have looked better with the Canon/Nikon xyz50000" is always going to cause you to doubt yourself, and you will loose trust in whatever it is you are using.

I had the very thing with a sigma 500, I got to a point were I would not use it, was it me or was it the lens, in the end I traded it for a 200-400 ... bliss, all was well with the world again.
 
Basically, I want the option to blow up huge sometimes and whatever anyone says about 12mp being enough I know for me that it just isn't. The 5DII would only be used for certain jobs and with only a couple of lenses so the expense doesn't massively bother me. As for the files, well, yes, I do think the 5 has a quality the D700 doesn't.
 
I reckon you have umm'd and ahh'd to the point of meditation by now!

I think you are seriously going to have to look at renting or borrowing each body for a shoot and seeing how well you get on with it, and deciding from there - because otherwise you'll just tear your hair out thinking about specifications and endless internet reviews and anecdotes and comparisons.
 
d700 replacement is coming sooner or later, so worth considering?

I know what you mean about running 2 systems. I want some nikon glass, as canon just can't make good enough FF wideangle zooms or a reliable 50. But canon wins (just) on the long side, and has affordable high res FF (try biting D3X!). But then there are good reasons not to buy 5DII which is why I got 1DsII.

2 systems are doable but seem so much more expensive and inherently problematic even if you consider the amount of extra gear to take.
 
doesn't it make more sense to just get a d3s?

more initial outlay but once you've got a 5d mark 2 and 2 L lenses you aren't that far off 4 grand anyway
 
The23rdman said:
Basically, I want the option to blow up huge sometimes and whatever anyone says about 12mp being enough I know for me that it just isn't. The 5DII would only be used for certain jobs and with only a couple of lenses so the expense doesn't massively bother me. As for the files, well, yes, I do think the 5 has a quality the D700 doesn't.
Click to expand...

Only Nikon full frame option is the D3x(24mp), which is a fair cost and pro sized body.
 
freecom2 said:
I reckon you have umm'd and ahh'd to the point of meditation by now!

I think you are seriously going to have to look at renting or borrowing each body for a shoot and seeing how well you get on with it, and deciding from there - because otherwise you'll just tear your hair out thinking about specifications and endless internet reviews and anecdotes and comparisons.
Click to expand...

I've used both enough to appreciate their pluses and minuses. I don't care much for reviews anymore. ;)
 
daugirdas said:
d700 replacement is coming sooner or later, so worth considering?

I know what you mean about running 2 systems. I want some nikon glass, as canon just can't make good enough FF wideangle zooms or a reliable 50. But canon wins (just) on the long side, and has affordable high res FF (try biting D3X!). But then there are good reasons not to buy 5DII which is why I got 1DsII.

2 systems are doable but seem so much more expensive and inherently problematic even if you consider the amount of extra gear to take.
Click to expand...

I had the 1dsII and loved it at low ISO, but the screen and menu system... meh!
 
joescrivens said:
doesn't it make more sense to just get a d3s?

more initial outlay but once you've got a 5d mark 2 and 2 L lenses you aren't that far off 4 grand anyway
Click to expand...

Nope. I want the 5Dii for the files resolution and tones. D3s is only 12mp and the x is just stupid money. A good used 5 is about 1250, 70-200 f4 is under 400 used and a 50mm of some sort. No worries.
 
ecniv said:
Just a thought - but couldn't you get some adapters to use the lenses on both systems? Leaving you with one or two dedicated glass and the rest can be shared?

Sounds like you want to have both cameras, so if finances/Other half says ok - do it?
Click to expand...

Nikon lenses work on Canon but only mf.
 
The23rdman said:
I've used both enough to appreciate their pluses and minuses. I don't care much for reviews anymore. ;)
Click to expand...

I reckon you'll just have to bite the bullet then - we can't make the decision for you and as I'm sure you are well aware all of these things are incredibly subjective :shrug:
 
Sell it all, buy a sony A77. 24mp goodness ;)

You're just dong the grass is greener thing. Take the raw files from the Nikons and just apply a canony preset. Simples :D
 
The way I see it is, if you like the Canon options you are best just getting rid of the Nikon kit instead of using both (is there something stopping you selling the nikon stuff?). As you know theres not really much between the different systems but having both seems like a waste of cash to me. If you can hold off for a couple of months like what I'm doing, more options might present themselves.
 
Chris Primadona said:
The way I see it is, if you like the Canon options you are best just getting rid of the Nikon kit instead of using both (is there something stopping you selling the nikon stuff?). As you know theres not really much between the different systems but having both seems like a waste of cash to me. If you can hold off for a couple of months like what I'm doing, more options might present themselves.
Click to expand...


The reason is I've just invested a **** load into new Nikon gear and I don't want to take the hit. Plus I LOVE the 35mm f/1.8G with a passion. Canon don't make an affordable 35mm that has the same wow factor. That alone makes keeping a Nikon worthwhile.
 
Why did you sell the canon stuff in the first place. I rememeber the thread but cant remember why.

It seems as though your arent happy with the Nikon as a whole, both bodies and lenses (the 35mm 1.8 being the exception it seems) , so whats stopping you going back to just canon again?

Seems silly and expensive running two systems.

**N/m, you posted above just as I fisinhed typing this
 
Last edited:
TCR4x4 said:
Why did you sell the canon stuff in the first place. I rememeber the thread but cant remember why.

It seems as though your arent happy with the Nikon as a whole, both bodies and lenses (the 35mm 1.8 being the exception it seems) , so whats stopping you going back to just canon again?

Seems silly and expensive running two systems.

**N/m, you posted above just as I fisinhed typing this
Click to expand...

Well, I put my problems down to buying used glass so instead of throwing my toys out of the cot I bought new. The reason I bought a D7000 over a 7D and 5DII was dynamic range and price. It's a wonderful combination with the 35mm 1.8 and I quite like it with the 80-200 (which I also love), but it hates the Siggy 50mm 1.4, which is something I've read elsewhere.
 
how much is the 35mm 1.8g?

i have the 35mm 1.4 L and it is truly special, at about £1000
 
Get rid of the siggy 1.4 and get the nikon G equivalent. Problem solved :)
 
srichards said:
Get rid of the siggy 1.4 and get the nikon G equivalent. Problem solved :)
Click to expand...

I had that before. Going to take the Siggy back and get another. I've also just bought a D700. I can't be arsed to faff around with another switch!
 
^^^
I swapped out the 50mm 1.4D for a 50mm 1.8G over the 50mm 1.4G, to me anyway the bokeh is lovely, and by quite a few accounts (Except Tom H) the 1.8 is sharper than the 1.4 at the same aperture.
 
MomentCapture said:
^^^
I swapped out the 50mm 1.4D for a 50mm 1.8G over the 50mm 1.4G, to me anyway the bokeh is lovely, and by quite a few accounts (Except Tom H) the 1.8 is sharper than the 1.4 at the same aperture.
Click to expand...

I hadn't really considered it, but I'll definitely take a look when I take the Sigma back. If it matches the 35mm I'll have one.
 
^^^
IMO, it's like a 50mm equivalent of the 35mm, although the first one I got focused like crap, but the second one I got is lovely.

Below was taken with the 50 1.8 @ 1.8.

1.jpg


22.jpg


15.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top