Should I move
- Thread starter rookies
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,023
- Name
- Ray
- Edit My Images
- No
The Nikon bodies in my experience definitely feel better in build. Example, the D90 compared to the 550D. But keep in mind that some of the Nikon equivelant lenses are more expensive than the Canon ones, not to mention variety.
Canon:
- 70-200mm f/4L
- 70-200mm f/4L IS
- 70-200mm f/2.8L
- 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mkII
Nikon:
- 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II
- 80-200mm f/2.8 (Old, later model has no AF-S. Don't think they are in production anymore)
I heard the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II has range problems too. 135mm equivelent at closest focal range or something
Canon:
- 70-200mm f/4L
- 70-200mm f/4L IS
- 70-200mm f/2.8L
- 70-200mm f/2.8L IS mkII
Nikon:
- 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II
- 80-200mm f/2.8 (Old, later model has no AF-S. Don't think they are in production anymore)
I heard the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II has range problems too. 135mm equivelent at closest focal range or something
- Messages
- 2,770
- Name
- Al
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You'll need some more info for people to help you.
1. Why are you thinking of moving to Nikon?
2. If you stayed with Canon, why do you want to upgrade the body (as opposed to the lenses, or at all?)
3. What type of photography do you enjoy most
4. Do you have a budget in mind?
Al
1. Why are you thinking of moving to Nikon?
2. If you stayed with Canon, why do you want to upgrade the body (as opposed to the lenses, or at all?)
3. What type of photography do you enjoy most
4. Do you have a budget in mind?
Al
more info
OP
- Messages
- 8,064
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
Think I fancy a change. All I do is landscape and portrait pictures. I need camera Good in low lights aswel. If stay canon might get a 24-105 l lens for portraits as it has is built in and the flexibility of range. I guess ** going say my 40d is good enough?
As above really, why do you feel you want to / need to change ?
- Messages
- 11,116
- Name
- And
- Edit My Images
- No
Do 'you' feel your 40D is good enough in low light ? :shrug:
Not tried the 5D MKII, but have heard very good things about it and wouldn't have thought the missing crop factor would have been a problem for you re landscapes and portraits.
- Messages
- 1,023
- Name
- Ray
- Edit My Images
- No
+1
One of the reasons I moved from Nikon to Canon was the lens prices and variety, mainly primes. I like the colour of the pictures from my Canon straight from the body too. My Nikon used to have a warm/pale yellow tinge to the pictures which I tweaked in PP to correct.
OP
- Messages
- 8,064
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
I did though about 5d mkii but pricey then the 7d is now what I think could be the choice. But though might be wise getting a 24-105 lens first? It seems best sticking with canon then?? Are they just as good as nikon as someone was saying nikon are street ahead?
- Messages
- 7,179
- Name
- Edward Bray
- Edit My Images
- Yes
For portraits and landscapes I would not consider the 7d over a full frame camera.
The lenses you have are all EF lenses and the improved quality and wider focal lengths of the FF sensor will be much more beneficial to your photography than the 7D which is a small upgrade from your 40D.
The lenses you have are all EF lenses and the improved quality and wider focal lengths of the FF sensor will be much more beneficial to your photography than the 7D which is a small upgrade from your 40D.
OP
- Messages
- 8,064
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
+1
But are nikon lens any better compare to canon L lenes?
OP
- Messages
- 8,064
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
Is there a 5d mkiii coming out? What best price for mkii body only ?
- Messages
- 3,321
- Name
- Peter Rushworth
- Edit My Images
- No
No, he like landscapes and portrait work, he need a full frame camera if he was to upgrade the body.
So you have the choice of the Nikon D700 (but then you need to invest in new glass) or Canon 5D (2nd hand) or 5D MKII and perhaps get the 24-70mm f2.8 rather than the 24-105mm f4 (good lens but has flaws at both extremes)
Canon V Nikon they both have their flaws, they both have their plus points before we get into the usual bashing from both sides :bonk:
As for your low light, is this studio work (indoor) or sunset, sun rises, expand please. Perhaps a flash or decent tripod and remote switch (suggestions) would solve your issue? or a faster lens as I wouldn't recommend using a f4 indoors, not quick enough
Last edited:
- Messages
- 11,116
- Name
- And
- Edit My Images
- No
Yes think it's around £2300 as a kit, but would have thought it could end up costing you more if you did change to Nikon
If you send Kerso on here a PM, he can send you an upto date price list for Canon
- Messages
- 11,203
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I always thought the Nikon lenses with the thin gold line around them was supposed to be the equiv of the Canon lenses with the thin red line / L series?
- Messages
- 7,179
- Name
- Edward Bray
- Edit My Images
- Yes
A mint very low shutter count 5DMk2 went on here for £1300 recently, WE are doing the 5DMk2 for about £1650.
You do not need to change any lenses initially, the 17-40L gives you a great ultrawide-standard zoom, the 50 f1.4 will cover any low light work and your 70-200L will be more than suitable for portraiture and give you the versatility of a zoom.
You do not need to change any lenses initially, the 17-40L gives you a great ultrawide-standard zoom, the 50 f1.4 will cover any low light work and your 70-200L will be more than suitable for portraiture and give you the versatility of a zoom.
- Messages
- 1,023
- Name
- Ray
- Edit My Images
- No
When I switched over from Nikon to Canon, the Nikon primes were nice but a lot of them were old models with the aperture ring. Also no AF-S so when you AF with it, you get that "zzzt zzzt" sound haha
Canon on the other hand had a large variety of primes at different price ranges to suit different budgets. The mid priced primes have a nice build to them and have USM.
Optically, there is not much difference. But the higher end lenses, Canon sometimes have that "mass produced" look eg. lettering and numbering on the lens body are stenciled on etc. Nikon lenses are like art pieces haha. The Nikon 24-70mm 2.8 looks and feels better than the Canon 24-70mm 2.8 but that's just my opinion.
OP
- Messages
- 8,064
- Name
- Andrew
- Edit My Images
- No
Low light is indoor at night time I found flash blind the image unless am missing something? Might look into a 5d mkii then if can get good price. U also suggest 24-70 over the 24-105 even for close portraits?
No, he like landscapes and portrait work, he need a full frame camera if he was to upgrade the body.
So you have the choice of the Nikon D700 (but then you need to invest in new glass) or Canon 5D (2nd hand) or 5D MKII and perhaps get the 24-70mm f2.8 rather than the 24-105mm f4 (good lens but has flaws at both extremes)
Canon V Nikon they both have their flaws, they both have their plus points before we get into the usual bashing from both sides :bonk:
As for your low light, is this studio work (indoor) or sunset, sun rises, expand please. Perhaps a flash or decent tripod and remote switch (suggestions) would solve your issue? or a faster lens as I wouldn't recommend using a f4 indoors, not quick enough
- Messages
- 2,770
- Name
- Al
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Canon 85 1.8 is always recommended highly for portaits as well.
I don't use flash but am planning on learning - sounds like you are using the on-board flash and \ or not bouncing it, off say the ceiling, to make it less harsh. Like I say I've no idea on this really, but I've seen great use of flash on here to produce stunning images.
If you do go 5d, a cheaper alternative to the 24-70 could be the 28-70 which can be had for around £500 second hand from the likes of ffordes (when in stock). It's an old lens, but when I spoke to ffordes they give a 6 months warranty and seemed confident of being able to repaid it in case of issues (it is discontinued).
I don't use flash but am planning on learning - sounds like you are using the on-board flash and \ or not bouncing it, off say the ceiling, to make it less harsh. Like I say I've no idea on this really, but I've seen great use of flash on here to produce stunning images.
If you do go 5d, a cheaper alternative to the 24-70 could be the 28-70 which can be had for around £500 second hand from the likes of ffordes (when in stock). It's an old lens, but when I spoke to ffordes they give a 6 months warranty and seemed confident of being able to repaid it in case of issues (it is discontinued).
Were you not at any point in the process of spending thousands of pounds on portrait photography equipment tempted to learn the basics of portrait photography?