Stick or switch

Jadegirl

Jadegirl

Messages
4
Edit My Images
No
Hi I've been lurking for a few months and this is my first post cause I have no idea which direction to go. I've been researching the forum but still clueless. Basically I was a film photographer for years and took a break for various reasons
and only recently made the digital switch. (Recent in comparison to how long digital cameras have been out). At the time looking at the reviews and trying in store the nikon D7000 was the best for my budget so I went nikon. For Film I used Minolta and Olympus with primes and was doing well with my portrait business. I had to take a few years out and decided with digital i wanted to go with the big boys of canon or nikon. Even still it's taken a while for me to fully want to commit to digital and invest in more glass. When i bought the camera I purchased a 50mm 1.8d, 70-300mm, and flash as well as the kit lens. Recently a friend gave me their old canon 450d and whilst it's not even comparable to the d7000 it did get me thinking about canon glass and before investing I need to be sure I'm on the right system. I purchased a canon 50mm 1.8 II and prefer it to the nikon. So I've basically succeeded in confusing myself further! I know I eventually want the 24-70mm and my film lenses can fit canon with an adaptor. The way I see it my options are trade in all my nikon gear and buy the equivalent canon body, maybe a 7D (although not regarded as highly as the d7000) 70D (not heard good things about it or go ff so I'm closer to film. Sell and invest in canon glass and just use the 450 for now. Sell my nikon lenses and get a couple of primes 50mm1.4, 85mm, and a zoom, although I'm unsure which nikon zoom to start with till I can afford the 24-70. Maybe a tamron 28-75. Most of the photographers I know or admire shoot canon so I know I'd get a 24-105 to start with on canon but haven't heard much about the nikon 24-120 and don't really want to buy an equivalent unless it's good in its own right.
So anyway I hope someone can point me in the right direction.... And be gentle. I know the canon/nikon thing is a sore point but I don't want a which is better debate just a which way should I go to help me rebuild my portrait business. Also with a view to upgrading to ff in the future. Staying nikon the d600/610/800 take same battery's etc so easier. It seems both ways have pros and cons. Unfortunately I can't afford to run both systems. Although that was suggested when I visited a store to try them out lol
Thanks guys
 
First off, welcome to TP :)
You will get loads of opinions / answers to those quandaries that's for sure.
As I see it (as a canon user)
The canon range of lens's is better than Nikon.
The 7D is a very capable camera,
the only down side to it, is that a comparable Nikon camera is better at "noise handling"
Actually this is my only "complaint" about Canon.

The 24-105 is a brilliant lens,
as its the 70-200 2.8 MKII (Canon) but its not cheap.
But that's not to take anything away from the Nikon version, that too is a brilliant lens.
Most of the above of course, depends on the subjects you are likely to shoot,
and of course the "budget" question has to be considered.
 
Hi

Of the two cameras, menus and handling etc, which did you find felt better in your hands.... Also hold the upper models (the full frame ones) as you've mentioned the d800/610...)

Lenses, well I know canon do a wicked (expensive) macro lens, but the rest are probably fairly close between the two systems.


Essentially it comes down to what feels the best in your hands.



If you have the older lenses from the film camera, and they are crisp, sharp and basically good, did you look at whether there is a current camera that can mount them? (spanner in the works ;) )

Good hunting :)
 
Indeed, welcome to TP.
As I see it (as a Nikon user!)
The 2 systems are very similar in terms of quality and are equally well served by the 3rd party manufacturers as far as accessories and lenses are concerned. There are differences in the ranges of lenses available (genuine Canikon) but both have a fairly full range of excellent lenses.
Personally, I wouldn't switch systems - not because I think Nikon is better than Canon but because I would take a huge hit in financial terms to get the same level of kit I have already.
At which end of the range of focal lengths do your main interests lie? If you love wide angles more than telephoto, maybe FF is the way to go while crop bodies will give you extra apparent reach at the long end (handy if you want long, fast lenses with less outlay.) Of course, a D800 allows heavy cropping while still keeping a good number of pixels, especially if the lens is up to it as far as resolution goes, not sure how well the Canon FF bodies cope.
The Nikon 24-120 f/4 is a great lens and unless you need the extra stop of shallowness of DoF is fast enough for their FF bodies. Mine lives on my D800 unless I need something else. It replaced a (good, sharp copy of the) Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 and I don't regret the change one little bit!
FWIW, I have a very old (plain AF, so pre D or G) 50mm f/1.8 Nikkor and it's built like a tank! Sharp as a tack and fast enough to AF even if it is screw driven rather than AF-S!
IIRC, Nikons need an adaptor with a glass element in to use other systems' lenses and that can't add any quality, so if that makes a big difference, it's worth bearing in mind.
Whatever you end up with, enjoy, whether it's purely as a hobby or if you get back into the business side of it.
 
Jadegirl said:
For Film I used Minolta and Olympus with primes...

I know I eventually want the 24-70mm and my film lenses can fit canon with an adaptor...
Click to expand...

I use Minolta and Olympus primes on my mirrorless cameras but I didn't enjoy the experience of manually focusing with my DSLR's unless the subject was big in the frame. It's too difficult to get accurate focus unless the subject is very easy to see with a modern DSLR IMVHO.

The Olympus lenses will work on a Canon DSLR via a cheap spacer adapter and you can get adapters that give focus confirmation but the Minolta lenses will need an adapter with a lens in it otherwise you wont be able to focus to infinity. I don't know about Nikon's and legacy lenses.

When going digital I went for Canon but these days I think that Nikon has a clear lead in bodies for ultimate image quality if not lenses but early FF cameras are pretty cheap these days so you could look at a Canon 5D for a more film like experience land and field of view wise.
 
canon have a better lineup of lenses? well the tilt shift are better than Nikons but how's that 14-24 equivalent working out? ;)
i could be wrong as i'm not a canon shooter but isn't the larger range something to do with changing the mount meaning not all the old lenses would be compatible?
i know if you buy in at the right level with Nikon you can use pretty much all the old lenses which opens up a whole world of bargain glass, however if you've got one of the great modern sensors you'll want to be using the modern Nanocoated lenses anyway :)
 
Tirpitz said:
canon have a better lineup of lenses? well the tilt shift are better than Nikons but how's that 14-24 equivalent working out? ;)
Click to expand...
The 10-22 is far superior :p
 
On FF? :rolleyes:
 
I would decide what focal range you want to cover and then compare the two brands against each other. Unless Canon has a specific lens that you particularly want I am sure that they will compare favourably against each other.

Moving to full frame with either brand will involve significantly more investment than you currently have in your body.

If you were to change to Canon on a like for like body then I would bypass the 7D in favour of the 70D.

I'm a Canon user. Nikon have the edge in dynamic range due to the Sony sensors that they are now starting to use. But there are other criteria that should decide your way forward.

I wouldn't rush into a decision. I'm not sure a change of brand is necessary.
 
I was in a similar situation to you in that having read all the reviews etc I couldn't decide between the Nikon D7000 or the Canon 7D. I wanted to make the right decision because it would be a fairly substantial investment eventually given the price of lenses etc.
The way I decided was to buy both cameras second hand and try them side by side in the same situations and with, as near as I could, the same lenses, then I could resell the one I didn't want with hopefully not too much financial loss. Both excell at what they do, but in different ways. The deciding factor for me was the noise handling was better on the Nikon (not massively though as some would have you believe). I really dislike noise in any photo but it may not bother others as much as it does me. The Nikon also felt better in my hands and I preferred the menu system, but that is a personal choice and one you can only make for yourself by handling both.
One thing that was apparent to me though while looking for second hand lenses etc was that the Canon equivalents were far more readily available (Canon and third party) and also, in the main, they were cheaper.
I also toyed with the idea of FF (Canon 5D Mk iii and Nikon D800) but the price of lenses etc were far more expensive and the crop factor suited what I wanted to shoot better.
I still have, and use, both cameras and the one I will sell eventually, when the time comes, will be the Canon 7D (when my Mrs eventually cottons on).
Hope that I haven't added to the confusion.
 
Hi
My input.........I don't think you will have made a mistake whichever make you choose, they both have pros and cons, as do other makes. Have you got friends or relatives with a particular make as that can be an advantage if they're willing to lend you lenses now and again. I went for Nikon purely because I liked how the body felt in my hands but I certainly don't feel it is better in any way than other major brands. Hope this helps a little.
John
 
Um if you want to use your old lenses and full frame, then get a a7 or a7r or next.
If your Minolta lenses are a mount, then you could get either the expensive adapter, or a a mount camera

Sony's more recent cameras have focus peaking which works well with manual focus lenses
 
The way I see it is that both systems can only produce results as good as the photographer behind the camera !
As already mentioned, the ergonomics of a camera system is important, so try as many cameras as you can, to see which fit the hand and your method best.
As far as the Nikon/Canon produce better lenses argument, that's nonsense. Both have stellar lenses, and some dogs too!
With the exception of the MPE-65, they both have a lens for any occasion. I wish Nikon made an equivalent to the 65, but it doesn't.
I use Nikon because I have done so for a long time, and I am used to them, not because they are "better".
Whichever you choose I'm sure you will become accustomed to it, and will be comfortable producing excellent pictures for many years.
Good luck with your decision.
Happy new year,
Gary.
 
There is no significant difference between Nikon and Canon overall, and while Canon has a slightly bigger market share, they're very close. Pound for pound, they're six of one, half dozen of the other. You may find one brand preferable for subjective reasons, or that one has a particular feature or lens that you want, but even then they're very similar. Pentax and Sony are also at the same level, but they're not as popular and their lens ranges are smaller; less choice second-hand too.

Personally, unless there is something specific you want that Nikon doesn't offer, swapping brands will just cost you money. If you're after better image quality, moving to full-frame is the way forward there, with either Nikon or Canon, and that is a (costly) decision you should take first as it will change the way all your lenses behave.
 
Thanks guys. I've been thinking it over and have decided to stick with my nikon. Rather then taking a loss switching I can use the money I'd lose to buy new glass and get my ff quicker rather then having to start from scratch with canon. Thanks for the input
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top