Why do Pro's tend to use Canon?

S

SuperCNJ

Messages
364
Edit My Images
Yes
Something I noticed looking at cameras used by professional photographers. I personally like look and ergonomics of Nikon but can't help but notice that a lot of professionals using Canon cameras espicially those working in the media sector.

So why is that? :shrug:
 
They don't.
Pros use whichever tools suit their needs, a lot of wedding photographers and most sports photographers use Canon, I suspect because until fairly recently they were the only camera manufacturer to produce acceptable results at high ISO settings and also because, until the Nikon D3 was introduced, they were the only so-called full frame cameras.

But nearly all press photographers use Nikon, I suspect because their flash system is better.
 
I have to agree with Mr Edwards there, pretty much all pro's I know use Nikon, I shoot canon but after the release of the D3 I'm going to the dark side :cautious:
 
I was given a press pass for an international athletics meet last week and looking round at the pro togs there I would say it was as near 50/50 as you could get. Some Canon lenses ( the white ones) tend to stand out more in the crowd too.
 
Both newspapers I have worked for used Nikon gear D2x's and D3's. The other guys said that the D3 is unbeatable for sports stuff
 
But nearly all press photographers use Nikon, I suspect because their flash system is better.
Click to expand...

from what i have seen it's 50/50
 
sportysnaps said:
from what i have seen it's 50/50
Click to expand...

I've met most of the pro togs in my area both press and commercial.
Press nearly all Nikon
Commercial 50/50 Nikon /Canon
 
Reading the title "touchpaper lit" was my first thought. :LOL: I've no idea what the breakdown of pro use to be but look to see this thread progress and find the answers ;)
I'm only interested in what I produce really but it's funny seeing the Nikon users stating all the pro's they know use Nikons though :LOL:
 
It's mostly because Press photographers, after they've murdered their competition and eaten their flesh, like to be able to steal their lenses and use them theirselves :D

Again, mostly Nikon from my point of view, with a lot more people opting to make the switch from Canon to Nikon. I can't justify the cost of replacing the glass, and happen to like the feel of my Canon. Plus I do mostly portraits and urban, which my 5D was born for....
 
well..as i see it its about 50/50..my mate who's a pro uses canon, but used to use nikons.there not a lot of difference in the two makes except personal preference..

i use nikons so imo they are the best and everyone should use them.lol
 
Please, fan-boys needn't contribute to this thread. The OP asked a serious question.

In the 70s and 80s most professionals used Nikon, who along with Olympus had historically made "the" professional SLRs. Olympus lost the plot when AF came in, and Canon annoyed so many people when they ditched the FD mount, that Nikon did very well out of it. But in the 90s Canon got digital technology working much faster and better than the opposition and they cleaned up, especially amongst sports photographers. Now Nikon have caught up and maybe even surpassed Canon technologically, the pendulum is swinging back.

Bottom line is, to a pro a camera is just a tool and they will use the tools that do the job best. For several years recently that's generally been Canon. Now they have more of a choice.
 
:clap:

I like that term "fan boy"

Olympus did lose the plot when they failed to see the future for digital SLR, they put their resources into P&S and are only now catching up with the E3.

Buy what you need to get the reuslts you want and recognise that there is often more than one way of doing that.
 
Interesting topic .... and if I may ask, Stewart ... when you started your business in renting out lenses you opted to go with Canon first. May be shedding some light on that decision can help us understand what has transpired (afterall, a Pro. shooter is in it for the money and the camera is just a tool; this is the same for you I guess since your business is for the money and the Canon you rent are only the tools to that means)?

That said, I am saddened to see Olympus and Pentax lose thrust in SLR, and even more saddened that Minolta is completely out of the game.

Now, however, I see both Canon and Nikon head-to-head and leap-frogging each other with each new release, while each is trying so hard to entrench itself in a market it has done so well in (Nikon, journalism and reportage; Canon, sport and events).
 
I had Nikon years ago, but went to Canon when the EOS generation started. At that time just about all the pro's used Nikon, but they were bloody expensive. I bought an F4 which was pretty funky for it's day as it had the facility to take a number of power sources.

These days from what I can see, the press guys still love there Nikons, but many of the sports togs have Canon. I still have my EOS 620 upstairs somewhere (reminder - must get new battery for it...) and if it wasn't for me having a couple of lenses, I may have gone down the Nikon route when I got back into Photography a couple of years ago.

At the end of the day, any photographer, be it amateur or pro, will shoot with what they're confident with. In the professional world it's a results business and you don't get results without the confidence in your kit.

.
 
Wail said:
Interesting topic .... and if I may ask, Stewart ... when you started your business in renting out lenses you opted to go with Canon first. May be shedding some light on that decision can help us understand what has transpired (afterall, a Pro. shooter is in it for the money and the camera is just a tool; this is the same for you I guess since your business is for the money and the Canon you rent are only the tools to that means)?
Click to expand...
Simple.

1. We had to start somewhere and wanted to concentrate our money on serving one market well rather than two poorly. We didn't want to diversify, especially since that would require spending another load of money, until we'd proven the operational model.

2. Canon has the biggest market share of DSLRs. (By which I mean the biggest installed base - roughly 45% of the market, versus Nikon 35% and the others sharing 20%.)

3. I have a Canon and I understand the Canon range.

4. Nikon lens nomenclature is completely incomprehensible.

And a couple of things I've learned subsequently which I didn't know then, but would have been on the list if i had:

5. Nikon lenses tend to be considerably more expensive than the Canon equivalents, which has to depress the hire market. (EG we can do a Canon 500mm IS for £180/week, but when we get the Nikon 500mm VR it would have to be about £240/week.)

6. Canon offer a number of lenses that seem very popular for birds/wildlife/aircraft - three of our big market segments - for which Nikon really don't have any comparable offerings. (I'm thinking of the 300mm f/4 IS, the 400mm f/5.6 and the 100-400mm IS.)

And yes, at the end of the day I stock Canons because there are customers who want to hire them. I don't think they're any better than Nikon when you compare like with like, and I don't think white lenses are cool. But they get the job done for me, and that's all that counts.
 
Several said it - but to a Pro - a camera is just a 'tool'

If a new tool is good enough to justify a total switch, then any Pro in any profession would make that switch. Usually, they don't as the price is often too much

As teenager into cameras (more than photography at the time) I met a veteran F1 shooter who'd just switched from Nikon to Leica - 7 bodies (yes 7!!!) and a host of lenses all at one go. About a £12,000 switch I reckoned at the time & my parents had just bought a 3 bed detached bungalow for £9,500 !!!!!!!

For my work, both are equally as good - so I favour Nikon simply as at the time of choosing Canon/Nikon - I preferred the feel of the Nikon (still do)

A couple of years ago I fancied a move over to Canon, but the D2Xs is easily good enough for my usual usage

Like most people where the camera is just a tool though - at every potential 'upgrade' the make doesn't really matter

DD
 
Most of the Nurburgring photographers use Canons, I'm not sure why. Most of them who do it professionally are local and I don't speak German well enough to understand the answer I would get if I ask...
 
I'd have thought Canon producing the first 'full' set of AF cameras and lenses was some reason for the high number of pro Canon users. That and the legacy effect of once you invest in one system, you rarely want to change, as it means starting again from scratch.

I've recently changed to Nikon personally but still use Canon gear at work because it would be too costly to re-invest in Nikon gear for the 12 photographers we have.
 
One aspect that hasn't been brought into the fray so far is the Professional Services support organisations of the two manufacturers.

Briefly outlining the requirements might shed a little more light on the subject.

Nikon PS have a general requirement that 2 'professional' bodies and 3 lenses must be used along with a registered photography business address. Compliance with the above will afford you quick access to replacement kit if yours requires service.

Canon's PS is a little more lax in its requirements. They require 2 EOS bodies and 3 lenses and greater than 50% of income generated from photography.

The immediate thing here is the spec used to differentiate....Nikon's D200 is not classified as a pro body so wedding togs and others having one as a backup wouldn't qualify. This pushes things more towards Canon (any EOS bodies would appear to qualify) but, as a direct result of this lower requirement, they end up with far more semi-pro's clogging up their system.

The end result would appear to be that fulltime pro's who need rapid turnaround of kit would are better served by Nikon...press togs would fall firmly in this category. Pro's in less urgent fields, such as wildlife, are more attracted by the reduced cost of Canon's longer focal length offerings and can risk the slower response of the support heirachy.

Bob
 
Canon Bob said:
One aspect that hasn't been brought into the fray so far is the Professional Services support organisations of the two manufacturers.

Briefly outlining the requirements might shed a little more light on the subject.

Nikon PS have a general requirement that 2 'professional' bodies and 3 lenses must be used along with a registered photography business address. Compliance with the above will afford you quick access to replacement kit if yours requires service.

Canon's PS is a little more lax in its requirements. They require 2 EOS bodies and 3 lenses and greater than 50% of income generated from photography.

The immediate thing here is the spec used to differentiate....Nikon's D200 is not classified as a pro body so wedding togs and others having one as a backup wouldn't qualify. This pushes things more towards Canon (any EOS bodies would appear to qualify) but, as a direct result of this lower requirement, they end up with far more semi-pro's clogging up their system.

The end result would appear to be that fulltime pro's who need rapid turnaround of kit would are better served by Nikon...press togs would fall firmly in this category. Pro's in less urgent fields, such as wildlife, are more attracted by the reduced cost of Canon's longer focal length offerings and can risk the slower response of the support heirachy.

Bob
Click to expand...


Interesting comment

A few years ago I 'queue' jumped with my D100 that needed cleaning as it was a 'Pro' camera at the time, though now considered well below the D200 on all fronts

Gladly, my D2Xs still jumps the queue though if I still had it I suspect the D100 would be laughed at now by comparison

I give it 5 years max before my D2Xs is considered in the same 'old hat' light

DD
 
Canon Bob said:
Pro's in less urgent fields, such as wildlife, are more attracted by the reduced cost of Canon's longer focal length offerings and can risk the slower response of the support heirachy.

Bob
Click to expand...

Surely a pro putting bread on the table through his/her wildlife photography, is going to get the best kit for the job, not cheap out on f/4.
How is the choice of budget telephoto's related to support ?
I can see how allowing ANY eos body to fit the criteria could bugger things up, but lenses, I dunno ?

wait....they choose the cheaper option because the response is slower, better to have £800 tied up in a slow queue than £2000.

I think I'm missing the angle/point...
 
joxby said:
Surely a pro putting bread on the table through his/her wildlife photography, is going to get the best kit for the job, not cheap out on f/4.
How is the choice of budget telephoto's related to support ?
I can see how allowing ANY eos body to fit the criteria could bugger things up, but lenses, I dunno ?

wait....they choose the cheaper option because the response is slower, better to have £800 tied up in a slow queue than £2000.

I think I'm missing the angle/point...
Click to expand...

Maybe I worded it poorly at that point.....

I was implying that wildlife togs were more attracted by Canon's super telephoto range....possibly better and cheaper than Nikon's. For news togs, the moment is there and gone, wildlife will probably still be there tomorrow.

Bob

PS...still not too clear eh!
 
It really depends on what you do! everyone has already said that a camera is a tool to create a image and this is so true. But depending on what you do tools can make all the difference. Its kind of went a bit different now with nikon bringing out the D3, I know alot of photographers sports more than others switching to the D3 because it really does make that much difference. Before the D3 most sports guys would use canon unless they had strobes because the high iso on the nikons were nothing short of disgraceful now thw nikons have the upper hand in that department and even though canon are not that far behind the falts with the mk 3 have just tipped some pros over the edge.
 
Canon Bob said:
Maybe I worded it poorly at that point.....

I was implying that wildlife togs were more attracted by Canon's super telephoto range....possibly better and cheaper than Nikon's. For news togs, the moment is there and gone, wildlife will probably still be there tomorrow.

Bob

PS...still not too clear eh!
Click to expand...

Yes, I read it again backwards, whilst gargling Old Peculiar, and it makes perfect sense.:)
 
James Rothwell said:
Most of the Nurburgring photographers use Canons, I'm not sure why. Most of them who do it professionally are local and I don't speak German well enough to understand the answer I would get if I ask...
Click to expand...

They speak English, too! I should know, I know them lol.
 
I worked in Nurnberg for 3 years and struggled to find anyone to practice my German on - everyone wanted to practice their English!
 
Canon Bob said:
Nikon PS have a general requirement that 2 'professional' bodies and 3 lenses must be used along with a registered photography business address. Compliance with the above will afford you quick access to replacement kit if yours requires service.

... The immediate thing here is the spec used to differentiate....Nikon's D200 is not classified as a pro body so wedding togs and others having one as a backup wouldn't qualify.
Click to expand...


Bob, it's been a while since you looked at Nikon PS isn't it

You only need 2 items on thier list only 1 of which needs to be a Body and the D200 is covered so is the D100!!

Linky to Nikon PS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top