Canon v Nikon?

Zascar

So first of all I don't think there is one better overall - it just depends what you want - but I'd like to hear your opinions on which you prefer and why. I've always been a Canon man, not sure why but it probably started with my little Ixus handheld and went from there. I've always liked the range and the quality of the L lenses especially, and with so many pro's using canons in video tutorials and what you see with press photographers etc - I was happy with my choice.

However I've had a play with some Nikons of late and actually I think they are great! Some little things like switches on the body instead of having to go into the settings - seems very logical. Better viewfinder and some extra trickery that seems quit useful

Why did you choose one over the other and who would one generally be better than the other?

zero19

Just to throw a spanner in the works I went with Pentax as I got a great deal on a KR body after a good bit of research. Can get some nice older prime lenses for low prices which also swayed my opinion.

magicbastarder

i went with nikon because a) that's what my wife had b) the entry level canons were really plasticky and cheap feeling.

the main reason was because i walked past gunn's and they were selling a pristine D300 s/h for €800 in the days where you wouldn't get one in another dublin camera shop for less than €1200.

Lelantos

Canon all day long for me. Tried the D3000, but it wasn't for me, back to the EOS & won't be changing.

flyingsnail

When I bought my first film slr the I didn’t know much about photography and the Canon kit was about £10 cheaper than the equivalent Nikon kit, so Canon it was. When it came time to upgrading to a DSLR I already had a couple of lenses and accessories so it was inevitable that I would stay with Canon.

When it comes to comparing systems there is probably a touch of the grass is always greener on the other side. There will always be some feature or something that you would like from the other company but there is probably somebody on the other side looking at your line up and thinking the same.

ado100

Zascar wrote: »

So first of all I don't think there is one better overall - it just depends what you want - but I'd like to hear your opinions on which you prefer and why. I've always been a Canon man, not sure why but it probably started with my little Ixus handheld and went from there. I've always liked the range and the quality of the L lenses especially, and with so many pro's using canons in video tutorials and what you see with press photographers etc - I was happy with my choice.

However I've had a play with some Nikons of late and actually I think they are great! Some little things like switches on the body instead of having to go into the settings - seems very logical. Better viewfinder and some extra trickery that seems quit useful

Why did you choose one over the other and who would one generally be better than the other?

Really? Again? Why would you poke that hornet's nest?

vintagecosmos

I started with a Nikon dslr years ago and its suited me fine. I tried a Canon recently but I just couldnt get used to the interface and buttons. But from what I can see in Ireland Canon appears to be more dominant (correct me if Im wrong).

Has anyone successfully migrated from Nikon to Canon?

magicbastarder

ado100 wrote: »

Really? Again? Why would you poke that hornet's nest?

because it can be an interesting discussion; given that once you buy into a system, you're pretty much stuck with it (without incurring significant cost in changing).
if someone has not bought into a system, it's a valid question to ask others who have made the choice about their reasons, in case there are factors they have not considered.

Corkbah

vintagecosmos wrote: »

I started with a Nikon dslr years ago and its suited me fine. I tried a Canon recently but I just couldnt get used to the interface and buttons. But from what I can see in Ireland Canon appears to be more dominant (correct me if Im wrong).

Has anyone successfully migrated from Nikon to Canon?

not sure about people to transfer from Nikon to Canon ...but know a few who took advantage of a Nikon offer a few years back ....swapping like for like lenses and bodies for those switching systems (Think it was only aimed at Professionals).

Nikon made a few people jump systems but then again ...if some company is offering you brand new gear for the gear you've been using (in some cases) for years ....swapping 20-30K worth over ...seems like a bargain ....you could always sell it off and buy new kit of your original system.

clappyhappy

Had this discussion only last weekend. I recently invested in a canon, getting up to speed and plan on doing the one day course.
We were in Northern Ireland a few weeks ago. At all the usual tourist spots, giants causeway, titanic, rope bridge etc. There were a large amount of Asian tourists at all places with their cameras clicking away, and I would say that 80-85% had Nikon cameras.
I began to think had I made a mistake getting the canon!!

Splinters

The brand is absolutely irrelevant so long as the camera does what you need it to do.

magicbastarder

that's a meaningless statement though, given that 'what you want it to do' can depend strongly on the brand; for example, the issue of the lack of focus motor in lower-end nikons (though not as big an issue as it used to be) would have been a not insignificant tick against nikon for people looking for a starter DSLR.

Nerro

I really don't think there is any difference between the two apart the price.if you ask me it all depends from the person who press the shutter button....the reason I have chosen Canon was because it was cheaper...that's it.show 2 pictures taken with different systems to average person and I can bet he ain't going to see the difference...
Lately I bought 135mm jupiter lens for 80e and my end results are as good as Canon equivalent which costs thousands. ..

Splinters

How is it a meaningless statement? If the camera meets all your requirements (so that would include a focus motor if it is a requirement) then its irrelevant if the camera is made by Canon, Nikon...or Kelloggs. If you need a focus motor then clearly a low end Nikon doesn't meet your requirements.

magicbastarder

if your requirements are more or less available in one brand compared to another, then it's perfectly legitimate to talk about relevancy of the brand.

ado100

magicbastarder wrote: »

if your requirements are more or less available in one brand compared to another, then it's perfectly legitimate to talk about relevancy of the brand.

The OP's original question is aimed at existing users, not new users - so the brand issue is irrelevant without a large investment. It makes no difference to the quality of the photograph if the label on the camera says Nikon or Canon - that's down to whoever is pressing the shutter.

Rightwing

Nikon.

magicbastarder

ado100 wrote: »

The OP's original question is aimed at existing users, not new users - so the brand issue is irrelevant without a large investment.

yep, in that context, i'd agree.

shleedance

Both are good. Both will have models come out that are considered "better" and have people moving brands. Both have their own problems and lack features that the other company has etc, yet both will allow you to get the photos you want to take.

What's important is what camera you choose suits YOU, and how you use it.

amdgilmore

I use Canon, but I've noticed that the default colour reproduction on Nikons, especially the 3100/3200, is much nicer than Canon. On flickr, I often mistake photos taken with those models for photos shot on film.

shleedance

If they're shooting JPGs, differences will show since each camera will process them differently.

Since there's little to no processing in RAW, different story.

magicbastarder

what differences? it will only change the photo in a fairly marginal way.

OldGoat

Is the cost of changing over really as high as people assume?

If you are swapping new for old then you'll take a hit but if you are swapping like for like on the second hand market then the losses aren't really going to be that great. A second hand 50mm Canon is going to cost roughly the same as a second hand 50mm Nikon so you sell the Canon and buy the Nikon*.


*Then quickly change back to Canon.

Cork Boy

Does anyone know if Canon or Nikon are selling their camera bodies at cost, or below cost in order to 'get you in'?

Once you get an SLR either Nikon or Canon you're stuck with them due to sunk costs(lenses) and familiarity.

Your only option for switch is if you're upgrading to full body at which point I assume you'd be selling all your old kit so you'd be free to move. However, I'm sure if you're looking to upgrade it means you've been taking a lot of pics and are very familiar with what you have so you might still not want to move... barring a serious price difference perhaps or promotion by either side at an opportune moment.

Out of interest, if you were upgrading to full body with a budget of say ~€3k, would a €500 cost difference (everything else be equal) be enough to make you switch?