Nikon vs. Canon

[Anita]

I started in photography years ago with a Nikon FE2 film camera and have been a devoted Nikon user ever since, so when it came time to buying a digital camera I naturally went straight for the Nikon D50 last Christmas. Since that time I've done lots of reading of mags and online sites and notice that Canon's seem to be the camera of choice. Is this hype? marketing? true? why? Are there any former Nikon users who have made the leap to Canon? If so, why?

Thanks for any feedback.

[Joshua Schroeder]

It's mostly marketing if you ask me. A friend of mine encountered a guy who was selling off his reasonably new Canon gear in order to "trade-up" to a comparable Nikon system (worked out well for my friend who got a 10-20mm Sigma lens from the guy for cheap).

From what I understand, Canon and Nikon can differ in what they are best suited for though. I've purused the SportsShooter.com forums a fair bit recently, and most action sports photographers seem to think Canon gives better performance at high ISO. It's little details like that which may be the deciding factor for you; for what you do, which gives you better performance.

Also, Canon's lenses zoom "backwards". I was playing with my friend's Rebel, and that threw me for a loop. I'm sure you get used to it, but at first it feels very weird ... the lens zooms in when you expect it to zoom out.

And of course, much of the Canon vs. Nikon debate boils down to brand loyalty. My Dad's old FE is now in my hands, so when I get a more serious DSLR, my inclination would be to go Nikon, despite the fact that I mostly shoot ice hockey. It could go either way, though :)

[Griffin2020]

My first "real" camera was a Canon AE-1. A great semi-auto SLR. However, once I got the N-90, I have been a Nikon convert. I absolutely love my D200, and would think it feels much more "hearty" than the Canon DSLRs. However, I bought a cheap lens with the body, and while it has decent optics, it is not at all on par with Nikon's usual optics.

This (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/nikon-vs-canon.htm) website has a great comparison of the REAL differences between Canon and Nikon.

[Anita]

hhhmm... i just did a quick search to see the article you're referring to but didn't come up with anything. do you happen to know the link?

[ron.richardson]

i've been a canon user since i started, and the reason i chose it was because it felt better in my hands and seemed to provide more options for me at the time. there are differences between the two, but in the end, it comes down to what you're more comfortable with. if you think the canon 20D fits in your hands better than the D70 (or whatever cameras you're looking at), then go with canon, otherwise go with nikon.

also explore pentax or olympus, or even sony... go to a camera shop and play with them.. most of them will let you play with them in the store, and maybe even use them for a day to see what you think.

[Joshua Schroeder]

I love this quote from that Ken Rockwell article:
They all give the same quality images within the same price class. See my Noise and Resolution comparison. These differences are so small I have to strain to see them with test charts. In the dynamics of the real world they are invisible. I ran those tests, and discovered that whatever differences entertain chat-room participants don't exist

[Griffin2020]

I am a big fan of KenRockwell.com . He has used all of the different manufacturers and tells it like he sees it.

[testmonkey]

also explore pentax or olympus, or even sony... go to a camera shop and play with them.. most of them will let you play with them in the store, and maybe even use them for a day to see what you think.

here here on looking outside the big 2. On glass alone I'm hedging my bets towards Pentax.

[raypg]

Well, I think both brands are excellent, I own a film camera canon AE-1, and just got a Nikon D80 since my original Idea was to get a Canon 30D, but my budget was limited at that time and get the Nikon, In general it is true that you can get excellent result with both cameras but, really believe that what really matters is the creativity to visualize the shoot, to apply all the tips to get a great photo to expand your vision, whatever brand of camera you have, you must find your creative side and show it to the people.

[Darren Rowse]

I'm a Canon fan and will be biased - but if I stand back and be objective I think you'll find that at similar price points cameras offer similar features and levels of quality between Canon and Nikon.

To me it's probably more to do with personal preference than anything - which one feels best for you, which one has a more logical menu system etc.

Other considerations - Canon does sell a lot more cameras than Nikon in many countries (it varies from place to place). What's the second hand market like where you live? (both for buying and selling your gear).

Also - check out how Nikon and Canon do repairs in your part of the world. I know Canon have a pretty local repair shop in my city while I'm pretty sure Nikon send their repairs away here.... that kind of thing can be worth considering as a secondary thing.

Ultimately though I think you'll be happy with either brand - EVEN a Nikon! (it hurts me to say that :-) )

[Griffin2020]

here here on looking outside the big 2. On glass alone I'm hedging my bets towards Pentax.
The disadvantage of going away from the Big 2 is that there is nowhere near that quantity of glass available for the other manufaturers. There are hundreds and hundreds of options for lenses for Canon and Nikon both, and there are very, very good third party lenses available for both. With a Sony, Fuji, Pentax, whatever, there are not as many lenses, and if they state compatability with Nikon or Canon glass, you cannopt be guarranteed that it will work as advertised (due to the fact that neither Canon nor Bikon will release their proprietary data on their electronics). You can be guarranteed that a Canon lens will work on a Canon and a Nikon dSLR will be able to use ANY of the "newer" lenses (manufactured after 1977).

[Saralonde]

I agree that it is best to stick to Nikon or Canon. My first camera was a Pentax SLR, but when I decided to get a DSLR, I went to Canon after a lot of research. More lens options for one thing. Decent price for another. A lot of options I liked. I think it is purely personal; both are good.

[Joshua Schroeder]

With a Sony, Fuji, Pentax, whatever, there are not as many lenses, and if they state compatability with Nikon or Canon glass, you cannopt be guarranteed that it will work as advertised (due to the fact that neither Canon nor Bikon will release their proprietary data on their electronics).

I disagree on the Pentax. There are loads of lenses available for the Pentax K-mount, including quality third party lenses from manufacturers like Sigma or Tamron. I've had no problems finding any glass for my *istDL. They've been using the K-mount for a long time as well, so there are plenty of second hand lenses available out there too.

I believe that Sony uses the same mount as Minolta did, so AFAIK, those lenses are compatible with the Sony bodies as well.

That being said, in a few years when I can afford to upgrade from an entry level DSLR, I'll more than likely look to Canon or Nikon.

[budrakey]

The Canon cameras feel better in my hands so I went with Canon.

[Nicole]

I have a Canon film SLR, a Nikon dSLR, and a Canon Point & Shoot.

For the SLRs, I preferred the way that the Nikon felt. It just felt better to me. Granted, it also lets me borrow my mothers lenses since she has had a Nikon for quite some time.

I do like the way the Canon P&S works though even though its old, but it still fits in my pocket and takes pretty decent pictures considering its a good 5 years old.

[carley]

I have used the Nikon D100, D2H and D70 and I like them a lot for the indoor flash situations but I have found the few times that I have picked up Canon SLR's that I have had a much easier time getting proper exposure outside than I do with the Nikon's. I think these are mainly because I am fairly new to understanding digital SLR's and how to get them to work the way you want them to but the Canon seemed to work itself outside and I had a bit of trouble with it indoors with flash. Again, not too helpful but just my opinion and expierience.

[Mtik]

I own a Canon 400D. The real reason I went with a Canon is that a friend recommended it and the price was just right.

I've read countless posts going either way ( Canon vs Nikon ). I really don't think it matters. Both brands have excellent cameras. Now that the lower cost cameras are coming into play, both sides present great opportunities for quality DSLR's.

You can pixel-peep to your hearts content. Sure, you might find some instances where one camera out-performs another. That's inevitable.

Even when you look at lenses, both companies have great options. I also heard that lenses hold their value quite nicely. If you want to jump ships later, it's not so much of an issue that you've spent thousands of dollars on lenses.

I'm probably not going to buy another camera for a really long time. However, when the time comes I'll probably stick with Canon because that's what I know.

*shrugs*

-Tim

[phoenixbebe]

yeah this has been a very difficult decision. I have yet to own any digital SLRS but from the days where I was surrounded by manual SLRS, i was around ppl who LOVED the Nikon slrs...

but everyone is telling me that the CANON REBEL xt is probably the best beginniers dslr to have...as opposed to hte Nikon D70 (?) which is comparable...

actually i am looking into purchasing a CANON REBEL XT wtih a Sigma 24-70 lens...i was told that Sigma is probably one of the best brands/upgrades from the default 18-35 lens for the REBEL. i think after this, i might look into a battery grip for battery reserves...as well as a bounce flash. the ability to take pictures under optimal lighting like that and almost eliminate whiteout situations with normal flash REALLY REALLY appeals to me.

And perhaps a polarizing lens (?) to reduce the effect glare has in pictures...

any opinions from experienced dslr photographers would be greatly appreciated.

[Nicole]

but everyone is telling me that the CANON REBEL xt is probably the best beginniers dslr to have...as opposed to hte Nikon D70 (?) which is comparable...

I think that you'll know when you go to the camera store and hold both a canon and a nikon in your hands which one is the right model for you. I can't give any advice on which feels better to you when you're using it. That being said...

[biased opinion]
What about the d50 instead of the d70 if you're looking for a beginning dSLR? I love my Nikon, what can I say? I could feel that it was much more comfortable for me to use when I tried both the Nikon and Canon out. I'm not sure what features you want / don't want for a beginning dSLR, but the d50 has many (not all) of the same features as the d70, in a more simplified package.
[/biased opinion]

...i think after this, i might look into a battery grip for battery reserves...as well as a bounce flash. the ability to take pictures under optimal lighting like that and almost eliminate whiteout situations with normal flash REALLY REALLY appeals to me.

And perhaps a polarizing lens (?) to reduce the effect glare has in pictures...


A polarizing filter would be a really good thing to get at the start. They aren't nearly as expensive as the other items you want to get, and they can make a world of difference to your pictures. They really help to get the deep blue skies and get rid of the reflections. Make sure you look for a Circular Polarizing Filter though, not a Linear one since the circular ones work best on autofocus lenses.

A bounce flash is also on my list of things I want but don't have yet. And as for a battery grip, I would say see how your battery life does first, then determine if you need to get the grip.

Good luck deciding on your new purchase :)

[Gunsotsu]

I think Joshua hit it directly on the head. There are plenty of other DSLRs out there that aren't just Canon and Nikon that to only compare those two manufactures is doing an injustice to other camera makers.

[RainPacket]

The main reason to consider Canon vs. Nikon (as opposed to others) is that the majority of lenses out there are for those two types. But that doesn't mean others don't have plenty of lenses.

I'm a Canon user, personally. Why? Well, a) there was a good deal on the camera at the store at the time (about $200 off, as a release-date promo), and b) the Nikons all felt too big for my hands. I could just as easily have gone Nikon, too; I know plenty of friends who went Nikon because, for their hand size, the grip felt better. I have friends who find the Canon EOS XTi too small for them. Etc.

So, yeah, I'd repeat the 'try them out, see which feels best in your hands' advice of others. :)

[alissasanderson]

The only reason I purchased the Canon Rebel as opposed to the Nikon was the size. I have small hands and the Canon felt more comfortable to me. I researched and researched and compared and compared and compared, but when I got to the camera store, the Rebel was the one that was easy for me to hold.

[Fusion08]

I use both Canon and Nikon, they both have different charecters and I use them for different types of picture, both equally as good, canon images IMO tend to be smoother whereas nikon tend to show more of the charecteristics of FILM, which I like in certain circumstances. They both produce great cameras which produce great images.

[Pernod]

I brought Canon, as when I first got into it the digital rebel was reaching end of life, so there were plenty of deals around, meaning Canon was significantly cheaper than any Nikons.

I loved it for 6 months, and then started looking for lenses... I paniced, and spent 6 months wondering if I should go to Nikon instead.

I tossed and turned at night, I wondered non stop what I was missing.

By then I had all Canon kit, so the cost to change was (thankfully) too high. I eventually upgraded to the 30D.

And then I realised the answer... the shots I get on the 30D are the same as the Rebel. They are no different at all. The Camera simply doesn't maek the difference.

Don't get me wrong, I love my 30D and it was worth the investment of upgrading as some features are invaluable (and the Rebel was limited in some areas I use a lot). But the real difference is what you feel comfortable with... not the sensor, not the noise, not the lenses etc. They are both as good as each other.

For eg. I simply couldn't use a 350D as my long skinny fingers just don't 'fit' it. I'm sure technically it would take the same photos as my 30D, or an equivalent Nikon, but for me it wouldn't work at all.

The Canon/Nikon(/Sony/Olympis/Pentax) debate is often just a case of the grass on the other side being greener.


P.S. The only thing I wish my canon could do is use the built in flash to trigger my flash gun remotely (like the nikons can) - I think its functional things like that which make the difference, not sensor sizes, noise reviews etc.