Jump to content

Nikon or Canon


mrs.cos
 Share

Recommended Posts

Nikon D60. LOL, I'm the bitch of the thread. Except maybe the girl with the Alpha. ;P

 

lol I liked my girl camera better when I compared between those Canon, Nikon, Sony starter DSLR cameras :)

 

IMHO Sony's alpha series are pretty descent; I'm sure there are about 80 million Canon/ Nikons out there and maybe like 10 Sony users; I'm not an expert but it does the job for me.

 

+ I've seen so many horrible shots with expensive gear and WOW shots with inexensive gears taken by the ones who know how to use it. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nikon D90, ive shot with both cannon and Nikon. and i personally like the feel and use of a Nikon.

 

See this is the boat i am in, sorta.. Ive shot with both, prefer the feel of the Canon, but love the colors Nikon produces.

 

I'd love to get my hands on some Pro-Level cameras for a week or two

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See this is the boat i am in, sorta.. Ive shot with both, prefer the feel of the Canon, but love the colors Nikon produces.

 

I'd love to get my hands on some Pro-Level cameras for a week or two

 

 

I like Nikon's menu's better. Although Canon has improved their entire lineup in the last year. Color wise, you're likely much like me, a fan of warmer tones. I tend to err on the side of warmth. Nikon does that too. Canon does and always has tended to be a bit cool. The reason is to favor the success this has with greens.

 

IMO, Canon renders nature landscape shots and greens more naturally whereby Nikon favors and does better with Reds. That's one reason why you will see so many more Nikon's and Fuji S series in studios shooting portraits. Kodak too...although they broke away from DSLR's years ago. However, at the time, their sensors were all Nikon.

 

I switched to Canon for their glass. They have a much wider selection, especially for sports (I shoot events) and costs were always better. Not so much know as they are creaping them up in terms of costs, but they still offer a huge selection. Canon also offers more pro-grade primes with a better selection of maximum aperture and build quality too. The latter being an opinion, but one I feel is justified and can be seen. Canon pro lenses are also far cheaper.

 

I consider the 17-40mm (I forget the newer version focal length...Tractor has it I believe), 24-70mm ranges pretty much standard issue to have and Canon whoops them on price and quality. The Canon 24-105 is also top notch and worth the $1k it costs. Sounds like a lot, but I'm not one for buying cheap optics.

 

Where Nikon has targeted is the entry level to consumer market (very evident when comparing bodies), Canon is still trying but tends to lean towards the advanced shooters. Nikon has some good quality general purpose lenses for family shooters, especially 18-105mm VR and 18-200mm VR. Canon however, just this year relaunch their lower end and kit lenses to higher quality optics and build. Prior, I would say Nikon had better quailty, but today, Canon has made that leap.

 

Just my long winded $.05 worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

D5000, I need to remove it from Adobe RGB, the 8 bit color spread is killing me.

 

On the upswing I picked up a 50 1.8D this week so I've been playing with that a bit, manual focus is a bit trickier than I anticipated given the green dot of joy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

D5000, I need to remove it from Adobe RGB, the 8 bit color spread is killing me.

 

Not sure I follow? Do you shoot for web or for print? Do you print at home or with a lab? Are you shooting RAW? I usually shoot Adobe RGB and convert when needed/where appropriate. I print at home and prefer the wider gamut vs sRGB. My gear all shoot 16 bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure I follow? Do you shoot for web or for print? Do you print at home or with a lab? Are you shooting RAW? I usually shoot Adobe RGB and convert when needed/where appropriate. I print at home and prefer the wider gamut vs sRGB. My gear all shoot 16 bit.

 

I shoot mostly for web in RAW format then convert as necessary, and I've only had 1 picture printed. Toss in that with an uncalibrated laptop monitor and it leads to hilarity :fuuuu:

 

Mine is supposed to be 14 bit, but by the time Nikon's internal processing gets done compressing it it's closer to 12 bit. I'm still a newbie though, and relearning everything I used to know about photoshop, so all in due time. I'm terrible about doing PP as well, I usually just use images straight from the camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...