Question for hoggers (Page 5): Ka-Pow!

Watash

Warhorse wrote:

Could possibly be because Canon cameras aren't as durable as Nikon's, therefore it is necessary for them to be replaced way more often.

Ka-Pow!

elliott937 Loc: St. Louis

I'm a Canon user here. But I want to share something said be a young 20-something, who worked at a local camera store. This goes back to film, but I think it still applies to digital. His comment was: A camera's job is to 'hold the film', and nothing more. It's up to use to be creative, and yes, select lenses we like best. But the camera body was there to "hold the film". I thought that was a very insightful comment from a young man.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

elliott937 wrote:

I'm a Canon user here. But I want to share something said be a young 20-something, who worked at a local camera store. This goes back to film, but I think it still applies to digital. His comment was: A camera's job is to 'hold the film', and nothing more. It's up to use to be creative, and yes, select lenses we like best. But the camera body was there to "hold the film". I thought that was a very insightful comment from a young man.

Sounds good.
The lens makes the image
The camera holds the film
The photographer makes the picture

BARRY COWAN

CHG_CANON wrote:

LOL - the market, rather than UHH, says people prefer Canon digital cameras at a rate of 4.7 Canons to every 2.2 Sony to 1.8 Nikon.

But certainly, just reading the UHH squawk box, one would think the numbers are 8 Nikons to 1 each of Sony and Canon.

When I was a kid I noticed there were a lot more VW Beatles on the road then there were Corvettes.

pdsdville Loc: Midlothian, Tx

Having shot both Minolta and Pentax film cameras for years, and I mean years I switched to DSLR's. I didn't worry about which was said to best, had better advertising, etc, I went in and held the different brands of cameras. I bought the one that "felt" best in my hands. I thought if I had a camera that felt good I was likely to be more comfortable, therefore take better photos. Since that decision I've never regretted it.

cascom Loc: Redmond

chikid68 wrote:

I have noticed (around here at least) the trend of photographers is to favor Nikon cameras over Canon or other brands.
The irony is that they are not even using the top models but rather a basic cropped sensor model.
Is this an indication of better quality or just minimal budget.

.
I went Nikon after my Topcon RE died because the local paper had a closet of Nikon lenses. I prefer sports photography so the cropped sensor is a natural choice. I added cameras and lenses over the years but saw no reason to journey into mirrorless cameras because of my age (82). I am very happy with my D500. The invention of the ON1 has opened my photography into dimly lighted areas I had not imagined.

Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Actually, the ownership of Nikon to other brands is significantly related to higher IQ by Nikon owners. For years Nikon out costs other brands and Canon flooded the market for young inspired would-be photographers and companies who bought the cheaper Canon's for their working-class staff.

The average profile of a Nikon shooter was a successful, educated and informed photographer, looking to capture the best possible photos (Pulitzer class) regardless of the cost of expensive Nikon lenses and bodies.

That trend continues as smart photographers continue to buy up used Nikon equipment or reach for Flagship models that are immediately listed on a major recall.

If you believe all that, it is possible a time warp or black hole has occurred, and we are actually on April 1st.

ELNikkor

I've been with Nikon since the late 70's when the FM & FE came out. They had multiple exposure levers and the AE-1 did not.

Watash

BARRY COWAN wrote:

When I was a kid I noticed there were a lot more VW Beatles on the road then there were Corvettes.

HRBIEL Loc: Rapid City, SD

Real Nikon Lover wrote:

Actually, the ownership of Nikon to other brands i... (show quote)

I’m sure he meant “Image Quality” …. Didn’t he?

Tjohn Loc: Inverness, FL formerly Arivaca, AZ

Orphoto wrote:

This forum is a fair cross section of photographers generally. Numerically less expensive consumer oriented cameras far outsell flagship or enthusiast models. That is reflected here. By and large the quality of work shared by others in the gallery and sub groups also runs at average levels.

You do no favors by inciting discussions as to brands. No one asked Picasso what brand of paint he used.

Picasso used common house paint.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

pdsdville wrote:

Having shot both Minolta and Pentax film cameras for years, and I mean years I switched to DSLR's. I didn't worry about which was said to best, had better advertising, etc, I went in and held the different brands of cameras. I bought the one that "felt" best in my hands. I thought if I had a camera that felt good I was likely to be more comfortable, therefore take better photos. Since that decision I've never regretted it.

If the camera "feels good" one will use it more.
If it is "uncomfortable to use", it will spend more time on the shelf (or in the bag).

photoman43

chikid68 wrote:

I have noticed (around here at least) the trend of photographers is to favor Nikon cameras over Canon or other brands.
The irony is that they are not even using the top models but rather a basic cropped sensor model.
Is this an indication of better quality or just minimal budget.

I do not think the brand makes that much difference unless you may have a very specific requirement that might be satisfied by just one or two bodies.

I am a Nikon DSLR user since around 1970 as the body had the ergonomics I preferred especially the viewfinder offset to the left as my dominant eye is my left eye and the body fit my hand. All that remains the same today. And I still use some of my original Nikon lenses on my Z9 and DSLRs. I own both full frame and crop sensor bodies as each type provides what I need for certain applications. Each photographer's situation will determine what works best for him/her.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

R.G. wrote:

If you check out performance figures on sites like DXOmark, Nikon and Sony run roughly neck-and-neck while Canon, Fujifilm, Olympus and Panasonic are less of a presence. However, with Nikon you get Sony levels of performance at a cheaper price point and with better ergonomics and simpler, more user-friendly menu systems. Sony sometimes wins out when it comes to bells and whistles but they're roughly equal when it comes to basic capabilities.

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

photoman43 wrote:

I do not think the brand makes that much differenc... (show quote)

WoW! I knew there were some old timers on here. But holy moly!