Once Again Nikon vs. Cannon
Mar 6, 2014 10:15:11 #
amehta wrote:
I prefer to do my shooting with a Nikon than a Remington. :-)
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mar 6, 2014 10:16:17 #
Mar 6, 2014 10:19:42 #
amehta wrote:
It was an off-white brick wall, and I used f/2.8 to get the wall out of focus. The point is to keep the viewer's eye on the bird, not the wall, so a dull wall was the intent.
And a good job indeed! This photo clearly has one focal point and there can be no confusion as to what it is.
Was this a jpeg or RAW save. If jpeg what in camera processing setting was utilized?
Mar 6, 2014 10:21:22 #
doublewoods wrote:
Truthfully there is no significant difference in q... (show quote)
Gorgeous work...
Mar 6, 2014 10:30:08 #
amehta
Loc: Boston
BobHartung wrote:
And a good job indeed! This photo clearly has one focal point and there can be no confusion as to what it is.
Was this a jpeg or RAW save. If jpeg what in camera processing setting was utilized?
Was this a jpeg or RAW save. If jpeg what in camera processing setting was utilized?
Aperture priority f/2.8, +1 exposure compensation, ISO 200, single point focus on the eye, the camera did everything else: auto WB, standard picture control, SOOC jpeg, no changes except cropping. The camera and lens did a lot more than the 12" behind it! :-)
Mar 6, 2014 10:48:50 #
Rongnongno wrote:
lol @ thread. If you want 'vibrant' in Nikon, jus... (show quote)
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Mar 6, 2014 11:03:42 #
Mark7829
Loc: Calfornia
doublewoods wrote:
Truthfully there is no significant difference in q... (show quote)
Well said. My point exactly but week after week, someone will pose the same question or profess the same differences. This topic getting quite old and tiresome.
Mar 6, 2014 11:04:18 #
Mark7829 wrote:
Well said. My point exactly but week after week, someone will pose the same question or profess the same differences. This topic getting quite old and tiresome.
:lol: :thumbup: :|
Mar 6, 2014 11:16:50 #
Canon and Nikon build first rate digital SLRs.
One major difference is the lens mount. Canon's bodies are thinner and they have a wider mount than Nikon so many non Canon lenses can fit their DSLRs. Many Canon users shoot digital video with non Canon lenses, as well. Nikon's mount doesn't adapt as well to non Nikon mount 35 mm lenses, but there are thousands of legacy Nikon mount lenses in the used market which offer very high quality optics at fair prices. Medium format lenses can usually adapt to either brand if you have access to these lenses. The competition between these brands have advanced the state of the digital technology, so we all benefit. If you don't require full 35 mm format digital, than Pentax can be a good choice.
One major difference is the lens mount. Canon's bodies are thinner and they have a wider mount than Nikon so many non Canon lenses can fit their DSLRs. Many Canon users shoot digital video with non Canon lenses, as well. Nikon's mount doesn't adapt as well to non Nikon mount 35 mm lenses, but there are thousands of legacy Nikon mount lenses in the used market which offer very high quality optics at fair prices. Medium format lenses can usually adapt to either brand if you have access to these lenses. The competition between these brands have advanced the state of the digital technology, so we all benefit. If you don't require full 35 mm format digital, than Pentax can be a good choice.
Mar 6, 2014 11:19:03 #
amehta
Loc: Boston
Mark7829 wrote:
Well said. My point exactly but week after week, someone will pose the same question or profess the same differences. This topic getting quite old and tiresome.
There's a really, really simple way to deal with the old and tiresome topics. :-)
Mar 6, 2014 11:23:00 #
I'm sorry, but I use both cameras in my work and each have there pro's and con's. But with that said, if your not getting what you want out of a D700, it's not the camera. Try this, decided what kind of a shoot you would like to do, then get on YouTube and watch and learn how others do the same shoot and then try your own. But just don't watch one video, watch a few because people have different takes on things, but you will pick up the basics. Once you do that then develop your on style, that is what photography is all about.
Mar 6, 2014 11:33:36 #
Mar 6, 2014 11:37:55 #
amehta
Loc: Boston
gee4time wrote:
Canon or Nikon? Which is better? Why not go real pro with Hasselblad or Phase One.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Mar 6, 2014 11:57:31 #
I own a D800E and have shot some frames with a 5 D Mark III and I really do not see all the differences that you speak of between Canon and Nikon. I do know that depending on the conditions you may have to crank up the ISO on both cameras to get desired results and a lot of photographers do not really know when to do this. The photographer must know his camera to get it to perform as it should. You must know the profiles, exposure comp, what settings to use to get the desired results. Also you must compare the glass because normally a kit lens will not perform as well as F2.8 and below glass, it is similar to
comparing apples and oranges. I agree that Canonites and Nikonians will argue the point till they are blue in the face but the fact remains a good camera does not a good photographer make.
comparing apples and oranges. I agree that Canonites and Nikonians will argue the point till they are blue in the face but the fact remains a good camera does not a good photographer make.
Mar 6, 2014 12:25:23 #
oberuwe wrote:
I had the D800, but sold it after a few month, great camera but was not too impressed, I still have all pictures taken by the D800 so, still can compare.
really like? well performance and handling of course, again never had a Canon DSLR so it will be an experience I look forward to, if I don't like I will sell it and by more Nikon stuff, it that simple!
really like? well performance and handling of course, again never had a Canon DSLR so it will be an experience I look forward to, if I don't like I will sell it and by more Nikon stuff, it that simple!
Oberuwe, not too many get your opportunity. It's too bad you no longer have the 800 to compare. The 800 is a slow shooter. And the 5Dlll has the heart of a lion. It's strong points are the focus system for fast action. You need to compare it to the action shooting ability of the d2x. Though it's frame rate is slower, it's focus-ability should be better, since it shares most of the 1dx focus system. If you don't shoot action, it's just another camera. And with the slow lens, the camera will NOT use its fast focus points. The 5dlll is actually designed to use the faster lenses, as is the 1dx. But it should still out shoot the 800 at action, as the 800 is processing too much info and designed for the opposite use. I suggest you also get a 50mm 1.4, or you won't really be able to test the camera.
If your just gonna bolt it to a tripod, there's probably no reason for you to even try it, it'll just be another camera, just like Sony, Pentax, Oly......,etc.
Good luck with your experiment. ;-)
SS
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.