My Days With Nikon Could Be Numbered

Blacktop

Senior Member
Pete, just so you know, I'm just sharing the journey more than I'm looking for ideas. And I never took your suggestions as anything other than friendly.

This is the culmination of a 5 year conversation between me and a long time Canon pro that I used to share a bedroom with growing up. He's essentially given me the opportunity to see how the other half lives, and that's awesome. It's the best part about all of this and something that will make me a more knowledgeable photo-geek on the back end no matter what. The tough part is that I'm sort of being backed into a corner and being asked to seriously consider making a change I would have never considered making on my own - at least with all other things being equal. If it was any other guy with a Canon shirt on I'd say, "Thanks, but no thanks. At least not now." For blood you do things you might not otherwise do for reasons that go beyond logic. The fact that I've been given all this time and equipment to "help" me make it is both the best and worst part of it.

I can definitely respect what you're saying. I also appreciate that you are sharing all this with us as well. It will be an interesting journey for sure that I will be following.
PS. Shots taken with Canon gear go here!
http://nikonites.com/non-nikon-cameras/#axzz3vgWaiHY6
:playful: (Sorry, just wouldn't have been me if I didn't do it)
 

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
Something that strikes me every time is,if i am browsing flickr and i see a very sharp and detailed image of a strong red or yellow bird when i scroll down its nearly always a Canon shot::what::,fortunately i dont come across many birds like that.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
Something that strikes me every time is,if i am browsing flickr and i see a very sharp and detailed image of a strong red or yellow bird when i scroll down its nearly always a Canon shot::what::,fortunately i dont come across many birds like that.

I've heard several people talk about loving the colors from Canon cameras. It will be interesting to hear Jake's take on it. Is it something that can be replicated in post? You'd think so, but many people haven't been able to do it. If anyone can, it will be Jake.
 

sonicbuffalo_RIP

Senior Member
I've heard several people talk about loving the colors from Canon cameras. It will be interesting to hear Jake's take on it. Is it something that can be replicated in post? You'd think so, but many people haven't been able to do it. If anyone can, it will be Jake.

Geez....ALL Canon birds are red or yellow. Don't you people have a clue? lol:cool::cool:
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
I've heard several people talk about loving the colors from Canon cameras. It will be interesting to hear Jake's take on it. Is it something that can be replicated in post? You'd think so, but many people haven't been able to do it. If anyone can, it will be Jake.
Geez....ALL Canon birds are red or yellow. Don't you people have a clue? lol:cool::cool:

My response didn't mention anything about red or yellow birds. Are you awake this morning, Chris? ;)
 
Last edited:

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
I've heard several people talk about loving the colors from Canon cameras. It will be interesting to hear Jake's take on it. Is it something that can be replicated in post? You'd think so, but many people haven't been able to do it. If anyone can, it will be Jake.
In having worked with several professional photographers at my job I've learned the general consensus is Canon kit shoots with a bias for Yellow and Magenta, while Nikon kit shoots with a bias for Blue and sometimes Green. The nitty-gritty details may vary but it's generally accepted Canon bodies shoots warm, Nikon bodies shoots cool.

Another big difference between the two is how differently they render bokeh. It may not be immediately evident, but once you see the difference, and it "clicks", you can't help but see it. I'm not going to say which one is "better" because that's totally subjective but many of my Canon shooters will tell you they shoot Canon for those two reasons: Canon shoots warm and they get better bokeh with Canon glass.
 

J-see

Senior Member
When using a Hald CLUT image during processing, it should be simple to get the Nikon colors on a Canon RAW or vice versa. It's not as if either cam actually captures different colors.
 

Blacktop

Senior Member
Something that strikes me every time is,if i am browsing flickr and i see a very sharp and detailed image of a strong red or yellow bird when i scroll down its nearly always a Canon shot::what::,fortunately i dont come across many birds like that.
I don't get to see many shots taken with a Canon. I pretty much only look at shots from people I follow,(which is not many) or when I'm researching a particular piece of gear, I look at shots from those groups.
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
The Nikon vs. Canon color thing has a lot to do with what the camera profiles allow you to capture in JPEGs and as your starting point in RAW and not, as J-See points out, what you can ultimately achieve. For pros who shoot JPEG this is critical, and just looking at the custom profiles in my brothers camera speaks strongly to that point. There was some discussion about it with one wedding photographer here when they purchased a D600 or D610 a while back, focusing primarily on natural skin tones. Any time you see a side-by-side comparison of similar Nikon and Canon bodies the color dominance Paul mentioned plays some role in the review. As a RAW shooter this aspect doesn't worry me in any significant way as I'm used to doing color manipulation as a part of my post processing - as I've said countless times before, I'm a lazy photographer which has forced me to become a more accomplished person in the digital darkroom. I wish it wasn't the case, and I'm making it a point to fix that (I suspect learning a new system will help), but the fact is that as it stands the color profile differences aren't something I suspect will factor into any decision, in much the same way as the focusing speed of a 1Dx with the 300mm f2.8 when shooting hockey will never be a part of the equation. LOL
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
The Nikon vs. Canon color thing has a lot to do with what the camera profiles allow you to capture in JPEGs and as your starting point in RAW... As a RAW shooter this aspect doesn't worry me in any significant way as I'm used to doing color manipulation as a part of my post processing...

I know you are quite gifted when it comes to post processing and most likely any differences between Nikon vs. Canon files won't make you bat an eyelash. ;)

I did an online search to see if there were any comparisons between Nikon and Canon RAW files, and apparently there are. After you've had a chance to play around with the Canon files, it will be interesting to hear your observations between post processing them. According to the article, Canon RAW files have a higher Auto White Balance temp than Nikon RAW files, and there are other differences as well.

I imagine a lot of people would be interested in your findings if you choose to share them--especially for those who switched to Nikon from Canon. Many don't seem to be able to identify why Nikon files are so different than Canon files (I'm specifically talking about RAW files).

Quote from the article:
As you can see, Darwin’s raw file seems more contrasty and warmer in temperature than the Nikon file. When we inspected the files in Camera Raw, we saw that the Canon file set to ‘auto’ white balance came up at 6000k while the Nikon on ‘auto’ white balance came up at 5000k. In other words, the auto white balance for the two cameras returned different results: ‘auto’ for one camera is not the same ‘auto’ for another. This matters a lot if you shoot jpeg and matters less if you shoot raw, because of course you can alter the temperature of the raw file to be whatever you like. Why would anyone care about this? Well, we think that, unless you have a strong vision in mind, what your camera captures influences how you process. This would be especially true if there were differences in the raw files. Could there be an insidious side effect? Could the raw file actually influence how you process? I tend to spend less time processing images than Darwin and usually end up with cooler, flatter images. Darwin favours warm hues and higher contrast and steers his images more in this direction. But is this a result of our artistic vision…or are we being secretly led by our cameras to deliver a particular result?

A Comparison of Canon and Nikon files and the Impact on Personal Style | oopoomoo : create, inspire, educate
 

Eduard

Super Mod
Staff member
Super Mod
What I am saying is that it's an opportunity thrust upon me and not one I was looking for, and I need to decide whether my decision is going to be made purely from a scientific and economic point of view, or whether or not I will allow other purely emotional factors (which play to both sides) to enter in and if so how much weight do I give them?

I hope it IS emotional!!! Your images tend to evoke emotions and getting wrapped up with your gear will invigorate you!!! I can't wait to see the results!!!!
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
This thread has been silent for a month so I wanted to at least give an update, if not put a period on things.

Simply put, I will not be switching brands, at least not in the near future. No earth shattering reasons. The decision was equal parts logic and emotion. And a little bit of timing.

On the emotional side, I know and love the stuff I shoot with, and had an opportunity to consider switching not been laid at my feet the thought would have never popped in my head. Plain and simple, I like what I shoot with and I like the fact that I chose to shoot with it.

On the logical side, I'm a high end pro-sumer shooter, and the stuff I was loaned (permanently or otherwise) was pro gear. Is it better than what I have? Uh huh. Not in every way, but in very important ways, including focus accuracy and speed. Do I need that? I can tell myself that I do, but my livelihood as a photographer doesn't depend on these things, so I can tell myself I might want it, but need is secondary. On top of that, comparisons to my gear are apples and oranges. If I had a D4s and a D810 in my hand, and a set of f2.8's instead of f4's, then I could judge whether the differences I could see were significant or almost nonexistent. So, if I were to change the question then becomes, "Are you trading up to 1d's and 5d's, or are you looking at a 6d to replace the D750, in which case what are you really gaining?" The truth is, I don't want the pro stuff, nice as it is. If the D5 doesn't make me want to trade up then the new 1d won't either. Plus, even if I'm getting a discount on new gear I still have to sell my old stuff off at a loss, and D610's and D7100's aren't bringing in lots of $$ these days. So at best I'm in a situation where I have some great glass to borrow while I slowly sell of stuff to replace it with the same stuff and slowly build inventory again. Not a bad thing, but only if I want to switch.

On the timing end? I was already where I am with the decision as laid out above before the announcement of the D500. The announcement was the death nail. Not that a 7d Mk III won't be out in a year, but with the $$ I'll save by not having to sell off and trade I can certainly look into some glass that will make my upgrade to the D500 even smarter down the road.

What this doesn't say is that I think Nikon is in any way better. What I've learned is that they're just different. For everything I'd gain I'd lose something I'd miss. The truth is that if I ever decide to ratchet up the rig then, should circumstances remain the same, I'll likely jump. Until then, I'm happy not to have to retrain myself.

So stick a fork in this thread.

PS - Playing with a 300mm f2.8 is not something I'd recommend unless you're ready to jump on one yourself. That's gonna be tough to say goodbye to.
 

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
This thread has been silent for a month so I wanted to at least give an update, if not put a period on things.

Simply put, I will not be switching brands, at least not in the near future. No earth shattering reasons. The decision was equal parts logic and emotion. And a little bit of timing.

On the emotional side, I know and love the stuff I shoot with, and had an opportunity to consider switching not been laid at my feet the thought would have never popped in my head. Plain and simple, I like what I shoot with and I like the fact that I chose to shoot with it.

On the logical side, I'm a high end pro-sumer shooter, and the stuff I was loaned (permanently or otherwise) was pro gear. Is it better than what I have? Uh huh. Not in every way, but in very important ways, including focus accuracy and speed. Do I need that? I can tell myself that I do, but my livelihood as a photographer doesn't depend on these things, so I can tell myself I might want it, but need is secondary. On top of that, comparisons to my gear are apples and oranges. If I had a D4s and a D810 in my hand, and a set of f2.8's instead of f4's, then I could judge whether the differences I could see were significant or almost nonexistent. So, if I were to change the question then becomes, "Are you trading up to 1d's and 5d's, or are you looking at a 6d to replace the D750, in which case what are you really gaining?" The truth is, I don't want the pro stuff, nice as it is. If the D5 doesn't make me want to trade up then the new 1d won't either. Plus, even if I'm getting a discount on new gear I still have to sell my old stuff off at a loss, and D610's and D7100's aren't bringing in lots of $$ these days. So at best I'm in a situation where I have some great glass to borrow while I slowly sell of stuff to replace it with the same stuff and slowly build inventory again. Not a bad thing, but only if I want to switch.

On the timing end? I was already where I am with the decision as laid out above before the announcement of the D500. The announcement was the death nail. Not that a 7d Mk III won't be out in a year, but with the $$ I'll save by not having to sell off and trade I can certainly look into some glass that will make my upgrade to the D500 even smarter down the road.

What this doesn't say is that I think Nikon is in any way better. What I've learned is that they're just different. For everything I'd gain I'd lose something I'd miss. The truth is that if I ever decide to ratchet up the rig then, should circumstances remain the same, I'll likely jump. Until then, I'm happy not to have to retrain myself.

So stick a fork in this thread.

PS - Playing with a 300mm f2.8 is not something I'd recommend unless you're ready to jump on one yourself. That's gonna be tough to say goodbye to.

I found that with the Nikon 300 PF :D so not trying the 2.8 he has in stock.
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
I found that with the Nikon 300 PF :D so not trying the 2.8 he has in stock.

If you want to sell it let me know. My brother was working in the Adorama used department for a while and I was constantly bugging him to let me know when one of those came through. Now I suspect he had an ulterior motive for never telling me. ;)
 

hrstrat57

Senior Member
This thread has been silent for a month so I wanted to at least give an update, if not put a period on things.

Simply put, I will not be switching brands, at least not in the near future. No earth shattering reasons. The decision was equal parts logic and emotion. And a little bit of timing.

On the emotional side, I know and love the stuff I shoot with, and had an opportunity to consider switching not been laid at my feet the thought would have never popped in my head. Plain and simple, I like what I shoot with and I like the fact that I chose to shoot with it.

On the logical side, I'm a high end pro-sumer shooter, and the stuff I was loaned (permanently or otherwise) was pro gear. Is it better than what I have? Uh huh. Not in every way, but in very important ways, including focus accuracy and speed. Do I need that? I can tell myself that I do, but my livelihood as a photographer doesn't depend on these things, so I can tell myself I might want it, but need is secondary. On top of that, comparisons to my gear are apples and oranges. If I had a D4s and a D810 in my hand, and a set of f2.8's instead of f4's, then I could judge whether the differences I could see were significant or almost nonexistent. So, if I were to change the question then becomes, "Are you trading up to 1d's and 5d's, or are you looking at a 6d to replace the D750, in which case what are you really gaining?" The truth is, I don't want the pro stuff, nice as it is. If the D5 doesn't make me want to trade up then the new 1d won't either. Plus, even if I'm getting a discount on new gear I still have to sell my old stuff off at a loss, and D610's and D7100's aren't bringing in lots of $$ these days. So at best I'm in a situation where I have some great glass to borrow while I slowly sell of stuff to replace it with the same stuff and slowly build inventory again. Not a bad thing, but only if I want to switch.

On the timing end? I was already where I am with the decision as laid out above before the announcement of the D500. The announcement was the death nail. Not that a 7d Mk III won't be out in a year, but with the $$ I'll save by not having to sell off and trade I can certainly look into some glass that will make my upgrade to the D500 even smarter down the road.

What this doesn't say is that I think Nikon is in any way better. What I've learned is that they're just different. For everything I'd gain I'd lose something I'd miss. The truth is that if I ever decide to ratchet up the rig then, should circumstances remain the same, I'll likely jump. Until then, I'm happy not to have to retrain myself.

So stick a fork in this thread.

PS - Playing with a 300mm f2.8 is not something I'd recommend unless you're ready to jump on one yourself. That's gonna be tough to say goodbye to.

With the D500 announcement I can't say that I am surprised.

I fully expect that camera will rock our Nikon world!
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
With the D500 announcement I can't say that I am surprised.

I fully expect that camera will rock our Nikon world!

I'm done having my world rocked, I just want a solid DX body that doesn't overload the buffer in a couple seconds. This more than delivers. Nothing is magic any more, only hype that needs to be delivered on. I suspect this one will do just that and as soon as some things sell I'll put my money where my mouth is.
 
Top