Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Nikonites
New Member Introductions
Another from Canon to Nikon
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ditonics" data-source="post: 464606" data-attributes="member: 39749"><p>Oh god.....</p><p>Obviously having all my gear stolen in one hit (it was nicely wrapped up in a lowepro bag for the sh1ts to take) gave me the opportunity to explore what I wanted as a replacement. I assumed I would get a 5D mk iii but wanted to do some reading first as a friends husband is a semi pro photographer and he is Nikon. Talking to him he kept saying go Nikon but I wasn't sure. </p><p>The release of the new Canon 5D got me all excited till I realized what the price was. After reading lots of reviews, watching lots of reviews on you tube and reading lots of tests such as DXO I came to realize the nikon has sharper images for the kind of photography I do and the colour range is greater (more dynamic). If you shoot sports or wildlife I believe the Pro grade Canon to be the better machine, it has better performance in poor natural light conditions and better burst rates with a faster and larger buffer. Other than that the Pro Nikon bodies tend to win. Some of the Canon lenses are better, the Canon 70-200 is the best in its class (my opinion only and possibly out of date). Can't wait for the 70-200 Tamron to turn up later this week and see how it compares, still amazed that the Tamron 24-70 and 70-200 out performs their Nikkor counter parts on most things, especially sharpness. The shots above were with the Tamron 24-70 and one of them was very heavily cropped and it stayed sharp. The vignetting in one shot was added, it's not the lens.</p><p></p><p>Sorry to bore you</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ditonics, post: 464606, member: 39749"] Oh god..... Obviously having all my gear stolen in one hit (it was nicely wrapped up in a lowepro bag for the sh1ts to take) gave me the opportunity to explore what I wanted as a replacement. I assumed I would get a 5D mk iii but wanted to do some reading first as a friends husband is a semi pro photographer and he is Nikon. Talking to him he kept saying go Nikon but I wasn't sure. The release of the new Canon 5D got me all excited till I realized what the price was. After reading lots of reviews, watching lots of reviews on you tube and reading lots of tests such as DXO I came to realize the nikon has sharper images for the kind of photography I do and the colour range is greater (more dynamic). If you shoot sports or wildlife I believe the Pro grade Canon to be the better machine, it has better performance in poor natural light conditions and better burst rates with a faster and larger buffer. Other than that the Pro Nikon bodies tend to win. Some of the Canon lenses are better, the Canon 70-200 is the best in its class (my opinion only and possibly out of date). Can't wait for the 70-200 Tamron to turn up later this week and see how it compares, still amazed that the Tamron 24-70 and 70-200 out performs their Nikkor counter parts on most things, especially sharpness. The shots above were with the Tamron 24-70 and one of them was very heavily cropped and it stayed sharp. The vignetting in one shot was added, it's not the lens. Sorry to bore you [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Nikonites
New Member Introductions
Another from Canon to Nikon
Top
