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
Nikon DSLR Cameras
Film SLR's
Nikon F that took a bullet - saved a life
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="SamSpade1941" data-source="post: 70044" data-attributes="member: 10336"><p>What you are seeing has a more complicated answer though than just Canon is edging Nikon. Going back decades and decades Canon had an edge on Nikon in making really clear BIG fast glass. So much so I know that back when everyone was still shooting film guys that could afford to do so often times would have one of those Big lenses adapted to his camera. The other part of it is while Nikon chose to pursue DX digital sensor technology Canon ultimately introduced a full frame digital sensor.</p><p> </p><p>As much as I love Nikon cameras there is a HUGE difference in image quality. Its like comparing 35mm to Medium Format huge. Nikon is just now is getting into the Full Frame digital sensor game and their cheapest full digital sensor cameras are 4 times what Canon's offerings are. Having said all that I worked in Iraq and Afghanistan, and mingled with a lot of professional journalists. </p><p></p><p>Do you know how many I witnessed carrying Canon camera out into the field? None, oh there may have been a few, but without exception the vast majority I met all were carrying Nikon gear. Some had a Leica stuffed in their jacket or bag somewhere. The reason being is this Canon takes a $3000 sensor and stuffs it in a D40 quality body. Canon gear is great for shooting the olympics and football games , I personally don't know how well it would survive the desert and being kicked about. </p><p></p><p>The Nikon D2x, and D3 series are substantial Pro cameras and are tough. Even the Nikon Prosumer cameras aimed at the advanced amateur like the D300, D700 and such are not a push over. They are serious business camera that pros on a budget purchase. If I had more money than I am currently blessed with I would actually be shooting a Canon and a Nikon most likely as the 5D Mark I and II are coming down in price with the Mark III out on the market and I would not mind having one of those for landscapes. </p><p></p><p>Since I primarily shoot landscapes and architectural photography, I really would love to have the full frame image to work with. Then for everything else I would have a D2x most likely because I know the D2 is built like an Abrams tank and will stand up to the abuse of me taking it on hikes in my rucksack, going to car shows, and everywhere else I am going to take it. Canon Cameras are just more dainty and require more care and less abuse.</p><p></p><p>JMTC and YMMV.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="SamSpade1941, post: 70044, member: 10336"] What you are seeing has a more complicated answer though than just Canon is edging Nikon. Going back decades and decades Canon had an edge on Nikon in making really clear BIG fast glass. So much so I know that back when everyone was still shooting film guys that could afford to do so often times would have one of those Big lenses adapted to his camera. The other part of it is while Nikon chose to pursue DX digital sensor technology Canon ultimately introduced a full frame digital sensor. As much as I love Nikon cameras there is a HUGE difference in image quality. Its like comparing 35mm to Medium Format huge. Nikon is just now is getting into the Full Frame digital sensor game and their cheapest full digital sensor cameras are 4 times what Canon's offerings are. Having said all that I worked in Iraq and Afghanistan, and mingled with a lot of professional journalists. Do you know how many I witnessed carrying Canon camera out into the field? None, oh there may have been a few, but without exception the vast majority I met all were carrying Nikon gear. Some had a Leica stuffed in their jacket or bag somewhere. The reason being is this Canon takes a $3000 sensor and stuffs it in a D40 quality body. Canon gear is great for shooting the olympics and football games , I personally don't know how well it would survive the desert and being kicked about. The Nikon D2x, and D3 series are substantial Pro cameras and are tough. Even the Nikon Prosumer cameras aimed at the advanced amateur like the D300, D700 and such are not a push over. They are serious business camera that pros on a budget purchase. If I had more money than I am currently blessed with I would actually be shooting a Canon and a Nikon most likely as the 5D Mark I and II are coming down in price with the Mark III out on the market and I would not mind having one of those for landscapes. Since I primarily shoot landscapes and architectural photography, I really would love to have the full frame image to work with. Then for everything else I would have a D2x most likely because I know the D2 is built like an Abrams tank and will stand up to the abuse of me taking it on hikes in my rucksack, going to car shows, and everywhere else I am going to take it. Canon Cameras are just more dainty and require more care and less abuse. JMTC and YMMV. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Nikon DSLR Cameras
Film SLR's
Nikon F that took a bullet - saved a life
Top
