Nikon or Canon?

if i was starting afresh in photography would i go for nikon or canon i have been a life long canon user for about 20years with the odd purchase of a nikon

if i was starting afresh in photography would i go for nikon or canon i have been a life long canon user for about 20years with the odd purchase of a nikon

Surely, only you would know the answer to this?

Surely, only you would know the answer to this?

Why limit yourself to these two brands? Personally, Sony, Pentax, Olympus, and Fuji would all be on my short list. I’d also want to rule out Panasonic (for some reason I tend to think of them as more video orientated - but I know I may be wrong). Of course the list above assumes I want to buy into a DSLR type system and not a mobile, compact or bridge based system.

Why limit yourself to these two brands? Personally, Sony, Pentax, Olympus, and Fuji would all be on my short list. I’d also want to rule out Panasonic (for some reason I tend to think of them as more video orientated - but I know I may be wrong). Of course the list above assumes I want to buy into a DSLR type system and not a mobile, compact or bridge based system.

Your portfolio of images is extremely good https://www.ephotozine.com/user/youmightlikethis-5845/portfolio You portfolio indicates a good grasp of post processing ability - a detail not dependent on the brand of camera used. Neither is an ability to take good photographs. Can you indicate why you want to consider other systems? If you are considering interchangeable mirrorless systems the Sony system currently has the widest native lens range by a wide margin - though Nikon and Canon, thanks to a larger lens mount, have a few (as distinct from all) lenses which are optically better than equivalent Sony lenses. Sensor dust I find a challenge with ML. Only Canon (the system you primarily use) has an internal shutter which covers the sensor when a lens is removed - which should dramatically reduce ML dust issues. You know your future aspirations and budget - so only you can decide if another system might be better for you at the shooting stage.

Your portfolio of images is extremely good https://www.ephotozine.com/user/youmightlikethis-5845/portfolio

You portfolio indicates a good grasp of post processing ability - a detail not dependent on the brand of camera used. Neither is an ability to take good photographs.

Can you indicate why you want to consider other systems?

If you are considering interchangeable mirrorless systems the Sony system currently has the widest native lens range by a wide margin - though Nikon and Canon, thanks to a larger lens mount, have a few (as distinct from all) lenses which are optically better than equivalent Sony lenses.

Sensor dust I find a challenge with ML. Only Canon (the system you primarily use) has an internal shutter which covers the sensor when a lens is removed - which should dramatically reduce ML dust issues.

You know your future aspirations and budget - so only you can decide if another system might be better for you at the shooting stage.

I used Canon exclusively for over 30 years but not out of brand loyalty. When I bought my first SLR, Nikons were too expensive. As time went by, each time I upgraded, I had too many lenses to change system. Recently, I needed to seriously reduce the weight of my camera/lenses and considered all brands. I eventually chose a Sony model. It is not clear to me that Olympus will survive or even Nikon whereas as Canon and Sony and a few others look much more likely to succeed. Along the way I did buy a Panasonic bridge camera but the image quality was too poor to compete with my Canon or the new Sony. When requiring a new camera, I write down the specification not a brand and then compare the alternatives before selecting. Dave

I used Canon exclusively for over 30 years but not out of brand loyalty. When I bought my first SLR, Nikons were too expensive. As time went by, each time I upgraded, I had too many lenses to change system. Recently, I needed to seriously reduce the weight of my camera/lenses and considered all brands. I eventually chose a Sony model. It is not clear to me that Olympus will survive or even Nikon whereas as Canon and Sony and a few others look much more likely to succeed. Along the way I did buy a Panasonic bridge camera but the image quality was too poor to compete with my Canon or the new Sony.

When requiring a new camera, I write down the specification not a brand and then compare the alternatives before selecting.

Dave

thanks for replies about about 3 years ago i bought a canon 80d a great camera but it has recently failed [a great shame ] but not only canon i have lost a couple of nikons along the way all due to card reader related problems was thinking about getting 80d repaired

thanks for replies about about 3 years ago i bought a canon 80d a great camera but it has recently failed [a great shame ] but not only canon i have lost a couple of nikons along the way all due to card reader related problems was thinking about getting 80d repaired

You state that the camera bodies have had problems, but surely if you kept any of the lenses your decision would be based on the qualty or proposed use of the retained lenses, if any?

You state that the camera bodies have had problems, but surely if you kept any of the lenses your decision would be based on the qualty or proposed use of the retained lenses, if any?

i have a couple of good glass lenses 17-40 24-105 which are now getting old but still have a couple of working canon bodies so would still have use of lenses want to stick with aps c size not keen on evf cameras

i have a couple of good glass lenses 17-40 24-105 which are now getting old but still have a couple of working canon bodies so would still have use of lenses want to stick with aps c size not keen on evf cameras

My first DSLR system was Pentax and it served me well for many years until arthritis problems made it difficult to carry around a backpack with camera and lenses. Many years ago, I won an Olympus EPL5 on an EPZ competition. It had no viewfinder and I purchased one which turned it into a lightweight camera that suited me for awhile. I was surprised as to how good the image quality on micro four thirds is so I eventually sold my Pentax and bought into Panasonic which I preferred after trying out one and now only use that brand. (I don't do video.) If I was to start again, it would still be Panasonic.

My first DSLR system was Pentax and it served me well for many years until arthritis problems made it difficult to carry around a backpack with camera and lenses. Many years ago, I won an Olympus EPL5 on an EPZ competition. It had no viewfinder and I purchased one which turned it into a lightweight camera that suited me for awhile. I was surprised as to how good the image quality on micro four thirds is so I eventually sold my Pentax and bought into Panasonic which I preferred after trying out one and now only use that brand. (I don't do video.) If I was to start again, it would still be Panasonic.

If I was to start again I would buy into Sony not because of charts, reviews, techno-babble and guff but because of recommendations from friends who are excellent photographers, use their cameras all the time and swear by the brand; btw I use Nikon and am not prepared to go to the expense and inconvenience of selling and then buying another system; I shall manfully soldier on with the gear that I have.

If I was to start again I would buy into Sony not because of charts, reviews, techno-babble and guff but because of recommendations from friends who are excellent photographers, use their cameras all the time and swear by the brand; btw I use Nikon and am not prepared to go to the expense and inconvenience of selling and then buying another system; I shall manfully soldier on with the gear that I have.

[quote]If I was to start again I would buy into Sony not because of charts, reviews, techno-babble and guff but because of recommendations from friends who are excellent photographers, use their cameras all the time and swear by the brand; btw I use Nikon and am not prepared to go to the expense and inconvenience of selling and then buying another system; I shall manfully soldier on with the gear that I have.[/quote] You must do what you want but I did not sell my heavy Canon kit so I still have it if I wish to use it for situations where I do not need to carry it. It is the only logical and sensible way to consider specifications against a requirement. I understand the technology and specifications so quite able to understand and decide. Are you suggesting that you do not understand the technical information relating to cameras? Reviews and recommendations can also be considered but you have to be careful in selecting them including good photographers. We have international standard photographers in my club and some do not fully understand the technology but are excellent artists which can enable them to capture some superb images. Soldiering on is pointless if you are in considerable pain which could be relieved by a lighter camera. Dave

Quote:If I was to start again I would buy into Sony not because of charts, reviews, techno-babble and guff but because of recommendations from friends who are excellent photographers, use their cameras all the time and swear by the brand; btw I use Nikon and am not prepared to go to the expense and inconvenience of selling and then buying another system; I shall manfully soldier on with the gear that I have.


You must do what you want but I did not sell my heavy Canon kit so I still have it if I wish to use it for situations where I do not need to carry it. It is the only logical and sensible way to consider specifications against a requirement. I understand the technology and specifications so quite able to understand and decide. Are you suggesting that you do not understand the technical information relating to cameras? Reviews and recommendations can also be considered but you have to be careful in selecting them including good photographers. We have international standard photographers in my club and some do not fully understand the technology but are excellent artists which can enable them to capture some superb images. Soldiering on is pointless if you are in considerable pain which could be relieved by a lighter camera.

Dave

[quote]Are you suggesting that you do not understand the technical information relating to cameras?[/quote] Totally thick and stupid, that's me .... ;)

Quote:Are you suggesting that you do not understand the technical information relating to cameras?


Totally thick and stupid, that's me ....

I started of Canon with the 300D went to the 20D and then switched to Nikon when the D300 came out as at that point in time Nikon were pulling ahead. I was lucky that it was early enough that I could switch without loosing money as my investment in glass wasn’t that high and I knew someone who could get me a sizeable discount. I doubt I would change manufacturer again as the cost would be to high now. Also I nowadays lean back on a saying that was mentioned to me quite a few years ago, ‘a good camera doesn’t mean a rubbish photographer will take great photographs and while a good photographer will take great photographs with a rubbish camera. It’s about the person behind the camera not the camera in front of the person. We as photographers get to far into the long grass when it comes to equipment instead of climbing above it and enjoying the view.

I started of Canon with the 300D went to the 20D and then switched to Nikon when the D300 came out as at that point in time Nikon were pulling ahead. I was lucky that it was early enough that I could switch without loosing money as my investment in glass wasn’t that high and I knew someone who could get me a sizeable discount.

I doubt I would change manufacturer again as the cost would be to high now. Also I nowadays lean back on a saying that was mentioned to me quite a few years ago, ‘a good camera doesn’t mean a rubbish photographer will take great photographs and while a good photographer will take great photographs with a rubbish camera.

It’s about the person behind the camera not the camera in front of the person. We as photographers get to far into the long grass when it comes to equipment instead of climbing above it and enjoying the view.

I have the impression that Canon and Nikon are playing a game of leap-frog and if you're determined to have the best, then this means frequent and very expensive changes of marque. How many of us work at the leading edge of photography where we need the ultimate in performance? Winter sports photographers do actually need the fastest AF if they're to put food on the table because their work has to stand out from the also-rans on the picture editor's monitor. Some wedding photographers claim that they do actually need a max ISO capability up into the millions. The best kit is no guarantee of success as I learned a few years back. We photographed a specialist removal company as they installed a Steinway Concert Grand into an auditorium. When the tuner had finished, he invited me to have a go but the piano wouldn't give me anything remotely like music! That was a quarter of a million quid's worth of piano so shouldn't it have turned me into an instant virtuoso? My old housemaster, who ran the school photographic society, told us that it's better to use good quality kit that we actually like using because then we'd have to take full responsibility for the quality of our photographs. He also advised us to really get to know our kit so that we can get the best out of it. And, like professional musicians, we need plenty of practice!

I have the impression that Canon and Nikon are playing a game of leap-frog and if you're determined to have the best, then this means frequent and very expensive changes of marque.

How many of us work at the leading edge of photography where we need the ultimate in performance? Winter sports photographers do actually need the fastest AF if they're to put food on the table because their work has to stand out from the also-rans on the picture editor's monitor. Some wedding photographers claim that they do actually need a max ISO capability up into the millions.

The best kit is no guarantee of success as I learned a few years back. We photographed a specialist removal company as they installed a Steinway Concert Grand into an auditorium. When the tuner had finished, he invited me to have a go but the piano wouldn't give me anything remotely like music! That was a quarter of a million quid's worth of piano so shouldn't it have turned me into an instant virtuoso?

My old housemaster, who ran the school photographic society, told us that it's better to use good quality kit that we actually like using because then we'd have to take full responsibility for the quality of our photographs. He also advised us to really get to know our kit so that we can get the best out of it. And, like professional musicians, we need plenty of practice!

When I got my first DSLR about 10 years ago I went with Pentax because their cameras felt solid compared to Canon and offered better value for money than Nikon. Other considerations were the sheer number of cheap K-mount lenses available on the used market and the availability of weather resistant bodies at a price level below both Canon and Nikon. I've stuck with Pentax for those reasons 10 years later. My K-50 has just developed the aperture block problem after 5.5 years and about 22-23k images but can still be used with manual lenses. I've just replaced it with a K-5IIs...excellent condition, low mileage...built to last and with good WR...all for less than £260...a no brainer for me. Cheap Canons feel like toys in comparison. Entry level Pentax...the K-70 is an excellent camera although the relative price has crept up against other marques now so not as tempting for a complete beginner as previous pentax entry level models...a marketing mistake in my view...maybe a K-700 at £100 less?

When I got my first DSLR about 10 years ago I went with Pentax because their cameras felt solid compared to Canon and offered better value for money than Nikon. Other considerations were the sheer number of cheap K-mount lenses available on the used market and the availability of weather resistant bodies at a price level below both Canon and Nikon.

I've stuck with Pentax for those reasons 10 years later. My K-50 has just developed the aperture block problem after 5.5 years and about 22-23k images but can still be used with manual lenses. I've just replaced it with a K-5IIs...excellent condition, low mileage...built to last and with good WR...all for less than £260...a no brainer for me. Cheap Canons feel like toys in comparison.

Entry level Pentax...the K-70 is an excellent camera although the relative price has crept up against other marques now so not as tempting for a complete beginner as previous pentax entry level models...a marketing mistake in my view...maybe a K-700 at £100 less?