View Single Post
  #1  
Old 04-08-2009, 10:41 PM
Waxing_Gibbous's Avatar
Waxing_Gibbous (Peter)
Grumpy Old Man-Child

Waxing_Gibbous is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: South Gippsland
Posts: 1,768
Canon vs Nikon vs everyone else

The wisdom of the ages.

Avoid super-zooms. This is all ye may know. This is all ye need to know.

Back in the dark old days of film, things were a little clearer.
Canon had the best telephotos and macros.
Nikon had the best wide angles and portraits.
Zeiss had the best everything, but at a price no one could afford.
Hasselblad ditto.
Now:
Zeiss/Contax/ Hasselblad remain the system of choice for studio snappers, landscape types, and portrait artistes. I know 3 photogs for fashion mags and all of them use one or more of these.
For the rest of us:
Canon has sold/licenced its image stabilistation technology to Nikon.
Nikon has ditto its flash technology to Canon.
In my not so humble opinion, Canon's in-camera image processing is better than Nikon's. By a fair cop.
Nikons ergonomics are superior to Canon's. By a fair cop.
Canon's telephoto lenses are without peer. All those big white lenses you see at sporting events?-Canon.
Nikon's wide angles and portrait lenses have more "bight" than Canon's.
Canon gets kudos for the 20DA, though any DSLR can be modified for astrophotography.
Canon's macro's? Top shelf.
Ultimatey it will boil down to which system you are most comfortable with, since how easy you find a system to use will help determine how good your images are.
Ultimately, your eye will win out. My wife, who has no interest in photography as an art, takes better images with her 20 year old Minolta happy-snapper, than I do with $30,000 worth of digital gear.
Go figure!
Reply With Quote