#1  
Old 30-12-2011, 03:55 AM
EddieDog's Avatar
EddieDog (Eddie)
Old Dog

EddieDog is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 127
Canon v Nikon

OK all, this question has probably been asked in some form, but I'm a bit more specific. I am looking to replace my Olympus E500 next year, and am considering one of two replacement cameras:
a) Canon EOS 60D
b) Nikon D7000
Has anyone used any of these for any astro work and thus have advice
Ta
Eddie
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 30-12-2011, 04:10 AM
skysurfer's Avatar
skysurfer
Dark sky rules !

skysurfer is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: 52N 6E (EU)
Posts: 1,047
I think both are good for astro work. Canon has an IR filter which makes reflection nebulas less 'red', I don't know about Nikon. But I have a Canon 40d which makes excellent astrophotos.
Canon has a larger bayonet mount which enables adapters from ebay to fit Nikon lenses to the bodies. Old lenses fit as well, but no autofocus. Similar adapters exist for all other mounts (including your existing Olympus lenses) except Canon FD.
The 60d is even better in noise reduction you can take pictures @ 3200 ASA which I sometimes do with the 40d.
Look on the internet for noise comparisons between these cameras.
Of course fullframe is better yet (Canon EOS5Mk2 or Nikon D700) but prices are > $2000 body only.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 30-12-2011, 06:06 AM
leon's Avatar
leon
Registered User

leon is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: ballarat
Posts: 10,813
From what I have heard and some research both are great Camera's Eddie, but me being a Canon man, I cant help much in regard to Nikon.

Leon
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 30-12-2011, 06:16 AM
EddieDog's Avatar
EddieDog (Eddie)
Old Dog

EddieDog is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by skysurfer View Post
I think both are good for astro work. Canon has an IR filter which makes reflection nebulas less 'red', I don't know about Nikon. But I have a Canon 40d which makes excellent astrophotos.
Canon has a larger bayonet mount which enables adapters from ebay to fit Nikon lenses to the bodies. Old lenses fit as well, but no autofocus. Similar adapters exist for all other mounts (including your existing Olympus lenses) except Canon FD.
The 60d is even better in noise reduction you can take pictures @ 3200 ASA which I sometimes do with the 40d.
Look on the internet for noise comparisons between these cameras.
Of course fullframe is better yet (Canon EOS5Mk2 or Nikon D700) but prices are > $2000 body only.

Yes, thanks for that, from reports the Nikon seems to have slightly better noise reduction, but I like Canon's swing electronic finder (Much like the G5 we have), as when on the end of my scope it can be low down and impossibles to see. Not sure if my Oly lenses are good enough for Canon (my 300mm would be 480mm Canon). I know Canon has, in the past, been the preferred choice for Astro an sport.

Eddie
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 30-12-2011, 06:21 AM
EddieDog's Avatar
EddieDog (Eddie)
Old Dog

EddieDog is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by leon View Post
From what I have heard and some research both are great Camera's Eddie, but me being a Canon man, I cant help much in regard to Nikon.

Leon
My initial preference (Bias), Leon, is towards Canon, though the slightly lower noise and, the double mem card facility of the Nikon are tempting. I negate Canon's better video as I don't see me doing much of that.

Eddie
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 30-12-2011, 10:59 AM
jjjnettie's Avatar
jjjnettie (Jeanette)
Registered User

jjjnettie is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Far Far Away
Posts: 16,726
Most astro software for DSLR's is made mainly with Canon cameras in mind.
You'll find more support in the astronomy community for Canon too, as most of us have them and understand their little quirks.
Not to say that other brands can't do the job, but that's just the way it is. Canon have lead the way for so long, the brand is ingrained into the hobby.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 30-12-2011, 11:22 AM
hotspur's Avatar
hotspur (Chris)
Registered User

hotspur is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: south east QLD,Australia
Posts: 2,851
Both Canon and Nikon are very good cameras.Regardless of what you choose,be aware you enter a 'System' of one or the other.Its best to think on what future photography may hold for you.The reason why Canon tends to be more popular on this and many forums is the great range of lenses and other gear they make for Canon cameras.

Another option is Pentax,there is a chap that visits our property he has a K5 body,the low level noise is amazing,way ahead of Canon,these bodies might be very good for astro work because of that,the down side is Pentax lens range much less than Canon,and tend to be super expensive,even second hand.

This forum regularly has good second hand Canon gear for sale,which makes life easier.

Good luck on what ever you buy.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 30-12-2011, 11:49 PM
Bassnut's Avatar
Bassnut (Fred)
Narrowfield rules!

Bassnut is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 4,772
Canon vs Nikon?. Thats easy. Its a well known fact that Canon is gods creation and Nikon is just crap, the devils work to extract your hard earned and toss it in the bin.

The 60D wins hands down, no brainer.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 31-12-2011, 12:00 AM
renormalised's Avatar
renormalised (Carl)
No More Infinities

renormalised is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Townsville
Posts: 9,698
Funny you should say that, Fred. The best shots of the comet have so far been taken by Nikons
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 31-12-2011, 12:23 AM
renormalised's Avatar
renormalised (Carl)
No More Infinities

renormalised is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Townsville
Posts: 9,698
Have a look at Alex's or Wayne's piccies. Proof's in the pudding, so to speak

There's some good Canon shots as well, but no better than any Nikon's.

In any case, the camera is only part of the equation....it's how the camera's operated that really counts
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 31-12-2011, 12:28 AM
skysurfer's Avatar
skysurfer
Dark sky rules !

skysurfer is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: 52N 6E (EU)
Posts: 1,047
These discussions ....

Android vs iOS
Samsung vs Apple
Canon vs Nikon

They all are / make good products but the choice is personal. I have Canon but I think Nikon is as good. If you like that pre-1987 lenses fit on your SLR without adapter or want to use a 6mm fisheye (actually a fishbowl) lens of 5kg with a FOV of 220 degrees, choose the yellow brand.
If you want to use long telephoto lenses up to 1200 f/5.6 which don't bend in direct sunlight (due to heat absorption of black finish) choose the red brand.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 31-12-2011, 12:50 AM
Octane's Avatar
Octane (Humayun)
IIS Member #671

Octane is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,158
What a load of bollocks.

Have you even seen an ISO-3200 image from a 5D Mark II or a 1D/1Ds Mark III or 1D Mark IV?

They eat Pentax high ISO performance for breakfast.

H

Quote:
Originally Posted by hotspur View Post
Another option is Pentax,there is a chap that visits our property he has a K5 body,the low level noise is amazing,way ahead of Canon,
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 31-12-2011, 04:44 AM
EddieDog's Avatar
EddieDog (Eddie)
Old Dog

EddieDog is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassnut View Post
The camera is not part of any equation. If you type "anypic+Nikon" into a calculator, you get "err". Canon owners dont bother with equations, thay just take better pics.
Fred, you appear to hate Nikon. I am looking for considered opion, especially from users. Whilst I agree that Canon has been the camera of choice for astro work (and sport), the new Nikon d7000 is the first to seriously challenge Canon's low noise specs. My personal choice would be the 5D Mark II, as I'd love a full fram cam, but it beyond my budget at the mo. The Nikon also has a slightly larger senser than the 60D and 100% optical viewfinder image and deeper colour depth. But I'm still thinking 60D.

Eddie looking for lotto win
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 31-12-2011, 09:09 AM
hotspur's Avatar
hotspur (Chris)
Registered User

hotspur is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: south east QLD,Australia
Posts: 2,851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Octane View Post
What a load of bollocks.

Have you even seen an ISO-3200 image from a 5D Mark II or a 1D/1Ds Mark III or 1D Mark IV?

They eat Pentax high ISO performance for breakfast.

H
You are correct H,when comparing to the 5D2,I should have stated that that observation of the K5 was against canon, crop sensor cameras,not the 5D2,so do not get upset

Just my opinion-but regardless of what camera brand is used,particularly these high end models-the skill of the person behind the camera makes a major difference.

BTW last time I looked this was not a Canon sponsored forum,and people are allowed to have different view points on different makes of cameras.If the OP wishes to buy Nikon,he will do very well.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 31-12-2011, 09:46 AM
dannat's Avatar
dannat (Daniel)
daniel

dannat is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Macedon shire, Australia
Posts: 3,380
I think the Nikon 7000 series havebthe same sensor as the Pentax, don't forget the gps add on for Pentax let's you take tripod mounted shots, the mirror shake is used to correct for trailing, 3mins at 200mm on a tripod
If it were me I'd be going the Pentax or nikon
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 31-12-2011, 09:49 AM
renormalised's Avatar
renormalised (Carl)
No More Infinities

renormalised is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Townsville
Posts: 9,698
Well, since this appears to be a showdown (in some people's minds) about Canon and Nikon and their respective abilities, why not blow both of them out of the water and let's throw in Hasselblad and Mamiya and compare the first two to these cameras. Neither Canon or Nikon would live in the same room. For any spec or picture characteristic either of those cameras have. But then again, you're paying for the privilege of owning one. Anyone here got $17000 to buy the little 'Blad??

Canon and Nikon are both very good cameras and will do whatever job you ask them to do very well. I've seen just as good astropics taken by Nikon's as Canon's. But if the person wielding the camera doesn't know how to use them, both of them can also take bad shots (in any situation). I mean, if you want to compare a Nikon D3100 to a Canon 5D MkII or better, go right ahead. But it's a case of comparing apples and oranges. People who can afford upper mid level or professional level cameras (of any make), that's great, but don't disparage the little guy with his cheaper Nikon (or Canon) for taking "sub standard" shots just because he owns one of them. Especially when you have a bias towards one camera make.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 31-12-2011, 10:06 AM
Octane's Avatar
Octane (Humayun)
IIS Member #671

Octane is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 11,158
Carl,

Of course. The bigger the sensor, the greater the image. I spend a lot of time on medium format photography forums, and even the $30K+ digital backs (sitting on a Hasselblad or Mamiya or xyz) have colour casts and ape skin tones. Furthermore, those cameras are not designed for long exposure astrophotographic use. Indeed, a lot of them struggle past ISO-400; they are designed for a specific purpose. There are issues wherever you go. How I long for one, but, I digress.

But, we're specifically discussing Canon and Nikon here.

I'm yet to see a deep space image taken by a Nikon system that rivals the fidelity and colour and sharpness of a Canon system.

I'm not talking widefield sky landscapes or lunar images. Both of these can be fulfilled by either system.

If I can find the time today, I will go hunting examples of high ISO images of the Pentax system with the equivalent level Canon system. If the Pentax has better noise characteristics, I'll offer a full apology, eat my shorts and not post anything photography related again. There's clearly people here who have greater experience and understanding than I do.

H
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 31-12-2011, 10:25 AM
renormalised's Avatar
renormalised (Carl)
No More Infinities

renormalised is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Townsville
Posts: 9,698
You don't see the point I'm getting at H. Both cameras have the good and bad points and depending on your particular "bent" one is better than the other. But, there are always bigger and better beasts on the block. Even amongst either brand. For instance, your 5D Mk II is going to out perform someone's little 600D. Someone's D7000 is going to out perform my D3000. But your 5D MkII and someone's D3S or D3X will be fairly close.

Yes, it's true that some makes do handle some stuff better than others, but that shouldn't dissuade anyone from purchasing those other brands. It all depends on what you're going to be using them for, apart from astropics.

Here's another thing...what were the skill levels of those using either camera.

In any case, if you're smart, you won't use a DSLR for high ISO imaging through a scope. You'll go and grab yourself a CCD camera and be done with it Jump into the deep end
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 31-12-2011, 05:42 PM
Paul Haese's Avatar
Paul Haese
Registered User

Paul Haese is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,403
We always see this argument cropping up. I have owned nikons for over half my life. I rarely use my D3 for Astro work, but I know it best to use a ccd camera for Astro work now. I used a moded Canon for Astro work for a while, and that was good, but certainly not in the same league as a ccd. I agree about looking at the system. I like Nikon personally, but not everyone does.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-01-2012, 09:31 AM
CapturingTheNight's Avatar
CapturingTheNight (Greg)
Registered User

CapturingTheNight is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Holbrook, NSW
Posts: 1,230
I'll pitch in. I'm a Canon man through and through. I own two Canons- a 1000D and the 60D you are considering. While I have no experience with Nikons I can tell you that I have a problem using the 60D for astro work. For widefield fixed tripod work it is great with it's high ISO capability (although I dream every night of owning a 5D Mark II for that sort of thing- Hurry up and release the Mark III Canon so that I can hopefully pick up the II cheaper) and the articulated LCD screen makes focus and checking results a breeze. BUT....with direct comparrison with the 1000D for mounted long exposure work the lowly 1000D wins hands down with it's star colour. The 60D produces horrible purple stars when shooting with exactly the same settings and lens/telescope as the 1000D. Now, I know this can generally be tuned out in post processing but I have yet to work out a way of removing it in camera.
That's my two cents. Just thought you would appreciate the opinions of someone who actually owns one of the cameras. As for purely brand related then all has already been said in terms of software mainly being available Canon only.
Cheers
Greg
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 04:47 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
Celestron Australia
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement