|
ah yes the Canon is better than Nikon tripe!
Sorry Greg, but the defining line between Canon Backs and Nikon back is well non extent anymore. Everything depends on the user and the skills of that user with the camera. I am using my Nikon D3 for some wide field astro and found it works very well unmodded. A modded version would be as equal to a Canon modded and only the deep magentas would be of more use. I own a 40d with cooling and modded and it does a lovely job but has more noise related issues than my D3. Several generations apart of course, but an unmodded can produce very good results now with the newer filters. Either Canon or Nikon would be a good choice, being modded will help but is not totally essential.
I think the major issue for you is the image circle on DSLR lenses. You could use it on the large format FLI but it is going to vignette quite a lot with DSLR lenses.
Your selection of the 14-24 is good but I don't think I will ever use that lens at 14mm to do wide field. I found at 24mm the field was just the right size, but other issues of being at f2.8 made for seagulls forming in the outer areas of the image.
You don't need an IS or VR lens for astro work. It needs to be turned off anyway if you do have it as it makes stars look like squares. So you could go for a second hand either Canon or Nikon Lens around 200mm and then something like a 24mm prime for ulta wide images.
Bottom line is that both Nikon and Canon make fine lenses and their backs are great too. I shoot with a number of guys that have pro bodies from both manufacturers and in the end the best images come from being proficient with the gear, not the gear being better.
|