posted December 12, 2010 10:49 PM
Edited By: SteveWFL on 13 Dec 2010 06:51
NIKON! as a preference for me,
consumer reports and possibly cnet.com will have the pro's and cons of each and maybe a side by side comparison known to us as a shoot-out ____________
2010 Concours14
'08 R1 YAMAHA
ZX14 gone!
CBR600RR track bike
posted December 13, 2010 12:00 AM
Edited By: Obba on 13 Dec 2010 08:31
The recent digital SLR Canon lens i have held, have been light (pardon the pun), and have feltlike 'Mickey Mouse' quality.
I've always had Nikon and the lens's i have used - in the past, Film SLR days N70 - have been heavy.
I'm a believer that glass is a lens and the more glass the better. Some low F lens's i have used have weighed a ton.
Have a good think about what/why you need one of these meduim to high range cameras for.
I've been down the - expensive - path of "Must have faster lens's", and so on and IMO it's all smoke and mirrors.
Did you now that there are 'FAST' Lenses?
Then you have to carry a range of filters, like UV, Soft, Blue and so on....
If you want to do normal shooting of this and that, you might find a lower priced camera will do it all.
But reading the specs, always makes you go "Oh, i didn't know that, i might use that feature....". And then you carry that guilt when you look a shit picture "If only i'd paid more for...".
You can have a cheap body, but the lens is always what captures the light.
NB: A work friend of mine (all day takes and sorts photographs of animals), has a Canon EOS something and she has just completed a Adobe Photoshop course.
She now says that with the power of Photoshop, you can turn a crap picture into a good one.
She wouldn't buy her up market camera again, as now she knows.
I got out of the game after realising that it - for me anyway - turned out to be a E-penis thing.
I now own a small digital auto (no lens change), and it's fine.
EDIT: The weight of a lens is also down to the number of 'elements' within the lens. The more elements the heavier and more cost and the better picture! Go Figure!!!
posted December 13, 2010 12:15 AM
In which case, Nikon < Canon in terms of lenses. Especially when you get into "L" quality glass on the Canons. If you like weight, go to a camera store and ask to hold a 24-70 f/2.8 L and see if it fits your fancy for weight. If that still doesnt, see if they have a 100-400 4.5-5.6 L....lol
The only prime lens that i have used thats light on the Canon mounts, is the 50 1.8 mkII, but it is a CHEAAAAP lens, but has produced numerous published photos.
posted December 13, 2010 05:15 AM
Edited By: Vertigo99 on 13 Dec 2010 13:17
I just acquired a Nikon D3100. Cheap to buy ($640 at Amazon) and the 18-55 kit lens is perfect for snapshots. There's also a kit with that lens plus a 55-200 for less than $1000. As others have said, put your money in quality lenses, the camera bodies come and go.
____________
08 Atomic Silver
posted December 13, 2010 07:24 AM
Edited By: BobC on 13 Dec 2010 15:27
It's a hard question to get a definitive answer to but I have a Nikon D700, an FX full-frame sensor, with a 24-70 Nikkor lens and it's an amazing camera so I'd say Nikon. If you were to ask my brother-in-law you'd get another answer.
____________
Candy Thunder Blue 2006 ZZR1400
Stock wheelbase
Max: 205.4 mph in 1.25 miles
2012 ZZR1400 in Golden Blazed Green
Brock CT Full System. etc
Max: 203.1 in 1 mile (so far)
posted December 13, 2010 07:35 AM
My wife just bought the 7d and she only did so after a years worth of research, countless times to the camera stores, and pricing them out. The 7d shoots true 1080p HD video which is cool because she wants to get videos of me at the track. Nikon's are the popular choice, but she's convinced me, the 7d is the better camera.
posted December 13, 2010 08:31 AM
Edited By: gilberjj on 13 Dec 2010 16:55
Just a couple photos she's taken. You can tell she's learning because her focus points aren't perfect, but she really has no experience, and she's taking some pretty cool photos I think. They look good to me....
posted December 13, 2010 10:45 AM
Cell phone cameras all the way especially if you want to sell something. You can't beat the pastel water color feel of the shots.
posted December 13, 2010 01:13 PM
Edited By: SteveWFL on 13 Dec 2010 21:14
gilberjj, nice pics! I'm trying to learn macro with my nikon. and also the black/white and color contrast options in software
I met this biatch while sport-touring a concours14 through VA last summer
posted December 14, 2010 09:26 PM
This was shot with a Canon 5D-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynWEPKHIMuc
Most of the film schools are using Canon video, (5d, 7d). It's not the camera that makes the best pictures, it's the lens.
____________
'There's more living in five minutes flat-out on a bike than some men have in an entire life'.
"The World's Fastest Indian"
One fast red ZX-14,
Three World and four National Land Speed Records,
One faster red and white Cessna Turbo 210
posted December 14, 2010 09:43 PM
Need to be clear about something: 5d mkII does video. mkI does not do video, and there is a hUUUUUGe difference in price ATM.
posted December 14, 2010 10:51 PM
Edited By: Flyboy on 15 Dec 2010 07:00
Thanks Steve. Both cameras are good and both make good lens but now that both make 1080 video I have to give the edge to Canon. I believe they make a better chip. And yes that is a 5D Mark ll. The ability to shoot in low light is amazing. It's makes you want to shoot a horror movie in your own back yard.
http://theeoscars.com/5dblog/ ____________
'There's more living in five minutes flat-out on a bike than some men have in an entire life'.
"The World's Fastest Indian"
One fast red ZX-14,
Three World and four National Land Speed Records,
One faster red and white Cessna Turbo 210
posted December 15, 2010 06:11 AM
I think the new Nikon 7000 shoots 1080 HD too, not sure as I don't use the DSLR cams for video
____________
2010 Concours14
'08 R1 YAMAHA
ZX14 gone!
CBR600RR track bike
posted December 15, 2010 11:48 PM
D300s body is $1450, 7d body $1600, I'm still undecided. Nikon made in Thailand, Canon Japan. btw, I followed a review off of cnet and got a nasty virus, more reviews with caution lol.
quote:My wife just bought the 7d and she only did so after a years worth of research, countless times to the camera stores, and pricing them out. The 7d shoots true 1080p HD video which is cool because she wants to get videos of me at the track. Nikon's are the popular choice, but she's convinced me, the 7d is the better camera.
My wife went with 5D MkII Canon for the 1080 HD movies and the 20plus pix, as you can take stills while in movie mode. None of these camers's are junk. It just depends on what you want from a camera and how much money are you willing to spend. The 7D was my pick as I was trying to save $. You see who won out :-) this camera is Sheri's ZX-14, now she drags me to different places every week end for pictures. DFW Photo Club has some cool places to take pictures that the public can't go to. After me going every week end racing my FJ1200 back in the day it's her turn.
HOME
NEW TOPIC
posted December 12, 2010 10:38 PM
Edited By: 
