Posted by Colin Smale on September 20, 2006 at 5:31 PM
Why is Nikon tail end charlie to Canon these days. I was out today with my non v/r 500 f4 (or if you are Canon i/s ) and was green with envy to see the guy next to me hand holding a Canon 500f4 i/s.
I don't keep up with the latest Canon stuff but oh boy how I could do with one of these.
Wouldn't it be just peachy if Nikon bring out a vr body so we can still use all our non vr lenses !!
Posted by Kent Staubus on September 20, 2006 at 7:24 PM
Not sure what you are talking about. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. With Nikon, they are clearly ahead with their SB-800 flash system, their RGB-2 meter, the 12-24mm lens, the 18-70mm S lens, and the 200-400mm f4 VR is a super wildlife lens. The Nikon D50 is the best selling entry level DSLR, and the D80 is probably THE best value DSLR out there. And, what does Canon have at the moment to compete with the D200? OTOH, Canon has an almost affordable full frame (5D) which is very good for night photos, three tilt/shift lenses (Nikon has one,) and the IS 500 and 600mm. Nikon has obviously concluded that very few people will buy a 500mm or 600mm f4 lens, but tons of people will buy an 18-70mm and a D80. I guess you just pick what works for you. I like the price point of the D80, the RGB-2 meter, and the SB-800 wireless iTTL flash. I don't often need a 500mm VR lens.
As for feeling envy for other photographers, it's pretty rare that I ever even see one. When I do, I'm more impressed by what they do than what they have. I've come across my share of people with $8,000 worth of stuff that didn't even know how to run it in aperature priority. I mean, it's pretty sad when I have to show them how to do that kind of stuff and explain why to.
Kent in SD
Posted by Steve Foss on September 20, 2006 at 10:12 PM
Well, let's not get into the Canon/Nikon thing, which is so repeatedly flogged in online forums that it's become ground horse meat. I like to think that NPN is a bit beyond that entry-level bickering.
As Kent suggested, each lineup has its strengths. I'm in the other camp when it comes to brand (at least it appears Kent is a Nikon fella), but I'm firmly in Kent's corner when it comes to the key question -- What's more important, equipment or talent? Money can buy equipment. Nothing can buy talent, and only hard work, regardless of the so-called advantages and disadvantages of various brands, can turn basic talent into something more fine. I know a few photographic geniuses, and some are Canon folks, some Nikon folks.
But c'mon Kent. $8,000 worth of stuff? That'll barely buy Canon's full-frame 16.7 Mp 1Ds MarkII.
Sorry Kent. The devil made me do it. Plus the fact that I grew up in the state to your north, the one with income taxes.
Hmmm. Did you get to see his shots? That's the real test of handholdability in my book. This kid always gets much better results with a Wimberly on a good tripod rather than handholding- even with IS.
There are two cardinal rules of photography:
Someone else will always have bigger and better gear.
You will always carry things you don't need and leave behind things you do.
Once you learn to quit fretting about those things, there's nothing left but to do your best with what you have.
Posted by chris hajee on September 21, 2006 at 4:01 AM
IMHO it doesn,t matter what you use to shoot but that you enjoy being out there, it,s not a competition who has the most expensive equipment, I think it,s graetful thing if you can help out a fellow photographer!!
A man's legs should be long enough to reach the ground.
Pete D. paraphrasing A.Lincoln
Posted by Colin Smale on September 21, 2006 at 8:39 AM
The simple truth is I could do with a 500mm vr lens because at the moment the only vr lens I have is 70-200 vr (brilliant lens) and I can see how a 500vr would benefit my photography, after all, aren't we all taking advantage of all this new technology and tailoring it to our own method of photography, I certainly am.
Posted by Kent Staubus on September 21, 2006 at 9:31 AM
Colin--
I won't argue that for bird photographers, the 600mm IS lens is probably the pinnacle. However, the 200-400mm f4 VR is a great lens too, and works with a 1.4x. Bird photography is a specialty where gear comes more into play than "regular" photography, but only up to a point. For example, let's say I decided to get more into bird photos and had to assign $$ to gear priorities. For me, a good little duckboat and a pair of waders would have higher priority than a 600mm lens. There are a lot of things go into making good photos; the lens/camera is simply the most visible. A few years ago in late November I took an out of state photographer out with me to photo some "exotic" shore birds coming down from the Far North. He had a camera worth eight times mine, and his lens was worth about 4x mine. However, I got the best shots that day. I had a goose down/GoreTex coat and insulated pants and he didn't. He spent a fair amount of his time in my truck warming up and drinking coffee!
Posted by Richard Wong on September 21, 2006 at 9:58 AM
Not sure, what all this has to do with the original post. And yes, I wish all bodies came with VR / IS, etc... Doesn't Minolta or another brand have a camera that does this?
I never understood all the photographers who run around handholding a $5,000 lens, IS or not.
On the plus side for having low-budget equipment. No other photographers will strike up a conversation with you about equipment.
Posted by Colin Smale on September 21, 2006 at 11:56 AM
I suppose I should also have said "because I have been photographing birds using Nikon equipment since the 1960's" I know what I like, I know what equipment I would like that has benefits and I know that a lot of it is just 'trinkets'. I have found that stalking birds such as chats and warblers is great using a 200mm image stabilising lens, now I would like to own a bigger lens for the more difficult hard to reach species but...Kent Staubus is absolutely right by the way when he says a 'duckboat' has priority over a 500mm lens. Yep, you are right Kent but I would still like a 500mm is lens !! AND A DUCKBOAT, hahaha, we are never satisfied are we.
If and when I replace my 500 f/4P, I'll opt for the 200-400VR over any eventual 500VR. But then again, I don't shoot small birds as a matter of course. For me the 200-400 overcomes my framing frustrations with fixed lenses.
Posted by Mark Hobson on September 22, 2006 at 1:17 PM
yo Colin
3 pearls of wisdom from Brooks Jensen
1. It's better to photograph with the camera (lenses) you own than to wait for the camera (lenses) you want.
2. Better photographers make better photographs. Equipment is never the answer to producing great work.
3. The more gear you carry the less likely you are to make a good photograph.
or, just do it.
Posted by Colin Smale on September 22, 2006 at 2:10 PM
Ok, here's my quote for today:
"If you still use a Thornton Pickard field camera, I have good news for you.!! "
One of the best bits of advice I read was from one of John Shaw's books, "BE THERE !"
Discussion
13 repliesI don't keep up with the latest Canon stuff but oh boy how I could do with one of these.
Wouldn't it be just peachy if Nikon bring out a vr body so we can still use all our non vr lenses !!
As for feeling envy for other photographers, it's pretty rare that I ever even see one. When I do, I'm more impressed by what they do than what they have. I've come across my share of people with $8,000 worth of stuff that didn't even know how to run it in aperature priority. I mean, it's pretty sad when I have to show them how to do that kind of stuff and explain why to.
Kent in SD
As Kent suggested, each lineup has its strengths. I'm in the other camp when it comes to brand (at least it appears Kent is a Nikon fella), but I'm firmly in Kent's corner when it comes to the key question -- What's more important, equipment or talent? Money can buy equipment. Nothing can buy talent, and only hard work, regardless of the so-called advantages and disadvantages of various brands, can turn basic talent into something more fine. I know a few photographic geniuses, and some are Canon folks, some Nikon folks.
But c'mon Kent. $8,000 worth of stuff? That'll barely buy Canon's full-frame 16.7 Mp 1Ds MarkII.
Sorry Kent. The devil made me do it. Plus the fact that I grew up in the state to your north, the one with income taxes.
There are two cardinal rules of photography:
Someone else will always have bigger and better gear.
You will always carry things you don't need and leave behind things you do.
Once you learn to quit fretting about those things, there's nothing left but to do your best with what you have.
Pete D. paraphrasing A.Lincoln
I won't argue that for bird photographers, the 600mm IS lens is probably the pinnacle. However, the 200-400mm f4 VR is a great lens too, and works with a 1.4x. Bird photography is a specialty where gear comes more into play than "regular" photography, but only up to a point. For example, let's say I decided to get more into bird photos and had to assign $$ to gear priorities. For me, a good little duckboat and a pair of waders would have higher priority than a 600mm lens. There are a lot of things go into making good photos; the lens/camera is simply the most visible. A few years ago in late November I took an out of state photographer out with me to photo some "exotic" shore birds coming down from the Far North. He had a camera worth eight times mine, and his lens was worth about 4x mine. However, I got the best shots that day. I had a goose down/GoreTex coat and insulated pants and he didn't. He spent a fair amount of his time in my truck warming up and drinking coffee!
Kent in SD
I never understood all the photographers who run around handholding a $5,000 lens, IS or not.
On the plus side for having low-budget equipment. No other photographers will strike up a conversation with you about equipment.
3 pearls of wisdom from Brooks Jensen
1. It's better to photograph with the camera (lenses) you own than to wait for the camera (lenses) you want.
2. Better photographers make better photographs. Equipment is never the answer to producing great work.
3. The more gear you carry the less likely you are to make a good photograph.
or, just do it.
"If you still use a Thornton Pickard field camera, I have good news for you.!! "
One of the best bits of advice I read was from one of John Shaw's books, "BE THERE !"