Ha, ha! Well said, Erik! Yeah pretty fantastic stuff. And Nikon shooters tend to be patient and forgiving with those who have not yet seen the light.
Posted by Darren White on October 30, 2007 at 7:54 PM
I have been a loyal Nikon shooter for the last 17 years starting with a Nikon 5005, then the F4s and now a D70....
That being said, Nikon better shine a very bright light in the near future or I am switching to Canon....with the D300 not being full frame and the only FF Nikon being 4500.00, I can easily get the 5D and a lens for the same price......Come on Nikon...some me something worthy!!!!
Posted by Mark Hudon on October 30, 2007 at 10:16 PM
Darren, with the quality of the D3 as you're eventual upgrade path, and it costing five grand compared to Canon's eight grand camera that isn't as good, you're going to switch?
Talk to Tony Kuyper about his 5D before you switch.
Posted by David Schoen on October 30, 2007 at 11:45 PM
and how much do you have invested in Nikon glass?
Posted by Darren White on October 31, 2007 at 12:11 AM
I own one lens.....thats all I use.....when I switch I will be switching to the 5D and the 16-35
so Nikon better come out with something comparable.....and if Canon comes out with the "3D" for under 3K then I will go that route.....I have looked at so many incredible images from the 5D that it just blows me away.....I feel that 2500 is a value price for that camera.....Now if Nikon comes out with something full frame with less features in the 13mp range, then I might consider....but dollar for dollar I just do not feel the D3 is worth the Extra 1500....just my opinion....
Posted by Mark Hudon on October 31, 2007 at 12:49 AM
Back in my rock climbing days the big campfire discussion was which shoes were "the best". I always argued to stop wasting time and learn to use a shoe, any shoe, just learn to use it and that the best climbers would still be the best climbers wearing any shoe.
You are simply not going to be a "better photographer" with a different camera. Ingrain this into your brain: all the best photos ever taken in history so far, were taken with far less sophisticated cameras than what you shoot with right now. Buying another system to take "better photos" is a fools errand.
Go ahead and change but know that the shoes do not make the climber any more than the camera gear makes the photographer.
Posted by Tom Kloster on October 31, 2007 at 1:54 AM
Well said, Mark - couldn't agree more. In fact, one of my favorite photography instructors (back in the pre-history of the early 80s) used to force the class to go out and shoot photo essays with fixed-lens 126 Instamatic cameras, just to get us off the damned zoom lens dependency everybody was falling into then. You had to actually move around to create a composition! The 126 film was really pretty good, too, and there were always great shots from this exercise. Everyone always felt great about this exercise, despite the initial grumbling.
Tom
Posted by Curtis Knight on October 31, 2007 at 10:46 AM
Ford vs Chevy... Chevys nickle and dime you to death, and Fords fall apart all at once. I like chevy, so I drive one with all the bolts tightened down (GMC).
Two things kept me from choosing Nikon when I went digital.
1. ISO 100. I was on a tight budget and had to choose between the D70 and the DRebel. The prices at the time were virtually the same. The D70 only goes down to ISO 200. I wanted the extra stop down.
2. R&D. Canon does all thier own R&D. I like an outfit that owns thier own technology.
Is one better than the other? probably not, which is why I made my decision the way I did.
oh, and when it comes time to argue Canon vs Nikon, I'll deny that last statement... even if it is in writing!
Posted by David Schoen on October 31, 2007 at 11:12 AM
sorry, Honda vs. Toyota (conservative vs. progressive)
How long did it take Nikon to come out with VR super tele?
Well, I am probably a better shooter now with my 500 f4 AFS non VR as a result. Had to develop good telephoto technique and shoot lots of silicon. Couln't afford that with film...
Back to Rick's original post.......that scenery from northern Vietnam is spectacular. Another place to add to my travel list!
Posted by Erik Lundh on October 31, 2007 at 4:01 PM
Nikon or Canon, A pro body is the way to go. I have used so many of the features on my D2x and with out them, there are definatly some shots I wouldn't have been able to get. I know they are expensive but if you are going for an upgrade, It's the way to go. I plan on having my camera for at least 3 more years.
Posted by Darren White on October 31, 2007 at 9:20 PM
Large prints....20x30's and up........Full frame is the way to go.....for many reasons.....all I am saying is that Nikon better come out with something similar to the 5D in quality and price.....I am not going to spend 4500 bucks for a nikon camera when I can buy the 5D and the lens for the same price....
I do not need all the bells and whistles...I need low iso....low noise and very high res......hell, I could manually focus the thing if they would take some $$$ off.......side by side, dollar for dollar, I am having a hard time believing that the Nikon D3 is worth the extra 2 grand over the 5D.....
Posted by Rick Lamb on November 1, 2007 at 12:44 AM
Hi folks, First off I never intended this to become a Nikon vs Canon thing. Both are IMHO awesome providers of awesome cameras.
As far as the Canon 5D compares to the Nikon D3 as an owner of a Canon 5D and a Canon 1D Mark II I don't personally believe that comparing a Canon 5D to a Nikon D3 is an even remotely fair comparison. The 5D is a pro-sumer camera while the D3 is a full on top of the line Pro camera with all the added features and expense that entails. It's kinda like comparing a Ferrari to a Corvette. Both are great cars but they are NOT in the same league. Until you've actually shot with a true pro level camera such as the D3 you won't understand the value. I like the Canon 5D a lot. But I LOVE my Canon 1D Mark II.
Darren you might find it really value-added to do a real side by side comparison of the Canon 5D, a Canon 1Ds Mark III, a Nikon D2X and the Nikon D3. Each of these covers their own unique nitch in the photography world and each can stand proud of what they are able to deliver in their own unique way.
But I like Mark's comment the best. Many an awesome image has been captured with much less of a camera than any of the above mentioned tools of the trade.
Posted by Erik Lundh on November 1, 2007 at 1:00 AM
I honestly think full frame is over rated. Just because a sensor is the same size as a 35 mm film, doesn't mean it won't make nice prints. I've seen prints from a d2x blown up to 24x36 and look great. There is a reason Nikon isn't abandoning it's DX line of lenses.
Posted by Tom Kloster on November 1, 2007 at 11:37 AM
So for the weekend warriors who read this thread, I just upgraded to an Olympus E-510 from my old (and failing) E-300 because there's no way I could afford the pro E-3 that just came out. Dollar for dollar, I'd have to use the E-3 for nine years, if my E-510 gives me three. So as an amateur, I've focused (pun intended) my limited dollars on quality lenses, and the best body I can afford is what I get. BTW, the E-510 is notably more compact than the E-300, which was notably more compact than the other consumer DSLRs on the market - definitely a consideration for me that goes way back to my old OM-1.
We now return to our regular Nikon/Canon programming...
Tom
Posted by Nancy Lamb on November 8, 2007 at 7:22 PM
Darren,
I think it is awesome that you have the power to make your own decision. I should stop there. But I won't. First, I love my 5D. I really enjoy the FF. It does not have all the bells and whistle's as Rick's 1DMarkII, but I never got into this to be the competing with those who are considering themselves professional caliber, whether they sell or not. The 5D is a great camera and many professional are using this machine with great success, landscape, sport and portrait photagraphers alike.
I can also tell you that the guys at Glazers have told me more than once that most pro's are finding the 5D to be quite worthy as a professional camera. Mark is right, there is no substitute for skill and creativity, and NO professional camera will make you good. You get to do that on your own. Many of the shots I've seen from the older 10D's are still spectacular shots.
What frustrates me is that everyone assumes that everyone else has the same goals. I don't know what your end goal is, but I do know that what worked best for me was slowing down, researching, reading, holding, playing with and otherwise examining both manufacturers simultaneously while thinking of my needs, not just what machine had the coolest newest features or functions. I needed to know what my long term goal was before I could invest. I needed to know whether a specific camera was going to suffice 3 years down the road.
Posted by Edward Thomas on November 8, 2007 at 8:29 PM
Darren, right inside the door of Pro Photo Supply is a 4x5 foot landscape shot by the weather guy here in Portland. It was done with a D200. Also, if you know who Roman Johnston is, (he posts a lot on Dpreview, and has a pbase account,) he has some really spectacular d2x shots blown up to 4 x 6 feet. I've seen great 5D enlargements, and I've seen 5D enlargements that were not so great.
What I'm trying to say is don't get hung up on the FF vs DX thing for large prints, it really has very little to do with anything.
Personally, I am much more excited about a pro body camera for under $1800, like the D300.
Posted by Darren White on November 8, 2007 at 11:52 PM
I have been doing lots of research and asking question to various people.....
there is one thing that reallllllllllly confuses me and I can not get a straight answer on this...
my D 70 has 6.1 mp....
and the D2Xs has 12.4 on the same size sensor...
if larger pixels are supposed to be better (and everyone says that they are) than this would mean that my pixels on my D70 are twice as big as those on the D2xs...right.....so why does the D2xs produce better pictures...is it the processor......
I am not upgrading my camera in hopes of becoming a better photographer, I am upgrading my camera so that the prints I sell will be of a much higher quality and I am also looking for more dynamic range in my images......truth be told the D70 does not have much of that.....
I will be curious to see some of the shots from the new Nikons......when do they arrive in peoples hands!!!!
Discussion
19 repliesHere is some trick Nikon marketing:
http://www.stunningnikon.com/challenge/
I am a Canon shooter but I was still impressed with this!! Very cool stuff!!
I agree, those are some amazing shots. But of course, to us Nikon shooters, this is old hat.
That being said, Nikon better shine a very bright light in the near future or I am switching to Canon....with the D300 not being full frame and the only FF Nikon being 4500.00, I can easily get the 5D and a lens for the same price......Come on Nikon...some me something worthy!!!!
Talk to Tony Kuyper about his 5D before you switch.
so Nikon better come out with something comparable.....and if Canon comes out with the "3D" for under 3K then I will go that route.....I have looked at so many incredible images from the 5D that it just blows me away.....I feel that 2500 is a value price for that camera.....Now if Nikon comes out with something full frame with less features in the 13mp range, then I might consider....but dollar for dollar I just do not feel the D3 is worth the Extra 1500....just my opinion....
You are simply not going to be a "better photographer" with a different camera. Ingrain this into your brain: all the best photos ever taken in history so far, were taken with far less sophisticated cameras than what you shoot with right now. Buying another system to take "better photos" is a fools errand.
Go ahead and change but know that the shoes do not make the climber any more than the camera gear makes the photographer.
Tom
Two things kept me from choosing Nikon when I went digital.
1. ISO 100. I was on a tight budget and had to choose between the D70 and the DRebel. The prices at the time were virtually the same. The D70 only goes down to ISO 200. I wanted the extra stop down.
2. R&D. Canon does all thier own R&D. I like an outfit that owns thier own technology.
Is one better than the other? probably not, which is why I made my decision the way I did.
oh, and when it comes time to argue Canon vs Nikon, I'll deny that last statement... even if it is in writing!
How long did it take Nikon to come out with VR super tele?
Well, I am probably a better shooter now with my 500 f4 AFS non VR as a result. Had to develop good telephoto technique and shoot lots of silicon. Couln't afford that with film...
I do not need all the bells and whistles...I need low iso....low noise and very high res......hell, I could manually focus the thing if they would take some $$$ off.......side by side, dollar for dollar, I am having a hard time believing that the Nikon D3 is worth the extra 2 grand over the 5D.....
As far as the Canon 5D compares to the Nikon D3 as an owner of a Canon 5D and a Canon 1D Mark II I don't personally believe that comparing a Canon 5D to a Nikon D3 is an even remotely fair comparison. The 5D is a pro-sumer camera while the D3 is a full on top of the line Pro camera with all the added features and expense that entails. It's kinda like comparing a Ferrari to a Corvette. Both are great cars but they are NOT in the same league. Until you've actually shot with a true pro level camera such as the D3 you won't understand the value. I like the Canon 5D a lot. But I LOVE my Canon 1D Mark II.
Darren you might find it really value-added to do a real side by side comparison of the Canon 5D, a Canon 1Ds Mark III, a Nikon D2X and the Nikon D3. Each of these covers their own unique nitch in the photography world and each can stand proud of what they are able to deliver in their own unique way.
But I like Mark's comment the best. Many an awesome image has been captured with much less of a camera than any of the above mentioned tools of the trade.
We now return to our regular Nikon/Canon programming...
Tom
I think it is awesome that you have the power to make your own decision. I should stop there. But I won't. First, I love my 5D. I really enjoy the FF. It does not have all the bells and whistle's as Rick's 1DMarkII, but I never got into this to be the competing with those who are considering themselves professional caliber, whether they sell or not. The 5D is a great camera and many professional are using this machine with great success, landscape, sport and portrait photagraphers alike.
I can also tell you that the guys at Glazers have told me more than once that most pro's are finding the 5D to be quite worthy as a professional camera. Mark is right, there is no substitute for skill and creativity, and NO professional camera will make you good. You get to do that on your own. Many of the shots I've seen from the older 10D's are still spectacular shots.
What frustrates me is that everyone assumes that everyone else has the same goals. I don't know what your end goal is, but I do know that what worked best for me was slowing down, researching, reading, holding, playing with and otherwise examining both manufacturers simultaneously while thinking of my needs, not just what machine had the coolest newest features or functions. I needed to know what my long term goal was before I could invest. I needed to know whether a specific camera was going to suffice 3 years down the road.
What I'm trying to say is don't get hung up on the FF vs DX thing for large prints, it really has very little to do with anything.
Personally, I am much more excited about a pro body camera for under $1800, like the D300.
there is one thing that reallllllllllly confuses me and I can not get a straight answer on this...
my D 70 has 6.1 mp....
and the D2Xs has 12.4 on the same size sensor...
if larger pixels are supposed to be better (and everyone says that they are) than this would mean that my pixels on my D70 are twice as big as those on the D2xs...right.....so why does the D2xs produce better pictures...is it the processor......
I am not upgrading my camera in hopes of becoming a better photographer, I am upgrading my camera so that the prints I sell will be of a much higher quality and I am also looking for more dynamic range in my images......truth be told the D70 does not have much of that.....
I will be curious to see some of the shots from the new Nikons......when do they arrive in peoples hands!!!!