As said, gear doesn't matter, why bother. Both are great camera.

Tone, Colour, etc has been discussed before many times, and it shows the person's understanding towards it.

900-1000

I hate MV convention centre, ceiling too high and lighting like crap

If your lens have VR, then becareful. Or maybe that's why your 1635 has decentering problem?

Power la that 'photographer'

Its subjective... to me color is usually not an issue la.. it depends on the photog after all.

KLCC more geng

Is there any sophisticated different between Nikon's pro grade lens, those golden rings vs Canon's pro grade lens, those red rings?

How about Sony? For Sony is Zeiss?

Why bother comparing? If you are using a Nikon, you should be using f-mount lenses... and not Canon mount or Sony mount etc.

Many a time, people are very tempted to bump up saturation and use Vivid profile. While this may work on some shoots, it works horrible on skintones. When you shoot with flash or at high ISO, the skintone looks overcooked.

Stick to Standard or Neutral picture style.

That's the most ignorant statement ever made. Where is here? Here as in Malaysia or here as in LYN forum?

I like Vivid even for my portraits

So do I!

I wanted to know the differences for technical knowledge, but not trying to compare as for what you thought of. For example some of Nikon's pro grades have Nano-coat, do Canon or Sony have anything equivalent to Nano-coat performance?

Something similar like Honda, Toyota and Mitsubishi have VTEC, VVTI and MIVEC technology respectively.

Therefore, anyone care to share the knowledge for lens comparison?

Bloody hell have you guys watch that video posted in lolyat frontpage about unblurry tool from adobe? freaking impressive stuff! I WANT ONE

I think the Nanocoat is purely marketing strategies, I believe there are so much more features to look into (newer) pro grade lenses, e.g. amount of glass elements, etc. These lenses no doubt will give extraordinary color renditions, bokeh rendition, sharpness, etc when used correctly. So called "premium" image quality of what you have paid for to give you the satisfaction in the outcome.

DISCLAIMER: This doesn't mean cheaper glass sucks. Just more satisfaction from more expensive glasses.

Does Nikon pro grade lenses have weather resistance?

This post has been edited by geekster129: Oct 11 2011, 06:52 PM

Google is your friend.

I know Canon has some fluoride and UD coating thingy. Zeiss has some T* coating.

I know one dude's who's using D3x and he's mounting a 35mm Zeiss MF lens, rather than a Nikkor for that range.

So, why bother? If you like Nikon, there are others who like something else on their cameras too

canon using infamous super spectra coating , there are no naming on the lens whereas nikon label it as N.

UD = Canon, ED = Nikon

Fluorite = Canon, Super ED = Nikon

err what else...

How will Vivid be with the 85 1.4G?

i kinda agreed with him but i dont like it. i love nikon image. like razu said, color can be editied but detail, not the detail. canon sharp soft that giving nice skintone while nikon sharp detail where all liang roma will be visible. thats makes nikon more realistic to me

Nikon in Thailand under attack!


Attached thumbnail(s)

Every sifus, can I ask how much does a 4 years old Nikon 17-55mm F/2.8 worth? I got a seller that willing to sell at AUD875=RM2,730.

Is the price ok price for its age? No more warranty.

i take it without thinking,

providing the swm is smooth, and zoom ring