Apr 1 2016, 03:31 PM
QUOTE(scoutfai @ Mar 26 2016, 01:30 PM)
The articles mention few important points, which I summarize as below:
a) Canon lens can be easily built to have larger aperture (faster lens), while Nikon lens if want to achieve the same, either too costly or impractical. So there is more fast lens in Canon than in Nikon.
First part of the question, yes... To say that Canon has more fast lenses than Nikon, that may be true a few years ago but now not so anymore. Speaking about f/1.2 vs f/1.4, that's just bragging rights and hardly relevant nowadays.a) Canon lens can be easily built to have larger aperture (faster lens), while Nikon lens if want to achieve the same, either too costly or impractical. So there is more fast lens in Canon than in Nikon.
QUOTE(scoutfai @ Mar 26 2016, 01:30 PM)
b) Nikon lens can be used on Canon body, Canon lens cannot be used on Nikon body, reducing Nikon user opportunity of choice of lens.
Not really. The only time I desired a Canon lens was because they were cheaper (for the longer lenses) and more available in the 2nd hard market. Somehow Nikon users keep their lenses like gold.There is one lens in the Canon lineup that I lust though which is the 17mm f/4 TSE lens.
QUOTE(scoutfai @ Mar 26 2016, 01:30 PM)
I would like to ask Nikon DSLR user here,
1) Have you ever feel in agreement with the weakness of Nikon lens mount system mentioned in the article?
I did not read the article though but I'm aware of the pros and cons of the Nikon mount. But that's delving into technicalities and I think so long as Nikon can produce comparable or better lenses than their counterparts, I'm happy camper.1) Have you ever feel in agreement with the weakness of Nikon lens mount system mentioned in the article?
QUOTE(scoutfai @ Mar 26 2016, 01:30 PM)
2) While on paper the content of the article might be true, but in real world usage, have you encounter such situation where the Nikon lens mount system "features" has causes you to feel disappointed or frustrated? I do not use the term "weakness" as I do not think it is a weakness, just a consequence of the design philosophy chosen by Nikon.
Nope. It used to be a time when Canon had IS on almost all their nice long lenses. Nikon slowly updated their long lenses with VR but then again professionals long ago did without IS/VR and still got great photos.QUOTE(ieR @ Mar 26 2016, 07:49 PM)
there isnt much reason for canon to use nikon lenses, unless the canon user manage to grab a 600mmF4 for RM800 deal... usually because the VR is broken (expensive to repair) and half of the coating is damage etc etc etc. (yea i have a friend who got his hand on several super tele for dirt cheap)
Everybody thinks about long lenses but not many would want to agree that one of the better wide angle lenses for the Canon full frame is the Nikon AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8.QUOTE(scoutfai @ Mar 26 2016, 11:02 PM)
Another reason is many years ago Canon is best in low light noise control. I like to shoot night scene so it is important strength to me. But time has passes and now Nikon low light also very strong.
Nikon is currently ahead in the dynamic range and noise in the sensor. But let's not kid ourselves... Canon will always come back stronger and lead Nikon like they used to. So you can be safe at either camp and still produce beautiful photos.QUOTE(scoutfai @ Mar 26 2016, 11:02 PM)
You mean although Canon lens can have bigger aperture, but at this wide aperture it is hard to focus accurately?
I think he means problems getting the AF to perform and lock on accurately.QUOTE(DaddyO @ Mar 27 2016, 01:46 PM)
I see. Though not sure why you would want a camera like D810 with whooping 36 megapixels camera for hobby, but if you have the money with intention to print sharp big pictures bigger than your house wall, why not. Just note that you need to pair it up with very sharp quality lens to get optimal 35 mps out of it, otherwise it be a waste. Also note that FF is not one size fits all cause FF has some disadvantage against smaller sensors and it's not just about the price.
I believe almost all new Nikon lenses are up to D810's sensor. So there's no problem there unless planning to use old lenses...Well, I do agree that the FX sensor produces huge files and storage can be a problem. But then nowadays memory cards and hardisk are relatively cheaper than it was a few years ago. And with huge files, you have the room to crop your pics in PP if you wish and still get away with excellent quality. If ts insist, he can also switch to 1.5x DX mode with 15.4 MP images or 25.1 MP images with 1.2x crop. FX has better noise and dynamic range while DX sensors are superior when it comes to macro and DoF.
QUOTE(DaddyO @ Mar 27 2016, 01:46 PM)
If you are the kind of guy who may end up collecting lots of lenses, Canon maybe the way to go. Though if you own vintage lenses like the Minolta, Sony is probably better cause they have shorter flange, correct me if I'm wrong. But if I'm new with no system commitment, between C and N, I would rather go Nikon for their superior sensor and less worry about lenses cause I'm not planning to catch em all.
I think more clarification to your statement is required, if you collect OLD lenses, the Nikon is a better system to stick to. Because as far as new lenses are concerned, both Nikon and Canon have equivalents.
Quote
0.0152sec
0.76
6 queries
GZIP Disabled