Phalanix Posted December 23, 2009 Posted December 23, 2009 I hope I can ask this question without us getting into a pissing match about which one is better, but I am curious to know why some choose Cannon and others choose Nikon. After all my research I found that Cannon generally stays on the bleeding edge with technological advancements while Nikon generally focuses on simplicity and making better what is already good. My research also led me to believe that Nikon, in genral, produces nicer lenses than Cannon. The choice for me was easy because I wanted a nice simple body with solid performance with a nice array of lenses to select from. Why did you choose the camera you have today? This kind of question usually kills threads, majority of the time it turns into a pissing match. LOL Personally, I just prefer the Canon interface and ergonomics, as well as their L lenses. In the end, it really comes down to the man and not the machine. That said, I just took some macro shots of the Sheryl figure I got in the mail today - will post some pics tomorrow. Quote
anime52k8 Posted December 23, 2009 Posted December 23, 2009 I hope I can ask this question without us getting into a pissing match about which one is better you can't. Quote
Dante74 Posted December 23, 2009 Posted December 23, 2009 This isn't the first time you asked this question. And my answer is the same as it was then. Why did you choose the camera you have today? Quote
Lynx7725 Posted December 23, 2009 Posted December 23, 2009 Since we're now officially in a pissing match... _________________________________________________________--> I hit here. On topic. I'm currently using a D70 (not a D70s, you whippersnappers! ), with a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR lens, 60mm macro lens, a 18 - 70mm DX, and a 35mm prime. I also have a teleconverter (next to unused), 2x SB600, and a SB-something commander unit (not the SB800). I'm entertaining suggestions to add to the stable, inclusive of a second body. Other relevant information: My primary shooting patterns: I shoot indoors a lot, company events. Very low light (even in the day), so I need high ISO and high speed lens. I also shoot miniatures/ toys a bit. Not true digital macrophotography, but similar techniques. My preference is to shoot from far, using tele -- I'm a stalker, not a paparazzi. I intend to stick with Nikon, so no Canon suggestions please. Also, whatever it is, it has to be CF compatible -- I'm using CF now, not keen to switch medias between 2 bodies. So, suggestions? Would appreciate some rationals too. Quote
anime52k8 Posted December 23, 2009 Posted December 23, 2009 I intend to stick with Nikon, so no Canon suggestions please. Also, whatever it is, it has to be CF compatible -- I'm using CF now, not keen to switch medias between 2 bodies. So, suggestions? Would appreciate some rationals too. you should buy a Canon seriously though, how about a D300? it works with all your existing lenses and it's make all the people with D90's jealous. Quote
Kicker773 Posted December 23, 2009 Posted December 23, 2009 man.. i think i'm getting lost in this topic... need to go back a few pages and start reading again.. erg.. Quote
logos Posted December 23, 2009 Posted December 23, 2009 (edited) Since we're now officially in a pissing match... _________________________________________________________--> I hit here. On topic. I'm currently using a D70 (not a D70s, you whippersnappers! ), with a 70-200mm f/2.8 VR lens, 60mm macro lens, a 18 - 70mm DX, and a 35mm prime. I also have a teleconverter (next to unused), 2x SB600, and a SB-something commander unit (not the SB800). I'm entertaining suggestions to add to the stable, inclusive of a second body. Other relevant information: My primary shooting patterns: I shoot indoors a lot, company events. Very low light (even in the day), so I need high ISO and high speed lens. I also shoot miniatures/ toys a bit. Not true digital macrophotography, but similar techniques. My preference is to shoot from far, using tele -- I'm a stalker, not a paparazzi. I intend to stick with Nikon, so no Canon suggestions please. Also, whatever it is, it has to be CF compatible -- I'm using CF now, not keen to switch medias between 2 bodies. So, suggestions? Would appreciate some rationals too. If your trying to stay around the same price range why not look at the D90 or D5000? Check out the reviews at cameralabs.com. Gordon Lang gives a great in depth review on both and there is a video review on the conclusion pages that you can watch. http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D5000/index.shtml http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D90/ Note there is no Compact Flash slot on either of these cameras. I think for mid range and lower Nikon has go to SD only. The good news is that you can get an 8GB high speed SD card for under $40 these days so I don't really see why you need to stick to CF. Edited December 23, 2009 by logos Quote
Phalanix Posted December 23, 2009 Posted December 23, 2009 (edited) Some pics of my new Sheryl Nome figure... More here... Edited December 25, 2009 by Phalanix Quote
anime52k8 Posted December 23, 2009 Posted December 23, 2009 Note there is no Compact Flash slot on either of these cameras. I think for mid range and lower Nikon has go to SD only. The good news is that you can get an 8GB high speed SD card for under $40 these days so I don't really see why you need to stick to CF. because CF cards offer more memory and higher speeds for less money. also SD cards are flimsy, I like my recording media to have better tensile strength than a saltine cracker. Quote
MacrossMan Posted December 24, 2009 Posted December 24, 2009 My current lenses. The Nikon Nikkor 35mm 1.8 was at the door when I got home today. Quote
logos Posted December 24, 2009 Posted December 24, 2009 (edited) because CF cards offer more memory and higher speeds for less money. also SD cards are flimsy, I like my recording media to have better tensile strength than a saltine cracker. EDIT: When I say SD I am talking SDHC. That is so not the case anymore. Where I live I can get equivalent memory SD/SDHC cards cheaper than CF just not as fast mind-you. You see the problem is that camera memory write time is way more dependent on the camera processor and buffer than the card. You are going to have to buy a $1200+ camera before you can even see slight deferences between the fastest cards. I know that you would like to keep your CF cards for a new camera but if you can buy a "fast" SDHC 16GB card for $50-$120 US why would you pay $80-$150 for the fastest 4-8GB cards that you are only going to notice the performance on a camera that is most likely more expensive than you need. So it might be a bit faster but are you really going to see it in anything other than burst mode? SD is taking over the market and more and more DSLRs are SD only (even Olympus has started to move). About the only thing propping up CF sales today are high end SLRs and older devices using CF. Almost everything else has moved to SD because it is small and cheap. I will give in that CF is probably more durable than SD but you should store all media in thier plastic cases and in the camera so are you really going to break an SD card? It's not like a floppy so as long as you don't try to bend it between your fingers it should be fine. Never mind that if you are using and 8 to 16 GB card how often are you going to be taking it out of the camera? If you want to stay with Nikon and use CF you are probably going to have to look at a D300 then which has CF and SD slots. Problem is that the Camera goes anywhere from $1300-$1700 bucks. Now I know you would rather stick to a Nikon to go with your glass so do you spend and extra $400-$800 for a now Full Frame Camera that you don't really need to save at MOST $100-200 to keep your existing memory? If you are making money taking pictures I would say go for it but for personal use a D300 is probably way more camera than you need. Edited December 24, 2009 by logos Quote
logos Posted December 24, 2009 Posted December 24, 2009 (edited) Sorry about the rant I got a little carried away. Anyways nice Sheryl pics and nice lens! Anyway take some sample pics with it please? You've got to be able to get some really nice shallow depth of field pics with that 1.8 lens. Edited December 24, 2009 by logos Quote
Vegas Posted December 24, 2009 Posted December 24, 2009 Some pics of my new Sheryl Nome figure... very very nice! Quote
anime52k8 Posted December 24, 2009 Posted December 24, 2009 EDIT: When I say SD I am talking SDHC. That is so not the case anymore. Where I live I can get equivalent memory SD/SDHC cards cheaper than CF just not as fast mind-you. You see the problem is that camera memory write time is way more dependent on the camera processor and buffer than the card. You are going to have to buy a $1200+ camera before you can even see slight deferences between the fastest cards. I know that you would like to keep your CF cards for a new camera but if you can buy a "fast" SDHC 16GB card for $50-$120 US why would you pay $80-$150 for the fastest 4-8GB cards that you are only going to notice the performance on a camera that is most likely more expensive than you need. I've got a $1,200 camera and I DO notice the difference in speed faster cards make. So it might be a bit faster but are you really going to see it in anything other than burst mode? SD is taking over the market and more and more DSLRs are SD only (even Olympus has started to move). About the only thing propping up CF sales today are high end SLRs and older devices using CF. Almost everything else has moved to SD because it is small and cheap. I will give in that CF is probably more durable than SD but you should store all media in their plastic cases and in the camera so are you really going to break an SD card? It's not like a floppy so as long as you don't try to bend it between your fingers it should be fine. Never mind that if you are using and 8 to 16 GB card how often are you going to be taking it out of the camera? photos also load quicker when you go to review them. and I've broken a SD card taking it out of it's case so yeah, I trust CF more than SD. Quote
anime52k8 Posted December 24, 2009 Posted December 24, 2009 Alright, We interrupt your regularly scheduled gab to bring you something completely different: Canon 70-200mm f/4L has arrived! don't they match just so well. UPS delivered this at about 10pm so I haven't had a chance to really give it a workout but here's a couple of quick shots I took while testing it out (shot in my room under terrible lighting, please excuse the awful high-ISO noise.) Hows this for some awesome bokeh (these were shot in front of my closet and some window binds respectively) better pictures will be spammed tomorrow when I've got some light. Quote
Vegas Posted December 24, 2009 Posted December 24, 2009 Alright, We interrupt your regularly scheduled gab to bring you something completely different: Canon 70-200mm f/4L has arrived! congrats, welcome to the prestigious L club they say that lens is probably the best canon zoom (optically) Quote
Dante74 Posted December 24, 2009 Posted December 24, 2009 (edited) Great buy there anime52k8! The 70-200 mmf4 is supposedly the sharpest telezoom lens on the planet. I chose the f2.8 because I wanted the extra stops available when I needed them. The 2.8 is still sharp as hell and I doubt my non-pro eye will notice the difference in sharpness. An L lens is quite an investment but you'll forget all about the money when you import that perfect picture into Lightroom. Edited December 24, 2009 by Dante74 Quote
Phalanix Posted December 24, 2009 Posted December 24, 2009 Sweet lens for sure, congrats! Liking the first pic with the VE-1 beside the lens. LOL Quote
Phalanix Posted December 25, 2009 Posted December 25, 2009 (edited) More Sheryl! Edited December 25, 2009 by Phalanix Quote
ruskiiVFaussie Posted December 26, 2009 Posted December 26, 2009 (edited) JVC GZ-HM200B Full HD. New addition to the family, the birth of my little daughter only a week old now called for something brilliant to record all her little awesomeness. I've been obviously too busy lately, but plan on testing it out on my new 11B, plus a few other little tricks i plan to make use of, should be sweet! The zoom on this thing is freeking incredible. Edited December 26, 2009 by ruskiiVFaussie Quote
MacrossMan Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 If you're looking for camera bags, I recommend lowepro camera bags. I have the slingshot model and I love it. After some consideration I picked up the Lowepro 350AW. It's a little larger than what I wanted, but it has ample room for the extra stuff I plan to pick up. The selling point for me was the laptop compartment. The bag should make for nice storage as well. Just hope it's small enough for a carry on when flying. Quote
eugimon Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 After some consideration I picked up the Lowepro 350AW. It's a little larger than what I wanted, but it has ample room for the extra stuff I plan to pick up. The selling point for me was the laptop compartment. The bag should make for nice storage as well. Just hope it's small enough for a carry on when flying. nice. I'd have gotten that if I had a slim profile laptop. Quote
Dante74 Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 (edited) Good choice on the bag MacrossMan! You don't want to be spending extra cash on a new bag every time you buy an extra accessory for your camera. Finally got my quick release clamp from RRS today so my tripod setup is complete. I got the various componants from different stores and saved over €300 making it possible for me to have a pro grade ballhead for a consumer grade price. Phone camera pic. Camera/flash/lens combo in pic weighs just over 3kg and is locked solid! ::EDIT:: Spelling. Edited January 4, 2010 by Dante74 Quote
MacrossMan Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 I knew I needed to score a bag to protect my stuff and the fact that it was only 75 bucks made it a no brainer. I am learning quickly though that between collecting Macross stuff and this photography thing one is going to have to be placed on hold! I've got custom work out the wauzoo lined up, but I keep seeing what I could be buying "camera wise" if I didn't have to pay for the customs. I am fiending for the Nikon 70-200 version that same Cannon L lens. I'm not going to even delve into tripods because I have seen how expensive they can be. I know there has to be something there driving up the cost, but I do not care to know right now; it'll just remind me of how much money I have to spend that I don't have . Wish this stuff was cheaper. It'll be June before I can afford 70-200, but that should do it for me for a while as far as lenses for what I plan to shoot. I can then focus on a nice flash, the nikon camera grip for the D90, and a decent tripod. Quote
eugimon Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 I've been looking at that new lens too... drool. That plus the new teleconverter. But way too rich for my blood. Might score the 80-200 on ebay though. Quote
Dante74 Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 Tell me about it! It took months for me to compile a decent, and 'affordable' tripod/ballhead set-up and it still cost more than €600. This Gitzo isn't even a carbon version, those start at €450 for the one I'd need for my equipment. I'm pretty much set for my racing photography with the 70-200 and the urban exploration stuff with the tripod for now. a fast ultra wide zoom is still on the wishlist, but it'll have to wait. I haven't bought any Macross toys for little over a year now because all my extra cash is going into the photography thing. I'm even thinking about selling some of the toys to pay for the ultra wide. I knew I needed to score a bag to protect my stuff and the fact that it was only 75 bucks made it a no brainer. I am learning quickly though that between collecting Macross stuff and this photography thing one is going to have to be placed on hold! I've got custom work out the wauzoo lined up, but I keep seeing what I could be buying "camera wise" if I didn't have to pay for the customs. I am fiending for the Nikon 70-200 version that same Cannon L lens. I'm not going to even delve into tripods because I have seen how expensive they can be. I know there has to be something there driving up the cost, but I do not care to know right now; it'll just remind me of how much money I have to spend that I don't have . Wish this stuff was cheaper. It'll be June before I can afford 70-200, but that should do it for me for a while as far as lenses for what I plan to shoot. I can then focus on a nice flash, the nikon camera grip for the D90, and a decent tripod. Quote
Ale Posted January 5, 2010 Posted January 5, 2010 My first steps with a nikon D200 I´m new using a DLSR Quote
Kicker773 Posted January 7, 2010 Posted January 7, 2010 Man I haven't gotten a chance to take pictures outside yet.. been busy reorganizing things.. just took quick pics of the destroids.. hopefully this weekend i can play with the camera more .. man i need to get 2nd lens.. and there are a lots of lenses suggested on here.. damn.. getting more confused.. Quote
MacrossMan Posted January 7, 2010 Posted January 7, 2010 Man I haven't gotten a chance to take pictures outside yet.. been busy reorganizing things.. just took quick pics of the destroids.. hopefully this weekend i can play with the camera more .. man i need to get 2nd lens.. and there are a lots of lenses suggested on here.. damn.. getting more confused.. What lens are you using right now Kick? I'm trying to get a 70-200 f2.8 and I'll be finished with lenses for a while. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.