Stay on Nikon or switch to Canon or shoot with both system?

yungfatyungfat Posts: 1Member
edited February 2013 in Nikon DSLR cameras
Hi! I need some advice from the pro over here before I can make-up my mind for the gear selection.

I owned a Nikon D7000 (with kit lens only) at the moment, but initially I love Canon DSLR.

I used to be Canon user, I owned 550D for two months, and the camera shut down by itself, cannot switch on after that. After sent for warranty claims, the camera store (my friend) advised me to trade in with Nikon as the Canon DSLR always got problems, at the time I was dissapoinnted with Canon, so I trade in my 550D with Nikon D7000.

After using D7000 for a while, I found that the image quality and low light ability from Nikon is much better than Canon, at least its able to shoot at lower ISO compared to 550D. A lots of Nikon users also commented that Nikon Creative Light System and Nikkor glass are much more superior compared to Canon, but I not sure. I found not much different for the 50mm F1.8 produced by Canon & Nikon, not sure about the "pro" glass.

I love Canon because of the Canon glass, especially prime lens. Canon prime lens are more up-to-date (at least with USM) compared to Nikon. Canon L Series lens are having very good reputation although some Pro who switched to Nikon commented that Nikon pro lens have better quality. But some also said Canon had better prime.

Anyhow, I still feel I love Canon. But I am not sure whether it's worth to trade in my Nikon D7000 to Canon 7D/7D2/70D, as I don't trust the lower end Canon anymore!

I am about to invest flash for my DSLR, so I got to decide whether stay on Nikon or switch to Canon or shoot with both system!

If I bought Nikon flash, can I use it on Canon DSLR with good result? Based on my searching, most of the user said that Nikon flash on Canon DSLR with have very bad results, vice versa.

I need your valuable advice before I can move further.

Million thanks!
Tagged:
«1

Comments

  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    edited February 2013

    If I bought Nikon flash, can I use it on Canon DSLR with good result? Based on my searching, most of the user said that Nikon flash on Canon DSLR with have very bad results, vice versa.
    To take full advantage of Nikon CLS you need a Nikon flash and Nikon Camera
    although some third party Nikon compatible flashes do claim to work with CLS I don't think they will work with a Canon

    I use an SB 900 on a D800 and the CLS is excellent


    Post edited by sevencrossing on
  • tcole1983tcole1983 Posts: 981Member
    Well a flash isn't a huge investment compared to lenses and bodies. At least not until you purchase multiple ones. We could argue all day about canon vs nikon. I think both are capable. Both have good lenses and bodies. If you already have a d7000 I don't see a reason to change...are you having problems? Also it sounds like you have bare minimum stuff. Spend the money and get nice glass and you might notice a difference. I think Nikon pro glass is stellar. I think the primes are also good. All Nikon primes I have shot have performed great. I haven't tested side by side with a Canon counterpart but I have no qualms with my Nikon glass. Will you notice a difference either way with kit lenses...probably not. Not saying there is no difference but try some Nikon 2.8 glass (or any with the gold ring) and I think you might be impressed.
    D5200, D5000, S31, 18-55 VR, 17-55 F2.8, 35 F1.8G, 105 F2.8 VR, 300 F4 AF-S (Previously owned 18-200 VRI, Tokina 12-24 F4 II)
  • MikeGunterMikeGunter Posts: 543Member
    Hi all,

    To the OP, you don't mention what kind of photography you do and that matters. If you do a lot of fast action photography for pay, you might want faster and bigger buffer rates, otherwise, the D7000 is a terrific all-around camera in the DX world. Mine is in the shop right now, but it gets more use than the average camera.

    CLS works very, very well. It is a light-of-sight systems on two groups on either of 4 channels. There are third parties that offer wireless radios that are compatible with CLS that allow non-line-of-sight synchronization for flash (I'm planing to add that ability to my personal kit this year).

    Kit lenses (18-55mm and 18-105mm) are sharp, journeyman lenses meant to do it all under a wide set of circumstances and they perform well considering their low cost. They are slow in low light.

    Add to your kit a fast prime like the DX 35mm f1.8, a 50mm f1.4 or the f1.8, and a micro like the 105mm f2.8 and eventually a 17-55mm f2.8 you'll have a good set of lenses to work with.

    I'd also add two flashes, an SB700 at least, but preferably 2 SB910s, and a SB-28 synch cord to get the flash off the camera.

    I have more invested in flashes than I have in camera bodies, and more in lenses than flashes. Balance in what you get and how long you get it is going to be key to keeping you happy. There's always going to be something new and shinny and different, but not always better.

    My best,

    Mike
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,396Moderator
    Canon vs. Nikon...an emotional decision. I would suspect both Canon and Nikon have subtle advantages and disadvantages. But, if an individual is attracted to one or the other for very subjective reasons, this may be the way to go. All camera companies have problems. My observation is that neither Canon nor Nikon hoods any real advantage with one exception and that is the D800 may have an advantage over Canon's close cousin.

    I might suggest playing with the cameras you are considering, waiting about a week, play again, then decide. This allows a slightly more objective decision making process to occur.
    Msmoto, mod
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,172Member
    Hmm .. you have not noticed the difference with nikon flash ? you obviously have not tried a nikon flash off camera with your D7000. I know pros who have swapped out a full set of canon systems for nikon just for the nikon flash system (CLS)..

    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • GitzoGitzo Posts: 174Member
    Yungfat;

    Open up the thread "need cheap pro lenses" and read the post I just finished making; if that doesn't make want to "stay with Nikon", nothing will ! Yes, all of those beautiful white lenses you see at all the football games are GREAT lenses; some of the Canon bodies that they're hanging on are pretty good also; yes, Nikon HAS done some DUMB things of late; having just said all of that........STAY with NIKON ! (the reasons why are too numerous to mention now) as for "going with BOTH systems" ? for anyone thinking of doing that, I would suggest switching "activities" altogether, and taking up stamp collecting. ( old canonite here )
  • TaoTeJaredTaoTeJared Posts: 1,306Member
    Just to point out, your Canon 550D was a whole class of system much below what you are using now or the Canons you have suggested. I wouldn't let that experience influence your decision.

    As for pluses and minus for either - it really depends on what is the most important to you. I think Canon does skin tones better but I feel Nikon's color is more accurate. Nikon's Auto ISO works better than any other system out there. Nikon's Lens system generally cost less than Canon's with being just as good or better. Canon has a few more lens options than Nikon. Canon's flash system has came a long way in the last few years and works well. I still think Nikon has the upper hand but not as much as it once did.

    Trying both systems out is the most ideal, but to do that successfully, you probably need to learn both. Rarely does that opportunity come about. Probably the best thing you can do is to make a list of things you want out of a system, a list of negatives that you have experienced and then pair that with the two systems.
    D800, D300, D50(ir converted), FujiX100, Canon G11, Olympus TG2. Nikon lenses - 24mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8, (5 in all)50mm, 60mm, 85mm 1.8, 105vr, 105 f2.5, 180mm 2.8, 70-200vr1, 24-120vr f4. Tokina 12-24mm, 16-28mm, 28-70mm (angenieux design), 300mm f2.8. Sigma 15mm fisheye. Voigtlander R2 (olive) & R2a, Voigt 35mm 2.5, Zeiss 50mm f/2, Leica 90mm f/4. I know I missed something...
  • GitzoGitzo Posts: 174Member
    Yungfat; Here's exactly what you need right now; go to Amazon and buy; David D. Busch's Nikon D 7000 Guide, and a copy of Mike Hagen's "Nikon Creative Lighting System" ( I'll probably get shot for this....they're both cheaper on Amazon.
    Both of these books are the BEST there are. ( I thought Thom Hogans D 300s guide was great after I paid $40 for it; David Busch's Guide is 3 times better , for less than half that. Ditto on Mike Hagen's book on speed lights. What you really need right now is some serious information and understanding of some highly technical "stuff" Dave Busch does it BETTER than anyone ! (IMHO) Good Luck !
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,396Moderator
    Charmdesign SAID:

    So it's been over a decade since my love for photography started. Back then I used film. After a very long hiatus I took up digital photography last April, inspired by my daughters birth. Now that I have a practice subject a motivation to preserve memories, I find myself spending every moment I can get learning as much as I can. I don't have much time, so it is frustrating. However thanks to my college photography 100 and 200 classes, I feel I have a head start at least on the fundamentals.

    When I first got to using my d7000, I found myself disappointed in regards to the crop factor. The seed was planted then that I would hone my skills and one day upgrade. Well I am just a hobbyist, artist. For now anyway. I do fantasize about doing this for money, but at the same time I am not forcing it. I don't want to ruin my passion...I will just master this and see where the path takes me. Despite not making money from this, I still want a FX camera so badly. Give me that an a nifty 50 and I will be set, for years.

    I just don't know that a. I can afford it right now, and b. that I have paid my dues with my FX camera. I am going to save though, and I would like a goal. Which camera would you suggest I shoot for? I am aiming at saving up over the cause of a year maybe faster if the price is not terrible. I keep reading about how people are sort of hesitant about space hogging images. While this does concern me as I am trying to keep costs relatively low, I don't think that fear is necessarily valid so long as hardware is updated. Drives keep getting bigger. hardware wise I have a Mac Pro from 09 and I store photos on external drives only. Will that suffice for bigger MP stuff, ram wise, knowing that I store my photos on external drives? I do fill my SD cards fast enough to annoy myself but I'm shooting raw and I'm lazy about cleaning up/ backing up. I don't have a good habit for backing up eg. I don't have it automated....I don't have off site backup either. That is another post though.

    I wouldn't mind spending around 1500, but probably not until summer/fall. Above that I will have to save longer. It's just, I recently paid 400 for a 50 although I have an old manual focus 50 that is better! So I am returning the new lens and trying to consider my options.

    I know I am on a Nikon forum so there may be bias. Believe me I am biased. I have romantic notions towards Nikon as that is what my grandfather used. I inherited his stuff...including the pre ai home conversion 50mm, my beloved lens! But my camera and lens have back focus issues and to say the least, I am a little disappointed. beyond that I know what my next purchase will probably seal my future brand allegiance as I don't plan to jump around. Would it be wise to TRY a canon before committing to a system and more expensive hear? I hear that IQ is the same but ergonomics is different on each. I also heard that nikons are like macs and canons are like pcs. Not sure what was meant or if that is true. Love my Mac though. Anyhow... Please advise.
    Msmoto, mod
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,172Member
    @Pitchblack.. just curious.. I have a friend i shoot with and he loves his canon! :-) so what are all these other categories that you consider that canon is better at?
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • shawninoshawnino Posts: 453Member
    At the risk of getting my account blocked (just kidding: we don't do that in these parts), if I was starting from zero today I'd be taking a very long look at micro-4/3 or maybe Sony/Fuji mirrorless. You are going to save money every step of the way, your kit will be small and light, and IQ is already good and improving rapidly.

    No, these solutions aren't perfect. The micro-sensors are small. The Sony and Fuji lines are about three years away from where they need to be in terms of lens selection. Some people don't want to embrace EVF.

    My D-glass has put the golden grip on me but if I were starting with $1500 today it just might be:
    Olympus E-PL-5 plus kit lens: $500
    Pancake 14 or 17 or 20mm fast prime: $400
    Oly 60mm 2.8 macro $500 OR if the length/macro doesn't do anything for you there are a whole whack of lenses between $300-$500 to look at, OR you might just save your money.

  • manhattanboymanhattanboy Posts: 983Member
    @shawnino
    Throw the Sony a7 in there too.

    I have also debated switching to Canon. Some of the lenses on sale are so much cheaper than Nikon that you could almost buy a body with the difference in cost. The IS 400 5.6 that will be affordable and released this year is tempting me like a dangerous Siren... Come to Canon...
  • WestEndBoyWestEndBoy Posts: 1,456Member
    @Pitchblack.. just curious.. I have a friend i shoot with and he loves his canon! :-) so what are all these other categories that you consider that canon is better at?
    I look forward to an answer from a guy with experience in both systems.

  • shawninoshawnino Posts: 453Member
    @manhattanboy:

    1) a7 is over the poster's budget of $1500

    2) Down the track I could see myself getting an a7 when the third or fourth iteration comes out and the adapters are rock solid, but if I were searching for a new body today I'd pass the current model because it's well and truly flawed: The AF isn't great, and for the 2% of the time anybody needs burst mode, the a7 doesn't have it. The native lens line remains too small, and commentary about current adapters on the market is very mixed. Smaller-sensor mirrorless has already passed these growing pains for anybody buying today, and has the added benefit of being small. When I'm deciding between the d830 and the a7.4 I'd imagine it'll be a close call, but if I was starting today with a $1500 budget, I'd be going micro-4/3.

    On your other point, I think you're completely correct. I think Nikon's lack of an enthusiast slow tele is a real hole in the lineup--and it gets even bigger if the 300 f/4 gets refreshed at $2500.
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,172Member
    @shawnino good point with considering the other brands .. earlier this year I almost switched to Fuji. If I were to start from scratch and didnt already have a dozen or so nikon lenses Fuji would be very tempting.

    But what kept me in the Nikon camp in the end was the CLS. Also, I "discovered" the Nikon1V1. and suddenly all my nikon glass are "new" again. The 2.7 crop of the nikon 1 sure changes all the lenses I have. Its like I have spent 10000 on a bunch of tele lenses to play with !
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    @Charmdesign, perhaps this had been pointed out already, but if you put a 35mm lens on your DX D7000 you will get the same field of view as your beloved 50mm on a film or full frame FX. The 35mm f1.8G DX lens at $200 is one of the best value DX lenses and stays practically welded to one of my DX bodies.
  • artgriffoartgriffo Posts: 1Member
    Seems to me that you have made your mind up... I'd switch back to Canon if I were you rather than slog a dead horse which obviously feel you have. There is nothing worse than using a camera which you feel is not right for you....
    The Nikon fans like me, will say stay true with Nikon... But you have tried both and Canon clearly is your preference as you keep referring back to the Canon system in your post... Be true to yourself and go with what you feel. Switch back to Canon...
  • mikepmikep Posts: 280Member

    I love Canon because of the Canon glass, especially prime lens. Canon prime lens are more up-to-date (at least with USM) compared to Nikon. Canon L Series lens are having very good reputation although some Pro who switched to Nikon commented that Nikon pro lens have better quality. But some also said Canon had better prime
    dont worry about any of this, canon and nikon are very very similar in all the important places, both make great cameras and great lenses. i like nikon just because i prefer the hand grip ....

    check these pictures out on flikr http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=night&cm=canon/eos_rebel_t3i .night time pictures taken with canon 600d. its a very capable camera, and so is the d7000

    yeah! the differences between canon and nikon are small, and you will be happy with either imo
  • ChasCSChasCS Posts: 309Member
    I don't have anything to add to this conversation, but I read an article that made me laugh pretty good.

    Not sure of the validity to these...
    switching camera's
    But they are worthy of a grin at the very least.

    I also get a kick, out of the names of people, they have used in these "stories".
    D800, AF-S NIKKOR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR, B+W Clear MRC 77mm, AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED VR, Sigma DG UV 77mm,
    SB-910~WG-AS3, SB-50, ME-1, Lexar Professional 600x 64GB SDXC UHS-I 90MB/s* x2, 400x 32GB SDHC UHS-I 60MB/s* x1
    Vanguard ALTA PRO 263AT, GH-300T, SBH-250, SBH-100, PH-22 Panhead
    Lowepro S&F Deluxe Technical Belt and Harness ~ Pouch 60 AW 50 AW & 10, S&F Toploader 70 AW, Lens Case 11 x 26cm
    FE, NIKKOR 2-20mm f/1.8, OPTEX UV 52mm, Vivitar Zoom 285, Kodacolor VR 1000 CF 135-24 EXP DX 35mm, rePlay XD1080

  • kyoshinikonkyoshinikon Posts: 410Member
    There actually is a difference between Canon and Nikon glass. Ive used both systems extensively and there are obvious differences between the performance of lenses. Nikon has better wides, Canon better teles both in terms of performance and sharpness. All of the canon 24-70mm were horrid compared to nikon up to the USM mk2 (slightly better). Most of the primes have very similar performance except the 85mm... Canons has nicer bokeh but isnt sharp anywhere until about f/4, Nikons are sharp all of the way through but the bokeh are harsher.

    As to bodies the two leapfrog each other every generation. I find the 5Dmk3 to be much superior to the D800 in terms of performance. However the 5Dmk2 was awful on the same plane both the D700 and a900 outperformed it.

    Get the camera you want. Both are nice systems. Ive used both and I perter nikon. If I was to get a second system I'd probably get sony but that is me. Canon and Nikon are not that much different that you should make a decision on settings unless it directly effects your work. I picked Nikon because it works better for what I do.
    “To photograph is to hold one’s breath, when all faculties converge to capture fleeting reality. It’s at that precise moment that mastering an image becomes a great physical and intellectual joy.” - Bresson
  • manhattanboymanhattanboy Posts: 983Member
    The Canon prices for the teles are just blowing away Nikon at this point. Canon's 70-200 2.8 is $600 cheaper than Nikon's at the moment, and most every other major lens is also at least $100 cheaper currently. I don't see how Nikon can stay in the game long term if they continue to price their equipment so much higher than Canon. Even if you argued that the entry DSLR market will save them, Canon has hit a significant blow with their new tiny EOS DSLR. Yes the Nikon pics are gorgeous with that amazing dynamic range, but at some point the cost may not be worth it.

    My biggest gripe with Nikon is that they hardly ever have good sales like Canon does frequently... I want Nikon to take my money, but feel downright scammed knowing that I am paying $600 more for equivalent lens performance for the Nikon version.
  • WestEndBoyWestEndBoy Posts: 1,456Member
    I agree. Both are great systems. Though I have no experience with anything from Canon except photocopiers (which means Canon gets about 100 times more money from me than Nikon, go figure), I am sure that I would be happy with a Canon system.

    I do have a sense that Nikon has greater potential and has a slight edge over Canon, but I concede that I don't have much evidence to support that. Perhaps D700 better than 5D2, D800 better IQ than 5D3, I don't mind fiddling "a bit" to get to better IQ. But that is it.

    The fact that I have used Nikon since I was 8 or 9 (rifle scopes and binoculars and a rangefinder I can't remember the model # of) which led me to my first SLR (an F80 I bought in Japan) combined with my weakly supported notions above is why I am with Nikon.
  • manhattanboymanhattanboy Posts: 983Member
    I am actually thinking of going to dual set-up. I love my Nikon D7100 and the crop mode giving an effective doubling of the focal length has been great for my distance shooting! However, I am thinking of adding a Canon full frame camera given the amazing sale Canon is having. While many here will disagree, on average the high ISO performance of Canon is better than Nikon, probably because Nikon has increased the megapixels for increased resolution whereas Canon has not moved the MP much. Yes, I'd love the D800's resolution, but I don't do studio work, and when I would be out and about at night shooting without a flash, the high ISO performance would be really helpful. I have a 910 flash for the Nikon to help sometimes, but anyone who has ever tried to focus a DX camera in pitch blackness knows that even with the help of the flash focus assistance lamp, shooting sharp pics can be difficult. If I get the Canon I'll post back what its like to start Nikon and convert to the dark side.
  • WestEndBoyWestEndBoy Posts: 1,456Member
    ............. I'd love the D800's resolution, but I don't do studio work, and when I would be out and about at night shooting without a flash, the high ISO performance would be really helpful. I have a 910 flash for the Nikon to help sometimes, but anyone who has ever tried to focus a DX camera in pitch blackness knows that even with the help of the flash focus assistance lamp, shooting sharp pics can be difficult. If I get the Canon I'll post back what its like to start Nikon and convert to the dark side.
    You might want to try out the Canon in pitch blackness first to ensure that your expectations are met.
  • rbrylawskirbrylawski Posts: 222Member
    Here's an interesting article by a professional photographer on why she moved from Canon to Nikon:

    http://tamaralackeyblog.com/switch-from-canon-to-nikon/
    Nikon D7100; AF-S DX 35mm f1.8; AF-S DX Macro 40mm f2.8; AF-S DX 18-200mm VRII; SB-700 Speed Light and a bunch of other not very noteworthy stuff......
Sign In or Register to comment.