It,s WAR (3 Viewers)

[Ian Latham]

I am afraid I will have to decline your kind offer as I am very busy and would currently find it near impossible to co-ordinate. Thanx anyway!! :t:

What little leisure time I do have is spent with my family and friends who live in and around the Salford area.(

I also worry about my gear. I live in Salford! regards Adrian

) :eek!:

My father is retired now so he enjoys the family get togethers. He was unable to see much of us when he worked in London (for the 'News of the World') On those days when we are all together we like to go and watch the 'footie' up at 'Old Trafford'.(

In my view your thread title exibits a bit of the tabloid or football supporter mentality that lurks within many, no worries it's human.

) :eek!:

 

[Doug Greenberg]

Your title "It's War" appeared very much aimed at starting an argumentative thread, hence my harsh response.

Frankly, the very title "It's War," along with the tone of Ian's original post, made it abundantly clear (to me, anyway) that it was NOT his intent to start an argument, only to invite speculation as to what kinds of "volleys" to expect from each company in the near and distant future. Innocent enough, I think.

As for the high cost of the newer premium camera bodies, I hate to see myself in the position of defending megacorporations, but I invite anyone to compare, side by side, the feature set and overall engineering of a new say, D300 or D3 and a much older "premium" camera like a Nikon F/FtN. The difference is astonishing; we've come to take for granted the engineering marvels that these companies are able to create. Consider the amount of research and development that goes into each new innovation, not to mention the incorporation of these into a single, ergonomically pleasing camera body. And on top of that, the product half-life of each new camera is increasingly brief!

So whereas I wince at what happens to my bank account when I shell out for a newer and better camera, I actually don't begrudge Nikon (or Canon) the income that I pass on to them.

 

[Geoff Brown]

This little "war" whether to buy Canon or Nikon is why the consumer society was invented.

 

[Ian Latham]

Frankly, the very title "It's War," along with the tone of Ian's original post, made it abundantly clear (to me, anyway) that it was NOT his intent to start an argument, only to invite speculation as to what kinds of "volleys" to expect from each company in the near and distant future. Innocent enough, I think.

Thankyou kindly Mr Greenberg.

I have read today that Nikon is expected to be the market leader for 2007. This is obviously going to mean that Canon and and the other camera manufacturers are going to have to up the ante for 2008, which will make for a very interesting time for 'enthuisiasts'.

I myself am going to have to make a purchase regardless of what is around the corner! I am eager to get a system together for birding/wildlife photography in time for spring.

I would really of liked to stay with Nikon but the lenses I was anticipating (the new 400, 500 and 600mm) are way beyond my 'hobby' budget....... A (soon to recieve) Kowa scope has to be added to the equation, and I also have other interests that cost a small fortune!

So 'in effect' my war with Canon and Nikon is nearly over (unless Nikon sneak a D90 or a decent 400mm for under a grand in before my prospective purchase)

There will of course be other wars to battle within the realms of the photography world, and I am fairly certain that as long as we are all happy with the products.........we are all winners!!:t:

 

[Jaff]

I occasionally go to Martin Mere but do not have a 40D but have friends who do. I only have a 20D. I do have a 100-400 canon zoom. Since you are placed in a dilema and provided you can be patient I would be more than happy to let you test out my gear if we were to meet up. I am sure, or I would hope that with such a request you would get assistance with those who use Nikon gear. I will ask around.

I also worry about my gear. I live in Salford!

The next time I visit Martin Mere I will send you a PM if you wish to take me up on the offer.

regards

Adrian

Hey, don't forget to include me too! :king:

As a photographer (I use the term very loosely) who recently switched brands I'll show you an excerpt from a Pm I sent recently that explains the decision :-

If it wasn't for this bloody forum I wouldn't even have given a moments thought to photography never mind shelling out well over a grand on upgrading and switching brands!

In an ideal world I'd have personally stayed with Nikon, their cameras always seem to be just one step ahead I think, but I just don't feel their affordable good glass is comparable to Canon's. You either have to choose between having VR or fast focussing, you shouldn't have to compromise your choice because they haven't pulled their finger out.

Anyway there we go, I'm sure I'l have no regrets unless they suddenly do decide to right the wrongs, they've sorted out the professional end and they're strong in the beginner market.....

So that's my situation, I'm sure many others have been or will be in the same dilemna and may do it completely differently but that's the way I did it and I stand by it, despite seeing since a second-hand Nikon fit 300mm F4 for sale at a rather attractive price.
Jaff

 

[Ian Latham]

If it wasn't for this bloody forum I wouldn't even have given a moments thought to photography never mind shelling out well over a grand on upgrading and switching brands!

In an ideal world I'd have personally stayed with Nikon, their cameras always seem to be just one step ahead I think, but I just don't feel their affordable good glass is comparable to Canon's. You either have to choose between having VR or fast focussing, you shouldn't have to compromise your choice because they haven't pulled their finger out.

Anyway there we go, I'm sure I'l have no regrets unless they suddenly do decide to right the wrongs, they've sorted out the professional end and they're strong in the beginner market.....

So that's my situation, I'm sure many others have been or will be in the same dilemna and may do it completely differently but that's the way I did it and I stand by it, despite seeing since a second-hand Nikon fit 300mm F4 for sale at a rather attractive price.
Jaff

Strangely enough my friend......this thread is all your fault.

I noticed in a thread that you were a regular visitor to one of my haunts (Martin Mere) so I decided to check out your gallery. I was 'reasonably' (let's not go overboard) impressed with the close up of the pigeon (taken with the Canon set up) and having looked on the next page I came across the mallards close up (taken with the Nikon D80). To my eyes there was a difference in quality that made me set off on a 4 hour quest to study various other folks photos with similar set ups.

I did it again the next night (with fresh eyes) and reached the same conclusion.....

It was'nt the cameras that were getting these results.....

If a Nikon D80 was used with say a 300mm ED G IF VR f/2.8 (£3300 approx) or say a 200-400mm ED G IF VR f/4 (£4600 approx) then the Canon 30D was getting the same results with the 400mm L USM f/5.6 (£980 approx) or the 100-400mm L IS USM f/4.5-5.6 (£1000 approx)

You are looking at a price difference of (for a set up to give similar quality results)....... £2000 - £3500 approx (about the same price as the Canon EOS-ID MK III or a Nikon D3)

It does'nt take a rocket scientist to work out where the 'smart money' is???

Thanks Jaff :t:

 

[Duke Leto]

Sorry I might be misunderstanding the last post, but are you saying that to get the same from a Canon D40 and a 400mm lens you have to by a Nikon SLR and a Nikon lens @ £5000 yeah right.............................. this thread has lost the plot

 

[nigelblake]

Sorry I might be misunderstanding the last post, but are you saying that to get the same from a Canon D40 and a 400mm lens you have to by a Nikon SLR and a Nikon lens @ £5000 yeah right.............................. this thread has lost the plot

I can only agree with your comments here Steve.

I think the chances of assessing the qualities of images from various body/lens combinations by looking at the BF gallery photos are very slim when you take into account the following factors :- They will have been resized, compressed, cropped (or not), leveled and sharpened to different amounts in different software, by people with vastly different processing abilities.

 

[Ian Latham]

How does the Canon 300mm L IS USM f/4 compare to the Nikon 300mm D ED IF f/4

or the......

Canon 400mm L USM f/5.6 compare to the Nikon 80-400mm D ED VR f4.5-5.6

and the difference is £4000 not £5000

 

[Leif]

Ian: One point to note is that you should not automatically assume that the old screw driver focus lenses are slow. I recently read accounts on Photo Net where some Nikon users reported FASTER focussing with non AFS lenses compared to Canon ultrasonic lenses. It depends on the lens, and the camera. I think you need to find out from a user how the 80-400 lens performs on a D300 for example. The D300 will be below £1000 in a few months IMO. Some reports of the D300 focus are very favourable, but with all these things, you need to know whose report you can trust. There are some user reports on Nikon Cafe too. I suspect the focus is not so good on a D200, but I do not know. I used a Sigma 400mm F5.6 Apo Macro on a D200, and it was fine for tracking ducks on a lake, even nearby, but not so good for Red Kites in flight, as it would lose the subject. But I ain't no bird photographer.

But yes the Nikon range is more limited in the budget long end. No 300mm F4 VR AFS. No 400mm F5.6 VR.

 

[Leif]

How does the Canon 300mm L IS USM f/4 compare to the Nikon 300mm D ED IF f/4

or the......

Canon 400mm L USM f/5.6 compare to the Nikon 80-400mm D ED VR f4.5-5.6

and the difference is £4000 not £5000

One place to get some idea if www.PhotoZone.de. Although it is not valid to compare lens tests across brands, you can still work out which lenses are decent and which less so. But bear in mind that he tests usually just one sample of a lens, and sample variation exists. Still, he does check for centering issues.

 

[Ian Latham]

Thanks Leif.......

Firstly, I've been on to that site for about a year checking the lenses out.

Also, I have based all this around my original budget of £2-3000 (this will not increase no matter what). I have also taken into account the accessories such as memory cards, batteries etc.

So the best package for birding with either the 300mm or 400mm, and getting the best all round quality is with the Canon set up.

 

[Neil]

Having just upgraded from the D2x to the D3 I now understand what people are saying about leveling the playing field. I was never happy with the performance of the D2x on fast moving subjects (eg warblers feeding, ducks in flight ), especially with a 1.4x tele on. Now I have the 1.4x tele on full time and I'm able to get shots that I couldn't get before.
We had a peregrine flyby at a popular spot last week where there were 5 others with pro gear (mostly Canon ) and I was the only one to get any frames (2).
I'm sure about the IQ comparisons, but the D3 is the pro DSLR that I've been waiting for ever since I bought the Nikon E3 in 1998. Neil.

ps I'm using the Nikon 300/f4 AFS and 300/2.8 AFS VR plus Nikon TC-14E II 1.4x Auto Focus Teleconverter

 

[pe'rigin]

If I was a Canon user and purchased the Mk III @ £3000, I would be fuming that they launched the 40D two months later at £700.[/QUOTE]

Might I ask why? Have you used a 1D Mark III vs a 40D?? I guess not.

Cheers

HH

Just a reply to Hugh, yes I have, and I have also commissioned professional photographers who have used both so I’m in a very good position to judge, because I have to pay for these images and produce something from them.

For the professionals I couldn’t careless what camera they turn up with, one job pays for their camera. The majority I deal with use Hasselblads, and wouldn’t soil their hands on a DSLR. They earn a very good living, so I have little sympathy for them.

The point I was making was the value for money aspect for the rest of us, the Mk III was marketed on it being “the best camera in the world’ headline, it’s not, and no way is it £2300 better than the 40D.

Ordinary people were seduced into spending £3000 on a very clever marketing strategy, fine if you have the cash, great if you are a professional, write it off as a capital expense and claim back the VAT. Canon don’t make duff cameras, the MK III is a very good, but over-priced camara.

 

[Jaff]

It seems to me the thread title you were looking for was "I've got £2-3000, which way should I go?" or something similar.
You cannot compare the pictures I took of the pigeon and mallards. One done with an £800+ lens (and my first go with a camera I'd never even used before!) and one done with an older model Sigma that cost £300 when it was new. Plus the pigeon is virtually full frame and the mallards a considerably heavier crop. I agree with what Nigel said in that do not compare photos taken in the gallery as there are too many variables to name.

It is the glass that makes the photo sharp and the camera improves the % of keepers I believe, could be wrong though as I freely admit that my experience is limited to say the least, I've only been going since April.

Just making my meager contribution.
Jaff

 

[Duke Leto]

So the best package for birding with either the 300mm or 400mm, and getting the best all round quality is with the Canon set up.

Ian, looking forward to seeing the results with the "ultimate" package. IHMO 300mm is a tad short for birding (come to that 400mm might also be a tad restrictive) or does he budget include a 1.4TC?

Leif, spot on re the older lenses, I miss my old 300mm IF-ED, to this day I still reckon it gave better results than my AF-S 300mm (and didn't fail after 14mths). Why did I swap? so I only needed on TC in the bag not 2.

 

[rezMole]

One thing I can never understand is people going out and buying a "cheap" Canon body as opposed to a "cheap" Nikon body because they are told that Canon glass is better and a bit cheaper. Then these people go out and buy a Sigma or Tamron lens. I count myself in this group. I went with Nikon because the cheapest body at the time felt better to me than what Canon had to offer for the same price. I knew that I'd never be able to afford a "serious" Canon OR Nikon lens so it made no difference to me what their expensive glass was like.

I'm quite happy with my Sigma 500mm f4.5. That took me two years to save up for - even secondhand!

Nikon or Canon - there really isn't much difference. Both have some good points and some bad. If one was significantly worse than the other, one would be out of business by now.

Actually, Nikon cameras are far better. Why? Because they have a nice bit of red on the casing.

 

[mark richards]

me myself, nikon user. spent months reading mags looking in shops, trying out all makes cameras. went for nikon ,why! because i think nikon looks after they're customers more,
not three months down the road, bringing out new cameras ,or is it canon users have bigger wallets,and smaller brains...!

 

[Hugh Harrop]

me myself, nikon user. spent months reading mags looking in shops, trying out all makes cameras. went for nikon ,why! because i think nikon looks after they're customers more,
not three months down the road, bringing out new cameras ,or is it canon users have bigger wallets,and smaller brains...!

God, this thread gets even worse. This particular post from a Nikon user is about as clear as mud - and hilariously, it implies that Canon users are the ones with small brains.

If you are swayed to buy a Nikon by reading this diatribe then good luck to you - at least Canon users have brains, albeit small, (according to to Mr Richards..)

HH

 

[Vectis Birder]

not three months down the road, bringing out new cameras ,or is it canon users have bigger wallets,and smaller brains...!

Hmmm, that's a more than a tad insulting - and I am a Nikon user myself. It comes down to personal preference in the end. I use Nikon because I have used them for years but maybe I'd have gone for Canon when I went digital if I hadn't already been in possession of Nikon lenses. All this squabbling between the two camps is so much bollocks.

Anyway, it's not what (system) you've got it's how you use it.