It,s WAR (4 Viewers)

[nigelblake]

went for nikon ,why! because i think nikon looks after they're customers more,

I buy my equipment based on how well the ergonomics suit my shooting needs and the quality of the results, irrespective of the name on it.
Just when this thread was starting to look as if there was some constructive debate developing and now its gone back to the childish "Nikon - Canon mines best" twaddle.

 

[Hugh Harrop]

I buy my equipment based on how well the ergonomics suit my shooting needs and the quality of the results, irrespective of the name on it.
Just when this thread was starting to look as if there was some constructive debate developing and now its gone back to the childish "Nikon - Canon mines best" twaddle.

Started by Nikon users slating Canon users, I might add.

 

[Vectis Birder]

Started by Nikon users slating Canon users, I might add.

Does it matter who started it? I wish everyone would grow up a bit - I assume we are all adults here.

 

[Ian Latham]

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

Much apprieciated Jaff........but I did'nt base my analasis soley on your gallery, rather on a great deal of folk who have used a variety of equipment and upgraded or swapped to newer or higher spec equipment within my budget range.

You yourself have moved over form the D80 to the 40D (when it arrives), and I can only assume your reasons were based on something you found lacking in the Nikon system?

My natural choice of upgrade would have been the D80, but it is due for a change (D90) and I am not prepared to hang around waiting for Nikon to decide the 'time slot'. I would have liked a DLSR with the movable live view screen that I figure will be a standard improvement to a lot of future cameras. Maybe this will be an addition to the D90? Who knows? But for now I have tried to assess the best birding set up for ME. Within MY budget.:t:

 

[Duke Leto]

I buy my equipment based on how well the ergonomics suit my shooting needs and the quality of the results, irrespective of the name on it.

exactly spend your hard earned on what suits you best not because someone told you too, I've always said that I went for Nikon only because the body I bought at the time (D70s) was far more comfortable and easier to use my larger hands (& chubby fingers) than the equivalent Canon the 350D, the Canon had some better points, I liked the smoother and quieter shutter and the viewfinder was brighter, do I regret the path I took, not at all, I enjoy my photography, as much as I did when I had a Zenit then a Pentax and then Contax SLR's, just pre marriage and children I found it easier to change....................

 

[Duke Leto]

You yourself have moved over form the D80 to the 40D (when it arrives), and I can only assume your reasons were based on something you found lacking in the Nikon system?

Ian not a fair comparison horse for courses, the 40D should be compared with the D200 (or even the D300)

My natural choice of upgrade would have been the D80, but it is due for a change (D90) and I am not prepared to hang around waiting for Nikon to decide the 'time slot'. I would have liked a DLSR with the movable live view screen that I figure will be a standard improvement to a lot of future cameras. Maybe this will be an addition to the D90? Who knows? But for now I have tried to assess the best birding set up for ME. Within MY budget.:t:

If I had £2000, I would be tempted to buy a Nikon D300 (£1050) a Batt Pack & Vert Grip (£200 and 8 fps) and then either a Tamron 200-500 or look out for a bargain online you could get a Sigma 500/4.5 for around £1100, okay with the 500mm it busts the budget

 

[a.dancy]

Oh dear, we have gone off the rails again. Unfortunately Ian no one can make a decision for you but I wish you luck with the decision you finally come to make.

 

[a.dancy]

me myself, ........smaller brains...!

'Me myself' is a tautology!....meaning needless repetion,something which seems apparant in this thread...?

Error spotted by a Canon user obviously with no brain.3

AD

 

[pe'rigin]

Just in an attempt to get us back on thread, because I agree with NB we have a good debate going. It makes a change to have an open discussion on an interesting topic, instead of endless repeats of taping the pins and crop factors.

Doug wrote about the R&D side of manufacture, I partly agree with him for the justification of the high costs, but if you look at Canon and to a lesser extent Nikon, they have both tinkered with slight modifications, but still charged top price for the replacement.

I feel we pay high prices to sustain a booming second hand market for both brands.


On who is best, I don’t know, because we are still awaiting the ‘burning bush’ experience from both Canon and Nikon.

 

[mark richards]

canon users get off our sub forums. and use your own..!

 

[Leif]

or is it canon users have bigger wallets,and smaller brains...!

Now maybe I'm wrong, but there might be something contentious in your posting. Give me a while and I'll figure out what it was.

I don't understand why someone needs to push a brand. That's for the marketing wonks to do surely? Cameras are tools, that's all.

I don't think anyone can argue that Canon do have some advantages for birding. They have had IS lenses for ages, so chances are you could pick up a decent used 500mm F4 IS at a bargain price. Could you do the same for a Nikon 500mm F4 VR? No. So think about future purchases and the system as a whole. From what Ian has said, he seems to be taking a sensible approach to making a choice i.e. not a brand fanatic (despite the provocative start of the first posting).

I use Nikon quite happily, and I like the fact that there are so many good quality manual focus lenses about. And many of the consumer grade lenses are good quality too. Plus Nikon still have mechanical connections, so you can more easily do things like reverse a wide angle lens for true macro work.

I'm sure there are lots more pluses and minuses for each system.

 

[Leif]

canon users get off our sub forums. and use your own..!

I don't think that comment has a place on this forum. Canon users (or anyone else) who make informative posts are more than welcome.

 

[pe'rigin]

canon users get off our sub forums. and use your own..!

Mark,
If that’s aimed at me then I’m am and always will be a die in the wool Nikonian. If not then I apologise.

We have not had a lot to shout about over the past 5 years, Nikon have been slow in developing and listening to the consumer and professionals.

The Company starts with a capital C for conservatism, nothing wrong with that approach, as they have always operated in this way. But Canon have been aggressive in the marketplace and rightly put our noses out of joint.

Ian was right about the D300 and D3, perhaps at last we do have something to crow about. There is no doubt Canon will respond by replacing the Mk III and 5D and off we go again on this very expensive consumer mini-roundabout.

 

[pabs]

Its Canon v Nikon.......and Nikon have just kicked ass with their latest offerings (D3 & D300).

Does anyone imagine that Canon will take this lying down (I don't think so!!).

Nikon have temporarily filled a gap in the DLSR market with the D300, which has become a sort of 'budget pro camera', slotted in between 'prosumer' and career pro cameras.

Now Canon must reply and slot a camera in between the 40D and the 1DS MK l/llls.

They will also have to better the Nikon D3 if they are to reclaim their crown.

None of this is helping my dilemma as a consumer.....I want to upgrade from a Nikon D50 to a useful birding set up between £2/3000 but I dont want to get caught in the crossfire. The D90 is just around the corner so why buy the D80?, the D300 warrants some decent glass which Nikon are short of around the 300/400mm mark.

Canon seem to have the best, and (judging from this forums gallery) the most popular set up with the 40D and a fare selection of good lenses around the £1000 mark (within budget).

Whats next............anyone got a crystal ball?

Hi Ian,
Your opening post raises an interesting point about selecting a camera for the first time. I myself rightly or wrongly started with nikon. The D70 was my first purchase which I was very pleased with. However, after purchasing the D200 I found my D70 rather neglected. With the features the D300 has to offer my thoughts were about upgrading until I bumped into a colleague that had just bought a Canon 40d. We were both on site for the same reason, to photograph a pair of Black-necked Grebes. It was then that I had a demonstration of the "live View" feature. I have to say that I was very impressed with this idea and it certainly worked a treat photographing rather grey looking grebes on a grey looking choppy water. My D200 was having trouble photographing the distant grebes because of the low contrast conditions. The waves as well as the grebes both had the attention of the focus lock. The D300 does have a new focusing feature that has colour focus tracking which I would like to try out. I guess I shall opt for the D300 in the end because I have nikon lens's but cant help thinking about what I am missing on the canon side.
Paul
http://www.birdlist.co.uk

 

[Hugh Harrop]

There is no doubt Canon will respond by replacing the Mk III and 5D .

Why do Canon need to "respond" and replace the MKIII to compete with the D3?

Cheers,

Hugh

 

[postcardcv]

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.

It's a shame you posted this thread in the Nikon section with the title you did... if it had been in general photography with a title such as "£2-3k to spend, what would you buy?" you may have got more constructive answers. People will tend to recommend what they use, but I'm sure you could get some good advice. For me (as a Canon user) I'd go for a 40D with a secondhand Sigma 500 f4.5, though I'm sure the same lens with a Nikon on the back would perform just as well. Good luck choosing your gear.

 

[Jaff]

exactly spend your hard earned on what suits you best not because someone told you too, I've always said that I went for Nikon only because the body I bought at the time (D70s) was far more comfortable and easier to use my larger hands (& chubby fingers) than the equivalent Canon the 350D, the Canon had some better points, I liked the smoother and quieter shutter and the viewfinder was brighter, do I regret the path I took, not at all, I enjoy my photography, as much as I did when I had a Zenit then a Pentax and then Contax SLR's, just pre marriage and children I found it easier to change....................

That was exactly the same for me. The D80 was just a lot better to hold and use as opposed to the 400D and since my brother had a 400D I know what it's like, mine was faster (esp. in image playback), bigger grip, better battery and more ergonmically friendly and it had a plastic cover to protect the screen, which just goes to show Nikon really put a lot of time and effort into the little things. Paul couldn't leave mine alone and kept fondling and groping it cos it felt that much better to hold. Yes you can get a battery grip for the 400D and problem solved but it's extra cost!

That said if I could have afforded a 30D or there was a second-hand 20D knocking around at the time then I'd have gone Canon without hesitation, mainly because they have a greater range of 300mm zooms which was all I was after at the time.

Some of the posts here have made me laugh but come on, lets try and keep a good honest thread free from lunacy.
Jaff

 

[pe'rigin]

Why do Canon need to "respond" and replace the MKIII to compete with the D3?

Hugh,


I don’t think that I indicated that the MK III was in any way competing with the D3.

I wrote that a better model would replace it.

What I should have written:-

“Canon will fix the Mk III, lead it into a darken room, lock the door, where it will morph into the D7. Complete with a bigger sensor, better cleaning unit, and automatic ISO”.

And of course charge £3K+.

 

[postcardcv]

...For me (as a Canon user) I'd go for a 40D with a secondhand Sigma 500 f4.5...

Such as this one heer at £1100 - http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=105353 buy a 40D, spare batteries and memory cards and still come in under £2k.

 

[mark richards]

Ha! Ha! He! He! You Lot Make Me Laugh....