Bodies aside, are Canon beating Nikon with lenses?

Photogaz

Photogaz

Suspended / Banned
Messages
445
Edit My Images
No
Everyone keeps going on about how Nikon are really going ahead of Canon especially in the sensor area. While I don't disagree, if we look at lenses is that the case too or are Canon leaping ahead?

I'm not stating facts, more asking as I don't keep track of Nikon as much as I'm a Canon shooter.

If we forget price, Canon's latest lenses really are special.

The 70-200 f2.8 IS II is an ultra sharp beast and completely wipes the Nikon to the floor. Now with the release of the 24-70 II, it seems that this is the case again.

Do people overlook lenses and only look at bodies, what's your opinion?
 
At the pro/high end of the market I'm guessing Canon's tele's and specialist lenses like the 17mm TS-E, 85mm 1.2, etc are helping them overcome (relative) sensor weaknesses.

In the mid market I think they benefit from the 10-22mm being cheaper than the Nikon 10-24mm and the 17-55mm being both cheaper and having IS over the Nikon alternative.

At the entry level I think brand image is probabley the most important factor and Canon have the benefit of being viewed as the "standard".
 
Photogaz said:
Everyone keeps going on about how Nikon are really going ahead of Canon especially in the sensor area. While I don't disagree, if we look at lenses is that the case too or are Canon leaping ahead?

I'm not stating facts, more asking as I don't keep track of Nikon as much as I'm a Canon shooter.

If we forget price, Canon's latest lenses really are special.

The 70-200 f2.8 IS II is an ultra sharp beast and completely wipes the Nikon to the floor. Now with the release of the 24-70 II, it seems that this is the case again.

Do people overlook lenses and only look at bodies, what's your opinion?
Click to expand...


:thinking: You know, your post could be completely spun around, many say canon are currently in the ascendency body/sensor wise whilst the lenses they
are now producing can only match what Nikon have had around for a few years...


The point is, it doesn't actually matter because it it is all opinion and based on differences that can be measured only in fractions of percentages [not exactly floor wiping].

Both produce a stunning range of lenses & bodies for every level/budget that will be more than capable of doing the job you want and I never quite get the [serious] debates over who does what better, because they all take turns at nosing ahead marginally before being nosed out by the other. :shrug:
 
Soda Farl said:
Get your 14-24 out.....



Ooh you can't :nikon:
Click to expand...

Get your F/1.2 lenses out.

8-15 fish eye?

17mm TS/E?

What about 65mm MP-E?

Okay okay, what about just a 50mm/1.8 lens that works on ALL Nikon bodies?

Surely they can do that right?

:D:D:D:D:D:D
 
Yv said:
:thinking: You know, your post could be completely spun around, many say canon are currently in the ascendency body/sensor wise whilst the lenses they
are now producing can only match what Nikon have had around for a few years...
Click to expand...

Also adding that Canon prices for new lenses are a lot higher than Nikon. :(
 
Raymond Lin said:
Get your F/1.2 lenses out.

8-15 fish eye?

17mm TS/E?

What about 65mm MP-E?

Okay okay, what about just a 50mm/1.8 lens that works on ALL Nikon bodies?

Surely they can do that right?

:D:D:D:D:D:D
Click to expand...

Mmm the 50 1.4g and 50 1.8g work on all digital bodies
 
This debate has been going on for ever. If you pick on specifics, either brand can win, and sometimes one gets a bit ahead before the other responds, but overall they've been neck and neck for decades.

In terms of total sales, Canon has sold a few more units over time.
 
3 people I know have recently gone from Canon to Nikon and 2 other people have gone the other way, would be good to find out why. I know that one person was been tempted by the Canon primes - got a taste for primes using Nikon - and thought the grass is greener - I have bought a few lenses of a chap on here who has done the same thing for similar reasoning....Maybe they are in search of perfection....

Personally I like Nikon - always had a Nikon body so bought the glass once you have the glass.........its a big step to sell and buy again.

I dont have itchy feet either
 
Last edited:
danbroad said:
Only on forums does one have to be versus the other. Out there in the real world people choose their system and shoot for decades without feeling the need to compare all the time.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that this is likely sometimes the product of a "verus" mentality, people overlooking the advanatge of a rival brand not purely for economic reasons but attachment to there own brand.

Personally I went with Canon when I bought a crop sensor because it was a cheaper option. I then went with Nikon when I upgraded to FF because the D800 offered me more of what I wanted(resolution/DR) and less of what I didnt(FPS).

kokakaste2 said:
Also adding that Canon prices for new lenses are a lot higher than Nikon.
Click to expand...

Its a bit of a generalisation but the impression I get is that this really sums up Canon's target markets, they try to offer more performance to the professional user at a prenium but also to offer cheaper products to the very low end user.

Nikon to me seem to target the inbetween market a bit more, the serious ammature or semi pro.

I spose I fall into the Nikon market more but I can see why its less profitable, users such as me value performance highly but do not have the income to pay a large prenium for products.
 
Mines better than yoouuuurs Na Na Na Na Na! Never heard such cobblers. Both Nikon and Canon produce excellent imaging products and has been said earlier they are seperated by miniscule measuremenst either way. I really cant see in real terms what the point of this post is, as the next lens/camera by either maker will change things again (if your a pico pixel peeper).
 
LASTOLITE said:
3 people I know have recently gone from Canon to Nikon and 2 other people have gone the other way, would be good to find out why. I know that one person was been tempted by the Canon primes - got a taste for primes using Nikon - and thought the grass is greener - I have bought a few lenses of a chap on here who has done the same thing for similar reasoning....Maybe they are in search of perfection....

Personally I like Nikon - always had a Nikon body so bought the glass once you have the glass.........its a big step to sell and buy again.

I dont have itchy feet either
Click to expand...

What's wrong with moving backwards and forwards between brands depending on what is better for you at that time? Yes for some people it is a lot more difficult, say if you have half a dozen specialist lenses and lots of accessories for your chosen brand, otherwise there is no reason not to.

For me and my usage Canon certainly have the better set of lenses at the moment, I knew that when I moved from a 400D to a D7000 (because the 60D just didn't do anything for me and the 7D is too big and has slightly poorer IQ - arguably, the D7000 had weather sealing, was smaller, good video and had great IQ and high ISO) but it can be a little annoying.

The Nikon 17-55 is a tank compared to the Canon but doesn't have IS and is heavier, however it is all metal and feels like you could drive a tank over it and not break. Nikon on the other hand don't have a 300 f/4 VR (and the 300 f/4 is stupidly expensive for what it is), have only just got a 70-200 f/4 VR, but no non VR for the budget buyers, no professional quality 70-300 (no the Nikon 70-300 does not compare in any way to the 70-300L or the Canon 70-200 f/4). There are plenty of other negatives, but also some positives.

Someone else could easily make the same kind of list for Nikon and in 3 years time it may be the other way round again, nikon with the poor sensors, high noise etc. and canon with the better cameras.
 
Nikon_Nick said:
Eerrrrrm.....try re reading what you just quoted
Click to expand...

lol

Just googled at the price £140? for a nifty fifty?

What about the 85mm?

This is what I don't understand, why do they make lenses that isn't compatible across their bodies. It is not the old FD mount, it is a current new Automatic focus mount, it is nothing to do with FF or Crop and they they make lenses without a motor inside?

I don't get that.
 
Raymond Lin said:
lol

Just googled at the price £140? for a nifty fifty?

What about the 85mm?

This is what I don't understand, why do they make lenses that isn't compatible across their bodies. It is not the old FD mount, it is a current new Automatic focus mount, it is nothing to do with FF or Crop and they they make lenses without a motor inside?

I don't get that.
Click to expand...
Firstly - I assume you're referring to the "older" lenses which are still for sale? They are exactly that - OLDER lenses. They didn't launch them last week.

Also - didn't Canon do something with their lens mount at some point whereby older lenses didn't fit on newer bodies and visa-versa?
 
Simplythebeast said:
Really?
Click to expand...

The Nikon beats version I of the Canon. The FOV is really where the Nikon lets itself down on their Mark II. At 200mm it's more like 160mm! Check the reviews!

On the very wide end, there's no doubt the Nikon is better but it depends what you do. But the most common shooters at weddings and general portrait seem to have the best.0.
 
Raymond Lin said:
lol

Just googled at the price £140? for a nifty fifty?

What about the 85mm?

This is what I don't understand, why do they make lenses that isn't compatible across their bodies. It is not the old FD mount, it is a current new Automatic focus mount, it is nothing to do with FF or Crop and they they make lenses without a motor inside?

I don't get that.
Click to expand...

The 85g

:cuckoo:
 
I've always thought the only significant difference is the budget range of lenses, where the equivalent lens from Nikon usually comes out on top.

Once you get into the L range it really is splitting hairs.

If I could choose, I would have the 1DX specs over the D4 and similarly I really wouldn't want a massive white lens on a black body...

Canon make good stuff, Nikon make good stuff but I feel the IQ VS choice for Nikon on a budget of £400-£1000 all in will get you more for your money.
 
OutLore said:
Firstly - I assume you're referring to the "older" lenses which are still for sale? They are exactly that - OLDER lenses. They didn't launch them last week.

Also - didn't Canon do something with their lens mount at some point whereby older lenses didn't fit on newer bodies and visa-versa?
Click to expand...

Canon has 2 mounts.

FD and EF.

All FD mount works on FD cameras, and all EF lens works on EF cameras. They did make an adaptor at the start but now they are like gold dust so the distinction is very clear, FD lenses for FD mount, EF for EF.

Nikon has the same but their new bodies can use all old manual lenses (whatever mount it is called).

That is not the question, the question I have is that their new mount lenses, although you said they are "old", they were created for the new mount, yet a D700 can use it, but a D40 can't.

That's where I am confused.
 
Raymond Lin said:
Canon has 2 mounts.

FD and EF.

All FD mount works on FD cameras, and all EF lens works on EF cameras. They did make an adaptor at the start but now they are like gold dust so the distinction is very clear, FD lenses for FD mount, EF for EF.

Nikon has the same but their new bodies can use all old manual lenses (whatever mount it is called).

That is not the question, the question I have is that their new mount lenses, although you said they are "old", they were created for the new mount, yet a D700 can use it, but a D40 can't.

That's where I am confused.
Click to expand...

You are wrong.

All Nikon glass in the last couple of decades is F mount and all will work with all of there digital bodies. The older D type glass will not AF on entry level bodies though all of the newer AF-S glass will AF on all of them.
 
Raymond Lin said:
Get your F/1.2 lenses out.

8-15 fish eye?

17mm TS/E?

What about 65mm MP-E?

Okay okay, what about just a 50mm/1.8 lens that works on ALL Nikon bodies?

Surely they can do that right?

:D:D:D:D:D:D
Click to expand...


Oh look, a bunch of lenses I never want to own!

As mentioned, both G 50mm lenses work on all bodies.

This is a troll thread.
 
Then you're not into macro - the MP-E is the best out there and a major reason to have a Canon body if you want that type of image.

I doubt it was a troll thread, one look at the other posts written by the OP would show you that had you bothered to look - mini rant over I just feel the word troll is used too much and too quickly with the intent of offense and igniting fires further.
 
Raymond Lin said:
Canon has 2 mounts.

FD and EF

.
Click to expand...

I'd imagine he was reffering to EF-S

All EF lenses work on any EOS SLR or DSLR

However EF-S Lenses only work on the 1.6 crop DSLR bodies (ie the xxxD and xxD series)
 
Soda Farl said:
You are wrong.

All Nikon glass in the last couple of decades is F mount and all will work with all of there digital bodies. The older D type glass will not AF on entry level bodies though all of the newer AF-S glass will AF on all of them.
Click to expand...

The D typ glass, are they still being made?

I am not clue up on it, i.e. like 135mm?
 
JohnN said:
Then you're not into macro - the MP-E is the best out there and a major reason to have a Canon body if you want that type of image.

I doubt it was a troll thread, one look at the other posts written by the OP would show you that had you bothered to look - mini rant over I just feel the word troll is used too much and too quickly with the intent of offense and igniting fires further.
Click to expand...


Any thread provoking the usual nonsense, one is better than the other, is basically asking for trouble. I'd call it trolling, just clever trolling. Why should I look at OPs previous?? I don't care enough.

I have a Nikon 105mm micro, it's more than capable enough. I personally do not need anything else, as I said. It's not up to you to decide if I'm into macro or not. Try not to troll in the troll thread, good lad.
 
lol, patronising wee so and so :)

You know the best way to deal with trolls is to ignore them, so if you think its a troll then why post? With that advise in mind (which I obviously just ignored!) have a great days debating I'm off to read something else.
 
Cagey75 said:
Oh look, a bunch of lenses I never want to own!

As mentioned, both G 50mm lenses work on all bodies.

This is a troll thread.
Click to expand...

It's not a troll thread, the simple matter of fact is that Canon has a bigger range of lenses.

Period. (I think). lol (I've not counted it)

Just make a list of lenses Canon makes that Nikon don't and make another list that Nikon makes and Canon don't. Something that has no comparable.

And then total it up.

Off my head, Canon make more lenses than Nikon doesn't. It's not really about whether you need them, it is about what is available to every other photographer out there and cater for all of them.
 
The thread wasn't about the range of lenses. Have you even read the first post? He's trying to say Canons newer lenses are better. And that is highly debatable.

If I was to troll I'd say it's the Canon users, no surprise, that are all heated up in here, getting defensive over lenses like they had shares in the company :D
 
but that argument is a bit like saying a skoda is a better car than an aston martin because the former makes a bigger range - theres more to 'best' than how many models are available

However at the end of the day a camera is just a tool, arguning about which one is best is pointless - just get out there and use which ever you personally prefer
 
Exactly ...

Arguing Canon V Nikon is as dumb as arguing BMW Vs Audi, whichever you drive you'll be happy with [or not] - they'll get you from A to B. Whether one is more powerful or not, it's the driver makes the real difference.
 
Its a good discussion, lets keep it civilised, guys.
muchas gracias :thumbs:
 
I have an idea, if we all buy a Nikon setup and a Canon one to match and take every photograph with both and keep the best. Oh wait a minute what about Sony, Pentax, and Olympus this is going to get expensive. O well just have to live with what I got.
 
Photogaz said:
If we forget price, Canon's latest lenses really are special.

The 70-200 f2.8 IS II is an ultra sharp beast and completely wipes the Nikon to the floor.
Click to expand...
How on earth can you not take price into the equation

If you think Canons 70-200mm offering wipes the floor with Nikons youre on another planet, ive shot lots of lenses from both camps and the Nikon VRII is sharper than the Canon right to the edge

Not that any of thios crap really matters to those of us who actually want to shoot rather than willy wave
 
Last edited:
Maybe wipe the floor was the wrong word. I would say the mark II wipes the floor with the mark I, in depth shows it just lacks the bad CA at 200mm.

As for trolling. Well, I already said there's no doubt that the Nikon sensors are much better. I'd love a Nikon sensor with no banding issues and low noise.

I just wondered. Now looking into it, Nikon has some great lenses in some, Canon has better in others.
 
Raymond Lin said:
Canon has 2 mounts.

FD and EF.

All FD mount works on FD cameras, and all EF lens works on EF cameras. They did make an adaptor at the start but now they are like gold dust so the distinction is very clear, FD lenses for FD mount, EF for EF.

Nikon has the same but their new bodies can use all old manual lenses (whatever mount it is called).

That is not the question, the question I have is that their new mount lenses, although you said they are "old", they were created for the new mount, yet a D700 can use it, but a D40 can't.

That's where I am confused.
Click to expand...

Nikon has had 1 mount from 1959 to present day - the F mount.

You're referring to older lenses needing a screw drive on the body for AF to work - the fact that Nikon are still able to supply these older lenses is I would say a bonus rather than a negative. Of course, at some point they will stop.

As for the number of lenses made by one manufacturer over the other - are we going to count the number of photocopiers as well? That must make all the difference... lol:bonk:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top