Canon 5D3 or Nikon D800(E)

redddraggon said:
What you say is probably not wrong, but EF-S/DX lenses are pretty much a non concern for the type of person is consider the D800 or 5d3

Nikon DX lenses (inc most kit lenses) are pretty much awesome, but that doesn't really matter when you need them to cover full frame.
Click to expand...

True point...but when switching to FF I wouldn't expect a huge difference between companies in terms of performance...

Squishy: 18-55mm is? Are you sure? Personally I'd compare the 55-250 to nikons 55-200mm and 18-200mm to the same range in nikons. They are the efs lens I've experienced by Canon and based on those I'd be pretty confident in bettibg that Nikon would outperform the others in the dx lens department.
 
joescrivens said:
So basically you are saying if you want to buy a budget camera and budget lenses as a hobby for example then you should choose Nikon. But if you are a serious photographer and serious about your equipment then canon is better, right?
Click to expand...

The first part of that yes without a doubt, the second no: then it would boil down to preference. Well said on the first part though!
 
Out of interest, what is your gear and what is your experience on the high end kit? (picking it up in FOCUS for a fiddle don't count)
 
Phil Young said:
Squishy: 18-55mm is? Are you sure? Personally I'd compare the 55-250 to nikons 55-200mm and 18-200mm to the same range in nikons. They are the efs lens I've experienced by Canon and based on those I'd be pretty confident in bettibg that Nikon would outperform the others in the dx lens department.
Click to expand...

The 18-55 IS does it's job very well. I use one as a cheap lightweight solution for focal lengths I want to have but don't need critical image quality for, and it's surprised me a lot with it's sharpness. Sure it's not quite as crisp and contrasty as my 150mm macro or 100-400L, but it comes remarkably close for a lens I paid £75 for.

So you've used two EF-s lenses compared to the nikons (and FWIW, the 55-250 is very highly regarded as a cheap telephoto), and then drawn the conclusion that all the other EF-s lenses compare the same way? That's a rather sweeping assumption to be basing comments like "their EF-s lenses are worse than rubbish" on.
 
squishy said:
Exactly which EF-s lenses do you consider worse than rubbish, and for what reasons? The 18-55 IS, 55-250, 60mm macro, 15-85, 17-55, and 10-22 are all considered very decent lenses by most people who use them, and that's most of the EF-s range right there.
Click to expand...

Indeed, the 10-22, 15-85 and 17-55 in particular are regarded as superb lenses.

Yes they're built to a budget but at least Canon devised EF-S as a way of building lenses specifically for crop sensor cameras at a lower cost so more people could benefit from high quality glass.

What do Nikon give us? An insane system where some lenses won't even auto-focus on certain bodies. In 2012! Give me strength.
 
Vertigo1 said:
What do Nikon give us? An insane system where some lenses won't even auto-focus on certain bodies. In 2012! Give me strength.
Click to expand...

Hardly much of a downside though, since nikon have been slowly building up AF-S replacements of all the lenses that were previously only non-AF-S (the only major gap seemed to me the 50mm f/1.8, and they replaced that with the excellent 50 f/1.8 G). I mean, how many nikon users with bodies <D80/D90/D7000 level really want an AF 80-400 VR (for example) anyway?
And you could argue that at least all the old nikon F glass will at least mount on all the newer bodies where FD lenses can't on EF. Swings and roundabouts.

Anyway, I'll stop contributing to a massively OT tangent to this thread now, it's getting quite out of control :nuts: and I'm not helping
 
Last edited:
Phil Young said:
They're all valid points.
Click to expand...

LOL, I was going to just leave you to your deluded reality but had to laugh at this.

You generalise that all EF-S lenses are complete rubbish when it's commonly accepted that some of them are amongst the best quality lenses available from any manufacturer.

You criticise your brother's Canon 24-70, which is one of the most commonly used 'professional' lenses, yet in the very next sentence you say you don't have a bad word to say about their 'professional' kit?

These are "all valid points"? You're either a troll or a fanboy of the highest order. Please go away.
 
It's threads like this that bring out the worst of TP.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, whether it's an informed one or not.

As a general observation, it seems that these days on TP, knowing your way around the tech specs of various camera equipment is a second job for some. I'm not going to be so flippant as to assume that those who are intent on proving themselves the most knowledge about kit are actually armchair photographers (I can see that many are not from their websites etc). However, despite the protests we regularly see on TP about it all being useful and grown-up debating, it does seem that at times things go sour very quickly because some people want to shout louder than the next guy in one way or another. Banter it most certainly isn't....

Better take my Xmas avatar off, as it seems the season of good will is well and truly behind us....
 
Last edited:
squishy said:
Hardly much of a downside though, since nikon have been slowly building up AF-S replacements of all the lenses that were previously only non-AF-S (the only major gap seemed to me the 50mm f/1.8, and they replaced that with the excellent 50 f/1.8 G). I mean, how many nikon users with bodies <D80/D90/D7000 level really want an AF 80-400 VR (for example) anyway?
And you could argue that at least all the old nikon F glass will at least mount on all the newer bodies where FD lenses can't on EF. Swings and roundabouts.
Click to expand...

To be honest I think my comment was probably a bit harsh. Whilst it does surprise me that you can even buy 'mainstream' lenses which won't autofocus on certain bodies in this day and age, I don't generally have a problem with Nikon stuff and accept that they make some damned fine kit.

I have friends with both Canon and Nikon stuff and enjoy the playful banter with the latter group but it's all good natured and we all accept that each brand has its strengths and weaknessses. It does amaze me how blinkered and opinionated some people do get regarding their chosen brand however, and these people really could do with chilling out :)
 
....I don't really know why I'm being attacked (Only by Canon users it seems and I'm the fanboy...)

I just made one point: IN MY EXPERIENCE...the Canon dx lenses (and mid range) are sub-standard to the Nikon ones. I don't believe the Canon L lenses are their professional top of the range kit?

If I said Nikon lenses are mostly better than Tamron lenses no one would argue, it seems that the Canon users are indeed guilty of fanboyism - even if trying to dress it up :) The facts speak for themselves...test the lenses yourselves if you want!

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...LensComp=662&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Anyway, it's getting boring now being attacked by infuriated Canon users over an opinion about lenses...I'll leave you all to it.
 
I can't be bothered getting into the which brand is best because let's face it, it's irrelevant. You buy into a system/brand and generally sick with it. The people who swap brands either have very little or a huge wallet.

However, I know canon, I have a fairly good range of bodies and lenses. I will say the efs 10-22 is great, colour vignettes at the edges wide open, but is easily corrected by Lightroom automatically.
Just bought my lad the 15-85 and I'm really surprised what an excellent lens that is. Stunning image quality, just a shame it's f3,5-5.6.
 
Phil Young said:
....I don't really know why I'm being attacked (Only by Canon users it seems and I'm the fanboy...)

I just made one point: IN MY EXPERIENCE...the Canon dx lenses (and mid range) are sub-standard to the Nikon ones.
Click to expand...


"DX" is a Nikon term and has nothing to do with Canon, if you're going to offer up "expert" opinion do at least try and get the basics correct. ;)

Oh, and I'm not a Canon fanboy :lol:
 
Phil Young said:
....I don't really know why I'm being attacked (Only by Canon users it seems and I'm the fanboy...)

I just made one point: IN MY EXPERIENCE...the Canon dx lenses (and mid range) are sub-standard to the Nikon ones. I don't believe the Canon L lenses are their professional top of the range kit?
Click to expand...

So, what experiences do you have? (this is the 3rd time I've asked this)

I, personally have never said canon make better lenses, I know the Nikon 24-70 is better than the mk1 of canon.

All I have said is canon has more choices, as a system.
 
Phil Young said:
....I don't really know why I'm being attacked (Only by Canon users it seems and I'm the fanboy...)

I just made one point: IN MY EXPERIENCE...the Canon dx lenses (and mid range) are sub-standard to the Nikon ones. I don't believe the Canon L lenses are their professional top of the range kit?

If I said Nikon lenses are mostly better than Tamron lenses no one would argue, it seems that the Canon users are indeed guilty of fanboyism - even if trying to dress it up :) The facts speak for themselves...test the lenses yourselves if you want!
Click to expand...

No I think you said something about all EFS lenses being worse than rubbish or something similar (can't be bothered to look it up), which is patently nonsense.

Even the lowly 18-55 IS is capable of very sharp shots IME (and that's actually using it not looking at lens tests on the internet).

Nikon make some great products and I have considered switching to a D700 before, but probably won't bother now the 5D mk III looks like my perfect camera (when it gets a bit cheaper). So hardly a Canon fanboy. I really can't understand people getting all tribal over a brand of camera.
 
Last edited:
Raymond Lin said:
So, what experiences do you have? (this is the 3rd time I've asked this)
Click to expand...

Gosh...if it could be left alone. No? Fine.

So my brother and his business partner run a family portrait business and shoot canon with a 7D and 5D mk2

They have efs: 18-55mm is, 55-250 & 18-200mm

EF: 24-70mm, 70-200mm is 2.

I have played about a lot with the whole kit and regularly am paid to retouch for them and so obviously see all their images.

Is that ok?
 
grum said:
No I think you said something about all EFS lenses being worse than rubbish or something similar (can't be bothered to look it up), which is patently nonsense.

Even the lowly 18-55 IS is capable of very sharp shots IME (and that's actually using it not looking at lens tests on the internet).

Nikon make some great products and I have considered switching to a D700 before, but probably won't bother now the 5D mk III looks like my perfect camera (when it gets a bit cheaper). So hardly a Canon fanboy. I really can't understand people getting all tribal over a brand of camera.
Click to expand...

I have considered too but there are lenses canon makes that nikon don't have and there are no rumours of them ever coming out - I.e. 85/1.2.

I so wanted the D700, it is a great FF body but I know i would be being short sighted by switching over and compromising on my lens choice. At the time, I said canon can fix what I saw the problem was with the 5D2 with 1 single body and I am right.

It is that simple, both are good, and i appreciate them both.
 
grum said:
No I think you said something about all EFS lenses being worse than rubbish or something similar (can't be bothered to look it up), which is patently nonsense.

Even the lowly 18-55 IS is capable of very sharp shots IME (and that's actually using it not looking at lens tests on the internet).

Nikon make some great products and I have considered switching to a D700 before, but probably won't bother now the 5D mk III looks like my perfect camera (when it gets a bit cheaper). So hardly a Canon fanboy. I really can't understand people getting all tribal over a brand of camera.
Click to expand...

Guilty your honour.:bonk:
 
Raymond Lin said:
I have considered too but there are lenses canon makes that nikon don't have and there are no rumours of them ever coming out - I.e. 85/1.2.

It is that simple, both are good, and i appreciate them both.
Click to expand...

This is true - I wished Nikon did a macro with 5:1 magnification, and a 85mm f1.2 AF...but they don't.

One thing I will say: I prefer canon premium compacts!
 
Phil Young said:
Gosh...if it could be left alone. No? Fine.

So my brother and his business partner run a family portrait business and shoot canon with a 7D and 5D mk2

They have efs: 18-55mm is, 55-250 & 18-200mm

EF: 24-70mm, 70-200mm is 2.

I have played about a lot with the whole kit and regularly am paid to retouch for them and so obviously see all their images.

Is that ok?
Click to expand...

That's not exactly a lot of kit, don't you agree? It's 5 lenses out of how many out there? Do you not think you are over reaching with your statement earlier?
 
Byker28i said:
I can't be bothered getting into the which brand is best because let's face it, it's irrelevant. .
Click to expand...

+1 :thumbs:

It's what is best for you, it's the system that works best for you that matters.
 
hmm well interesting thread. someone said that canon budget lenses are not as good as the nikon ones...

canon 50mm F1.8..in a magazine only in the last few weeks this lens comes out top in a review(by people who know what they are looking for, not just us internet types)

i also think the list of EF lenses used are not exactly top draw lenses..

For me the price of the cameras is stupidly high, but i have been hankering after a D700 for some time...
 
Phil Young said:
Gosh...if it could be left alone. No? Fine.

So my brother and his business partner run a family portrait business and shoot canon with a 7D and 5D mk2

They have efs: 18-55mm is, 55-250 & 18-200mm

EF: 24-70mm, 70-200mm is 2.

I have played about a lot with the whole kit and regularly am paid to retouch for them and so obviously see all their images.

Is that ok?
Click to expand...

Interesting choices for a portrait business. So the efs lenses can only be used on the 7d, the 18-200 is quite wide range zoom.
Have you used them in anger and compared them to you Nikon stuff? Just you said they were rubbish yet your brother is earning a living from these rubbish lenses.
There's a little bit of contradiction in your posts I'm finding confusing.
 
matty said:
hmm well interesting thread. someone said that canon budget lenses are not as good as the nikon ones...

canon 50mm F1.8..in a magazine only in the last few weeks this lens comes out top in a review(by people who know what they are looking for, not just us internet types)

i also think the list of EF lenses used are not exactly top draw lenses..

For me the price of the cameras is stupidly high, but i have been hankering after a D700 for some time...
Click to expand...

There are a lot of EF lenses which are pretty poor most of which are from when the system started.

It never used to be about cost - both Nikon and canon were around the same price but now for someone like me who wants a quality body and lenses canon is less attractive.

There are also a lot of lenses that can't resolve the higher mp of some of the newer sensors. I hate to think what the 36mp D800 sensor will record with some of nikons lenses that struggled with their first FX sensors.
 
matty said:
but i have been hankering after a D700 for some time...
Click to expand...

Oh tell me about it! And the D3 has also come calling but now with the D800 my wallet is prepared to open wide and start moving from Canon to Nikon!


I wasn't massively impressed with Canon's 24-70mm. It's a great lens but my Canon 85mm 1.8 gives me far nicer shots - but then it is a prime.

Apart from the awesome specs of the D800, a few other factors have come into play with my decision to move from Canon. I have to wonder why my wife's uncle; 38 years award winning mainstream editorial photographer will only shoot Nikon, my neighbour; 15 years award winning sports photographer for the premiere league will only shoot Nikon, and photographers on here such as Guy who, despite our past indifference, I will happily say that his photography is outstanding and certainly a benchmark, and he shoots Nikon.

There are lots of great photographers who shoot Canon, but I'm more interested in those who shoot Nikon. So I don't think it's about which system can be proven to be better, but it's about a personal choice. :)
 
Byker28i said:
Interesting choices for a portrait business. So the efs lenses can only be used on the 7d, the 18-200 is quite wide range zoom.
Have you used them in anger and compared them to you Nikon stuff? Just you said they were rubbish yet your brother is earning a living from these rubbish lenses.
There's a little bit of contradiction in your posts I'm finding confusing.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you know...but the best photographers aren't necessarily the most successful! Some of the pictures they produce are truly terrible, but their packages are good and apparently the general public do not see sharpness as the be all and end all of a picture...hence they buy!
 
Phil Young said:
....I don't really know why I'm being attacked (Only by Canon users it seems and I'm the fanboy...)

I just made one point: IN MY EXPERIENCE...the Canon dx lenses (and mid range) are sub-standard to the Nikon ones.
Click to expand...

No you didn't simply "make one point"! First you claimed all Canon EF-S lenses were "serious pieces of junk". You then said they were "worse than useless" but qualified that with "IMHO".

With ridiculous remarks like this you wonder why others are getting agitated by your posts?

I don't believe the Canon L lenses are their professional top of the range kit?
Click to expand...

Canon 'L' lenses are exactly that - the top of the range.
 
gman said:
Oh tell me about it! And the D3 has also come calling but now with the D800 my wallet is prepared to open wide and start moving from Canon to Nikon!


I wasn't massively impressed with Canon's 24-70mm. It's a great lens but my Canon 85mm 1.8 gives me far nicer shots - but then it is a prime.

Apart from the awesome specs of the D800, a few other factors have come into play with my decision to move from Canon. I have to wonder why my wife's uncle; 38 years award winning mainstream editorial photographer will only shoot Nikon, my neighbour; 15 years award winning sports photographer for the premiere league will only shoot Nikon, and photographers on here such as Guy who, despite our past indifference, I will happily say that his photography is outstanding and certainly a benchmark, and he shoots Nikon.

There are lots of great photographers who shoot Canon, but I'm more interested in those who shoot Nikon. So I don't think it's about which system can be proven to be better, but it's about a personal choice. :)
Click to expand...

YES!!! Phil is building and army!!!! hahaha just kidding folks. Nice to see some posts sharing the same views and opinions that's all :)
 
Phil Young said:
Well whatever the red lenses are then! Are the L ones the white ones? I'm talking about the 24-70 (red banding being the middle range no?)
Click to expand...

All 'L' lenses have the red band - it's what visually marks them out as an 'L'.
 
I don't think that's always the case, it's the "L" which defines their professional range I believe, regardless of colour.
 
gman said:
I have to wonder why my wife's uncle; 38 years award winning mainstream editorial photographer will only shoot Nikon, my neighbour; 15 years award winning sports photographer for the premiere league will only shoot Nikon, and photographers on here such as Guy who, despite our past indifference, I will happily say that his photography is outstanding and certainly a benchmark, and he shoots Nikon.

There are lots of great photographers who shoot Canon, but I'm more interested in those who shoot Nikon. So I don't think it's about which system can be proven to be better, but it's about a personal choice. :)
Click to expand...

It is about a personal choice, same for the people you mention here - how are they relevant to what you are going to do with a Nikon if you get one though? There's not something magic about them that makes you take better photographs and gives you a successful career. ;)

Phil Young said:
Ok thanks for that lesson, but as stated, what I know of Canons top of the range, they are white...no?
Click to expand...

Quite a few that aren't white - I have a 24-105mm f4L and a 24mm f1.4L II which are both black with the red ring. You could argue the 24-105 is 'mid-range' but not really the 24mm 1.4. The white ones are just L telephotos aren't they?
 
Last edited:
grum said:
There's not something magic about them that makes you take better photographs and gives you a successful career. ;)
Click to expand...

Oh but there is! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top