Canon 6D or Nixon D750?

I've owned both 35 1.4's, they're both excellent, not much between them.

I made the switch to Nikon around 6 months ago. Having gone from a 5D to the D750 the first impression was that - as resolution was similar - there wasn't much in it. At first i felt the menu system on the Canon was easier but I've soon got used to the Nikon and it's highly customisable. The real difference though is in the auto focus and dynamic range. Autofocus is superb, the 3D option locks onto anything moving. What really has been a game changer though is the dynamic range, you can pull the files around like you wouldn't believe. There's no comparison with any Canon, just have a Google and see some of the underexposed shots by 5 stops that have been brought back to life. Nikon sensors still lead the way in high ISO.

I agree that Nikon these days have, as affordable lenses as Canon for most people. I had allot of Canon glass that stopped me moving at first but it became pretty apparent that there's a price premium with every launch that became a joke. The equivalent Nikon body is significantly cheaper so I made the decision to buy into a quality Nikon line up so that body upgrades in the future will no doubt be much cheaper.
 
Last edited:
My comment regarding better lenses on Canon was a general statement which IMO applies across most of the range. Lenses like the 24-70 II, 70-200 IS II, 100-400 II provide better IQ, whilst the budget Pro lenses such as the 24-105L, 135L, 200L, and 70-200 non-IS versions offer very decent build and IQ for little money. At the expensive end of primes and zooms Canon also leads the way. I swapped from Nikon to Canon for the lenses, even though Nikon bodies had the edge.
 
I was leaning towards the Canon, but get that the Nikon is a better camera. I am struggling to find an all rounder lens in the Nikon range like the 28-300 that Canon do. I was thinking of hiring one for my upcoming trip to Paris and the french open tennis.There is very little chance of me ever affording to buy one of these lenses, so hiring is how I will go, this is the same with other lenses.

I think I have in my mind that Canon is like VW and Nikon is like Seat. they are just as good but the Canon is the better brand. Thats why I have a Golf!!! (I am a brand snob!)
I just wish I could justify the 5D!!!!!

Argh, think I will have to venture to a shop and have another try of both of the cameras and see.
 
gti jen said:
Arh yes, but it can't be anywhere near the quality of the canon, its under half the price. its not a pro series lens is it.?
I take it the ones with the gold band are the pro lenses.

having said that if its any good, I might be able to afford it at some stage.
Click to expand...

You're making the wrong assumptions, the Canon is clearly better built than the Nikon but you may find the Nikon to be better optically. Or perhaps not, you'll only find out by using the thing and deciding for yourself.
 
Orville said:
My comment regarding better lenses on Canon was a general statement which IMO applies across most of the range. Lenses like the 24-70 II, 70-200 IS II, 100-400 II provide better IQ, whilst the budget Pro lenses such as the 24-105L, 135L, 200L, and 70-200 non-IS versions offer very decent build and IQ for little money. At the expensive end of primes and zooms Canon also leads the way. I swapped from Nikon to Canon for the lenses, even though Nikon bodies had the edge.
Click to expand...

Nikon's equivalents in all of those lenses, with the exception of the 135L & 70-200 non-IS, are just as good, guess we shall have to agree to disagree.

For the vast majority of people shooting everyday subjects, there's really little difference between the two brands. Canon is the larger company so there are more of them around.

gti jen said:
I was leaning towards the Canon, but get that the Nikon is a better camera. I am struggling to find an all rounder lens in the Nikon range like the 28-300 that Canon do. I was thinking of hiring one for my upcoming trip to Paris and the french open tennis.There is very little chance of me ever affording to buy one of these lenses, so hiring is how I will go, this is the same with other lenses.

I think I have in my mind that Canon is like VW and Nikon is like Seat. they are just as good but the Canon is the better brand. Thats why I have a Golf!!! (I am a brand snob!)
I just wish I could justify the 5D!!!!!

Argh, think I will have to venture to a shop and have another try of both of the cameras and see.
Click to expand...

The D750 is better than the 5D3! The only thing I think the %D£ wins on is that's it's slightly better built but that's quite minimal. When you consider grey prices, it's a no brainer unless you are tied into a system. If I were considering Nikon I would be looking at these very good lenses in the Nikon lineup: 24-120 f/4 VR (bit pricy but great all rounder) or 24-85 but certainly the 70-300 VR if you need that range, it's a superb lens for the money and you can pick them up second hand for just over £200.

I wouldn't be drawn on brands, they're pretty equal in most people's book. For the record, I couldn't give two hoots between the two and I am particular about buying quality.
 
gti jen said:
Arh yes, but it can't be anywhere near the quality of the canon, its under half the price. its not a pro series lens is it.?
I take it the ones with the gold band are the pro lenses.
Click to expand...

Don't look at the price tag. Look at the photos. Some of Nikon's 'cheap' lenses are as good as their 'pro' lenses - or certainly close enough to make it worth while saving a few hundred quid. IMO, YMMV etc.

The gold band signifies nano coatings - nothing to do with being a 'pro' lens, or price.

Expensive - http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/p...fx/single-focal-length/af-s-nikkor-35mm-f1-4g

Inexpensive - http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/p...fx/single-focal-length/af-s-nikkor-35mm-f1-4g
 
Ed Sutton said:
The gold band signifies nano coatings - nothing to do with being a 'pro' lens, or price.

Expensive - http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/p...fx/single-focal-length/af-s-nikkor-35mm-f1-4g

Inexpensive - http://www.europe-nikon.com/en_GB/p...fx/single-focal-length/af-s-nikkor-35mm-f1-4g
Click to expand...

they are the same lens. I can take a look myself though. So thanks.

I am now thinking that maybe as I can't afford a range of glass the Nikon is the better camera and I should go for that. I will only have one lens for some time. I am sure all options are going to take better pictures than the camera I currently have!
 
My two pence worth. I remember one of the best bits of advise I was given several years ago is invest in your glass rather than the camera body. The 6D is a very fine camera indeed and as you rightly pointed out can be bought from Panamoz at a very competitive price. I have bought from before and the service is very good and you get a 3 year warranty. I guess it comes down to how comfortable you feel in using a "system" I have never owned a Nikon so cannot comment on the handling of a Nikon.
 
Update.
After much deliberation I have ordered a 6d from Panamoz. Having had a play with a 6d, Nikon D750 and a 5Dm3 at the weekend I took the plunge. I just couldn't fathom out the Nikon and the other 2 seems so more in tuative, havig owned a canon I could find all of the controls. I am sure I could have got used to the Nikon but wanted to get out and take photos without having to read the inch thick user guide first.
I really wanted a 5D but when planning on some rather expensive home improvements I couldnt justify the money.
I realise there might be a MK2 6 D out soon, hence why the price is so good. I will have a pro lens and could upgrade in the future. Thanks for your help.

Jen
 
A 6d mk2 won't be out for a couple of years yet at least!

Enjoy the 6d, it's a beautiful camera :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top