Just a few observations after my last trip abroad.
I'll start with the caveat that these are my personal views and shouldn't be taken as gospel.
Nikons first - as most of you may know, we got the Nikon D2x bodies last September after I'd been using D1x for about four years. Prior to that it was F5s, F3s and FM2s.
Apart from the suspected sensor glitch mentioned elsewhere, the cameras are doing fine. They've been subjected to a sustained battering in the past few months and have been out to Iraq (twice), Malawi and Afghanistan. I carry my kit in padded bags when travelling to and from a job, but once in theatre, the cameras are carried 'loose' at all times so as to be immediately ready for use - they've stayed out in the open for the last six weeks, more or less. Most Military vehicles are open-topped to allow troops to return fire - this also means that dust and crap is swirling around you all the time - we all wear goggles and shemaghs (arab scarves) to keep the crud out of our eyes and mouths.
So far the seals have been fine - no dust has made its way into either body and no hideous dust spots have appeared on any of my images, despite the harsh conditions.
Malawi saw monsoon style rains and again the cameras were fine - no water ingress and no misting up of viewfinders in the high (90%) humidity.
Only glitch was a lens problem - the AF-S 80-200 f/2.8 Nikkor started to fall apart as the screws holding it all together came loose. I had to keep tightening them up with my Leatherman until I got home his weekend and Loc-Tited them back in place.
The 'borrowed' AF-S DX 17-55 f/2.8G Nikkor lens is truly awesome and Nikon'll have a hell of a fight to get it back off me. The range is just right if the other lens you carry happens to be a 70-200/80-200 or similar. Sharpness and colour rendition are both very good and resistance to flare in extreme lighting conditions is also very good. The lens hood now features a lock mechanism to prevent it falling off after it's gotten looser after prolonged use.
The 14mm Sigma never came out of the bag and anyway is being replaced by the AFS DX 12-24mm f/4 Nikkor soon..
Also metioned elsewhere, I had a play with some colleagues' Canons - an EOS1D and a 1D Mk11 (I think that's right - the 8Mpi and the 17Mpi respectively?) the camera body is almost identical in size and shape and all of the functions seemed the same.
I hated it - no doubt the Mk11 has better image quality (at 17Mpi it had better), but the guys weren't using it at it's full capacity as the file sizes were too big for the kind of work we were doing: JPEG medium was the norm for these guys, whereas I shoot RAW exclusively.
But to me the ergonomics were all wrong - the camera felt blocky and brick-like in my hands after the Nikon and reminded me of my old Nikon F3 with the MD-4 Motordrive attached.
The method of selecting focussing zones was very awkward after the rocker-switch on the Nikon - you have to press a button and then scroll the command wheel to select and it just seemed to waste time - why not a one-touch, one-operation?
Once selected though, the AF seemed faster and more precise than the Nikon, but I put that down in part to the newer IS lenses on the Canons - I still have older generation, non-VR lenses (apart from the new 17-55 already mentioned). Shutter release was crisp and shutter noise was good but unobtrusive (shutter noise makes a great deal of difference and should not be overlooked) though the audible 'beep' for AF confirmation was about as distracting as anything I could possibly imagine and would be switched off at the earliest opportunity.
All in all, I reckon that as ever it comes down to personal preference - the Canons have the edge on quality at the moment - but in a Hard News context, it's wasted as photographers wont use it at max quality - great for studio and 'slow' PR as well as landscapes et al - indeed anything that doesn't require speed over all other considerations.
For my line of work I still believe the Nikon has the edge - it feels better in the hand and is faster and more intuitive to use (and yes, I took into account that I've always used Nikons). Sun Photographer Dan Charity reckons he still has to look at the camera for certain operations as the buttons are small enough to be overlooked. All of the controls on the Nikon are still obvious enough to be found without looking for them.
You pays yer money and takes yer chances.
I'll start with the caveat that these are my personal views and shouldn't be taken as gospel.
Nikons first - as most of you may know, we got the Nikon D2x bodies last September after I'd been using D1x for about four years. Prior to that it was F5s, F3s and FM2s.
Apart from the suspected sensor glitch mentioned elsewhere, the cameras are doing fine. They've been subjected to a sustained battering in the past few months and have been out to Iraq (twice), Malawi and Afghanistan. I carry my kit in padded bags when travelling to and from a job, but once in theatre, the cameras are carried 'loose' at all times so as to be immediately ready for use - they've stayed out in the open for the last six weeks, more or less. Most Military vehicles are open-topped to allow troops to return fire - this also means that dust and crap is swirling around you all the time - we all wear goggles and shemaghs (arab scarves) to keep the crud out of our eyes and mouths.
So far the seals have been fine - no dust has made its way into either body and no hideous dust spots have appeared on any of my images, despite the harsh conditions.
Malawi saw monsoon style rains and again the cameras were fine - no water ingress and no misting up of viewfinders in the high (90%) humidity.
Only glitch was a lens problem - the AF-S 80-200 f/2.8 Nikkor started to fall apart as the screws holding it all together came loose. I had to keep tightening them up with my Leatherman until I got home his weekend and Loc-Tited them back in place.
The 'borrowed' AF-S DX 17-55 f/2.8G Nikkor lens is truly awesome and Nikon'll have a hell of a fight to get it back off me. The range is just right if the other lens you carry happens to be a 70-200/80-200 or similar. Sharpness and colour rendition are both very good and resistance to flare in extreme lighting conditions is also very good. The lens hood now features a lock mechanism to prevent it falling off after it's gotten looser after prolonged use.
The 14mm Sigma never came out of the bag and anyway is being replaced by the AFS DX 12-24mm f/4 Nikkor soon..
Also metioned elsewhere, I had a play with some colleagues' Canons - an EOS1D and a 1D Mk11 (I think that's right - the 8Mpi and the 17Mpi respectively?) the camera body is almost identical in size and shape and all of the functions seemed the same.
I hated it - no doubt the Mk11 has better image quality (at 17Mpi it had better), but the guys weren't using it at it's full capacity as the file sizes were too big for the kind of work we were doing: JPEG medium was the norm for these guys, whereas I shoot RAW exclusively.
But to me the ergonomics were all wrong - the camera felt blocky and brick-like in my hands after the Nikon and reminded me of my old Nikon F3 with the MD-4 Motordrive attached.
The method of selecting focussing zones was very awkward after the rocker-switch on the Nikon - you have to press a button and then scroll the command wheel to select and it just seemed to waste time - why not a one-touch, one-operation?
Once selected though, the AF seemed faster and more precise than the Nikon, but I put that down in part to the newer IS lenses on the Canons - I still have older generation, non-VR lenses (apart from the new 17-55 already mentioned). Shutter release was crisp and shutter noise was good but unobtrusive (shutter noise makes a great deal of difference and should not be overlooked) though the audible 'beep' for AF confirmation was about as distracting as anything I could possibly imagine and would be switched off at the earliest opportunity.
All in all, I reckon that as ever it comes down to personal preference - the Canons have the edge on quality at the moment - but in a Hard News context, it's wasted as photographers wont use it at max quality - great for studio and 'slow' PR as well as landscapes et al - indeed anything that doesn't require speed over all other considerations.
For my line of work I still believe the Nikon has the edge - it feels better in the hand and is faster and more intuitive to use (and yes, I took into account that I've always used Nikons). Sun Photographer Dan Charity reckons he still has to look at the camera for certain operations as the buttons are small enough to be overlooked. All of the controls on the Nikon are still obvious enough to be found without looking for them.
You pays yer money and takes yer chances.
). 
