Changing from Canon to Nikon

Ok I've worked out what I want

A camera.
105mm macro
A prime lens 300mm or above
 
I'm just curious, all the people complaining about noise on the 50D, do you have any samples to illustrate this? It was a bit of a worry for me when I was looking into it, but I really can't see what the fuss is about! Cheers!

Chris
 
squizza said:
Ok I've worked out what I want

A camera.
105mm macro
A prime lens 300mm or above
Click to expand...

Well you can definitely get that with both Nikon and Canon! Personally if it were me, I'd stick with canon if you're looking at long primes, as I believe they're a fair bit cheaper than the Nikon equivalents.

Have you tried some of the older bodies? Like a 1DmkII (or III or IV depending on how flush you're feeling :D) or something? Maybe you'll like the handing of a pro body better? And you've still got a 1.3x crop factor? Not sure what the ISO will be like though!
 
Nikon don't do some of the smaller primes Canon do. If you want a Nikkor lens then these are the options:

300/4 - £969
300/2.8VR - £3978
400/2.8VR - £6514
500/VR - £5739
600/4VR - £6927

All prices WEX. So, if you want IS/VR, the cheapest option is £4000
 
grumpybadger said:
Nikon don't do some of the smaller primes Canon do. If you want a Nikkor lens then these are the options:

300/4 - £969
300/2.8VR - £3978
400/2.8VR - £6514
500/VR - £5739
600/4VR - £6927

All prices WEX. So, if you want IS/VR, the cheapest option is £4000
Click to expand...

Thankyou for doing that for me!
:eek: ........double :eek:

Here's an example at ISO 400

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sarahlefley/3884543994/sizes/l/in/set-72157622231772844/

Others may be impressed, but I'm not... I think my problem....hang on, I know my problem is comparing higher spec cameras against the 50D...
 
swag72 said:
What is your budget on this Sarah? How much can you afford to throw at this, either swapping to Nikon or sticking with Canon?
Click to expand...

£500 max on top of the sale of all my gear to swap to Nikon.

£500 max on top of the sale of the 50D to get a different Canon body.
:)
 
I don't know about Nikon prices, but the prices that Paul listed looked fairly hefty! Write down all your Canon kit and realistic prices. Add £500 to that and could you afford to buy what you want?
 
Does it have to be Nikkor Lenses? Would yo consider a fast Sigma like the 120-300 F2.8 (cracking lens by the way).

Does it have to have VR/OS?
 
The prices are hefty if you want IS/VR. If not then it is less of an issue I reckon. But, if you like handholding in poorish light, there is no equivalent to the 300/4 IS. That's one of the things that kept me Canon.

And Alison - big primes hold their price. The fact there are no "budget" primes makes it even harder to find telephoto Nikkor lenses used.
 
I just did some guesstimates and it looks like its a Canon Body. :)
 
barneyrubble said:
Does it have to be Nikkor Lenses? Would yo consider a fast Sigma like the 120-300 F2.8 (cracking lens by the way).

Does it have to have VR/OS?
Click to expand...

Excellent questions Barnie which the OP hasn't answered. However, if you don't need VR/IS and a Sigma 120-300 will do, then that will get a stop more light than the Canon 300/4 on the 50D I'd I'll be willing to bet my mother that there isn't a stop of light difference in performance between the 50D and D90...
 
grumpybadger said:
Excellent questions Barnie which the OP hasn't answered. However, if you don't need VR/IS and a Sigma 120-300 will do, then that will get a stop more light than the Canon 300/4 on the 50D I'd I'll be willing to bet my mother that there isn't a stop of light difference in performance between the 50D and D90...
Click to expand...


........................I'd rather not use Sigma. :| Even though my macro has never let me down...

The opinion I may have in my head now may be because I spend a lot of time in bird hides talking (quietly :D) to other birding togs and none of them have recommended Sigma to me..not to say this is the opinion of all birding togs.
 
Apart from macro, I've not had great luck with Sigma I have to say.

Not sure what your definition of noise and image quality is but this is from a 7D and is about as dark as I would ever take photos



EOS 7D, EF 400 f/4DO IS, tripod, Acratech Long Lens Head

This was wide open (f/4) at ISO3200 and only 1/40s shutter speed. It's pretty dark in Scandinavian pine forest in a heavy storm...

To me, that passes the threshold of acceptable although it is pretty much full frame. I've not seen anything from a crop camera to convince me anything else would be able to do much better....

Paul
 
Nikon will give less noise but you will have to crop more than say a 1.6 crop therby making the noise show up more.
So in many ways unless you can fill the frame you wont gain in the noise department and as said with FF you need 500mm to match 300mm on a 1.6crop ( APROX )
I would check out the 7d its a super camera.
Rob
 
squizza said:
£500 max on top of the sale of all my gear to swap to Nikon.

£500 max on top of the sale of the 50D to get a different Canon body.:)
Click to expand...

That will get you a new 7D, it really is a very good camera.

An awful lot of noise issues are due to underexposure, just make sure that whatever camera you use you err on the side of slight overexposure!
 
I think I understand your need to change to Nikon ( felt like that myself not long before I bought the 7D) but the feeling is just that.. It will not make your pictures better or make you any happier and it might even make them worse in the short term...... I suggest you get out with your current camera and take MORE PICTURES.....and then more... stretch your ability with what you have.... Honestly, Its the secret. I went through a period where I bought a new lens every month thinking it was needed to make me better. They tend to sit in the bag now as I have found I love the nifty fifty...
 
Is there a canon 7d thread? I searched but couldn't find it?:$
 
squizza said:
Here's an example at ISO 400

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sarahlefley/3884543994/sizes/l/in/set-72157622231772844/
Click to expand...

That's quite remarkable, are all 50D users seeing this same level of noise at ISO400, as that doesn't look right? :o I can see why you are disappointed.

As an example, here a full frame jpg converted from a raw file from a D300, at ISO800 with noise reduction turned off in my processing software to get as fair a comparison as I could (converted to a quality '85' jpg by the GIMP):
http://www.bluelion.org.uk/forumImages/talkphotography/full_frame_robin_iso800_no_noisereduction.jpg

I've been a bit negative about the D300 recently, especially after seeing some of the more recent Canon output from the 5DmkII and 7D. I think its time to take it all back, thanks for the thread!
 
Bluelion said:
That's quite remarkable, are all 50D users seeing this same level of noise at ISO400, as that doesn't look right? :o I can see why you are disappointed.

As an example, here a full frame jpg converted from a raw file from a D300, at ISO800 with noise reduction turned off in my processing software to get as fair a comparison as I could (converted to a quality '85' jpg by the GIMP):
http://www.bluelion.org.uk/forumImages/talkphotography/full_frame_robin_iso800_no_noisereduction.jpg

I've been a bit negative about the D300 recently, especially after seeing some of the more recent Canon output from the 5DmkII and 7D. I think its time to take it all back, thanks for the thread!
Click to expand...

Well I had hardly cropped in on that image also, as I was using a macro lens and very close anyway.:shrug:
 
blaze_away said:
Hi Sarah
IMO you need to sit and really think hard about why you want to change, what is it about your canon 5D you don't like ?
Will switching to some other brand 'fix' that problem or not ?
Then ask yourself what will it cost me (time and money) to switch and will I lose anything i really like ie Must have.

I am a long term nikon user with a huge amount invested in both lenses and ancillaries, I believe if you are in either the nikon or canon or other quality brand then you would be hard pressed to find a real technical benefit for switching at a realistic price.
Although I would say that at present the D3 and D700 have an advantage in low light performance but I'm sure Canon will counteract that, indeed they may already have done that. I don't think switching will make anyone a better photographer so if you look hard at why you want to do this you may well find its just a distraction.
Click to expand...
Excellent and spot on advice.
 
Bluelion said:
That's quite remarkable, are all 50D users seeing this same level of noise at ISO400, as that doesn't look right? :o I can see why you are disappointed.

As an example, here a full frame jpg converted from a raw file from a D300, at ISO800 with noise reduction turned off in my processing software to get as fair a comparison as I could (converted to a quality '85' jpg by the GIMP):
http://www.bluelion.org.uk/forumImages/talkphotography/full_frame_robin_iso800_no_noisereduction.jpg

I've been a bit negative about the D300 recently, especially after seeing some of the more recent Canon output from the 5DmkII and 7D. I think its time to take it all back, thanks for the thread!
Click to expand...
You can't really compare this image with the one squizza posted. Her's was a full frame picture, yours is a downsized one.
Can you post a full size large picture to compare the results?
 
Isn't there a default setting on the 50D that actually creates noise and should be switched off? I seem to remember a thread on this...
 
Someone mentioned over exposing a bit, in order to get noise clean image. That is correct. Switching to a different brand will not solve your problems, the problem might be your technique.
Please don't take this as an attack, I am only trying to help. I would say go for the 7D and learn how to properly use it. You will be happy with it.
 
Dimitri said:
Someone mentioned over exposing a bit, in order to get noise clean image. That is correct. Switching to a different brand will not solve your problems, the problem might be your technique.
Please don't take this as an attack, I am only trying to help. I would say go for the 7D and learn how to properly use it. You will be happy with it.
Click to expand...

:lol:I know, I'm useless! :D
 
Hmmm. Just viewed the photo you posted of the ISO 400 shot which I too would be slightly perturbed about, my 400D doesnt show noise at ISO 400. A bit concerning for me as I was planning (and very much looking forward to!) purchasing a 50D next month!
 
Dimitri said:
I wouldn't go that far. :lol::lol:
Seriously, I have heard in the past people complaining about their gear and how bad results they get but most of the time, it is a user fault.
Click to expand...

No, seriously. :D

I'm quite tempted by the 7D. :love:

I'll try the over exposing but I very rarely had any trouble from the 40D and my technique hasn't changed.
 
odd jim said:
Hmmm. Just viewed the photo you posted of the ISO 400 shot which I too would be slightly perturbed about, my 400D doesnt show noise at ISO 400. A bit concerning for me as I was planning (and very much looking forward to!) purchasing a 50D next month!
Click to expand...

That image was taken with

Canon 50D on a grip
Sigma 105mm (of which I have had absolutely superb results from on the 40D)
Manfrotto tripod

I don't understand it myself. I just know that I have personally never really been happy with it.

Ah ...I don't want to deliberately put people off!
 
It does seem strange, that seems like a lot of noise for ISO 400 especially for a prosumer body. I take it this is before any sharpening or any significant PP'ing?
 
odd jim said:
It does seem strange, that seems like a lot of noise for ISO 400 especially for a prosumer body. I take it this is before any sharpening or any significant PP'ing?
Click to expand...

I would have done some selective sharpening on the drop itself. Couldn't tell you if I did noise reduction or not. Too long ago. :bang:
 
barneyrubble said:
One thing to watch, is that a lot of people aren't that impressed with the D300. There is noise at base iso - you need to check it out before definately deciding to swap.

I myself have sold two D300 cameras because I was disappointed with the IQ. Why I bought the second I will never know. I met another member from on here today who said exactly the same.
Click to expand...

+1

I have both the D3 and D300S, the noise levels on the D300S are atrocious - it was better controlled on an entry level 400D I started with a long time ago. The D3 on the other hand is out of this world but you then lack the reach of a 1.5(or 1.6) crop camera.

My advice is, unless you are going straight to D3 then I wouldnt bother swapping over. I'm now faced with the dilemma of heading back to Canon to get those extra reach shots (for wildlife) and sticking to Nikon for everything else = cost me a packet in lenses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top