(not) Another Nikon vs Canon (at Tony Northrup vid link)

JohnN

JohnN

Suspended / Banned
Messages
6,359
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi,

I watched this on youtube this morning and its a very considered review and in my eyes well worth a watch - if only to confuse us further :)

 
Interesting and enjoyable to watch

Interesting option for a Nikon users - hand held, carry around, travel set up, for bird shots - Canon 7D and Canon 400mm f5.6L - less than £1,500 from the "grey" guys

Tony N seems a good guy and he explains things well

Looks like Canon have to "step up to the plate" and produce a couple of new bodies

Thanks for posting
 
Last edited:
No worries and I agree.

Certainly made me think as I've not got round to getting a 70-200 II, but could benefit from some of the other parts.
 
JohnN said:
No worries and I agree.

Certainly made me think as I've not got round to getting a 70-200 II, but could benefit from some of the other parts.
Click to expand...

It looks as if he is saying that if you stick to maybe 175mm the Nikon 70 200 f2.8VR l …… i.e. the first VR not the latest, is a good lens to go for ,,,,,, especially as you can pick one up for sub £800 used ……. I have always been pleased with mine, (except with a TC).
 
Could be interesting if Nikon sort their lenses before Canon sort out their sensors.

I also thought it showed that the 36mp of the Nikon is a bit pointless if even their best lenses could only resolve 24ish mp
 
ChrisHeathcote said:
Could be interesting if Nikon sort their lenses before Canon sort out their sensors.

I also thought it showed that the 36mp of the Nikon is a bit pointless if even their best lenses could only resolve 24ish mp
Click to expand...

It seems to me that Nikon have a couple of "gaps" at the "short" longer lens end

but good glass especially prime tele's is becoming really expensive ……. and the way that it is going with high mega sensors, it would seem that you need very good, (expensive), glass to get anything near what the new bodies can offer …….. difficult to see which way it is going as high meg sensors in cheap bodies don't match cheap kit quality lens….. so Nikon would be better maxing sensor size at below 15 MP to get good ISO and IQ performance in their cheap bodies … I would have thought so, anyway
 
Last edited:
Interesting:)
talking of the Nikon 70-200 2.8 I spent the other day shooting with a chap who had the Nikon 70-200 2.8 and D700
I was using a Canon 550D and 70-200 F4
He got some really nice shots and I liked the background that he could get with the full frame camera and that lens but he was struggling with the weight after a while as the cheetahs that we were shooting were constantly moving, my setup is really light so I was ok
we both got lots of shots that we were happy with and it shows to me anyway that being in the right place at the right time is what matters and gear that you're comfortable using:)
 
Last edited:
Funny I was going to post this a couple of days back but didnt want all the updates from the;

:canon: or :nikon: fanbois..

I think it was a very well done review and kept as much as possible from being self subjective.
 
Lol, I was cautious too, so no emails from this thread!
 
I do envy the Canon lenses. I still think it comes downs to what you find best, the layout for changing settings is different, I think for a lot of people, one will feel most natural.
I only have the older Nikon lenses, the 28-70 and 80-200 (I got a D90 partially as I could buy older lenses and have AF), i find they're pretty damn good wide open really.

I wonder if 99% of people will notice the tiny flaws in each brand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top