| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Should I switch from Canon to Nikon ?
Pete Gawlik, Photographer
 |
Brighton | East Sussex | United Kingdom | Posted: 5:16 PM on 12.05.09 |
->> My gear is showing its age now, I'm using a MKII and a MKII N. My lenses are early 300 2.8L non is and a sigma 70-200 2.8 and I'm fed up with how badly they perform in bad light.
Today I covered a soccer game in the rain under pretty bad flood lights but not the worst I've worked under.
Chatting with another snapper he showed me how he could pull in his pics on his Nikon D3 using a 300 2.8 non is (or vr ? as its called by Nikon) with very little noise and nice and sharp images and he was shooting much further up the field.
So help me out here and tell me what you would do? |
|
N. Scott Trimble, Photographer
|
Lake Oswego | OR | USA | Posted: 5:36 PM on 12.05.09 |
->> Well, its a very personal choice. Why don't you go to your local camera shop and spend a good part of the day testing both systems? If you have a laptop, bring it, and shoot around the store and download photos. Everyone here can go back and forth until Tiger grows new teeth, and it won't mean anything until you engage our senses with real experience with both systems.
That being said, as I shoot both, they have their advantages and disadvantages, BOTH of them!
Go for it. |
|
N. Scott Trimble, Photographer
|
Lake Oswego | OR | USA | Posted: 5:37 PM on 12.05.09 |
| ->> Your senses, not "our." Oops! |
|
Mike Brice, Photographer
|
Ogden | UT | USA | Posted: 6:16 PM on 12.05.09 |
->> While I am a Nikon shooter, it is not fair to compare one generation of Canon with a newer generation of Nikon.
If I were in your shoes, I would look to upgrade to a newer Canon as opposed to a total swap. There are a lot of hidden expenses in a total swap - flashes, cords, etc. |
|
Michael Fischer, Photographer
|
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 7:36 PM on 12.05.09 |
->> I've owned both. I love the D3 and will go with a D3s as soon as the excitement settles down.
Go rent one. And a lens or two. Never want to make this kind of decision without working with one. Make sure it feels right and is responsive to you.
IF you want to go used, there are some good deals on used D3 bodies right now. Worth thinking about...
Good luck. |
|
Greg Francis, Photographer
|
Rochester | NY | USA | Posted: 11:02 PM on 12.05.09 |
| ->> I purchased a D3 used in March. This week I was shooting a corporate science fair in a cafeteria. Wasn't happy with the bounce flash into the hung ceiling. Turned off the flash and went ambient ISO 1000-1600, and I was once again amazed by the low noise and incredible sharpness of the D3. Nine months after buying it, it continues to amaze me. Especially with portraiture and sharpness. |
|
Nick Morris, Photographer
|
San Marcos | CA | United States | Posted: 2:31 AM on 12.06.09 |
| ->> Pete, it is VERY expensive to swap complete systems. I made the jump in 07 when the Mark III was announced. I was shooting Nikon (after switching from Canon film to Nikon Digital) and I was shooting a lot of sports. Nikon at the time had nothing even close to what the Mark III "CLAIMED" so I ran the numbers and struggled with my decision for months. I even looked at repair records from rental shops across the nation. Nikon at the time had a higher percentage of repair tag than Canon. The repair tags were based solely on Canon and Nikon not on the individual issues that were repaired. So I decided to go for the full switch. I contacted Nikon and asked if they had ANYTHING in the making before I switched and they had no comment. I had a budget of about $18,000 to do this and I wound up hitting the $21,000 mark and better. There are so many little things you will miss in your switch that you just can't think of and they add up fast. As for switching... I'd stay with Nikon and upgrade all of your gear and keep some of your old gear as a redundant back up system. I'm not all that impressed with Canon right now and yes I am a pissed off Mark III owner but still like it or not that D3 is friggin awesome. |
|
Pete Gawlik, Photographer
|
Brighton | East Sussex | United Kingdom | Posted: 3:39 PM on 12.06.09 |
->> Thanks all for your good advice.
I think I will start by hiring the D3 Nikon set up and see how I get on, I do take on board what you all say about the cost but like I said my gear is old and its time for a upgrade anyway.
It would mean 4 lenses 2 body's and a flash to replace what I have now.
In fact I reckon I could get away with one body, one 300 lens, one 70-200 lens and a 24-70 to begin with.
Oh and one flash head
Pete |
|
Pete Gawlik, Photographer
|
Brighton | East Sussex | United Kingdom | Posted: 4:46 PM on 12.06.09 |
->> Actually this has got me thinking does anyone shoot sports with a combination of camera makes ?
ie: Canon and long lens, Nikon and short lens or vice versa,
Or is that just silly !!! |
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 6:05 PM on 12.06.09 |
->> Pete, its doable, and I had to do it for a while as I was trying to find some Nikon glass, like the 70-200 in stock, but its frankly a bit difficult as the interfaces are quite different, zoom rings turn "backwards", lens mounts are reversed etc.
The overall files are going to look rather different as well and that can be a real pain in your work flow too.
Once I had the D3 and the 24-70, along with their excellent flash system, I really started to loathe using the 1D mkIII and my Canon 70-200 and couldn't wait to go fully Nikon. Just works much better for me under a range of shooting conditions |
|
Renay Johnson, Photographer
 |
San Diego | CA | | Posted: 6:13 PM on 12.06.09 |
| ->> Pete, I think there are plenty of photographers who have both systems. Nothing silly about that at all. |
|
Erik Markov, Photographer
|
Kokomo | IN | | Posted: 6:31 PM on 12.06.09 |
| ->> As a camera system bastard (Canon at work, Nikon at home) it's all what you feel comfortable with, your style of shooting and what you're shooting. I can make great images with the Canon, but I've only been shooting with it for 9 years. I've been shooting Nikon for 20, consequently it feels better in my hands. And for me at least, it's more about the lenses. My Nikon glass has held up better over the years than the Canon glass I have used for work, don't know why that is, but it has. I've got a D700 that's been a pleasure to shoot with over this past year. I've heard a lot of Canon shooters who don't like the fact that pro Nikon is more of a knobs based system, while Canon has a few buttons on top but there are options that they put in menus (such as live view) while Nikon doesn't. I like more buttons and knobs and less buried in the menus. And at least for me, the features Nikon included in the d700 like artificial horizon, multiple exposure, auto iso, more suit the type of stuff I shoot when I'm not shooting for a paycheck. |
|
Daniel Malmberg, Photographer
|
Huskvarna | Sweden | Sweden | Posted: 8:10 PM on 12.06.09 |
->> Personally i would wait some months, before making a decision.
And see what EOS 1D mkIV realy goes for.
Its hard to know yet.
But it might delivers even better images than what Nikons D3 and D3s does.
If 1D mkIV shows up to be good enough.
Than you will be able to use your moneys in better ways than to switch system totally. |
|
Darren Whitley, Photographer
|
Northwest Missouri | MO | USA | Posted: 11:26 PM on 12.06.09 |
->> It depends on what you shoot. If you shoot a lot of Strobist type stuff, the CLS flash system is a significant benefit IMHO.
If you're an ambient light sports photographer, there's nothing wrong with Canon. Canon doesn't clip the reds as fast as a Nikon. I find using my Nikon is a little tricky in terms of reading the histogram and knowing whether to go by the red channel or by the composite. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|