What do you shoot

[akhater]

I have been on this forum for just a few hours, but I have noticed that most of us own Canon gears, just out of curiosity what do you shoot?

I'll start Canon 30D

[studio206]

Canon all the way ^_^
i also have an Olympus digital camera o.O it's pretty good but it's not a dslr, it's one of those hybrid cameras, or super zoom... whatever u want to call them.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Canon for Life.

[Adaptive]

Canon 30d and a bunch of lenses with red rings around the tip :)

[FocZoEM]

Ok, there it is: NIKON!!!!!

[dnorris]

I ***** all the time about my Nikon stuff though.
The sensor isn't full frame and My d2x only goes up to iso of 800 which pissed me off. the flash heads don't rotate all the way around like canon does. Plus its cheaper.

But, in low light the camera focuses better even with the 800 iso. Plus is goes down to 100 iso, which I hear canon only goes to 200.

Its a love hate relationship. But I wont switch, due to the forcusing issue (at this time)

[studio206]

lol yeah i'd say so

[TX_Gulf_Coast]

Don't take this wrong, cause I advocate the theory that you USE what equipment works, not the brand name.

But...I dropped Nikon due to metering and focus problems with 2 of my D2H bodies. One body I sent to NPS 3 times and they still couldn't fix it right, the other twice.

And one of the reasons most sports photogs use Canon over Nikon IS the Auto Focus capabilities and performance. It is reputed to be the best in the business. I regularly use it in some "dungeon dark" High School football stadiums and it works fantastic. Alot of the focus capabilities on any camera is inherent in the lenses you choose to use. (I am using fast primes, so that helps alot. Variable aperature zooms will not perform well in low light.)

I can take My Canon's down to ISO 50 and up to ISO 3200. Don't know if that is the deal on all Canon's, but it just maybe that some people don't have the Expand ISO feature enabled on their body under Custom Functions.

My entire reasoning in the brand switch was due to functionality NOT brand. Canon bodies and lenses allow me a camera I can use in the studio, at weddings and in difficult low-light conditions (sports) where flash isn't an option and still produce a marketable image. Canon does that for me, where Nikon didn't. I can also depend on my images at ISO 1600 & even 3200 (with minimal Post work) where I NEVER could with Nikon, above 800. So I swapped. I used Nikon Digital, D1H, D1X, D2H, D2HS, and D100 bodies before switching.

Nikkor lenses are damn good too. I miss some of my Nikkor lenses. But have gained a couple that I will never part with on the Canon side too!

I am not convinced that the FF issue is that important. I have a full frame...but I hate the files and post work it creates. I like the size on my 1.3 crop sensor better and it produces ANY image size I need to print. I have 24" x 36" prints from my D2H (4.1 MP) files that are tremendous! No issues. It is more dependant on post processing and file handling in the print process than the image size.

I just wanted to make you aware of these things (and others that read) so that people make an informed decision.

By all means, if Nikon works for you...don't even toy with switching.


I ***** all the time about my Nikon stuff though.
The sensor isn't full frame and My d2x only goes up to iso of 800 which pissed me off. the flash heads don't rotate all the way around like canon does. Plus its cheaper.

But, in low light the camera focuses better even with the 800 iso. Plus is goes down to 100 iso, which I hear canon only goes to 200.

Its a love hate relationship. But I wont switch, due to the forcusing issue (at this time)

[najahannah]

Hello Everyone,
Thanks to focusfaction, I just registered myself a couple of minutes back. Am a novice in photography. Thought I could learn a few things from all. Last week got myself a Nikon D80 & have been practicing with the equipment. Never used a digital camera earlier. Thanks once again.

[najahannah]

Don't take this wrong, cause I advocate the theory that you USE what equipment works, not the brand name.

But...I dropped Nikon due to metering and focus problems with 2 of my D2H bodies. One body I sent to NPS 3 times and they still couldn't fix it right, the other twice.

And one of the reasons most sports photogs use Canon over Nikon IS the Auto Focus capabilities and performance. It is reputed to be the best in the business. I regularly use it in some "dungeon dark" High School football stadiums and it works fantastic. Alot of the focus capabilities on any camera is inherent in the lenses you choose to use. (I am using fast primes, so that helps alot. Variable aperature zooms will not perform well in low light.)

I can take My Canon's down to ISO 50 and up to ISO 3200. Don't know if that is the deal on all Canon's, but it just maybe that some people don't have the Expand ISO feature enabled on their body under Custom Functions.

My entire reasoning in the brand switch was due to functionality NOT brand. Canon bodies and lenses allow me a camera I can use in the studio, at weddings and in difficult low-light conditions (sports) where flash isn't an option and still produce a marketable image. Canon does that for me, where Nikon didn't. I can also depend on my images at ISO 1600 & even 3200 (with minimal Post work) where I NEVER could with Nikon, above 800. So I swapped. I used Nikon Digital, D1H, D1X, D2H, D2HS, and D100 bodies before switching.

Nikkor lenses are damn good too. I miss some of my Nikkor lenses. But have gained a couple that I will never part with on the Canon side too!

I am not convinced that the FF issue is that important. I have a full frame...but I hate the files and post work it creates. I like the size on my 1.3 crop sensor better and it produces ANY image size I need to print. I have 24" x 36" prints from my D2H (4.1 MP) files that are tremendous! No issues. It is more dependant on post processing and file handling in the print process than the image size.

I just wanted to make you aware of these things (and others that read) so that people make an informed decision.

By all means, if Nikon works for you...don't even toy with switching.


Hi,
Couldn't have agreed with you more! You are right in saying its finally "to each his own" - its functionality that matters ultimately and not the brand.

Rgds
Najahannah

[NikonNut]

I use a Nikon D70, and on a lesser scale, an N90s. I also have the 18-70 and 55-200 DX lenses, and a 300mm f4 ED-IF. Was my first pick at a semi-pro level lens, and am very happy with my choice.
-Dan

[MillerPhoto]

I shoot with Canon 20D.. its my first DSLR. I love it. I print 20x30 prints on a regular basis and the shots are chrisp and clear. I have no complaints about the camera or the lenses.. execpt the lenses I want are like $8000 haha.. thats the only down side. I agree with people when they say its not all about the brand.. Of course brand name does affect a little. But I did alot of research into the camera I wanted and it came down to the features and versitality. And Canon won hands down.

[nburwell]

I also shoot with a 20D and I recently bought a 350D to use as a back-up to my 20D. Ideally, I would like a 5D and have my 20D as my back-up, but I'm waiting for the 5D prices to come down first (plus, I don't have $2,000 to spend). The 20D is actually my 2nd DSLR, the D70 being my first. I was a big Nikon guy prior to purchasing the 20D. A friend of mine also had a D70, but had his stolen in NYC. Luckily insurance covered it and he went out and bought the 20D. He let me try it out one day, and I just fell in love with it. A few months later I sold my D70 body to my brother and bought the 20D. I've gone through many lens. First started out with the 17-85mm IS, then moved onto the Sigma 18-50 f/2.8, but I think I finally found my niche with my current set-up since it suit my photographic style very well.

[MillerPhoto]

Was wondering if you Nikon users that have switched to the 20D. Do you find the shutter is a little louder in the 20D then the Nikon?

[nburwell]

The 20D shutter, I think, is louder than the D70. I don't think it's a drastic difference, but it's definitely noticable to me.

[fzipperer]

Hi all, I'm a new member and am looking forward to the forums. My equip consists of Nikon D2x, Nikon D70 and Hassy 500cm. Been a Nikon user ever since the 8008s film camera. On my wish list is the new digital back for the Hassy.
Frank

[timtam]

Hi guys... I've just joined recently also... and have to say that I'm far from professional! LOL

I use the following 35mm
* PEntax Z-7
* Pentax Z-10 (this one takes beautiful shots! especially on b and w film)

and a Kodak Z710 digital

I used to have an awesome Sony digital that died last week.... so I got a new cheapy digital... unfortunately cash restrictions don't allowe me to get the camera I'd love to have! But I'm happy working with what I've got... and photoshop helps with the rest! LOLOL

So many people rave about Canon cameras.... to be honest, I've never actually used one. I must get out and try it!

[mommymomo]

Maxxum 5D By Konica Minolta which is now known as Sony Minolta.

[LuisV]

Obviously I am amongst the few Nikonians in here but with all due respect to the others, I have had no problem with the Nikon at all, ever, going back to the film bodies. I too have shot with many bodies going back to the F401 & F3 in the 80's through to every dSLR they've made since the D1X. I love them all and I think they all have thier niche.

This never boils down to more than a matter of taste. In my work the Nikon AF system is far more customizeable and easy to work with. The metering is great for me. However, like with any brand, there are times when I know it will be fooled and that's what they make incident meters for. The ergonomics, for me, are far better. I can go on for ever as well........ISO 1600. Canon can't get a clean shot at ISO 1600. Nor can Nikon or anybody else. Is there more noise in one than in anohter? Perhaps. Will you get the shot with either, yes. Was one film more grainy than others? Yeah. It's a matter of taste. For me, it's pointless. I don't shoot at ISO 1600. Even when I have had to, the noise reduction in camera was fine. If you go with post shot processing, you won't ever tell the difference.

In the end, don't be led by what the Pro's use or by what's #1 in market share. That changes like the tide. Go with what feels best and most intuative to you. In the end it's the shot that counts. If somebody looked at my photo and said "You must have shot that with a Nikon"....... I've failed. If somebody looks at my photo and says "that's amazing".... I've suceeded. Any camera can get any shot. It's a tool nothing more, nothing less.

[timtam]

OOoohhh.. I like what you've said here... so true!

"In the end, don't be led by what the Pro's use or by what's #1 in market share. That changes like the tide. Go with what feels best and most intuative to you. In the end it's the shot that counts. If somebody looked at my photo and said "You must have shot that with a Nikon"....... I've failed. If somebody looks at my photo and says "that's amazing".... I've suceeded. Any camera can get any shot. It's a tool nothing more, nothing less."

[tvdoll]

Originally Posted by TX_Gulf_Coast

And one of the reasons most sports photogs use Canon over Nikon IS the Auto Focus capabilities and performance. It is reputed to be the best in the business. I regularly use it in some "dungeon dark" High School football stadiums and it works fantastic.


Which is exactly why, after researching, I purchased my Canon 20D.
Dungeon dark High School stadiums...ha ha ha!!! Oh man, can I relate.

[steviems]

You know I read something at the photo.net forum that made me embareassed (so, I cant spell, BFD) about what I have, and how I got it ....someone said "the canon 30D LOOKS very pro..." and i just...it botherd me. The topic of the OG post was trying to figure out what camera this person should buy, so I went on and on about how the 30d felt right and fit in my hands and felt comfortbale yada yada yada...Im so new at photgraphy, that sometimes i think i have no business owning a camera like that. That comment made me feel so naive. Then it got me tinking baout what she/he ment when they said that, so I started wondering if my camera was considered a POS of not, to "pro" photographers, and wether or not people will actually judge you on how your camera looks.
but I like my camera, so i dont really care, not trying to impress.