Okay i know that the cannons have great lenses and that they are really good when it comes to portraits and the Nikons are good when it comes to taking pictures of sporting events and that the nikon is faster then the cannon soo what else can you tell me about the Nikon and the Cannons and is sony any good? At the high end the Nikons and the Canons are the same in capability. Both have similar quality, both get you outstanding pictures, both have a huge array of gadgets that will help to solve some of your photography issues. So from a quality point of view, you can flip a coin. At the entry level the Nikons are more functional and more robust. If you're after a high end camera there's no contest but if you're starting with an entry model you might consider Nikon.
There is however a difference. Each tends to design their cameras differently so one brand might feel better in your hand than the other. For me that's the Nikon, it's a bit bigger than the Canons and I find the key controls slip comfortably under each finger making the camera a joy to use. However, there are people who say the same about Canon too, it depends on your hands and what kind of work you do. So in the end you have to physically hold each model to determine which you prefer.
The other difference is historical. Nikon tends to be more conservative and slower to innovate but in return when a new model of something does come out it's incredible both in quality and functionality. Canon innovates faster so in any given moment they seem to have more solutions than Nikon, but by rushing things to market they end up selling things that aren't really fully debugged and working. Their new stuff works well to be sure, but if you wait a few months or a year, Nikon's version ends up a hell of a lot better. When Canon catches up again the Canon users have to buy the feature again to finally have a perfected version.
Nikon also tends to stay away from wizbang stuff. Canon often builds in features which seem just wonderful to the novice photographer but in fact they are features that you'll never use since there are better ways to achieve the same end. Still though, it sells a lot of cameras since people are taken in by features even when the features have no value. Nikon doesn't build in stuff that you don't need, they put their resources into making sure that what you do need is functional and effective.
Nikon tends to better protect your investment. Canon has obsoleted it's FD lenses that were sold in the seventies during the film era. People who spent thousands on those lenses were screwed and had to buy new lenses all over again if they wanted to use the later Canon SLRs. Canon has a history of doing that kind of thing. Nikon protects your investment. Any Nikon lens you bought since 1977 will work on the digital SLRs. Nikon lenses that were bought before 1977 would need a modification usually costing about $30 before they will work on the digital SLRs but they too will work. That impresses me. It means that whatever I invest in Nikon I can use even when new camera bodies come out that I decide to buy.
At the consumer level Canon also tends to go on the cheap and try to build sexy looking bodies. But that means you've got something you better not drop for fear it will break and it means you don't always have the controls you need to work effectively. For instance Nikon has two dials to control its cameras, Canon only has one. That means Canon users have to hold down a button to turn the single dial to make some adjustments where Nikon users simply turn two dials. Nikon doesn't build sexy cheap bodies, theirs are very robust, able to take quite a bit of abuse and they are replete with controls exactly where your fingers expect them to be.
If you're just into snapshots either brand will give you outstanding quality, flip a coin and have fun. If you're into more specialized stuff it's not the camera that is the issue, it's the lenses and other accessories that are important, they will help you achieve the goals you set for yourself. The Nikon lenses all fit and work with all their digital SLRs. With Canon some lenses work with some SLRs and some with others. You can't mix and match.
People who believe a camera should be a solid piece of work and be designed to be easy to operate often prefer Nikon. People who believe a camera has to be small and light and are willing to accept more cumbersome controls will pick Canon. And both will tell you that theirs is the best.
Oh yes, and what do I use? I use a Nikon D200. I started with a D70s (now replaced by the D80) and eventually migrated to the D200. Both bodies placed the critical controls under my fingers and both bodies fit comfortably in my hands. With the D200 I never have to go to a menu to turn something on and my eye never has to leave the viewfinder either. To me those kinds of things are critical because often seconds count when you鈥檙e taking a picture.
Finally, I find Nikon technical support better. I used Canon for twenty five years in the film days. Often when I needed help they didn't respond to my emails. Later when I wanted to go digital I asked them if I could use my $6,000 worth of FD lenses on their digital cameras. They didn't even bother to answer my question. The answer I later learned from research I did after was no. So I went Nikon since I already knew they would support older products and their customers. I've never had to use their support for my two cameras but I did use them for a slide scanner I bought from them and also for advice on some of their accessories. I got a response to my emails within 24 hours and it was always helpful.
In the end though, you have to touch them both to decide what is right for you and what compromises you are willing to make. I'd download the user manual for each camera you are considering and read it. That will tell you a lot about whether it's intuitively designed to meet your needs. I'd dream for a while - what kinds of lenses and flash do you eventually want to own? Which maker can meet those needs best? I'd also hold each after reading the manuals to see if the controls are comfortable and easy to access and use. Then I'd finally make a decision. My decision after all that was Nikon.
Oh yes, and Sony? Forget them. First of all they're proprietary, you have to use a Sony flash in their SLR, nothing else will attach to the hot shoe and you have to use the memory stick instead of Compact Flash or Secure Digital cards that are becoming world standards. While Sony did buy Minolta to get into the camera business, they don't understand how photographers work. You won't find the many controls that exist on a Nikon and Canon on their bodies. For many things you will have to go to a menu which can cost you a picture. And besides all that, when you outgrow your SLR where is there to go? There's no higher end professional model though that might change eventually. With Nikon and Canon you have a good migration path as you get more sophisticated. Sony is an electronics company not a camera company. Stick with Nikon or Canon. Both of them have been building cameras longer than Sony has been in business.
I hope this helps a little. Good Luck!! Nikon is faster than canon? Since when? The new canon ID MARK III can shoot at 10 frames per second. Sony is decent, but not up to Canon and Nikon for the most part. It does well in high contrast lighting. As for whether Canon or Nikon is better, it really depends on your budget. There are different competing models for different price ranges. Nikon and Canon are the first choices of pros. I don't know where you got your information about the qualities you noted in your statement, but they were not made by any pro.
That said there are compelling reasons to choose one over the other.
If you already had Nikon or Canon lenses the choice would be easy.
I use three features that only Nikon D200 or D2x cameras have. Image Comment (all my images have the copyright notice embedded in then when shot), Image Authentication (important when doing any legal work) and Commander mode when using remote flash units (although some Canon cameras can do this). In the hands of a great photographer, any camera works well.
However I decided not to get involded in the Canon/Nikon debate (see Coke/Pepsi or Keebler/Oreo debates, lol) and Have been shooting the Pentax K10D since it came out (and have been shooting Pentax for 5 yrs now).
Sony is a baby in the SLR market currently, but its growing up fast (and has the clout to take on Canon). |
