Nikon versus Canon (1 Viewer)

[calcarius]

Hi All

I would like to buy a decent camera and a couple of good lenses for bird photoghraphy and was pretty settled on a Nikon D3 or 300. But a few people seem to think Canon is better for bird shots. One chap, called Mike Atkinson, says on his website that "most serious bird photographers use Canon".

Is this true?

 

[rezMole]

I would say most birders on here use Canon - not because Canon are better but because there are probably a few more choices when it comes to lenses, and they used to be generally a bit cheaper. Things change though and Nikon seems to be fighting back and as a result more and more birders are starting to use Nikon.

I chose Nikon over Canon just because I prefered the D70 over the similarly priced Canon at the time - it felt better in my hands. I have since upgraded to the D300 which is a cracking camera for bird photography.

I wasn't bothered about the fact that long Canon prime lenses were cheaper cos I was never going to spend 4 to 5 grand on one. I use a Sigma 500mm lens which is the same price whichever fitting.

 

[Pluvius]

You wont go wrong with the D300 by all accounts an excellent camera with very good autofocus, probably better than the latest canons. It goes well with the expensive 200-400 zoom lens. Nikon long lenses tend to be more expensive than Canon. However if you are starting into bird photography you will very quickly realise that long lenses are a necessity. I also have the sigma 500 which is an excellent lens but if I had the money would definately upgrade to a canon 500. For one one cannot get quite as sharp images with a teleconvertor on the sigma as the canon. At present there seem to be quite a few jumping ship from Canon to Nikon.

 

[postcardcv]

Hi All

I would like to buy a decent camera and a couple of good lenses for bird photoghraphy and was pretty settled on a Nikon D3 or 300. But a few people seem to think Canon is better for bird shots. One chap, called Mike Atkinson, says on his website that "most serious bird photographers use Canon".

Is this true?

It is true that long lens availability and range is better for Canon and they used to cheaper but with recent price rises this isn't such an issue. The simple fact is that both are very good and can deliver outstanding results. I use Canon but if I was starting out today I'd definitely be tempted to go down the Nikon road... try some stuff, see which you like and go for that. Don't worry about what someone else thinks is best just get gear that you are happy with. I think that the quality of cameras and lenses from both sides is so good that the limiting factor will always be the photographer (I know my gear is capable of much more than I manage).

 

[JohnZ]

I always wanted a Nikon camera but sadly they were always too expensive for me. I also found the cost of the lenses prohibitive as well.
Have things changed ? You tell me.

 

[Gentoo]

I agree with what's been said by everyone else. The two can be so similar that many refer to them rather disparagingly as "canikon" or "Nikonon" .

I've looked into Canon as well but found the Nikon ergonomics more natural and comfortable for my personal taste. I wasn't aware that many birders are jumping ship from Canon to Nikon. What I have noticed is that the average person seems to have Nikon around their necks more than Canons (I work in a theme park).

 

[Phil Bishop]

Nikon was the make to go for, all the way from the late 50's to the early 90's. Being a tad more conservative, they lost ground to Canons faster auto focusing lenses ,and later on image stabilization. Thats the main reason why you see so much Canon equipment these days.
The current Nikon lens line up is as good as Canons (yes there are some focal lengths unique to each and some are better than others-eg Canon users are getting adapters made to use the new wide angle Nikkors) and Nikons current crop of DSLR's are as good as if not better than the competition.
Nikon along with Pentax also have the major advantage in backwards compatibility with older equipment. As the lens mount has essentially stayed the same, it is possible, with some exceptions to couple any lens/extension ring/bellows made over the last fifty years to the latest cameras (and vice versa if you happen to have an old film body lying around.
Quality control seems to be better too-Canon's focusing problems spring to mind immediately
Remember this though. At the end of the day, provided you have not bought a dud, any of the current cameras, whether it be Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Sony or Olympus is capable of doing the job. Its the person pressing th shutter that determines how good the results are.

 

[Robert / Seattle]

Hi All

I would like to buy a decent camera and a couple of good lenses for bird photoghraphy and was pretty settled on a Nikon D3 or 300. ...

The Nikon D700 has the same sensor as the D3, is lighter, and equipped with a self cleaning sensor. It's also about 1/3rd less in price. I have them both, and use the D700 for field photography, reserving the D3 for studio work. Either way, both of these cameras are equipped with the finest performing high ISO, low noise, sensor made -- and these higher ISO settings will be of immense value in bird photography. All things considered, I'd spring for the D700 if I were in your position - an impressive machine!

I have several pro colleagues who are trading in their Canon gear for Nikon, though for reasons that have admittedly little if anything to do with bird photography.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,
Robert / Seattle

 

[Matt_RTH]

Consider support. Nikon service is horrific (personal experience) and Canon is outstanding (personal experience). Go to dpreview or fredmiranda and I think you'll see experiences largely consistent with that.

 

[QuantumTiger]

Canon and Nikon are always chasing each other's heels and at various points one or the other could be said to be doing better in terms of their camera bodies. Currently Nikon bodies do seem to be attracting better reviews particularly in comparisons at high ISOs. But Canon will doubtless catch up. When I started on the SLR route I was tempted by (sadly now defunct) Minolta's excellent ergonomics but I chose Canon in the end on the basis of lens range and availabilty. Canon also have a clear upgrade path from cheap to mid-range.

The advice I was given then was to start by working out which lenses would meet my needs and could afford then work out which body to go behind them. Generally speaking lens technology advances more slowly than camera technology and as a consequence lenses hold their value whilst cameras don't.

As has been said already both are good so you can't go far wrong.

 

[Vespa]

Haven't Nikon just introduced a serious hike in prices across all its DSLRs and Lenses - 10% at least? The D300 seems to have gone to an average of around £1k form £900. If you are contemplating this with a decent lens, you could now be looking at another £400 in all compared with a few month ago. Does this now leave Canon at the cheaper end again or are they following suit?
There was a recent thread on the price differentials but that may now be out of date.

 

[stevo]

Haven't Nikon just introduced a serious hike in prices across all its DSLRs and Lenses - 10% at least? The D300 seems to have gone to an average of around £1k form £900. If you are contemplating this with a decent lens, you could now be looking at another £400 in all compared with a few month ago. Does this now leave Canon at the cheaper end again or are they following suit?
There was a recent thread on the price differentials but that may now be out of date.

There is also a Canon price increase too.

Steve.

 

[Dave Williams]

Haven't Nikon just introduced a serious hike in prices across all its DSLRs and Lenses - 10% at least? The D300 seems to have gone to an average of around £1k form £900. If you are contemplating this with a decent lens, you could now be looking at another £400 in all compared with a few month ago. Does this now leave Canon at the cheaper end again or are they following suit?
There was a recent thread on the price differentials but that may now be out of date.

I posted W.Express prices yesterday and Canon now appear to be a lot higher than Nikon at the super telephoto end.
That said the majority of both Canon and Nikon lenses are unavailable.
This whole Canon vs Nikon debate goes on and on and on and on
and ends up no one being any the wiser !
What about Sony ?

 

[calcarius]

This whole Canon vs Nikon debate goes on and on and on and on
and ends up no one being any the wiser !
What about Sony ?

I would not agree. I am finding all this fascinating and informative. Of course in the end it comes down to personal choice, but I would like to thank everyone who has posted on this thread. It has been extremely helpful.

May I ask one other question? How big a lens would you recommend - is 500mm large enough?

 

[Pluvius]

Is 500mm long enough!!!! No.
Well sometimes it is but if I had an extra £9000 I would buy the 800 but I dont. It also depends on what you are shooting. Small passerines most of the time not quite enough but the bigger birds ok.

 

[Dave Williams]

I would not agree. I am finding all this fascinating and informative. Of course in the end it comes down to personal choice, but I would like to thank everyone who has posted on this thread. It has been extremely helpful.

May I ask one other question? How big a lens would you recommend - is 500mm large enough?

You might be better off thinking about the limits of your budget, if you have one and then asking what is the best way to spend it. At £3k and £1k, the two bodies you have quoted vary in performance and price quite considerably.Likewise a cheap end zoom up to 500mm and a top of the range 500mm prime.
I think you need to give a little more indication of the level of your research and your expectations rather than open up a brand debate.Once you have decided the former you can decide which brand to commit to.

 

[RJM]

Well if go with a Nikon dslr you could use their ED82 fieldscope as an inexpensive 1000m F13 telephoto lens that weighs only 1.5kg. Unlike other dslr/fieldscope combos, their FSA-L1 dSLR adapter will pass full Matrix Metering and Exposure Compesation control to the camera. You can shoot Aperture Priority too instead of a limited Manual as with other brands.

F13 may seem really slow, but with the high ISO capability of the D700/300/90 bodies you can still get fast shutter speeds for excellent results. Only downside is manual focus.

 

[rezMole]

Consider support. Nikon service is horrific (personal experience) and Canon is outstanding (personal experience). Go to dpreview or fredmiranda and I think you'll see experiences largely consistent with that.

i would disagree with this. I recently had an accident where i slipped on some ice, fell, and my D300 suffered a crash on some rocks. The damage? A badly cracked rear monitor (inside) and a scratched top display screen. I returned it to Nikon and they sent me an estimate for repair by email on the day they received the camera from me. The estimate of £216 (parts, labour, clean, full testing and return postage) seemed reasonable to me (i know someone who uses Canon cameras for his job and he led me to believe it wouldn't be worth repairing!).

Anyway, i logged onto their site and accepted the estimate, telling them to go ahead with the repair. Four days later I got another email telling me the repair was complete. I logged on again and made payment. The camera was back in my hands two days after that. The actual cost was less than the estimate - £203. I am very satisfied with the service - painless and efficient.

 

[Neil]

Canon had Image Stabilising on their long lenses early on so got the jump on Nikon with nature and sports photographers. They also have a very good 400/5.6 light lens for anyone who likes to walk around and photograph. I use the Nikon 300/4 plus 1.4x tele to do this and the Nikon 500/4 VR when using a tripod/monopod.
I think these days both systems are very good. I'm very impressed with my D3 and don't intend to upgrade any time soon.
Neil.