is it true that nikon lens selection for FX is not as wide as Canon?

[nikoneer]

Hi guys,

I am jumping camp from canon to nikon. I sort of feel that nikon lens selection is not as wide as canon. is this the case or i am not knowing enough? Just curious: what are the usual reasons for canon people to junk their canon system and embrace nikon? I just like to see what are the reasons so as to be sure it is not a moment of impulse.

thanks
song

These are the probable reasons why you want to jump:

1. Nikon released d600 which has generally positive reviews.
2. Canon is going to release 6d which has generally negative reviews based on specs - which is not yet materialized.
3. Nikon's FX system is at the top of DXO mark.
4. Nikon doesn't have RED rings to signify its expensiveness like how Canon made their line-ups.

In my observation, Nikon's lens selection for FX is practical aimed for $eriou$ enthu$ia$t (if you get it) and PROS. Whereas Canon FF is aimed for pros and probably mid level beginners.

For me, Nikon doesn't have RED ring but the image quality of almost all of their FX lens is comparable to RED rings of canon, even the moderately priced ones. Try the ones with N markings....

you probably got big balls to jump because you don't have enough canon lens to hold you off... if that is the case then you are welcome to jump... it's nice to share happiness with others...

btw if the 5d mk3 price is similar to d600... I would have gone to canon camp because they have wider range of lens for FF.... heheheheheheheheheh

 

[wolfton]

For me, Nikon doesn't have RED ring but the image quality of almost all of their FX lens is comparable to RED rings of canon, even the moderately priced ones. Try the ones with N markings....

The Nikkor 70-300 VR is a good example. It gives the C "L" version a good run for its money, and beats the C cheaper IS version hands down

 

[avsquare]

These are the probable reasons why you want to jump:

1. Nikon released d600 which has generally positive reviews.
2. Canon is going to release 6d which has generally negative reviews based on specs - which is not yet materialized.
3. Nikon's FX system is at the top of DXO mark.
4. Nikon doesn't have RED rings to signify its expensiveness like how Canon made their line-ups.

In my observation, Nikon's lens selection for FX is practical aimed for $eriou$ enthu$ia$t (if you get it) and PROS. Whereas Canon FF is aimed for pros and probably mid level beginners.

For me, Nikon doesn't have RED ring but the image quality of almost all of their FX lens is comparable to RED rings of canon, even the moderately priced ones. Try the ones with N markings....

you probably got big balls to jump because you don't have enough canon lens to hold you off... if that is the case then you are welcome to jump... it's nice to share happiness with others...

btw if the 5d mk3 price is similar to d600... I would have gone to canon camp because they have wider range of lens for FF.... heheheheheheheheheh

Nikon don't have red ring, but they have gold ring.

 

[nikoneer]

Nikon don't have red ring, but they have gold ring.

ah yes.... due to nikons poor marketing strategy, the gold ring doesn't signify that it is the best lens... from the plain eyes of photographer, it is just nothing. but to a keen NIKON user... it is the ring that rules them all!!!!! rrrrarrr!

 

[avsquare]

ah yes.... due to nikons poor marketing strategy, the gold ring doesn't signify that it is the best lens... from the plain eyes of photographer, it is just nothing. but to a keen NIKON user... it is the ring that rules them all!!!!! rrrrarrr!

Yeah, one good thing about Nikkor AF-S lens is that no gold ring doesn't mean it's cheap and poor.. I see most of them are moderately price with good performance for the moolah paid.

 

[malcom7373]

Hi,

To answer your question - YES.

Before the jump - You have to list down yourself the function, the image quality, the type of photography you be doing...etc. Frankly, I jumped ship from canon to Nikon base on the following few considerations. So far, happy with my choice; probably happy too if I did not jump ship.... hahaha ... guess that I finally realized that it is just a preference. quality of shots depends on how well you know your setup and what degree of adjustment you need on the different gear that you use. Just like riding a Shimano or Saracen bike.....

Many try to convince the jump to be worthy...etc. But I think the main reason is the money you invested into Canon and now you got to sell them to fund for Nikon...haha...Simple, rent a set to try out.

In my opinion:-
1) Canon does have a more vibrant colour compare to Nikon by default. It is the user who will make the necessary adjustment before taking the shoot. Canon has the widest lens as compared to Nikon. 8-15mm if I recall correctly; Nikon is 14mm. But there are also alot of 3rd party lens available for both.

2) Fact is also true that Nikon has lesser range of lens as compare to canon. But, do you know Nikon FX can take DX lens? - Not for canon.

3) Only until recent canon included the various features Nikon carries in-body; to maintain their competitiveness. Example 7D and D90. Make that comparison.

4) Nikon 3D tracking developed by nikon was highly commented. Not sure with the current series of canon cross-type sensors.

Let me know if you can think of any more difference....

 

[ahboy168]

OT ... Why most commercial shooter use canon not nikon? In press conference, sports, etc

 

[wolfton]

OT ... Why most commercial shooter use canon not nikon? In press conference, sports, etc

Simple, because they either have contract with Canon, whereby they are given preferential rates of up to 50% off RRP or Canon sponsor them. Don't believe? Go ask the SPH photogs if you happen to know them. I know a couple that uses Canon because no choice, that's what the company gives.

 

[TWmilkteaTW]

OT ... Why most commercial shooter use canon not nikon? In press conference, sports, etc

Most are sponsored i believe.
And we know Canon is very active in participation. Ads everywhere too. :bsmilie:

 

[cutecdo]

In my opinion:-
1) Canon does have a more vibrant colour compare to Nikon by default. It is the user who will make the necessary adjustment before taking the shoot. Canon has the widest lens as compared to Nikon. 8-15mm if I recall correctly; Nikon is 14mm. But there are also alot of 3rd party lens available for both.

You remember wrong. Nikon have the famous 6mm 2.8 fisheye. The nikkor lens is able to see behind itself.
Nikkor 6mm f/2.8 Fisheye Nikkor lens

 

[edutilos-]

You remember wrong. Nikon have the famous 6mm 2.8 fisheye. The nikkor lens is able to see behind itself.
Nikkor 6mm f/2.8 Fisheye Nikkor lens

Do they still make it?

If you are talking about lenses still in production, I think it's true that Canon 8-15 L fisheye seems to be the widest fisheye available out there. Being able to switch between circular and FF fisheye is something great, imho. They should make more lenses like that one.

 

[Jeremy1]

Are some Canon lenses really that bad as what some people said here ?

Sorry moi never used Canon.

:embrass:

 

[SilentSeth]

Are some Canon lenses really that bad as what some people said here ?

Sorry moi never used Canon.

:embrass:

IF ones say yes and others say no (regardless of whether they actually use Canon lens), who will you believe, and why?

 

[Jeremy1]

IF ones say yes and others say no (regardless of whether they actually use Canon lens), who will you believe, and why?

I guessed u had to try it yourself...............................

Different people had different expectation..............................

 

[SilentSeth]

I guessed u had to try it yourself...............................

Different people had different expectation..............................

Hehe exactly bro. False or subjective info can be misleading.

 

[Blur Shadow]

Are some Canon lenses really that bad as what some people said here ?

Sorry moi never used Canon.

:embrass:

Even when viewed objectively, it is difficult for a manufacturer to make a winner out of every lens.

Add in everyone's unique needs and any possible prejudice for or against a particular brand or type of lens, it is fairly clear that such statements can occur time to time.

To illustrate, I love hammering the Canon 17-40mm f/4L because I don't think it deserves the L lens designation and its price tag. But there are plenty of users who are satisfied with it.

Maybe the 17-40mm I used was unfortunately a bad copy. Maybe I am unreasonably biased against that lens. But I go around making that claim from then on...

 

[nikoneer]

Are some Canon lenses really that bad as what some people said here ?

Sorry moi never used Canon.

:embrass:

can you quote the post here from someone saying some canon lenses are bad? Bad is not the right word probably... it should be... comparable to nikon.

 

[george671]

And then there are guys like me who own and love both Canon and Nikon...However I must admit that I mostly put Nikon glass on my Canon 5D....He He...

 

[Jeremy1]

can you quote the post here from someone saying some canon lenses are bad? Bad is not the right word probably... it should be... comparable to nikon.

Yeah maybe should use the word comparable instead.

 

[dliem]

Are some Canon lenses really that bad as what some people said here ?

Sorry moi never used Canon.

:embrass:

Actually bad is not the word, for me overpriced is the correct word.
Competitors make similar lens with more attractive price
Maybe the need more money to fuel their aggressive marketing