[Brightcolours]

[quote name='exuvia' timestamp='1282296754' post='1946']

you should ask yourself some questions...



- "which size I'm going to print, at maximum?" This is actually what makes you choose between a high pixel count body and a medium pixel count body (aka: FF or DX).

- "I'm going to need high iso shooting?". If yes, go with a FF D700.

- "how much Depth of field handling is crucial to me? (portraits, for example)". If it is, go FF, otherwise DX is more than enough.



And now for the brands: as Edge said, feel a body in your hand, to decide the brand. Nikon has better ergonomics, but that doesn't mean Canon has something wrong.

[/quote]

Nikon does not have better ergonomics. One could actually argue the opposite. Internet myth 313.

[quote name='exuvia' timestamp='1282296754' post='1946']

Nikon makes some better lens, as the micro series and the wide angle zooms (14-24 at the top), but they are expensive.

[/quote]

That is not true either. The Canon macro lenses are BETTER than the Nikon micro lenses. The 60mm from Nikon has worse CA than just about any other macro lens (even other normal prime lenses). For the rest it has nothing that distinguishes it.

The Nikon 105mm f2.8 VR is remarkably not contrasty for a macro lens, and is not any sharper than the competition either, more to the contrary. The 85mm VR DX is not in any way special either. And the out of production 200mm f4... Not exceptional either, and dog slow to focus (especially troublesome at MFD, where its max. aperture starts to be a problem).



On the other hand, the old Canon 100mm f2.8 macro USM already was a great macro lens, and the 100m f2.8 L IS USM improves on it in certain areas. Both are very good. The Canon EF-S 60mm f2.8 USM macro also is a very good lens, without the CA problems of the Nikon. The Canon 180mm f3.5 L USM is a very good lens too, and a fast focuser for its class.



Internet myth 422: Nikon makes better wide angle zooms. That is not true. The Nikon 16-35mm f4 VR is NOT better than the Canon 17-40mm f4 L USM. Bigger and heavier, yes. The Canon 16-35mm f2.8 L USM II is NOT worse than the Nikon 17-35mm f2.8 either.

That just leaves the Nikon 14-24mm f2.8, which is in areas a very good lens. Canon does not have an equivalent. The Nikon is not for everyone, though, with its weight, its protruding front element (with its flare catching ability) and its relatively high barrel distortion.



In macro lenses, Canon has the edge. In wide angle, both makers are very comparable.

[quote name='exuvia' timestamp='1282296754' post='1946']

Canon makes very good lenses too, and not necessarily cheaper.

[/quote]

In MOST cases Canon lenses actually ARE cheaper. Or rather, Nikon lenses more expensive. Yes, you can find a few exceptions.

[quote name='exuvia' timestamp='1282296754' post='1946']

About other makers: trust Tokina, less so Sigma (quality control issues).

[/quote]

I have the opposite EXPERIENCE. Do not trust Tokina (optical problems, mainly the typical CA problem Tokina wide angle lenses have), my 12-24mm f4 has shown Tokina to be too crude AF wise, and its build quality to be not more than skin deep.

The only 3 lenses from Tokina I find more or less interesting still: 11-16mm f2.8 DX (with CA), 35mm f2.8 DX macro (nice... a 35mm macro on APS-C!) and the full frame 19-35mm (great super cheap wide angle for full frame on a budget, when you stop down to f8 at least).



Sigma on the other hand has a lot more gems in its line up.

[quote name='exuvia' timestamp='1282296754' post='1946']

I'm a full time pro nature photographer, and I am totally satisfied (up to 60x90 prints) with my D300 and D200. So, after all, what does matter is other than megapixel.

[/quote]

Of course, I make great 75x50 prints and bigger from my 450D (12mp APS-C, just like your D300) too. Does that mean higher resolutions make no sense? Of course not.

[exuvia]

As you can see, I didn't state absolute concepts, mainly beacuse there aren't, out there; so what was the point to answer just to say: "no, sometime it isn't true?".

It was already implied in my message. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



Anyway, about ergonomic: it is not a myth, but a general opinion by a lot of serious users.

The same, I suggested to try and feel.



But, ok, I should have added "in my opinion", which I'm doing here.

Of course you should have done the same, when you stated what you stated. It works both ways, you know.

[edge]

Let's not turn this into the usual "bash the other brand" thread.

Of course there are minor differences in between the Canon and Nikon lens equivalents, but it is very minor... It's not going to make or break anyone's life.

[edge]

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1282300383' post='1949']

In MOST cases Canon lenses actually ARE cheaper. Or rather, Nikon lenses more expensive. Yes, you can find a few exceptions.

[/quote]



I thought the price difference was because typically Nikon includes a hood with their lenses.

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='exuvia' timestamp='1282304925' post='1953']

As you can see, I didn't state absolute concepts, mainly beacuse there aren't, out there; so what was the point to answer just to say: "no, sometime it isn't true?".

It was already implied in my message. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



Anyway, about ergonomic: it is not a myth, but a general opinion by a lot of serious users.

The same, I suggested to try and feel.

[/quote]

Yes, it is a myth.



ergonomics |ˌərgəˈnämiks|

plural noun [treated as sing. ]

the study of people's efficiency in their working environment.



This silly myth has been going around on internet a number of years now, mainly due to the compact size of the Canon XXXD series. A lot of misinformed people started to bitch about the small size of the grip design of the XXXD series, ranging from not fat enough to too short. That kept on going even when the Nikon D40-D3100 range had an even shorter grip.



Besides the fact that the size and grip of the camera is not very important, and in fact thinking of it as a "grip" is not good, as it will induce camera shake from the shutter button when actually "gripped", ergonomics does encompass a LOT more than the grip.



One can argue that the placement of controls on Canon bodies is more ergonomical. the position of the index finger on the shutter button, the position of the dials, the design of the program selection and position of settings buttons, and indeed, the much better menu system. And silly stuff, like the wrong way around you have to twist lenses with the Nikon mount to mount them.



The ergonomics only are being brought forward by people that have a more than practical relation to the Nikon brand, and they most of the time are not based on factual things. And of course, what one is used to also influences one's view, but that does not alter ergonomics science.

[quote name='exuvia' timestamp='1282304925' post='1953']

But, ok, I should have added "in my opinion", which I'm doing here.

Of course you should have done the same, when you stated what you stated. It works both ways, you know.

[/quote]

What did I state? That it is of course personal.



However, I did not state false things... like saying the Nikon Micro lenses are better than what Canon offers <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.



I do come from a Nikon background though (1970's SLR).

[Steinar1]

[quote name='exuvia' timestamp='1282296754' post='1946']

you should ask yourself some questions...



- "which size I'm going to print, at maximum?" This is actually what makes you choose between a high pixel count body and a medium pixel count body (aka: FF or DX).

- "I'm going to need high iso shooting?". If yes, go with a FF D700.

- "how much Depth of field handling is crucial to me? (portraits, for example)". If it is, go FF, otherwise DX is more than enough.



And now for the brands: as Edge said, feel a body in your hand, to decide the brand. Nikon has better ergonomics, but that doesn't mean Canon has something wrong. Nikon makes some better lens, as the micro series and the wide angle zooms (14-24 at the top), but they are expensive. Canon makes very good lenses too, and not necessarily cheaper.

About other makers: trust Tokina, less so Sigma (quality control issues).



I'm a full time pro nature photographer, and I am totally satisfied (up to 60x90 prints) with my D300 and D200. So, after all, what does matter is other than megapixel.

[/quote]



I am not necessarily needing a FF sensor for the print size, because I never print that big other than for testing maybe. I mostly limit to A3.



I often shoot in low light conditions where flash is impossible or useless (inside cathedrals or similar conditions and would like the ability to shoot at high ISO



I don't think I absolutely need the FF for the DOF. However, it would be nice



With respect to brands, I think that I can adapt to both with some work. I have had the 7D in my hands and it feels nice, but I have not yet seen a D300S or a D700. However, I am confident that I can adapt to both and I agree with you that High MP count is not a guarantee for high quality images.



Frankly, I think both make good lenses, but I am interested in seeing whether I can find the same quality for a lesser price.

[Steinar1]

I should maybe add that I come from a Canon background (F1 and A1 back in the 70ties) and my last Canon body is a EOS 650. However it is 20 years old and technology has changed and I want to be open minded to avoid choiced brought on by prejudice of some kind.

[edge]

Technical things aside, the most imortant thing in my opinion is:



1. How it balances in your hands. If you'll be holding this thing for a prolonged time, you'll want something that is comfortable.



2. What do your family/friends use. You'll be able to share equipment and knowledge. You can help each other with technical issues. You'll have support from people around you for your brand choice. And you won't stick out like a sore thumb (I can only imagine how much crap an Olympus DSLR user must get when they go into a crowd of Nikon/Canon shooters...)



3. Lens selection and item availabilty at your favorite local authorized dealer. And to a lesser degree, if there is a Canon/Nikon repair center nearby where you live.

[Steinar1]

<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> [quote name='edge' timestamp='1282312197' post='1963']

Technical things aside, the most imortant thing in my opinion is:



1. How it balances in your hands. If you'll be holding this thing for a prolonged time, you'll want something that is comfortable.



2. What do your family/friends use. You'll be able to share equipment and knowledge. You can help each other with technical issues. You'll have support from people around you for your brand choice. And you won't stick out like a sore thumb (I can only imagine how much crap an Olympus DSLR user must get when they go into a crowd of Nikon/Canon shooters...)



3. Lens selection and item availabilty at your favorite local authorized dealer. And to a lesser degree, if there is a Canon/Nikon repair center nearby where you live.

[/quote]

I agree with the "feel" in your hands. I also need quite big buttons because of arthritis in my hands. So I have to get the Nikons in my hands. Fortunately, I live quite centrally for that and I can find retailers both in Blois and in Orleans.

My family and friends think I am nuts for spending all this money on anything but a compact. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> Unfortunately, I will have to join some user group to find likeminded people again.

I can find anything in Paris and France is blessed with some very good on line retailers.

Out of curiosity, I would like to know if anyone has tried or worked with the Sigma SD15. Do you know of anyone?

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='Vieux loup' timestamp='1282314023' post='1965']

<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

I agree with the "feel" in your hands. I also need quite big buttons because of arthritis in my hands. So I have to get the Nikons in my hands. Fortunately, I live quite centrally for that and I can find retailers both in Blois and in Orleans.

My family and friends think I am nuts for spending all this money on anything but a compact. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> Unfortunately, I will have to join some user group to find likeminded people again.

I can find anything in Paris and France is blessed with some very good on line retailers.

Out of curiosity, I would like to know if anyone has tried or worked with the Sigma SD15. Do you know of anyone?

[/quote]

The Sigma SD15 is only surfacing now, this week... so you will not find many (if any) people who have actually used it, yet.