Canon or Nikon?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The AF motor in the 1.4 is a weak spot, it's not a problem with every lens though obviously. Also whether recent build lenses are still susceptible I don't know. People have had the 1.8 quite literally fall apart in their hands, sometimes it does just snap back together...
 
An Exception said:
Read the con's, there is clearly an issue with reliability.
Let me know if you here of any other lens with anywhere near as many reports of failure.
Normally lenses can last decades without issue...


http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=29&cpage=1&perpage=16&cat=2#poststart
Click to expand...
thats interesting reading ,its recommended by 93% of those reviews so its not that bad (not great ether)when you think its been out 10 plus years if you look at the build quality rating of the 1.8 on that site its lower that the 1.4
so i don't think you can say its the worst ever, just an older lens that would benefit from an update
 
People are slating the plastic build quality of the 1.8, but there isn't that many reporting failures. The 50 1.4 doesn't feel cheap, it's just got an Achilles heal (AF mechanics).
 
Purely for budget reasons, I've always stuck with Canon and Sigma lens combinations, along with Cokin for filters.

I can't say I have very much experience with Nikon, but I did use a friends camera for a day to shoot and found it a little awkward (probably because I was looknig for buttons that weren't there after using Canon for so many years.)

Oh, also, in the realm of videography, I've always seemed to find most people shoot on Canon 5D's over the Nikon equivalent. Maybe that says something.

Either way, I'm impartial, and agree with the sentiment that it's 75% down to the photographer using it right.
 
Crafty said:
Are you trying to imply that Canon (or any other lens manufacturer coming to that) don't do the best they can at the price point ? seriously ?

You mentioned the Canon 100-400 lens - you do realise this is one of Canons best selling lenses ? According to you everyone bought it just because its got an "L" in the name, never mind the quality :rolleyes:

I think some people here seriously need to go look at the results photographers are getting with all these "marketing gimmicks" and "soft" lenses.

imho the biggest problem with Nikon is the AF vs AF-S thing when it comes to upgrades.. at least with Canon you can stick to EF lenses on a crop and know those lenses will be good on whatever body you may move to in the future.

I agree with earlier posters that its not really going to make much difference which brand you go for - its a bit like a learner driver buying a Ferrari or a Porsche, both will be very quick cars - will one of them hold the driver back ? not a chance, both are very capable machines. Might the driver prefer one over the other for purely subjective reasons ? absolutely.
Click to expand...

I never implied anything, simply the canon L is a sucesful marketing trick. GO look on the canon website and tell me what it officially is supposed to signify, it doesn't mean fixed aperture, doesn't mean fast aperture, doesnt mean weather sealed, doesn't mean fast AF and gives no guarantee about image or build quality. There are great lenses tat are to L and there are mediocre that are, there are fixed aperture and variable aperture, weather sealed and non weather sealed.


Secondly, by your logic of sales figures the cann 500d must be far better than te canon 5dmkiii, and the hone must be better than both. By your logic the 18-55mm end must be canons best lens ever.....


As for AF-s on Nikon, most people believe it to be one of the best aspects of the nikon system te fact that Nikon has a strong belief in maintaining backwards and forwards compatibility. That way you have access to decades worth of classic lenses and have less worry about the future of your lens investments. The ability to use MF lenses, AF-d and AF-s, DX or Fx on either DX or Fx bodies ones p do many possibilities. The down side s as you pointed there are multiple supported standards with different capabilities. In reality this isnt much of a problem because if an enthusiast is going to buy a classic older lens then they most likely know what that implies for functionality.
 
D.P. said:
I never implied anything, simply the canon L is a sucesful marketing trick. GO look on the canon website and tell me what it officially is supposed to signify, it doesn't mean fixed aperture, doesn't mean fast aperture, doesnt mean weather sealed, doesn't mean fast AF and gives no guarantee about image or build quality. There are great lenses tat are to L and there are mediocre that are, there are fixed aperture and variable aperture, weather sealed and non weather sealed.


Secondly, by your logic of sales figures the cann 500d must be far better than te canon 5dmkiii, and the hone must be better than both. By your logic the 18-55mm end must be canons best lens ever.....
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

You said that Canon deliberately make poor lenses to persuade the customer to spend more to get the next lens up. Agree or disagree ? would you like to give us an example or this is just trash fanboy talk ?

You find me professional togs that uses the entry level Nikon lenses that are, according to you, superior in every way to L lenses.
Now show me how many togs use high grade Canon lenses.

Now go and ask them why they use them. Maybe then you'll stop your silly little rants.

There are good and bad lenses in every single line up out there. No-one said otherwise.

I can't make much out of that second paragraph but I would say the 500D sales figures are better than the 5d3 - its been out longer and is far cheaper. the 500D is a better camera than the 5d3 for the market/usage its aimed at. Likewise the 5d3 is superior for its market/usage.

Not sure what a "hone" is ?

We get you like Nikon and dislike Canon thats fine, but there is little need for you to spout the sort of unproven bile you have so far.
 
Crafty said:
:rolleyes:

You said that Canon deliberately make poor lenses to persuade the customer to spend more to get the next lens up. Agree or disagree ? would you like to give us an example or this is just trash fanboy talk ?
Click to expand...

They seem very keen to do it with camera bodies, so why is it out of the question that they do it with lenses?

Tbh, I'm not sure and wouldn't like to say either way. What I think is more likely is that they maybe don't update certain consumer lenses in order to push people to L's.

For instance, the 85L IQ build quality etc. is much better than the 85 1.8.
With Nikon (consumer lenses have been updated), the 85 1.8G has about the same IQ as 85 1.4G. Has similar build quality, only smaller and lighter.

Same with 50 1.8G Vs 1.4G

Same with 35 1.8G Vs 1.4G or 28 1.8G Vs 35 1.4G etc.

I guess Canon 50mm 1.4 provides very similar IQ to the 50L, but build quality or more specifically.. reliability, is not in the same league.
 
An Exception said:
No need for sarcasm buddy, it's probably the most fragile unreliable lens made.
This is camera gear, there is no need for emotional outbursts.
Click to expand...

Firstly I suspect you didn't see the :rolleyes: - the post was sarcastic rather than emotional.

As for the 50mm f/1.4 being unreliable, well mine has been going strong for over three years and not broken. I know there can be issues with the motors inside but I suspect that like anything mechanical some things work, some things break. I would like to see failure rates on some of Nikons/Pentax/Sony cameras and lenses.

Of all the Canon lenses the worst has to be the 50mm f/1.8 - I've heard of cases where people have put them into their camera bags, taken them out lf an hour later and the front part of the lens has seperated from the rear! I don't use Nikon, but I cannot believe that there aren't similar stories.

As for build qualities being the same for Nikon lenses but not for Canon Lenses - if something is smaller and lighter that something that looks similar then you can bet that the build quality isn't the same.

I think this thread, despite the OP's request, has decended into the usual arguements (and I'm as guilty as the next).

To the OP - I think the best advice would be to go to a good Camera shop and try the bodies in your hand. Work out what things you want to take photographs of, such as Portraits/Landscapes/Animals/Macro etc and then purchase the best lens/es you can for your budget. Camera sensors have got to the stage where they're all pretty good - the biggest difference to image quality is from the lenses themselves.

The thing is, the vast majority of DSLR cameras on sale in the UK are capable for excellent results in the hand of someone who has a bit of talent and who knows what they are doing. To talk about resolving power of lenses and sensors is an endless debate that ultimately goes nowhere. There has always been defects in lenses and grain on film - that however has not stopped some of the greatest photographers in the world from creating stunning images with all the imperfections of their equipment.

Buy a Camera and go out and take photos. If you dither about what to get you will never make a purchase.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom