Originally Posted by equetefue
uhmmm i really dont want this to end as a nikon vs canon thing as this goes back for years, but like I said before each system is great, but no lens offers more "pop" than the other. This is very subjective and purely dependant of the shooter and multiple variables.
I do know that for a fact most of my professional friends (10+ of them with 100% income out of photography) stick to canon or are swapping to Canon due to the lens selection,IQ, and availability. At the same time we agree that at the current moment Nikon has a better sensor technology and offer excellent bang for the $.
I do feel that the assumption of "pop" is personal and not correct, and point can be validate it as whenever I go out with these guys or by myself. I see Whites dominating the field. Also most of the stunning works captured by NG and SI have been by Canon.
Competition is a beauty and we are the ones that win here as it drive for better equipment and pricing.
Sorry Rick, but I can't agree with you on this one as I shoot both camps on weekly basis and definetely do not see the "pop" being referred here. Stunning images come out of both systems or lenses for that matter.
Law of economics explains that prices goes up when supply is low and demand is high. Nikon has always struggled with lens and body production, thus price is high. Not because of fufu coatings or more "pop".
Canon uses Fluorite on their lenses and prices are good 20-30% lower not because lens offers less pop, but because supply is much higher.
Not argueying though as we are all friends here.
BTW off topic here. Got offered by a friend to do a shoot with him in NY for a baseball game. Still deciding if I should take the week off, but excited as hell.
Well I can see your "pro" friends switching for availability and pricing, But IQ.. uh uh.
Most of the stunning works in NG, Last time I looked Frans Lanting shoots Nikon, I'll check the others.
SI?? Have you been to a pro football (US) game lately?? I have season Bears tickets and routinely see more black than white on any given Sunday and especially at night games when high iso is a factor. You say you see whites dominating the field. Does that mean they provide better images?? Do you see any Leica optics in the field. Is this simply a question of economics? cause if it is, then white it will be. I make my purchasing decisions based on IQ and what I can afford. I can't afford Leica. Taking the money I spent on my Nikon gear and converting it to Canon, I'm rollin in all kinds of prime equipment. But to me IQ is more important. And I honestly realize better IQ with Nikon optics, case closed.
For me, Canon is a better economic decision, Nikon is a better decision with regard to image quality and the oh so important ergonomics and burst speed shen it comes to sports and wildlife.
But as you know, I'm trying my best to find something I can live with on the white side in the 600 - 800 mm range. I refuse to pay nikon's tarif at that point. I guess I'll just have to spend more time in PP.