Nikon

Daniel... when it comes to a discussion between camera company x and company y it usually comes down to how the camera "feels" in your hand. The one that you are most comfortable in accessing the camera's functions. Oh... and of course the glass ;O)

well yes. but the thing is that im used to canon. but as i was a better camera I also had to look for Nikon cause i find the prices a lot more attractive. So I would like to know if the quality is same good. or maybe even better. I always used canon and i love it. just if I see a camera by nikon that has the same things for 250 euros cheaper i think about changing.

When changing to a whole new system there will be much more cost than 250 Euros I think. You will need to buy all new lenses, external flashes, etc, etc. Plus you have to learn all over again how to use the camera because Nikon and Canon's are completely different mechanically. As far as quality goes they both are equal from what I understand. I use Nikon and don't plan on switching. I don't have experience with the D3300 but I'm sure a Canon equivalent will probably be following right around the corner. I would suggest selling your camera on Ebay and put it towards a newer better Canon equivalent or more to the D3300. That would be the most financially lucrative bet I think. But if you must switch you can't go wrong with Nikon either.

All of the top brand cameras are good cameras, so, it's mostly personal preference and what feels the best. Also, if you change brands because you can get one for a little cheaper, is it really cheaper, since you have to buy all new lenses also? If you already have and love Canon why would you want to buy a Nikon with the same things because it's $250 cheaper.

Both camera systems have their pros and cons.
As Bob said it is best to handle the cameras to see how they feel to you.
You will get different replies depending what camera people have.I have always used Nikon.
Another big factor is the cost of new lenses if you change to a Nikon.It could wipe out and saving in the cost of the camera.

Hi Daniel! I got the Nikon D3100 a little over a year ago and am very happy with it! I am now looking to upgrade to either the D5300 or the D7100. I got mine refurbished at Adorama.com... it was a very good deal and it was basically new! It has given me maximum performance....

You should also go to dpreview to see all sorts of comments and experiences with all the different nikon cameras, along with formal reviews.

i doubt you reached your, now canons, hardware limits

its not the cam, its the user - and a geiz is geil mentality has nothing to do with art ;)

instead id rather work on my skills, this forum has so many inspirational inputs, go for new projects and save your money, invest in your art


having a hasselblad or having a range of zeiss optics hasnt ever made anybody an artist

Remember all those lenses you wanted to sell 3 days ago just to buy a different lens? For a Canon camera, and now you want to change brands to save a few euros. Take time to learn more, stick with a system and things will hopefully be fine.

I changed after my Cannon was stolen. I wish I had gone back with cannon. But now I have so much invested in Nikon it would be too expensive to change. Both cameras shoot good, the cannon has a better metering and focusing system. And when I need to switch to AF I find I can stay manual and do better and faster. Even with my D3100. And the change between the d100 and the 3100 is not as great as I thought it would be, I can barely tell the difference between 6mp and 14.5 mp. So the more I use the camera, the less impressed I am with it.

Professional often choose a body so they can use a particular lens. Have you figured out what your current equipment is preventing you from accomplishing?

I have a Nikon D3100 and D3200 - the 3100 is better camera - JMHO - I get better results - and all of the functions are the same. I couldn't go to a cannon - heck - I ain't learned how to use the Nikon yet and I've had 4. Some days I consider getting me the best Nikon (cause I really do like them) point and shoot I can find - one of those new CoolPix - Today - I lost nearly a "whole role of film" (not really - it is a DSLR) - cause I was being smart and needed to shoot quickly - and I just couldn't set the camera quickly enough and was shooting with the wrong set up - - I cannot see the small print without my glasses on - and I seldom have them on - don't need them - except to read - I can see fine through the viewfinder - but that info on the set up on the 'big screen' just a blur. I can even see the dials for setting it up on top - the screen - a blur.

I have big problems in darker situations. It doesnt even need to be to dark and I already cant use this camera anymore. at least not without a tripod which i dont always have with me. and i also dont want to depend on one. the iso in my camera is really bad. it goes until 1600 but i cant use all that cause i get too much noise. As im a student i dont have much money so thats the reason why i think about changing to nikon. I dont use my 70-300mm so much, so I would be fine with sell all my stuff now and buy the nikon with the kit lens 18-55mm and in 2 months the nikon 50mm 1.8. So I would have the same equipment as i have now.

the nikon 50mm 1.8 is as good as the one for canon?

what it usually comes down to is:

how many canon lenses do you own? flashes? etc and how many do you want to replace?

then it's the overall features. i like the programming modes on the canon, but i think the sharpness and color is a bit better on the nikon, but that's all i know - on the more or less highest camera. it comes down to what do you need?

i don't think there is a lot of difference with noise in the cameras. if you have a dark thing to shoot - use the tripod on a low iso. there really is no miracle camera unless you have the money to shell out for it.

---Mike Savad

if noise is your only issue, id suggest looking into de noising software

sounds crazy but im often surprised how retouching improves those noise issues, when done well you cant see much difference from iso 1600 to iso 100

but keep in mind its not a one press button solution, its a workflow with 3 or 4 layers all together to get your result

you can stretch your iso with chdk or magic lantern to 3200 btw

Daniel, I've been a Nikon shooter for my whole professional life. It started here:



and wound up here:



A couple of years back, I had a chance to shoot with Canon equipment. I didn't much like how Canon felt in my hand, but more important to me was that features that are easily controlled on the Nikon with switches and buttons were buried in menus with Canon. Shooting parameters were similar, as was noise at high ISO settings. I understand that Nikon has made quantum leaps where noise is concerned, and have seen some incredible low light Nikon shots.

Obviously, even if I decided I like Canon cameras better today, my investment in Nikon gear would make a switch very problematic. On the other hand, there's nothing I've ever asked of my Nikons that they wouldn't do, so I really have nothing to complain about.

If you have a heavy investment in a Canon system, it could be foolish to switch just to save a few hundred bucks (or euros) on a relative low-end camera body. But, if you have other, more compelling, reasons to make the jump, then why not go for it?

Nikon User are a very die hard group of individuals, And I am one of them. Nikon is the one DSLR I can use and interchange Nikon lenses from the older lenses to the newer, Your not going to get that with Canon. Also the glass in Nikon lenses is superb! Been a Nikon user for 4 years now and I will never turn back. I get the quality and versatility I need and the video and Photos are out standing. It comes down to a matter of choice. I use the Nikon D5300 and Nikon D90 as my backup, Love both cameras. Whatever Nikon you choose, do your footwork and review before you buy to see which one is right for you.

I would say that until now I'm in a point I could change. So I do want a new camera. Idk yet if it's nikon or canon. And I'm sorry if I ask many questions here. I just want to be 100% informed cause don't want to regret.

no matter what camera you get, you'll find something you don't like - it's just how it is. the best you can do is do a side by side comparison. ask yourself - how many night shots will i really do? can i put it on a tripod and work around the limitations the cameras have? a faster lens helps, but not by a lot. clean iso helps, quite a bit, but there will still be noise depending how long the shutter is open for, the temperature outside, how hot the camera itself is etc. i needed clean iso for indoor shots. however there are work arounds for that too, including over exposing the shot by a 1/2-1 stop and making it darker in photoshop, it removes quite a bit of the noise.

noise cleaning software is another way. there was a time when cameras didn't have good iso. my first camera the 10d, 400iso was noisy.


---Mike Savad

"Nikon is the one DSLR I can use and interchange Nikon lenses from the older lenses to the newer, Your not going to get that with Canon."
when i read between the lines, that means there was no real technical evolution

and also not true, you can use old canon lenses, heck you can even mount m45 lenses and also nikon lenses to canon body

while we talk about lense quality, neither canon nor nikon have good lenses, compared to the real good lenses like leica or zeiss, but thats another story ...


back to you, why do you want a new cam? i havent read one valid argument till now. i mean money factor - you got your answer, noise - you got also answers


i just cant follow your needs ...

It's not quite true what Stanislav has said.
The new lenses from Nikon have evovled its just that they kept the same mount that lets you use all the old lenses that have the F mount.A good quality lens will last a life time if you look after it.

It's also not really true that both Canon and Nikon do not have good lenses.They produce some top quality lenses for their cameras at a price.The kit lenses however are only ok really to keep in the family album.
As I said in my earlier post I'm a Nikon user,always have been and always will be.That is because I like the feel of the camera and I have invested heavily in good quality lenses.That does not mean that canon isn't a good camera maker.They have cameras that are as good and some even better than Nikon.
If you have an older Canon or Nikon camera then the image quality and noise may not be as good as a more modern cameras.

How many Canon lenses do you own.Have you tried any Nikon cameras.You may change and then realise that you prefer Canon.

It seems to me that you are looking to get a Nikon just to see if the grass really is greener on the other side.It isn't it is the same.

I don't have any answers per se, but I can say this site that has reviews of many cameras and comparisons, shows the Canon D60 and the Nikon D3300 as TIED.
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_EOS_60D-vs-Nikon-D3300
I would look at the reviews on that site, as well as around the web, such as Amazon and other photo sites. I also saw a review of a different camera earlier tonight and the reviewer said for only $100 extra (over the price of the camera being reviewed), he could buy the "very excellent Nikon D3300." Not enough to make a decision on, but if you keep reading reviews you'll get more and more pieces of the puzzle.

As far as switching from Canon to Nikon, it doesn't sound to me as if you have a lot of equipment, so the arguments that switching will cost you a lot more may not matter. So also, you should carefully compare whatever you are thinking of choosing with what you have to make sure it is enough of an upgrade.

If hand-held, low-light photography is your thing the two best options currently available are the Sony A7s and Nikon DF/D4. All are expensive. Not sure if switching to any of the lower-tired Nikon's will make a world of difference in that regard. In fact, I'd be surprised if it does. If you want better high ISO performance its going to cost you.

http://www.adorama.com/alc/0012810/article/15-Low-Light-High-ISO-All-Stars

according to this the Nikon D3300 is actually pretty good for low light. Make sure to check some flickr pages though as test charts don't tell you anything...

Pentax has not changed their mount in decades. The lenses that one bought years ago will still work on the cameras that Pentax builds today.

When I entered photography over twenty years ago I bought a state of the art slr with all the bells and whistles. When I decided to start shooting weddings I bought a “cheap” Pentax. It was fully manual. The only thing it had was a center-weighted light meter. It didn't not take long for me to prefer the Pentax.

We Pentax users are sometimes said to be members of a cult! LOL. But there is good reason for this!

“Ricoh, please send me more money for marketing.” --- from this video.



Interesting that I just shared this video on another thread....

You will be buying all the newer and more expensive lenses . Better to spring for a higher level camera with a motor in it and buy the cheaper lenses. Unless you don't mind manual focusing. The 50mm f.1.8 will be about twice the price if you need the motor for autofocus. If you want to buy more expensive lenses and the difference in price can be even more. If you want used exotic lenses you will be very limited if you chose an entry level Nikon.

hello and thanks for all your answersAs many of you said its not just the camera but also the photographer, I decided today to invest 100 euros in books, one about photography and one about photoshop. So I'll try to learn more now and then when I'm done with it I decide if I need a new camera.
Thanks for all your answers again. you've been a big help!

-Daniel Precht

I recommend:

Welcome to Oz: A Cinematic Approach to Digital Still Photography with Photoshop by Vincent Versace

This is an older book - 2006 but includes a lot of wisdom. More about approaching photography as storytelling. I got my used copy for 75 cents plus shipping on Amazon.

I'm really liking what I see from the FujiFilm X series. http://edwardfielding.me/2014/09/08/which-camera-to-really-learn-photography/

If someone asked me what camera to buy to really learn the basics of photography and to focus on image creation and storytelling, this is the type of camera I'd buy.

I have been talking to some friends that do different types of photography works. Many of them are going from Nikon and Canon to Fuji. Seems they have a very good product going on. I have a friend in New York that shoots food, and street, as well as teaches. She just made the switch from Nikon to Fuji. And she is happy about it too. I know some one in Arizona that shoots bands, and she went from Canon to Fuji as well. Seems it is just not for learning, but many pros are going there as well.

Daniel I think you've made a good decision. Sometimes just getting back to basics and getting the most out of what you already have is like getting a new camera.

One of the best and most inspiring books I ever read is "Developing the Creative Edge in Photography" by Bert Eifer. It's down to earth and is geared toward using the camera's settings as creative tools. It's long out of print and was back in the days of film, but all the principles apply to any SLR. Copies can be had cheap on Ebay: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Developing-the-Creative-Edge-in-Photography-1984-by-Eifer-Bert-0898791103-/231325718759?pt=US_Fiction_Books&hash=item35dc1658e7