Nikon or Canon Dilemma

[camerapapi]

I have been using Nikon gear for more than 55 years. I like how easily I can switch from one camera to another knowing that ergonomics and menus are pretty identical.
When I go to my Olympus bodies it is totally different. My two Olympus bodies are different in many respects. Switching to Olympus if I am using one of the Nikon bodies makes me think because as I said both are different. I am sure that Canon and Nikon are also different but I am not going to make any comments because I do not use Canon gear.

When you mentioned the 16-24 f4 I thought you were talking about the Nikon lens, which is an excellent performance. I am sure the Canon version is very good too. For landscapes and tight spaces the lens will prove to be an asset. I use the old Nikon 12-24 f4 AF-S with my D610 between 17 and 24mm without vignettes. This lens has served me well. I am sure that if you decide to buy the 16-24 Canon lens you will get many beautiful images from it.

If you travel often my suggestion is that you take only one camera with the lenses you prefer. Using two different cameras and lenses at the same time could slow you down considerably.
Good luck with your choice.

 

[snegron]

Ok, so I have owned both the D750 and the 6dmk2 for a few months now. I ended up purchasing a Canon 85mm f1.8 USM as well to match my Nikon outfit.

The interesting news is that so far I have had much better results with the D750 than the 6dmk2. At first I wasn't getting as nicely satured colors from my D750 as I was with the 6dmk2. After a few tweaks my D750 is now capturing images with better, more saturated colors than the 6dmk2.

In terms of image detail, the D750 captures way more detail than the 6dmk2. Overall, the D750 is an absolutely amazing camera! If I were to rate it from 1 to 10, the D750 is a 9 while the 6dmk2 is a 7.

Now I need to seriously think what I plan to do with my 6dmk2. On another note, my crop sensor 7dmk2 is awesome for sports, so I definitely plan on keeping it. However, the 6dmk2 is somewhat "lackluster ". No point in keeping it or the 16-35mm f4.0L either. Problem is that my 6dmk2 is 3 months old, so if I sell it I will be taking a major hit. Not sure if it's worth selling or just keeping it as a novelty for the few Canon full frame lenses I own (28mm f1.8 USM, 50mm f1.8 STM, 85mm f1.8 USM, 16-35mm f4.0L, 70-200mm f2.8L). Of these full frame lenses only the 70-200mm f2.8L makes sense to keep together with my EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 to use with my 7dmk2 for sports.

As they say, hindsight is 20/20. Had I known what I know now, I would have not spent the money on the 6dmk2 nor the Canon full frame lenses; I should have put that money toward a Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 instead.

 

[davidzvi]

......The interesting news is that so far I have had much better results with the D750 than the 6dmk2. At first I wasn't getting as nicely satured colors from my D750 as I was with the 6dmk2. After a few tweaks my D750 is now capturing images with better, more saturated colors than the 6dmk2.......

This is actually something that seems to go to the early days of digital. If I recall there were threads here and over on DPR about Canon images having more POP by default than Nikon. Threads about more people liking the OOC JPegs from Canon more. But Nikon producing RAW files that take to processing better, kind of like log or the new ProRes for video.

 

[Minuteman3]

After a year with the Canon 6D2, I have found little, if any, differences in image quality at least in the types of situations I usually work with. I know there are charts out there that say the D750 (my previous camera) has a big advantage in dynamic range and so on, but frankly I don't see it at all. I do believe there is a little subjective difference in color rendition in both RAW and JPG files with the Canon, particularly with facial tones, that slightly favors Canon but it's nothing that could not be easily corrected in PP.

The primary advantage I have found with my Canon gear is service & tech support (through Canon USA) has been both timely and excellent, and there are some creature comforts such as easy wireless transfer of images to my iPhone as well as the built in GPS. The new D780 solves the connectivity issue, but still doesn't have built in GPS capabilities, otherwise I might be interested in returning.

Cheers!!

Ken

 

[snegron]

Update:

I tried selling my 6dmk2, but everyone wanted to lowball me down to almost 1/2 of what I paid for it new. This body was only 2 months old. I purchased it new for $1,200, was asking $800 but the highest offer I got was $700! I decided to keep it as a beater camera since, in principle, it's like I would have been paying $500 for having used it only 2 months!!

So, I went the opposite direction. I ended up purchasing the Canon 3 year extended warranty for my 6dmk2 that covers everything including accidental damage. My plan now is to use it as a daily beater as much as I can, so if it needs repair or replacement I will be covered for the next 3 years.

I also tried selling my Canon 16-35mm f4.0L, but didn't get any offers whatsoever. So, I'll be keeping that as well. I don't have much confidence in the build quality of the mostly plastic 16-35, and being that I paid full retail for it, I plan to use it only during times I know there will be no risk whatsoever of damage. I ended up ordering a Canon 35mm f/2 USM IS to use on my "daily beater" 6dmk2.

Funny how I wasn't planning on spending any more money on Canon, yet here I am spending more. When I get some extra cash to spare I would love to purchase a Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 for my D750.

Lesson learned: dabbling in other systems can lead into an expensive slippery slope.

 

[Jonathan F/2]

Update:

I tried selling my 6dmk2, but everyone wanted to lowball me down to almost 1/2 of what I paid for it new. This body was only 2 months old. I purchased it new for $1,200, was asking $800 but the highest offer I got was $700! I decided to keep it as a beater camera since, in principle, it's like I would have been paying $500 for having used it only 2 months!!

So, I went the opposite direction. I ended up purchasing the Canon 3 year extended warranty for my 6dmk2 that covers everything including accidental damage. My plan now is to use it as a daily beater as much as I can, so if it needs repair or replacement I will be covered for the next 3 years.

I also tried selling my Canon 16-35mm f4.0L, but didn't get any offers whatsoever. So, I'll be keeping that as well. I don't have much confidence in the build quality of the mostly plastic 16-35, and being that I paid full retail for it, I plan to use it only during times I know there will be no risk whatsoever of damage. I ended up ordering a Canon 35mm f/2 USM IS to use on my "daily beater" 6dmk2.

Funny how I wasn't planning on spending any more money on Canon, yet here I am spending more. When I get some extra cash to spare I would love to purchase a Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 for my D750.

Lesson learned: dabbling in other systems can lead into an expensive slippery slope.

Photography is in a transitional period. Shooters are mainly reverting back to committed pros and hobbyists. Also more young people prefer going mirrorless as opposed to starting with DSLRs. It's better to be a used equipment buyer than seller right now!

 

[camerapapi]

I have been using Nikon cameras and lenses since 1963. A few years back I began to use Olympus M43 cameras and lenses and believe me, when I use my Olympus bodies going back to Nikon is not that easy. If at present you are enjoying the Canon and Nikon systems I would recommend that you stay where you are right now.
The Nikon 16-35 f4 lens is a very nice and sharp wide angle zoom. I have never used one because I am able to use my Nikon 12-24 f4 AF-S with my D610 between 16-24 mm without vignettes. If you need one I would say it will make a nice contribution to your landscape photography with the advantage that you will not have to change lenses since you will have all of those focal lengths in just one lens. That indeed is very convenient. For traveling and sports it is not the ideal lens as I am sure you know.

 

[snegron]

I have been using Nikon cameras and lenses since 1963. A few years back I began to use Olympus M43 cameras and lenses and believe me, when I use my Olympus bodies going back to Nikon is not that easy. If at present you are enjoying the Canon and Nikon systems I would recommend that you stay where you are right now.
The Nikon 16-35 f4 lens is a very nice and sharp wide angle zoom. I have never used one because I am able to use my Nikon 12-24 f4 AF-S with my D610 between 16-24 mm without vignettes. If you need one I would say it will make a nice contribution to your landscape photography with the advantage that you will not have to change lenses since you will have all of those focal lengths in just one lens. That indeed is very convenient. For traveling and sports it is not the ideal lens as I am sure you know.

I agree with you 100%! For now I'm staying where I'm at in terms of gear.

I'm planning on an upcoming road trip to northern New Mexico and have been giving a lot of thought as to what equipment to bring. Weight won't be an issue because I'll be driving.

More than likely I will be taking my D750 with 24mm, 35mm and 180mm as primary, Canon 6dmk2 with 35mm as back up.

 

[snegron]

Latest update:

Returned from the road trip, couldn't go to New Mexico as planned due to the pandemic shutting down mist of the places I wanted to visit in NM. So, I ended up driving from Florida to Kansas, Texas, Arkansas and Mississippi.

I took my D750 with 3 lenses (24mm f2.8 AF-D, 35mm f2.0 AF-D and 180mm f2.8 AF-ED), also took my Canon 6dmk2 with just one lens (16-35mm f4.0L) as backup.

I unded up using the D750 with the 24mm for most of the images I took. I used the 6dmk2 as a quick "point & shoot" for quick, on the go type images.

Both cameras performed well. However, in low light/ high ISO situations, both cameras provided noisy results. I'm sure it was 100% user error on my part, and I probably need to either practice more or read the manuals. Again, I know it was more likely than not user error on my part, but I honestly couldn't see the difference between low light shots taken with both of these FX cameras and similar shots I have taken with my old D200 or even my tiny Lumix GX85. All my images from all these cameras (FX, DX and m4/3) look equally noisy to me!

Anyway, at least I know one thing for sure: no matter what brand of camera or sensor format I use, I will probably take equally crappy images! ?

Not sure if if will open or not, but this shot was taken with my D750, 24mm f2.8 AF-D, super high ISO of 12,800 (no idea why it metered at such a high ISO), processed in PS to remove noise.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Mike Buckley]

Great photo! How was the music and food?

 

[gchappel]

no matter what brand of camera or sensor format I use, I will probably take equally crappy images!

It took me a long, long time- and cost me a heck of a lot of money- to come to that very simple conclusion. Just like buying a better piano will not make you a better musician. Now if you want to play the banjo and own a piano, that is a different story.
Gary

 

[snegron]

Great photo! How was the music and food?

Due to the pandemic, mostly everything was closed. Not one jukejoint was open and never got the chance to taste any hot tamales!

 

[snegron]

It took me a long, long time- and cost me a heck of a lot of money- to come to that very simple conclusion. Just like buying a better piano will not make you a better musician. Now if you want to play the banjo and own a piano, that is a different story.
Gary

I'll stick to the harmonica for now! ?