| Moderated by: chrisbet, | Page:   1 2 3   |
|
|||||||
| What the .... is this? - Page 2 | |
| Rate Topic |
| Author | Post |
|---|
| Posted: Wed Jun 26th, 2013 02:57 |
|
11th Post |
blackfox
|
amazing what you learn on here ,and a rarity to well done eric
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 26th, 2013 08:33 |
|
12th Post |
Constable
|
Well it started as partial. Then I picked up (in my hands) a 300 mm f2.8 and 500 mm f4 Nikon: 300mm f 2.8G ED VR II AF-S NIKKOR 2.9 kg Canon: EF 300mm f 2.8L IS II USM 2.4 kg Nikon: AF-S 500mm 4.0G IF-ED VR 3.88 kg Canon EF 500mm F4.0 L IS II USM 3.19 kg I can walk 20 k with either the 300 or 500 without really feeling it ... the Niko 500 was never an option in the wild. And then I got an offer for exchange that I could not refuse. To be honest the systems are very similar except where particular special lenses exist on one side or the other. I seem to be opposed to the majority in finding the flash system from Canon slightly better (at least as far as the ring flashes are concerned). Ed
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 26th, 2013 09:45 |
|
13th Post |
jk
|
I'd tend to agree with you. There is little to choose between Nikon or Canon but I find the Nikon control interface better.
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 26th, 2013 14:43 |
|
14th Post |
Eric
|
Constable wrote:Well it started as partial. Then I picked up (in my hands) a 300 mm f2.8 and 500 mm f4 If I walked 20km I wouldnt feel anything either...especially my legs. 
____________________ Eric |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 26th, 2013 14:53 |
|
15th Post |
Constable
|
yeah... I got healthy! It's horrible!
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Wed Jun 26th, 2013 15:20 |
|
16th Post |
Eric
|
Constable wrote:yeah... I got healthy! It's horrible! I used to run marathons in the 80s. But I developed a lower spine problem. Specialist diagnosed an anterial bulge in the spine. That's when the disk protrudes forwards. Unlike the normal disk issues I am not allowed to use lumbar supports or do swimming or arch my back. In fact when I asked the specialist what I should be doing to protect the instability he said " slump in a comfy chair". I have since then, tried to adhere to his recommendation as often as possible. 
____________________ Eric |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jun 27th, 2013 05:57 |
|
17th Post |
blackfox
|
tis a very hard one to quantify ,i used to use canon had them through film cameras right through to digital ,by the time i had found my niche (i.e wildlife) photography i was on the verge of retirement ,so i never had the funding to work my way into the longer lenses . i changed to nikon after trying out a d7000 in store sold all my canon gear and started afresh .i hear what JK is saying about interfaces etc but the thing that clinches it for me is flexibility and durability ,with canon i found myself carting around 4or 5 lenses to cover most situations ,with nikon i can narrow that down to one ,my 300mm f4 with t.c's will cover 300mm ,420mm,500mm and with a flick of the full focus switch becomes a half decent pseudo-macro lens and its lightweight to . a few weeks ago i bought a canon 1Dmkii off of my lad for a silly price and in all honesty i find it a good ,fast ,accurate camera limited in its 8mp but still useable .however having sat here trolling e/bay for a few weeks looking for a suitable lens i now realise why i changed systems .its great if you have a large budget but not otherwise . turning to a close friend who has been through the same quandary recently and settled on canon coupled with a brace of big lenses his simple answer was look at my pictures jeff ,can you see a £20,000 pound investment improvement in them ,are they significantly better than yours .the answer is a resounding no ,in fact he stated that with the latest high megapixel cameras coming on stream the need for a large apeture long reach lens is fading fast and i.m.h.o a need for a camera with lower iso levels will soon be upon us possibly back to the days of film when iso or asa (lol) started at 50 iso . they will probably ressurect that soon and hail it as the next big breakthrough and charge us zillions for it .!!!!!
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jun 27th, 2013 09:42 |
|
18th Post |
jk
|
Well I have completed my Nikon lens collection and have all and every lens I have a need or use for. I am now questioning whether I want or need a D400 or D600. I would like a D400 but since Nikon refuse to release it then it seems that I must really go to another D800 (too many MP) or a D600 (doesnt use/have the 10pin socket and I have a number of these accessories) both of which are FX which isnt what I want. I want the D400 as it is DX and as a high ISO replacement for my D300. Before the D3 came out I did briefly tot up the expense of changing from Nikon to Canon as I wanted FX and Nikon didnt have it. The cost then would have been about £20K extra layout after trade in of all Nikon stuff which I though was crazy money!
____________________ Still learning after all these years! https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jun 27th, 2013 10:59 |
|
19th Post |
Eric
|
blackfox wrote:tis a very hard one to quantify ,i used to use canon had them through film cameras right through to digital ,by the time i had found my niche (i.e wildlife) photography i was on the verge of retirement ,so i never had the funding to work my way into the longer lenses . i changed to nikon after trying out a d7000 in store sold all my canon gear and started afresh .i hear what JK is saying about interfaces etc but the thing that clinches it for me is flexibility and durability ,with canon i found myself carting around 4or 5 lenses to cover most situations ,with nikon i can narrow that down to one ,my 300mm f4 with t.c's will cover 300mm ,420mm,500mm and with a flick of the full focus switch becomes a half decent pseudo-macro lens and its lightweight to . I too was a Canon man before digital. It was merely the fact that Nikon brought out the groundbreaking D1X and I was blown away, that made me change. I had previously thinned down lots of lenses to fund a flirtation with medium format, so the task was not too hard.
____________________ Eric |
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Posted: Thu Jun 27th, 2013 12:55 |
|
20th Post |
blackfox
|
if my memory serves me rightly eric i was going to change up to digital along the canon route initially but when i went to buy one i was told none of my lenses would work on digital ,so still wanting a state of the art camera i settled on a sony f828 ,the one with the zoom lens and swivelling body .super camera and in its day a ground breaking 8mp but it suffered from terrible c.a .and back in them heady days of the turn of the century we didn't at that time have the software to cure it .hmmmmmmm now theres a thought back to e/bay LOL
|
||||||||
|
| |||||||||
| This is topic ID = 653 Current time is 20:45 | Page: 1 2 3 | |
| Nikon DSLR Forums > Totally Off Topic Stuff > Everything Else > What the .... is this? | Top | |
Users viewing this topic |
||
Current theme is Modern editor
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you. |
Hosted by Octarine Services
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0461 seconds (58% database + 42% PHP). 83 queries executed.
UltraBB 1.173 Copyright © 2008-2025 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.0461 seconds (58% database + 42% PHP). 83 queries executed.