Why do people buy Canon?

[BradSut26]

I really don't understand. I can see why they used to. But not now. Any ideas? http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cam...Sensor-Ratings

[Colin Southern]

Because those parameters are pretty much irrelevant for real-world photography.

[Andrew76]

I understand that we all have varying opinions on the matter - I for one don't choose one brand over the other in what ends up being a multi-thousand dollar hobby over one very small aspect of the hobby itself - Sensor Ratings? Really?

When I bought my first dSLR, I chose Canon because at least 4, if not more of the features that were important, if not NECESSARY to ME, are not even offered in the Nikon line-up, at the price range I was looking at. Which I think is a pretty good reason.

On another note, I understand that this is a learning forum, and we can all learn something from DxO benchmark ratings, but is this thread intended to be helpful in any way, or just gratuitous??

[BradSut26]

I just don't know why people spend so much money on lesser technology? I personally think to stops of light is pretty important

[Daisy Mae]

If you don't shoot with Canon you won't understand...if you do, you won't need to ask.

Colin is correct.

[Daisy Mae]

On another note, I understand that this is a learning forum, and we can all learn something from DxO benchmark ratings, but is this thread intended to be helpful in any way, or just gratuitous??

A very salient point Andrew.

[Andrew76]

I personally think to stops of light is pretty important

I personally think being able to bracket shots, and have the option for HSS is VERY important. But I'm not buying professional level cameras.

[Colin Southern]

Here's a real-world case in point. The D800 has a great sensor - no doubt about it.

You're a professional sports photographer - assigned to a difficult event - in harsh conditions. Which camera has the better AF and highest frame rate - a D800? D4? Or Canon 1DX?

Sensor performance is irrelevant in this situation - AF performance - frame rate - weather sealing are critical.

The Canon would be the best tool for the job despite not topping the DxO Mark.

[Scott Stephen]

Lenses.

[Mark von Kanel]

because it feels right in you hands! as a d800 user i can tell you that im seriously disgruntled with Nikon but i cant afford to switch to canon, and if i could I would. im sorry but at the moment canon offer the best selection of cameras with good iso noise performance for the average and professional user do i need 36 MP? no ok for some of my shooting it gets used but would i miss it? i dont think so, but what choise have i got? either that a d600 with cannibalized features and build quality or a d4 which is way expensive.

if you choose a camera by the DxO rating, then maybe you should take up photography instead!

[BradSut26]

I have always heard that nikon AF is more accuarte than canons system

[brannend]

I chose Canon after exhaustive research over the period of a couple of years (it took me that long to set aside the cash for the range of camera I wanted). I got what I needed from my first camera, a 30D. Took great sports images and was very durable. Now comes the lens part. I began to collect a couple of lenses. I believe that if you spend good money on good lenses you have pretty much set your brand choice in stone (at least if you have the limited budget I do). I upgraded to a 40D for sports and recently purchased a 5D mk II because I want to shoot serious landscapes.

The bottom line for me is this; Can I, or anybody else for that matter, REALLY tell the differences between two images from similar models of all the brands out there? Grab similar a Nikon, Pentax, Canon or whatever model you want. Put them all on separate tripods with similar lenses and shoot the same scene with the exact same settings at the same time. Are we going to give an "OH MY GOSH" when we view one cameras image over another? If I were worried about that then I would have to spend years finding the best monitor, calibration system and printer on the planet so I could glean everything I could from that superior camera. There has to be a point at which I worry more about developing my skills as a photographer as opposed to buying more stuff. I choose to become a better photographer (one of the reasons I spend so much time on this site).

The best sensor in the world can still take a crappy picture.

[Colin Southern]

I have always heard that nikon AF is more accuarte than canons system

Yes - many Nikon users say that. Not many Canon users agree with them though.

I'll put my 1DX AF against anything Nikon has to offer any day of the week.

[Colin Southern]

The bottom line for me is this; Can I, or anybody else for that matter, REALLY tell the differences between two images from similar models of all the brands out there?

Nope - not for a moment, but don't tell everyone - if word gets out all the reviews will be deemed worthless and nobody will buy the magazines they're printed in.

A lot of people will suffer anxiety attacks through not being able to buy the camera with the best reviews too.

In one informal study I saw, industry professionals couldn't even tell the difference between a Hassleblad MF and an up-market P&S with 8 x 12 prints. Go figure.

[DanK]

Because (1) because lots of things besides the additional DR of the sensor matter in the choice of a camera, and (2) there is a point of diminishing returns, so that for many of us, it frankly doesn't much matter--the bottleneck is 10 cm behind the viewfinder.

There is an interesting clip from a review of the D800, the 5DMkIII, and some other FF cameras from Practical Photography here.

[Glenn NK]

If you don't shoot with Canon you won't understand...if you do, you won't need to ask.

Colin is correct.

I shoot some landscapes - likely the most valuable lens for landscapes is a tilt/shift lens. They are invaluable in architectural work - nothing will match them other than a large view camera. The Canon TS lenses are in a class by themselves.

Apart from that, the Canon lens mount system is excellent - the following is a quote from a well known and very knowledgeable Nikon user:

"The Nikon lens mount is a disaster. . . . . they were trying to keep all the old lenses working when they introduced AF . . . . but it is an electromechanical mess that is a huge weak link in the system. Canon took a lot of heat for changing the mount when they went to AF but they definitely have the last laugh here. Canon mounts just plain never fail and are rock solid. I have at least three mount repairs per year with Nikon lenses and its almost always the aperture tab spring".


Glenn

[Andrew76]

the bottleneck is 10 cm behind the viewfinder.

Ha! I haven't ever heard it quite that way, Dan. But I'm stealing it!

[inkista]

In one informal study I saw, industry professionals couldn't even tell the difference between a Hassleblad MF and an up-market P&S with 8 x 12 prints. Go figure.

for the curious: linkage.

[Glenn NK]

I have always heard that nikon AF is more accurate than canons system

Try googling: "D800 focus problems"

[pnodrog]

I have seen top model Canon and Nikon cameras hanging around the necks of people who produce hopeless photographs. It seems to be a fashion statement to many of them. Top photographers will produce top results with just about any of them. At extreme limits one particular camera/lens combination may have characteristics that are preferred for a particular situation but for the rest of the time it does not matter a hoot.

Does anyone else have the feeling that good photographers just get on with it and the less skilful use equipment choice as an excuse.

At the end of a series of golf lessons the Pro and I played a round of golf so he could advise me on course management. We shared my clubs and I became acutely aware that I could never again blame my equipment. Skill is by far the main limiting factor and the same is true for photography.