In this article I want to touch on the very difficult, almost unbearable, full of contradictions and subtleties topic of choice between Nikon System and Canon System... This part of the 'confrontations' will only touch on the topic relatives discrete (i.e., fixed) autofocus lenses that are suitable, or may be suitable for portrait shooting.
Confrontation systems Nikon / Canon. Part 1. Discrete portraiture. This picture was shot neither on Nikon nor on Kenon.
What is written here is nothing more than my personal, subjective vision of this issue. I used to joke about the fact that Nikon and Canon they only do that they copy names and pathos for their trinkets products. But, making reviews of various photographic equipment, working as a photographer and talking with my colleagues, I have accumulated a lot of notes about the main issue of Life, the Universe and Everything Else: Nikon or Canon? In addition, recently I have been tormented by the issue of acquiring the highest quality lens for personal use, which was the starting point in the creation of this article.
In this article, I mean by portrait fixed lenses only lenses with a fixed focal length from 85 to 200 mm, designed to work with full-format cameras and having automatic focus. These lenses were originally designed to work with the Nikon FX central lens (full-format Nikon cameras) and the Canon central lens with an EF mount. and where a half ?? But what about your favorite half dread !!!!!!!
Nikon can conditionally distinguish only 18 lens models that fit my criteria:
| Lens | Exit time | Today's prices |
| Nikon Nikkor Z 85mm 1: 1.8 S | July 2019 | View-> |
| Nikon 85mm 1: 1.8 AF Nikkor | December 1987 | Outdated |
| Nikon 85mm 1: 1.8D AF Nikkor | March 1994 | Outdated |
| Nikon 85mm 1: 1.8G AF-S Nikkor | January 2012 | View-> |
| Nikon 85mm 1: 1.4D AF Nikkor | November 1995 | Outdated |
| Nikon 85mm 1: 1.4GN AF-S Nikkor | August 2010 | View-> |
| Nikon 105mm 1: 2.8 AF Micro Nikkor | June 1990 | Outdated |
| Nikon 105mm 1: 2.8D AF Micro Nikkor | October 1993 | Outdated |
| Nikon 105mm 1: 2.8GN AF-S Micro Nikkor ED VR | February 2006 | View-> |
| Nikon 105mm 1: 2D AF DC-Nikkor | September 1993 | Outdated |
| Nikon 105mm 1: 1.4EN AF-S Nikkor ED | July 2016 | View-> |
| Nikon 135mm 1: 2 AF DC-Nikkor | October 1990 | Outdated |
| Nikon 135mm 1: 2D AF DC-Nikkor | November 1995 | Outdated |
| Nikon 180mm 1: 2.8 ED AF Nikkor (MKI) | September 1986 | Outdated |
| Nikon 180mm 1: 2.8 ED AF Nikkor (MKII) | January 1987 | Outdated |
| Nikon 180mm 1: 2.8 ED AF Nikkor (MKIII) | November 1987 | Outdated |
| Nikon 180mm 1: 2.8D ED AF Nikkor (MKIV) | December 1994 | Outdated |
| Nikon 200mm 1: 2G ED AF-S Nikkor (MKI) | June 2004 | Outdated |
| Nikon 200mm 1: 2GII N ED AF-S Nikkor (MKII) | September 2010 | View-> |
| Nikon 200mm 1: 4D ED AF Micro Nikkor | October 1993 | Outdated |
Also, a brief description of these models can be found in my article on choosing a portrait lens for the Nikon system.
Canon has a little less models - 15 pieces:
| Lens | Exit time | Today's prices |
| Canon LENS EF 85mm 1: 1.8 USM | July 1992 | View-> |
| Canon LENS EF 85mm 1: 1.2 L USM | September 1989 | Outdated |
| Canon LENS EF 85mm 1: 1.2 L II USM | March 2006 | View-> |
| Canon lens RF 85mm F1.2L USM | May 2019 | View-> |
| Canon lens RF 85mm F1.2L USM DS (DEFOCUS SMOOTHING) | October 2019 | View-> |
| Canon LENS EF 85mm 1: 1.4 L IS USM | August 2017 | View-> |
| Canon lens RF 85mm F2 MACRO IS STM | July 2020 | View-> |
| Canon MACRO LENS EF 100mm 1: 2.8 | April 1990 | Outdated |
| Canon MACRO LENS EF 100mm 1: 2.8 USM | March 2000 | Outdated |
| Canon MACRO LENS EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM | October 2009 | View-> |
| Canon LENS EF 100mm 1: 2 USM | October 1991 | View-> |
| Canon LENS EF 135mm 1: 2.8 Softfocus | October 1987 | Outdated |
| Canon LENS EF 135mm 1: 2 L USM | April 1996 | View-> |
| Canon MACRO LENS EF 180mm 1: 3.5 L USM | April 1996 | Outdated |
| Canon LENS EF 200mm 1: 2.8 L USM | December 1991 | Outdated |
| Canon LENS EF 200mm 1: 2.8 L II USM | March 1996 | View-> |
| Canon LENS EF 200mm 1: 2 L IS USM | April 2008 | View-> |
| Canon LENS EF 200mm 1: 1.8 L USM | November 1988 | Outdated |
Let it not bother anyone that Nikon has a bit more models. At times, Nikon updated its range of lenses adding only a very minor improvement to the previous version. So, the following groups of lenses have the same optical design and in all other respects do not have cardinal differences:
- Nikon 85mm 1: 1.8 AF Nikkor и Nikon 85mm 1: 1.8D AF Nikkor
- Nikon 105mm 1: 2.8 AF Micro Nikkor и Nikon 105mm 1: 2.8D AF Micro Nikkor
- Nikon 135mm 1: 2 AF DC-Nikkor и Nikon 135mm 1: 2D AF DC-Nikkor
- Nikon 180mm 1: 2.8 ED AF Nikkor MKI and MKII, MKIII, 'D' MKIV
- Nikon 200mm 1: 2G ED AF-S Nikkor MKI и Nikon 200mm 1: 2GII NED AF-S Nikkor MKII
Canon is also updating its lineup and the following lens groups have the same optical design:
- Canon LENS EF 85mm 1: 1.2 L USM и Canon LENS EF 85mm 1: 1.2 L ii USM
- Canon LENS EF 200mm 1: 2.8 L USM и Canon LENS EF 200mm 1: 2.8 L ii USM
As a result, Nikon has 11 different models, and Canon has 10. Nikon and Canon go head to head in terms of the variety of lenses.
In the sign the meaning 'Outdated'means this lens cannot be purchased new. Clever guys who write about used in the comments. options for photographic equipment do not take into account that a guarantee and warranty service is important for a professional.
About macro lenses
If you try to use a macro lens for portrait photography, in real life for this task only Nikon 105mm 1: 2.8GN AF-S Micro Nikkor ED VR or Canon MACRO LENS EF 100mm 1: 2.8 L IS USM is taken. Both lenses are by and large very good and here the forces of the systems are approximately equal. All other macro lenses indicated in the tables, due to their specific features and lack of stabilizer, are not of particular interest for portraiture. Anyway, choosing a good portrait lens on a number of macro lenses, I would advise you to pay your last attention, and here's why:
- Macro lenses have less aperturethan comparable focal length 'classic' lenses.
- Macro lenses are 'sharpened' primarily for shooting small objects, work in the classic range of focusing distances is rather a secondary function. Ultimately, macro lenses have very slow focus ring travel at the distances at which people are captured. The small pitch of the focusing ring is damn awkward when focusing manually and causes more focusing errors when focusing automatically.
My little summary on macro lenses: Nikon and Canon each have one serious player, who can act both as a macro lens and as a portrait lens. We can say that here Nikon and Canon hold parity. The functioning and capabilities of other macro lenses should be of interest only to photographers who purposefully shoot macro.
About 85mm and Nikon system issues
In the amateur segment, I would call Nikon 85mm 85: 1G AF-S Nikkor and Canon LENS EF 1.8mm 85: 1 USM the direct competitors of the 1.8-current.
It should be noted that in the fall of 2006 a camera was released Nikon D40, it has been cut for compatibility with 'AF' type lenses and required the use of 'AF S'. In the label, such lenses are highlighted in green.. But the trouble is, from the list of compatible lenses there was only the large and heavy Nikon 200mm 1: 2G ED AF-S Nikkor, which owners of the unpretentious could hardly afford Nikon D40, and 'makrushnik' - Nikon 105mm 1: 2.8GN AF-S Micro Nikkor ED VR. The classic portrait lens, which could be used on amateur cameras, had to wait another 3 years (an eternity in the era of new technologies). With this camera, the serious trouble with the compatibility of Nikon lenses with amateur cameras began. You can imagine that you go, buy your own cute 'Nikkor', put it on your amateur camera, and he does not want to focus on it! And a whole horde of such cameras was released: D40, D40x, D60, D3000, D3100, D3200, D3300, D5000, D5100, D5200, D5300, D5400WTF?, D5500... And I'm already silent about 'Nikon 1' mirrorless cameras, which are not compatible with lenses like 'AF'.
What do I personally care about amateur cameras? We are talking about serious matters - portrait lenses! But the point here is this - in due time Nikon D40 I had a spare camera for the D200 / D90, and it's damn inconvenient to have defective system, which does not fully support their own native lenses. FROM Nikon D40 I could not fully use my favorite and inexpensive Nikon 85mm 1: 1.8D AF Nikkor. Moreover, such lenses cannot just be given to a friend / acquaintance who has an amateur camera. There are a great many such examples. I guess it was with this lens that I had a suspicion that Nikon had blundered somewhere.
If we take the Canon system, then there is full compatibility (except for very rare cases) of lenses with Canon EF mount and cameras with Canon EF / EF-S mount. Even if we take the oldest lens from the list presented by me - Canon LENS EF 135mm 1: 2.8 Softfocus, 1987, then it will work on any Canon CZK.
At the same time, the Canon LENS EF 85mm 1: 1.8 USM has been available since July 1992, and the Nikon 85mm 1: 1.8G AF-S Nikkor since January 2012. Canon's built-in noiseless focus motor introduced 20 (twenty!) years earlierthan Nikon. However, it is worth noting that Nikon has been making 85s since December 1987 (Nikon 85mm 1: 1.8 AF Nikkor). As a result, Nikon had an affordable 5 / 85 for 1.8 years, while Canon did not. But, in general, in the budget 85-current segment, Canon beats one of its successful Canon LENS EF 85mm 1: 1.8 USM against three Nikon 85 / 1.8.
As for the TOP 85-current, here the Canon system wins. The Canon LENS EF 85mm 1: 1.2 L USM was released back in September 1989, six years before the legendary Nikon 85mm 1: 1.4D AF Nikkor. At the same time, the Canon equivalent has a larger geometric hole and a USM motor. The appearance of the motorized Nikon 85mm 1: 1.4GN AF-S Nikkor had to wait another 5 years (a total of 11 years since the release of the TOP 85tki from Canon). The difference between F / 1.2 and F / 1.4 is one-third of the stop, and at least stand still, Nikon does not have such F numbers for portrait shooting in full frame!
Canon was also the first to release the 85 / 1.4 lens with stabilizer - Canon LENS EF 85mm 1: 1.4 L IS USM
Summary of TOP 85. In the TOP segment, the 85-current Canon system wins.
Even if we discard the lack of full compatibility of Nikon lenses with the younger line of SLR cameras, then the lack of a built-in focusing motor in the lens imposes some more limitations. The focus motor really sounds very loud during focusing, there is no direct access to the focus ring (Nikon M / A or Canon FTM modes), there is a more complicated method for switching between manual and automatic focus mode, etc.!
To be precise, all Nikon lenses with a built-in focus motor use SWM motors, which are quite quiet. Canon lenses are all equipped with a built-in focusing motor, usually quiet USM or STM motors, but there are also old lenses with the usual noisy micro-motor. These lenses include only Canon MACRO LENS EF 100mm 1: 2.8 and Canon LENS EF 135mm 1: 2.8 Softfocus, marked in yellow (such lenses do not have the prefix 'USM' or 'Ultrasonic' or 'STM' in their name).
If you shoot certain stories in a row on the rumbling Nikon mastodons, such as Nikon 180mm 1: 2.8D ED AF Nikkor MKIV, and then shoot the same thing on the quiet Canon LENS EF 200mm 1: 2.8 L II USM, then the superiority in working with Canon optics will be on the face. I’ve been feeling very strongly lately defective Nikon lenses without a focus motorWhen working with them, sometimes one gets the feeling that one has a prehistoric technique in one's hands. This article is not paid for, believe me, I just had / have the opportunity to touch various 'pieces of glass' in real conditions. The absence of a focusing motor theoretically only reduces the cost of making a lens and simplifies its repair, but if there is nothing to cover, you can always write about an abstract 'drawing' of lenses of this or that system :).
100mm / 105mm
Nikon and Canon each have several 'portrait hundredths' - Canon LENS EF 100mm 1: 2 USM (October 1991), Nikon 105mm 1: 2D AF DC-Nikkor (September 1993) + Nikon AF-S Nikkor 105mm 1: 1.4E ED N (2016). The lens from Canon is very attractive for its low price. Nikon's first lens to feature 'Defocus Control' i.e. 'Out of focus control'. The second lens from Nikon has a huge f / 1.4 aperture. Due to the unique technology of 'DC' and F/1.4@105mm, it is impossible to compare lenses directly, but if we weigh the pros and cons, I would stick with Nikon's lenses. Nikon DC is a topic for a separate Olympiad, it has certain difficulties in setting up and using it. All in all, the Nikon system theoretically shows more advantages here.
135mm
Probably one of the main questions is the choice of the 135th. This is one of the most sought after open air portrait lenses. Nikon has the unconquered Nikon 135mm 1: 2D AF DC-Nikkor (November 1995), Canon has the Canon LENS EF 135mm 1: 2 L USM (April 1996). If you recall the story that Nikon has been making its 135/2 since 1990 (the first Non-D version), and Canon had to wait another six years before the 135 F / 2.0 came out. Again, due to the unique 'DC' technology, lenses cannot be compared directly. But I really want to, because I'm looking for the best tailor! As a result, I am much more attracted to the Canon LENS EF 135mm 1: 2 L USM, because it is 'performance without unnecessary problems'.
Based on my needs, I personally have two serious complaints about Nikon - the lack of a model update Nikon D700 and updates to the Nikon 135mm 1: 2D AF DC-Nikkor portrait lens. 'DC' is good, but the lens itself is outdated.
Also, Canon has an unusual 135mm - Canon LENS EF 135mm 1: 2.8 Softfocus with a 'soft focus' system (this is not at all like Nikon DC). As a result, if you look at both systems, Canon has one very productive Canon LENS EF 135mm 1: 2 L USM and one creative Canon LENS EF 135mm 1: 2.8 Softfocus, while Nikon has only one super-creative Nikon 135mm 1: 2D AF DC-Nikkor. It is for the sake of Canon LENS EF 135mm 1: 2 L USM that many photographers are willing to choose Canon instead of Nikon. Canon's system in the choice of 135 is preferable.
180mm
The choice between Nikon 180mm 1: 2.8D ED AF Nikkor MKIV and Canon LENS EF 200mm 1: 2.8 L II USM is also obvious to me. I suffered a lot with slow focusing, an absolutely stupid focus mode switch and rather big noise of my own Nikon 180mm 1: 2.8D ED AF Nikkor. The Kenon lens is much more tech than the Nikon. Among the lenses of the class 180-200 / 2.8, Canon clearly leads.
200mm
As for super-class 200 / 2.0 lenses, here too Canon can boast of the existence of the unique Canon LENS EF 200mm 1: 1.8 L USM. Nikon did not have a 200 / 1.8 class lens. But Canon LENS EF 200mm 1: 1.8 L USM is outdated and the main competition now has to go between Nikon 200mm 1: 2GII N ED AF-S Nikkor and Canon LENS EF 200mm 1: 2 L IS USM. These are very specific lenses, it is difficult to say which one is better. But if we consider system selection issue, I would be flattered that in 1988 Canon created its 200 / 1.8, and Nikon slowed down for another 16 years!
Experienced photographer chooses not Nikon or Canon, but a system for comfortable operation... And the earlier this or that new technology was introduced, the more feedback it will receive and the better the new updated or modified model will work. Therefore, I am quite seriously attached to the release date of this or that lens.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Results
Portrait photography is one of the most popular in the world. Having a good portrait photographer is vital. I still think that it doesn't matter what you shoot. Without the work of a photographer, all these expensive lenses are nothing more than pieces of glass and metal, soulless, gray, unable to create anything on their own. And if someone decided to acquire a high-aperture fixture for porter shooting, then in general the Canon system can offer more 'functional' options than Nikon.
On the topic, see also:
I expressed my opinion, I am waiting for your bright thoughts on this in the comments.
Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
And why bypassed such a very common class as fifty dollars ???
so, they are not portraits :)
come on!
So Arkady wrote that he does not consider fifty dollars in this article.
Does Nikon have an autofocus 50mm f1.2?
At full frame, it’s dumb to use a half as a portrait. On the crop, okay yet. Noeya even on crop more than 80 for a portrait I use.
but how stupid to use half the full frame?
Shtatnik, makrik, if resolution permits and MDF.
high-aperture fifty-kopeck piece is yes ... that's five.
and portraits can not be removed on staff?
When you need to seize the moment, without fifty dollars - nowhere.
What are you saying ?!
It will begin now.
135ka with Nikon is long outdated, they say that soon there will be a new one, and Nikon’s ravas are much more plastic, which will not hurt for the same portraits :)
And what are you from the raves going to portraits to pull?
For example, overexposure, shadow, no? :)
Yes Lynx is not mistaken :)
But how is it necessary to shoot staged portraits in order to smear so with highlights and shadows
Another small addition: the old M42 lenses easily adapt to Canon through an adapter, while Nikon with a lensless adapter disappears infinity. Only a millimeter, and such a dirty trick ... although, of course, everything is solved.
And at Kenon, when switching from FD to EF, the working distance was increased and all the old Canon lenses can not be put on new cameras. And Nikon F has not changed for 60 years.
Well said about Nikon non-motorized lenses - more fiddling with them than pluses.
And although the advantage of the Kenons follows from the article, but Nikon d750 + 85 / 1,8ji is, I think, the dream of very many_) And if still paired with straight arms ...
Drag it to 750tke relies 85 / 1,4
ok, 1,4 so 1,4 -)
I'm 750th with 50mm 1,8 more than satisfied))
from yes!
Arkady, from this article, we can conclude that you are switching to Kenon? Or is it correct to say - will you shoot portraits at Kenon?
In general, for fashion, wedding and production portraiture, Canon is best suited.
With what?
Basic skinton basically. Smaller dd and speed / focus in these genres are less significant.
well, a slightly more convenient and affordable line of lenses for this - three 85s, 135ths, successful 24-105, while any fits on any carcass.
+1 about the basic skinton. the canon seems to tint a little brown skin, the reflexes are not so noticeable become. It looks nicer. but sometimes this brown fill begins to annoy.
why?
I already wrote here once, worked in Germany in a publishing house and in an advertising agency. In and there and there there were cabinets with different photographic equipment "from manufacturers" ... so by default, the rule: for a reportage-nikon (details and color breaks are needed) and for a creative-canon ....
Arkady signed an advertising contract with Canon :)
+1 bought the same for a more portrait and embellished picture of the canon.
Something I don’t recognize the author ... As if all the old grievances were poured out on Nikon (?), As Ken did in his time: D. On the face of at least disrespect for the long history of objective engineering. Nikon kept the f-mount, and Canon threw all lenses into the abyss until 1987 with the new EF. For some reason, the important fact that Canon EF-S lenses designed for cameras with a crop factor of 1,6 are not compatible with full-frame cameras is not mentioned at all! As well as the fact that Nikon has absolutely no full-frame cameras without a motor in the carcass.
It is clear that af-s did not appear in nature right away, so why blame the screwdriver! I was particularly surprised by the following remarks: “the inferiority of Nikon lenses without a focusing motor”, and this ingenious passage of course: ... Nikon D40, it was cut in compatibility with lenses of the 'AF' type and required the use of lenses of the 'AF-S' type. ... But here's the problem, from the list of compatible lenses there was only a large and heavy Nikon 200mm 1: 2G ED AF-S Nikkor, which owners of a simple Nikon D40 could hardly afford, and a 'makrushnik' - Nikon 105mm 1: 2.8GN AF-S Micro Nikkor ED VR. The classic portrait lens, which could be used on amateur cameras, had to wait another 3 years (an eternity in the era of new technologies). With this camera, the serious trouble with the compatibility of Nikon lenses with amateur cameras began. You can imagine that you go, buy your own cute 'Nikkor', put it on your amateur camera, and he does not want to focus on it! And a whole horde of similar cameras were released: D40, D40x, D60, D3000, D3100, D3200, D3300, D5000, D5100, D5200, D5300, D5400 WTF ?, D5500. " And here D40 and prof. Work?! Need a screwdriver - buy a little older carcass. On the face of the division of the line of cameras into junior and senior (only d50 was mistakenly released with a motor, but quickly covered). For fans with a lower crop, they finally released an inexpensive high-quality AF-S zoom 55-200 in time, which is quite enough for those who love it. portrait shooting. WTF, Arkady?
Shaw, is the full-frame lens mount different, that the cropped lenses in it jam?
I don’t know the details and the true reasons, but a fact. ef-s do not stand up to the full frame (ef).
And for some reason, canon full-frame lenses on cropped carcasses get up. how so?
perhaps software hacked. marketing. they threw out the lenses without asking until 1987.
no, it turns out to be a constructive incompatibility: “The rear optical element of the EF-S lens is located closer to the light sensor than in small format (24x36 mm) SLR cameras. In cameras with a reduced sensor, the size of the rising mirror is also smaller, which, on the one hand, allows you to bring the rear element of the lens closer to the focal plane, and on the other hand, excludes the installation of such a lens on a film camera or digital camera with a sensor larger than APS-C. " (wiki)
At the expense of thrown fd lenses. I agree, it's sad, Canon had a lot of excellent fd lenses. BUT, the Canon engineers were smarter than the Nikon engineers. with the change of the mount and the abandonment of mechanics, they were ahead of Nikon by more than 20 years. Now Nikon is faced with the problem of a mechanical diaphragm, it really does not keep up with d4. and in this regard, we had to install an electronic diaphragm on a brand new 400mm f2.8 (maybe 300 2.8), and so far Nikon has only 2 cameras with this function (D4 and D4s) ... Draw your own conclusions
The Nikon Electromagnetic Aperture Lens is the Nikon 800mm f / 5.6E FL ED VR AF-S. Full support is declared on the D7000. Only if you buy a lens at the price of 1 Russian rubles for a camera at the price of 000 of the same rubles. Needless to say, only two cameras support electronic aperture. This is solved by updating the camera software.
Interestingly, the cropped third-party lenses climb the canon ff (I tried it on a tamron and sigma, probably tokina as well). Climb on ff and Nikon's crop windows (through the adapter). Only canon kropovye do not climb.
Cropped third-party lenses are mounted on ff for the simple reason that they are made with an EF mount. EF-S hike only Canon and did.
ugums .. that one is still twisted.
You still don’t understand that the author was chasing not so much that Nikon cut the cameras, but that the camera with a “screwdriver” works like a drill and this can annoy others? The screwdriver, like the aperture jumper, is too outdated technology, from which Nikon himself has only problems, the same D40, because of the “jumper”, is not able to do exposure metering on non-chip lenses.
"For some reason, the important fact that Canon EF-S lenses designed for cameras with a crop factor of 1,6 are not compatible with full-frame cameras is not mentioned at all!" - and why be so perverted? Why pull a cropped lens over a full-frame camera to get a circular vignette image?
But the D200 perfectly measures everything and transfers the aperture value to the carcass, while the mechanism is very simple, actually hidden in the bayonet “ears” from film cameras. It is not clear what can interfere with the work of progressive nano-innovative electronics.
Stupidly put the carcasses in different segments and that's it, in the same way the number of buttons on the carcasses of different classes is naturally due to mechanics or even kinematics with cybernetics, don't make my slippers laugh ...
“But the D200 ″ ... So, for this purpose, the aperture sensor of the D200 is still used to read the position of the aperture ring on the lens. My D1X also reads like, but on Helios it has nothing to cling to in the ring and this leads to specific metering errors.
Will Helios work on Kenon without dancing with tambourines?
Anything except focus confirmation will work with an unpinned adapter. Everything works with a chip adapter absolutely without problems, even a lens from glasses. Moreover, unlike Nikon's adapters, no chip (“dandelion”) settings are required, once I put on the adapter and put on any optics. There are no problems with exposure metering, it works even without a lens.
At first I wrote a lot of things that I think about Nikon, but it turned out that there are very few decent words.
Especially after reading about the 7D mark 2. Miracles are written.
the main thing is that AF eventually works.
I support you, Sir.
I myself had a D40 and already imagine how I wind it 85mm, which costs more than a carcass, and they buy D40 to dive into the mirror world and understand what's what, they don’t remove the whale from me at all.
Screwdriver. Such a pain!? Yes, no. Screwdriver lenses for those who firstly have money for them, and secondly who have a camera with a screwdriver. Nirazu did not hear anyone complaining about incompatibility. But the D40 with 85 / 1,4g or d never seen.
Portraits can be done for anything, because they are different.
Even in the table, the item “outdated” surprised me at all. How deprecated? Glass opaque steel? Is the resolution lacking? I have an olympus 50 / 1.4, he is older than all these in the table and everything is fine with him: both bokeh and resolution and weight.
AF
the screwdriver buzzes disgustingly. Well, it's generally a gun! What does buzzing affect? Will the model run away? She is at least two meters away; for her it is not a sound at all. And what's the use of canon motors in lenses? identical af sensors lived in chambers from 10D to 5D mark 2, and fidgeted safely for many years.
Canon has all sorts of f / 1.2, well, yes. elki. red stripe “this is show-off, this is, this is show-off” in Nikon 58 / 1,4. So what? as if a portrait at 1,2 is a portrait, and on more closed ones it is an under-portrait. Then makriki with their f / 2,8 generally do not understand what they are doing.
strange that there are no fifty dollars in the review, the half-length portrait is probably not a portrait. Canon 50 / 1,4 has the same chlamine. uncompromising systemic failure. if you want a good fifty dollars - TAKE ELKA FOR TENS OF THOUSAND RUBLES.
Immediately to the portraitist it is necessary to think about the shirik. If in the battle of 16-35 zooms from Canon (2 versions) and Nikkor 17-35 the Canon will most likely win, then in the fixes Nikon is better everywhere in terms of SHU. And so to the advantage of canon in terms of shooting portraits, the question of color will immediately arise, but this is generally the case ...
http://www.photographydo.com/reviews/nikon-d810-vs-canon-eos-5d-mark-iii&prev=search here the guys are testing head-to-head d810 and 5dmark 3 with 24-70 and makrushniki - both glasses and carcasses are gorgeous, and everyone will choose the color
sorry, threw the link crookedly. Fixed
http://www.photographydo.com/reviews/nikon-d810-vs-canon-eos-5d-mark-iii
there are ravas
Thanks for the test, by the way. In the examples of the whites of the eyes, you can clearly see how Canon turns the picture yellow, so that the skin tone "prettier" comes out. Very clear. :)
An interesting theory about widths. Can you name any Canon glass that will at least stand next to the Nikon 12-24 f / 2.8? So most landscape painters who changed the system precisely because of this glass could not.
There is no exact analogue. There are 16-35 f4 with good sharpness for landscape if. And with a hole f 2.8 only reporting 16-35 with a daub in the corners. There is still the hellish 14 2.8 (very praised) but not a zoom and is worth tryndets. There is a 17 f 3.5 tilt shift (Nikon does not have this at all in super-wide). There is something to choose from shorter))))
and about the yellowness, put in the converter the temperature is not 5000K as the automation chose, but 4200 and immediately the picture will be nicer https://vk.com/album76003725_211713109
guess who is where now))
To be honest, I don't really care about Nikon's professional series. Tamron made lenses with the same quality characteristics at a price one and a half times lower. Here's what to choose. :) About skin tone - i.e. Do you agree that Canon's color temperature is deliberately turned towards warm in order to produce a more “pleasant” skin tone at the output?
it's not about warmth.
You can set “heat correction” on nikon, but you still won't get such a skin tone right away.
So in addition there is a shift in color space. In any case, it turns out that this color is wound up and there is no need to talk about accurate color rendering. For this reason, where color accuracy is important, use the Nikon technique. Do I get it right?
maybe just the opposite?
Is it the other way around? Check out the industries that use professional fixture photography - Nikon is used everywhere. In space, in medicine, in expert services, etc.
specifically in the test that I brought the white balance into the warm shades of both cameras, and Nikon is stronger (somewhere up to 5500K, and canon up to 5000K). But they look almost the same because of the firm tan from Canon. After pipetting, a temperature of about 4200 drops in the eye, which makes the picture better in both cameras. After editing the BB, it becomes clearly visible that the skin on the nikon is pale and the tan on the canon (at the same color temperature and shade). Since I did not see this boy live, the veracity remains behind the scenes, but the color of the canon is cooler. In general, the truth of color and its winning are two different things, but rarely see models in reality. Therefore, Canon is prettier to me. You should also remember the fact that in the d2 model they sagged green due to numerous complaints of green, because this version of the skin from Nikon may become different in D810, d4 (e), and certainly not in the seven hundred
In general, it’s unrealistic to make a theme about portraiture and not abut against the theme of skinton, because the theme will inevitably grow in taste, and possibly even srach. As they say, you can’t just make a topic about who is better, Nikon or Canon
to be honest, I was counting on a more detailed review, with examples of photos and conclusions based on their pictures, convenience, workmanship…. And in the end, it all came down to dry rewiring of design features ((((
Thank you for the article! varezhkin, and where does it recognize the author or not? Earlier it was clearly seen that the Nikon system was more to the liking of Arcadia, but by comparing both systems head-on, especially in the segment of portraiture, he drew conclusions for himself and shared with us. Thank you again, it was very interesting to read
as for me the main indicator is the quality of the photo / cost and convenience, and not in what year BC a lens was released. I personally, before the light bulb, in which year my 85 began to be produced, the main thing is how it works. Strong emphasis was placed on the year the release began.
I, as an amateur, generally chose Nikon at the time, since there was no built-in flash in a similar kenon.
Use the built-in flash on soap dishes. Of course, she is a way out when there is nothing at all, but usually they use external ...
Nikon's built-in flash is a command in creative lighting
Guys. I would not advise photographers to read this article by Arkady, because the photographer doesn’t give a damn about all the technical subtleties that Arkady painted here, the photographer will equally beautifully remove both Canon and Nikon, it all depends not on the screwdriver, but on the straightness of the hands. But to techno-droders this little article is very helpful, everything is clearly and in detail painted, Arkady very accurately indicated everything and justified it. Photographers are better off not bothering to shoot, shoot, shoot, whatever is convenient for them, and Nikon is not bad in this regard. Just to each his own. After all, the whole world cannot shoot on mark 3, we are all individual.
Arkady do not torment yourself with the choice go to this Carl Zeiss Otus 1,4 / 85 ZF.2. The company still does not bother with such a trifle as autofocus, screwdriver, ultrasonic motor, stm. And the main thing is perfect for both kenon and nikon
Why not Pentax? =)))
patamushta alimpus ludshy!
An annoying detail - it was worth mentioning the same in relation to the price. And one more detail ... Did you talk about a super-duper professional photographer in the article?
If so, then the target audience is clearly not responding. If not, then it was worth paying more attention to the cost of the lenses, and not the convenience of use, to third-party lenses (the same CZ), to creative old lenses. All the same, not everyone can afford to pay for the glass an extra couple of thousand cu
From all for myself I draw a conclusion: 1. The article follows into three parts - system availability, system convenience, alternative fixes. 2. Make test shots with the most common fixes.
in the next article, Arkady will talk about the advantage of Nikon in wide angle
In my opinion, the article is rather from a series of stories. Statement of fact. We have what we have))))
It is primarily a person who shoots, not a camera or lens. If we talk about 85mm and higher then where does amateur DSLRs ???
With Crooked hands, no money, lenses, professional mirrors will help. In the portrait I get around with manual lenses without any problems, the Jupiter-9 from the early ones will stay in the collection forever ... IMHO But in general, thanks to Arkady for his articles, he prompts me to think that he can not but rejoice)
Some Canon FD lenses could be added. They are quietly remade for EOS and their quality is considered better than modern ones.
But the Vedas are the same as the M42 and M39. They don’t even have to redo it. Of course they are better, because they cost (in terms of today's dollar) much more and were made for centuries. Although today's technologies are more advanced, they are also expensive.
My first Nikon appeared in 1999. It was presented to me by one journalist, whom I closed from a ricocheting shot from an RPG. Having quit the army and went into war journalism, it was Nikon who bought it. Now I am faced with the problem that Nikon does not often provide the necessary characteristics in his cameras, and Canon is simply not convenient to operate. And it’s not a habit. My current passion is shooting at 5D mark III, so I had both the opportunity and the time to practice. And about the lenses, too, rightly said.
Thanks to Arkady once again for a clear and structured situation.
I have long suspected that Kenon has secret algorithms sharpened not just for skin tones, but also for smoothing out any spots, pimples, wrinkles, etc.
You’ll take off at Nikon, and the picture shows all the disgrace in all its glory, all that you can’t even see with your eye. Sometimes it even gets scary.
By the way, I conducted specially tests, the JPG camera does much better than any program from Rava, Nikon or Photoshop. And then the same file can be twisted and twisted in Photoshop, with much less distortion, without losing sharpness than the equal in the same Nikon software. Who does not believe, check it yourself, take something colorful in poor light.
+100. nikon is here in the end loser with his honesty pictures ...
The target audience of the article is beginners, techno maniacs and those who like to argue ... For those who have made their choice, and for a long time, it does not give anything ... Well, a person will not merge one system and switch to another, having at least a few professional lenses ... But, obviously, “ young men pondering their future ”, will give points in favor of Canon ... It's time for Arkady to puzzle the company with payment for advertising ...
Will become. There are plenty of examples of the transition with the sale of a large accumulated park
These are not photographers, but those who are looking for the "masterpiece" button ...
not at all.
An even greater number of both are true to their system.
Arkady specifically at the beginning of the article indicated “What is written here is nothing more than my personal, subjective vision of this issue”
One more remark ... The concept of "outdated" in relation to the lens sounds rather ridiculous ... The author, as an experienced photographer, understands what he is talking about, nevertheless, he uses this amateur vocabulary ...
double up.
Apparently, Sony Alfa or whatever it was that disappointed Arcadia ;-) And from me the reverse process is buying old Nikkors - a beautiful drawing. At the moment, I think that there was some kind of hidden “war of megapixels” in the field of lens design and they (Nikon, at least for sure) splashed something wrong with water: “objective” (measured) parameters became better, and the image was worse. Although, perhaps, simply by adjusting manually, you get a picture that is more appropriate to your taste, but for weddings - for whom everything on the conveyor is really better suited to the most automated system
The point is in plastic lenses, the production cost reduction ... It's not for nothing that modern lenses come from China and Thailand ...
I'm not sure if Evtifeev has an article on disassembling 18-55 Canon - where is it more budgetary? The lenses are glass, the mechanism is flimsy, but somewhere they should have saved, right? It will last 5 years, but you don't need more. One will quit taking pictures, the other will buy a lens to their liking, and this one is just right for “looking”. And the plastic of the body in this case is a plus, not a minus - the lens is lighter, focuses faster, the lenses will not crumble in the cold ...
Yes, Arkady! I did not expect from you such disrespect for Nikon and all his fans! You have lost me as a regular reader, I think. Although, probably, the loss is not great for you))
Eugene, your surname Nikon, or what?
If you tried to piss off, then you did not succeed.
well no. it seems that for him a bad word towards Nikon is like a caricature of a famous prophet for Muslims.
and what, in the negative facts that offend you to blame Arkady?