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| Nikon 85mm 1: 1.8 AF Nikkor | December 1987 | Outdated |
| Nikon 85mm 1: 1.8D AF Nikkor | March 1994 | Outdated |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| Nikon 85mm 1: 1.4D AF Nikkor | November 1995 | Outdated |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| Nikon 105mm 1: 2.8 AF Micro Nikkor | June 1990 | Outdated |
| Nikon 105mm 1: 2.8D AF Micro Nikkor | October 1993 | Outdated |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| Nikon 105mm 1: 2D AF DC-Nikkor | September 1993 | Outdated |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| Nikon 135mm 1: 2 AF DC-Nikkor | October 1990 | Outdated |
| Nikon 135mm 1: 2D AF DC-Nikkor | November 1995 | Outdated |
| Nikon 180mm 1: 2.8 ED AF Nikkor (MKI) | September 1986 | Outdated |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
An interesting criterion is “more functional options”. But what about the picture quality, where Nikon is always better than Canon? Is this not the main criterion?
And in what way is it always higher?
Open DxO Mark and see where Nikon lenses are and where Canon is. Resolution, sharpness, etc., etc.
Colleagues, perhaps my experience of communicating with photographers is somewhat one-sided, however, I noticed that when the confrontation between “Canon-Man” and “Nikon-Man” arose before my eyes, the instigator was always the Nikonian, proving and convincing. Canoner, in most cases, looked like: “Hmm, are there more systems? What for?" or “yes, cool, Nikon. Wow! I'm going to shoot further. ” I have met a similar “aggressive Nikonianism” among the professionals of Olympusovodov - a desire to “prove” and “persuade” something.
I do not want to offend anyone, of course, but I wonder if anyone else noticed something like that?
Itself worked both with Canon DSLRs and with Nikon (I liked both systems at one time).
Now I'm shooting on NEX, so I don’t care.
By no means ... It all depends on the individual ... Each sandpiper praises his own swamp ... The very opposition is ridiculous ... Two professional systems ... Each has his own ...
“I wanted the best, but it turned out as always.” Another bumping foreheads of adherents of different systems. The main criterion is the quality of the picture, the picture that everyone defines for himself and laughs when they say that the lens is “outdated, makes noise with a screwdriver, there is a more complex method switching between manual and automatic focusing modes, etc. ”
You are not right. Grabs the instigators from both sides. An example is the D800 and 5Ds. At first, shoemakers were laughing at 36mp in D800, now nikonyuns laugh at 50mp in 5Ds. :)
Yes, right, right. And there is.
Somehow, on an excursion with the working department, getting his d7100 out of a case full of lenses, it was attacked by a colleague with a 550d kenon and a tamron (I did not see which one, something from discharge 18-200).
K: - Oh, do you have a bad apparatus too?
Me: - Yes, no, ordinary, nothing special.
K: - Yes? And it looks like normal, but what for the company?
Me: - Yes, nikon.
K: - Dear go?
Me: - Well, there is little.
K: - You should have taken a real professional like mine, this KENON is the best company in the world, and objective, see? TAMRON, great. What is your lens?
Me: - Which one?
K: - Well, this one on the camera.
Me: - Fix a stack of micro.
K: - What kind of fix?
Me: - Well, this one does not bring closer and does not move away.
K: - Damn, well, do you need this?
Me: - How is that nafig? Shoot close-up, portraits, whatever!
K: - But he doesn't bring it closer ?!
Me: - But he shouldn't, he's a fix.
K: - I don't know what kind of "fix" it is, but you had to buy TAMRON so that you could bring it closer.
Me: - But I have one, here, 70-210 f4.
K: - What else is f4, also go for some fix?
Me: - No, zoom.
K: - Okay, this is all bullshit, if you decide to take serious equipment, come, I'll tell you.
I'm fine thanks.
This I mean, when such “colleagues” run around and begin to discuss which system is better and which is worse, then usually it turns out srach.
+5
Well, you have patience! First listen to all this, and then write about it. By the way, gentlemen, what is better in your opinion Nikon or Mercedes?))
Clear pepper Mercedes! You can sell it and buy a whole bunch of Nikon lenses and a couple of carcasses.
RZHUNIMAGU, straight from life.
I don’t believe it! :) It doesn’t happen :)
It even happens! I personally watched the photographic lady with the 5dmk3 + 50mm1.2 set, so her entire wedding was filmed at apertures 7.1 - 10.0! Nariz nowhere has a normally blurred background, everything is in the DOF. And then why was it necessary to buy such equipment?
This is definitely true!
Funny joke.
This is not a joke, this is a case of life, and most recently it was, about a month and a half ago. We spent the whole day taking pictures, and then a week later he asked me for pictures to cram on Facebook, otherwise he didn’t succeed. I did not give, said that this is intellectual property.
I’m talking about this. An anecdote from life. Thank you, I was very able to reproduce it.
Cool story! :)
Everything is just like that!
I specially taped all markings on my and nikon and kenon. For they got it!
And to the question "What kind of camera do you have?" I answer big black.)
Well, I have been on Nikon for 10 years, but I usually advise Canon, mainly because of the skin tone (secret algorithms :) and now these matrices from Sony with VR ... but something tells me that I won't change the system.
Strange of course the article. And the comparison is strange. To me, as an amateur in the system, the quality of the picture, the price and the reliability of the system are most important. What is the difference in my mind before the year in which what was produced. Well, I'm not shooting in September 89th, but now.
Well, Arkady also noticed in his article why he cites the “age” argument, and I would add: Old lenses were designed for old matrices that were relevant then. Newer versions are for modern matrices, with greater detail, for example.
old lenses were calculated on the film actually.
Yes, even on tape. Does a 35mm film and a full frame with 16-50 megapixels have different requirements for resolution, the angle of incidence of the rays (perhaps true for some widths, or is this only a problem for rangefinders / mirrorless?)
Probably the electronic matrix is somehow not right and not there, unlike the film ... It is enough to sacrifice a black ram, sprinkle the camera and glass with blood and everything will be formed.
The point is not in the location, but in the mechanics (chemistry) of the photographic process.
It’s exactly the case in the application of the Newton’s three laws in the design of light-writing, it elastically bouncing moves in a rectilinear and equally accelerated exact way, striking straight along the orbitals, shaking off excess electrons from the orbits and thus the field blocking the pn junction is destroyed and we can forget about the skin tone, which is already not pull out of RAW. Alas and ah.
two in optics.
And off we go, straight arms, the skill of a photographer, etc. I would give you "agate 18" now and look at your hands. Some show-off about hands, I don't believe if there is no good technique, hands won't help. Levsha also had different hammers to shoe a flea.
And why do you need to be faithful to one thing?
For portraits, I like Kenon, so take it and two fixes for yourself. Take everything else off to Nikon.
Now it will be possible not to bother with any garbage, and directly deal with the main thing.
+5
Peter, and carry a cart of cameras?
What for?
I know when I’m going to shoot a portrait photo session, and when all sorts of different things.
Perhaps I will do just that, I’ll take a sprinkled Kenon simpler, and one 85mm fix.
a professional should have 2 kit just in case
Vitaliy, 2 carcasses, as a rule, are taken by one manufacturer so that glasses / transcripts / synchronizers / other pribludy are interchangeable.
I talked about the kit, not about the carcass. You can’t help the defective body with a flash :)
A complete set of equipment? That is, carry with you 2 carcasses, 2 shirikas, 2 normal zooms (such as 24-70), 2 telephoto zoom (70-200), or 4 fixes (85 + 135), 2 flashes? Brad, at such a pace the cart will not help. You need to rent Kraz ...
Great article! As usual, however :) I like these comparisons, I have searched for them on the net for a long time and have found it quite rarely. And here everything is clear and simple. I can compare the beauty of the picture and the bokeh by taking pictures on the network, since they didn’t banned Google. And compare the price tags on the market. A structured comparison of canon and nikon is hard to find. Especially for each focal comparison.
I also like to compare canon and nikon :) True, so far there was only enough money to buy fifty dollars of both systems, and even then the toad strangled the money for 50 1.2l. I tried the remaining fifty dollars, namely, the Canon 1.4 and 1.8 and the Nikon 1.4 and 1.8 d and g versions. Even Sigma did not try art, but autofocus killed. Of all, I liked the Nikon 1.8g the most, though I also left the Canon 1.8, (the difference from 1.4 is only constructive and a bit lighter, but I liked the 1.8 in terms of the picture) and Nikon 1.4d, in reserve. I got rid of the rest (so far only Nikon 1.8d has not sold).
But comparing 85s or 135s is too costly, since I'm not a photographer or a billionaire, I decided to moderate my ardor for now, although the desire to compare remained. And then Arkady laid out his comparison just in time!
Since this is part one, now I hope to see a comparison using other focal cameras, and other cameras from both companies. It is clear that Nikon 14-24 wins in the super-wide position, but Canon 11-24l is coming. But there are also telephones, and comparing them is mega-costly, each fixed telephoto costs 100-300 thousand, comparing them is the business of some very rich amateur (or we just look at technical comparisons on specialized sites).
It would also be interesting to compare the carcasses. From old to new, with a link in price. For example, for a price of up to 5 thousand rubles, you can take Canon 400d or Nikon D3000, up to 10 thousand rubles, you can take Nikon D3100 - an initial cut-down DSLR, or you can take Canon 50d - professional crop. For 20 take Nikon d300s - professional crop or canon 5d - the first ff. For 40, take Nikon D600, or an old, but flagship unit from Canon.
Also for flashes. Itself compared only sb-700 and 430 2. The Nikon flash seemed to me more serious, now I use two of them.
In general, the scope for creativity is huge, I really hope that Arkady will continue this series of comparisons :)
I really liked the article. Thanks!
It is funny to read the comments of the adherents of Nikon or Canon, as always they break their spears, the impression is that most did not read the article, and did not accept that Arkady in this article writes about his personal choice that he personally likes or does not like.
I hope this is not the last series of comparisons in the author’s personal preferences.
and after all, the most interesting thing in the article under discussion is that those who do not shoot with professional optics and most likely will not shoot in comments are most likely to get excited.
Arkady, thanks for the thought!
I’m a Nikonist-wedding photographer, I work basically without zoom (on two D700 cameras). Portraits I use 85 / 1,4D and 135 / 2D. It’s unfortunate that the glorious beginning of the 700s continued with a miscarriage in the form of the D750 ((. 800s and many people are not at all interesting to me, since few people need a ballast in the form of such megapixels in the portrait (if you don’t remove the posters). Now Nikon does not want to put the matrix from the top D700s into the D800 / 4 case as before.
About portraiture. I completely agree with the range, it is exactly 85-200.
Old man 135 / 2D from Nikon, this is really a bokeh monster, but also a monster of chromaticity, which you delete and delete ... I think if he were younger and more "motorized", then the autofocus would be more precise and faster. Still, I love this lens and put up with its old lady habits. For your information, there were two specimens, one of which is much stronger chromatite.
85 / 1.4D is not bad, but a screwdriver at open f / 1.4 is something: a more or less decent backlight in a dark room makes the lens smear even at f / 2,0. In all other situations, I am satisfied with the result of 85, a very sharp and fast lens.
About the screwdriver. Yes, the dogs are buzzing, but you won’t believe it, I am a bastard from this.
I have not had a chance to shoot tightly with the same Kenon 5DM3, and even more so with the Kenon 135/2 and 85 / 1,2. But, I think, if I were “at the beginning” again, I would have developed from Kenon or Sonya.
With a modern approach, Nikon does not have to wait for an adequate continuation of the D700. But everything is correctly said: the specialist is more important than the technician.
Friends, do not be discouraged, shoot on your systems, there are holidays on every street!
I support. I recommend to listen.
I recently discovered that in fact for all situations, I need three fixes and a 24-85 whale. The remaining 5 (five!) I will sell.
3 fixes are enough for me, I sell 24-85 boring he
Article by nothing. A bunch of facts.
More farts to the fire god!
And in my opinion, these comparisons are just a flame. After Trehsotkovich's comments, I don't even consider anything except Fuji X-T1 for purchase. If, nevertheless, put the question point-blank - Canon or Nikon, then I would still take Canon (the Nikonist himself, if Th). Because it's cheap and cheerful. Because 85 is cheaper. Because 6D fewer megapixels. Because the flange is shorter. Because skin tone is more adequate. Because the system is just more popular among the people. which means more used lenses on hand. Because the controls are more convenient. The only thing I really dislike about Canon is the cheap, sickening flashes and the disgusting look of Canon lenses. But this is all subjective. So I could not resist the flame.
it’s more convenient to control .. then someone like .. I’m kept from the transition by the control of the canons, eh .. I would start from the canon and would not know grief))))
Gromozeka
Do not buy Fuji, they have a black primer on all silver models under a layer of silver paint (the campaign is white), under which the silver metal, after a month of active dragging, wear and a black primer shines under the silver paint, it looks disgusting! In addition, the lower bottom consists of two halves, one of which is metal and the other plastic :) the metal campaign was not enough for the second :) In general, the quality of the pictures is class, and the body is poop.
You are right about Canon. In many places, it is really better and cheaper than Nikon. Nikon has recently been kakbe checking his fans for durability, saluting with the release of useless copies, and not releasing anything like inveterate D700 and D300s in cast-iron cases that would protect Dmitry (he is higher in the comments) from RPG shots, and their D750 and other whistles like D810A alpha, males will not buy for sure. Nikon has recently become miserable, and Canon will soon finally smear it.
Bravo! Sobbed
Not an article but "Golden Raspberry" !!!
Canon work.
Nikon creativity.
Everything has already been proven and retold 1000 times.
What is the debate about?
It’s like bikers.
Four wheels for life. - Canon.
Two wheels for the soul.-Nikon.
In my axiom.
"People, you are so funny!" (c) Thor.
There was a great forum, but his cats were crap.
Well, you got fed up, here are just the facts and explanation. Moreover, there is nothing about color and texture, just lenses and their advantages. When I chose the first DSLR, I first chose a Nikon with a screwdriver, I wanted to dial old lenses. and then I read about M42 and the rest, about CHDK, Magic Lantern, and realized that Canon still has more advantages in terms of expansion than Nikon.
And I'll say about plastic 18-55 - take sigma or tamron. They are really metal.
I’m just tired of reading all the comments) This is a battle) Yes, Arkady well done)) Heated the forum) I have not seen this for a long time)
Maybe bets were made on this? :)
yeah, from him not a single kament, sits and giggles paddy)))))
for sure)))
The article is actually a bomb. At one time, all these tricks of a screwdriver were turned away from nikon, the lack of focus on infinity on Soviet optics, which was not inherited by the big zhenya. Kenon has really not a bad selection of not expensive fixed lenses. 40mm pancake, 50-1.8, despite the constructive - give it plastic, as it is called. Well, I’d really like to bribe 85-1.8. For me, as an amateur, for shooting at home, for my family this is enough
And then there are 85 135 both CCs for Sony / Minolta - a very worthy choice and no less exclusive for the sony-A mount - Sony 135mm F / 2.8 [T4.5] STF - oh, it's a pity the system is surviving its last days ...
And as regards competition, kenon and nikon, which have been competing with each other for more than half a century and creating their own masterpieces, do not freely come to the conclusion that this is not possible in principle in principle, because one company would have pressed another for a long time, but for some reason it’s possible . This is the case when without kenon there would be no Nikon, and without Nikon there would be no Kenon. This competition is what it should be. And it is in this competition that masterpieces appear. And to whom, which is more convenient, everyone chooses for his own needs
Canon and Naikon have divided the professional market into niches.
One is soft portrait, catwalk and glamor. The other is reportage, rigidity and micro-contrast.
Accordingly, the production of carcasses and lenses for these tasks.
Previously, there was a normal resource, but now there are so many letters ...
Yes, imagine, it’s not only the pictures that are being examined. And also, you will probably be surprised, but this site is almost entirely made up of beeches.
Bright, Arkady still occasionally takes video reviews (apparently for such unfortunate readers)
I'm not saying that letters are bad. And I read well. What are you making a fool of me? I say that there used to be letters too, but there were not so many of them, but there was a bunch of D700 + lenses. Something has changed it is not clear that the feeling is the beginning of the end.
Well what are you really, none of you are doing anything. So, it’s just that the situation is painfully anecdotal, where there are blondes, there is talk about the ends. In general, everything is as usual: there is a lens or some other device, then there is a review, no lens means an article with thoughts about the photo, or just wait.
Speaking of ends, they all have a beginning, if that.
And at the ends in the beginning there are testicles. And all the blondies are well aware of this.
Krasava !!! ))))))))
quite obvious things are stated in the article. only required to take portraits. people as soon as the problem of skinton nikon pops up. well, by tough post-processing and killing the skin to the level of the plastic, the type problem was solved.
but suddenly it turns out that the lens of Kenon is obviously more interesting! 1.2 fast autofocus lenses and better on Nikon is simply not there.
(one of the reasons is the outdated Nikon bayonet, where either a light lens 1.2 or autofocus, but not both together :))
Okay, convinced yourself that it’s going to be darker.
100mm - Kenon has a magnificent 2.0 for $ 500. for Nikon it is empty. 135mm - Kenon has just a legend 135 2.0. Nikon's ancient Matsodont does not shine with anything.
85mm - Kenon has a great cheap super popular 1.8. for 350 dollars. and only here Nikon has at least something.
the article is useful - finally Arkady noticed why the pros (except landscape painters) choose canon :)
and still there are fantastic quality Elks 24-70 second version, 70-200 - for no less fantastic money. technology is worth it. Kenon has been using fluorites for a long time, Nikon only implements spraying from it :)
That everyone is so clinging to this unfortunate skinton, it seems that not a single portrait can do without post-production today, even bad photos began to be given to unprocessed photographs, so many inventions have just been invented to study so many color and texture correction options. So it’s not a matter of skinntons, a professional will look for that tool that will help to realize his intentions, and an amateur will conceive what can be achieved with the existing equipment. In my opinion so.
but in fact it is not at all so. for weddings, fashion designers, reporters and other pros, it is important how much time is spent on processing. the price of 1 hour of professional photographer - from ... to ...
from Nikon, alas and alas, getting a normal skinton is not easy (often impossible), and you definitely need to spend a lot of time.
I am not saying that the colors of the canon are more accurate. they are definitely more commercial.
Now estimate the costs - skin from kenon - 5 min, skin from nikon - 35-55 min.
worse, you can screw up a session such as a wedding, etc.- not every bride will positively appreciate the piglet or the greenish-gray (zombie style) signature shade of Nikon's skinton.
therefore, novice amateurs scour the DRL in search of a dimensionless DD and rejoice at the Nikon rubber RAVs. And they also collect a bunch of muddy soapy old rubbish in the form of prehistoric lenses advertised by flea market stores.
advanced photographers look at color, the presence of specific (often very expensive!) lenses for their specific tasks, and the amount of time that is needed for post-processing.
go to the photo ru - evaluate the level of the photo in the branches of Nikon and D800 / D600 / D750, etc. and branches of kenon 6D / M2-M3 ...
Someone read the instructions and takes pictures, but someone can’t figure it out with BB and is torturing himself and others on the forums.
really, and why do most of the pros shoot with kenon? BB on a gray card will not learn to exhibit in any way ... :))))))))))
http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/02/canon-leads-the-way-in-world-press-photo-nominations/
http://www.worldpressphoto.org/awards/2015
can you teach them? at the same time you will understand (maybe) that even the correct BB cannot correct the gray-green or piggy (depending on the camera and matrix) nikon's skin tone. and, there is also a RAV - there like a BB, you can also put it? :))) and doesn't help either - the color channels work differently :)))
Alex +100500