Probably the most difficult question when choosing a modern camera is the choice of system. By system, photographers usually mean one of the brands: Nikon, Leica, Canon, Sony, Pentax, Olympus, etc. The system allows you to build up your potential. So, for example, having bought a camera, it can be supplemented with new lenses, external flashes, battery packs, memory cards, remote controls and other buns. The more developed the system, the better. Here I will express my subjective opinions on the choice of a system for a digital narrow format (crop and full frame, please do not write in the comments about any medium format Hassel, etc.) with automatic focus support.
System Selection
Probably the most common question I am asked by ordinary people, amateur photographers and even some professionals is 'Nikon or Canon?' I have already jokingly touched on this topic. here and jokingly touched on this topic here... But it turns out that modern digital photography isn't just about Nikon and Canon. For the summer of 2015, a clear hierarchy for choosing a system has formed in my head. There is a hierarchy for two cases - when a camera / system is chosen by an amateur and a system / camera is chosen by a professional.
So if I was lover, and didn’t know which camera with interchangeable lenses I could buy, then I would be guided very, very much in choosing a system simple rule.
What system does your friend / colleague / brother / sister / uncle / aunt / dad / mom / Mamimi Samejima (girl from the poster) / teacher at the photo school / acquaintance, etc. removes, you should buy the same system.
My practice shows that this is a very wise decision, which in the future will greatly help you in your career growth. Photographers, even amateurs, support each other. It is very good when you have compatibility between your photographic equipment and that of your friends. This allows you to quickly exchange not only technology, but also experience, expands your horizons and makes your religion the system is stronger.
By the way, this spring, it just so happened, most of the weddings I shot on the lenses of my colleagues, because at the moment I just do not have a normal portrait :).
In the case of a stalemate situation, for example, when you do not have friends who have a camera, I recommend looking at the system that your favorite photographer takes. If you don’t have a favorite photographer, you can look, for example, at 500px.com, choose your favorite pet and look at what he is doing his masterpieces. If you don’t have a favorite photographer, either, or he will wipe all night long EXIF data from my masterpieces, I suggest using my subjective hierarchy for professional photography.
My subjective hierarchy of systems for digital narrow format (all kinds of mirrors / mirrorless there for crop or full frame) with support for auto focus for the summer of 2015 for bias to professional photography:
Canon # 1
Anyway, Canon is the number one system. A system that is always one step ahead. Canon is the first full-frame camera (among the competitors listed). The first full-length camera available. The first full-frame camera with adequate video recording. First autofocus system for f / 1.2 and f / 1.0 lenses. Large park of optics. Excellent system compatibility. A huge park of cameras for any photo task. Well thought out and logically correct periphery. And most importantly, it just so happened that most professional photographers shoot with Canon. Read the remaining 100500 advantages in the comments to this entry.
Nikon # 2
I have been working with Nikon for a very long time and I know all their jambs with which I constantly have to put up with. Due to the jambs and stiffness in development, Nikon is only second in 2015. But at the same time, if you grasp the essence of Nikon, then there is nothing better than this black and yellow logo! A bayonet with a very ancient history, a huge park of optics, well-thought-out peripherals, the only 'fighter' who can wipe Canon's nose :).
Sony # 3
Sony is a system with big ambitions. Sony has taken the world of photography seriously with Konica Minolta. Honestly, I really like this company. Collaboration with Carl Zeiss, full-format mirrorless cameras, full-format SLTs, the shortest flange distance of all digital cameras, extensive experience in matrix construction, a large fleet of Sony / Minolta lenses, matrix stabilization! And although I recommend it as a third alternative system, personally, if I abandoned Canon, I would simply switch to Sony. The future belongs to ideas and technologies, something that Nikon has long forgotten :(.
I did not include other manufacturers in the TOP for one important reason - the lack of full-size CZK. I believe that the crops are Pentax, Fuji, Olympus (ah, my dear Olik), Panasonic, etc. can not compete in the professional segment with the full frame of the top three.
Yes, and in fact professionals themselves know exactly what they need, what to spend money on and this my TOP for them does not matter. Only those who do not have experience working with them are eyeing systems. So, professionals who accidentally get to Radozhiva do not be offended by my TOP :).
And a small postscript. Personally, by and large, I don’t care what to shoot, you can get used to everything very quickly... I try to track myself and clearly understand that my personal habits and preferences are not yet a sign of something good or bad. Many users of this or that system are very fanatically in love with their system for one simple reason - they did not shoot for something else :). And even if they were filming, it was not enough, without understanding the essence of another system. Therefore, I can say with a great deal of truth that the opinion of many commenting here on Radozhiv, or on others forums / blogs / platforms - wrong :). Remember, important how to take pictures, and not using any photo equipment.
We share info with others. Thanks for attention. Arkady Shapoval.
Nikon has a built-in flash and ditches are better, and DD, and noise at low iso less than Kenon
And the skinton is filthy! Either blue, or gliozem, or piglet.
Well, it’s not rotten, not as beautiful as the canon, and then fixable :)
... learn how to set up the camera, then complain about blueing with alumina))) I'll tell you, a good technique of the same class and release time, of course, has its FEATURES, but no more! It is a fact! All those who use a Nikon system fall into three categories.
The first (most numerous) "USERS": people who have bought good equipment and who believe that the very fact of buying expensive equipment is already a guarantee of getting excellent, "professional" pictures))) Very often and write a lot of comments on many Internet resources. They fiercely defend “their” brand, start “system wars”, although they are very far from photography. Therefore, when they switch to another system, they begin to find fault with the previous one.
The second category is “PROFI”: these are people who simply make money by photography and, due to a number of circumstances, have become the owners of Nikon equipment. They are used to always relying on automation and not bothering too much with creativity. Once))) They often have a good income, they have a park of excellent glasses and accessories. They work "according to somebody's proven scheme", get quite decent, TECHNICAL competent pictures, which brings a decent income, but they do it without pleasure. They rightly consider themselves professionals, therefore, they constantly “teach” the first category of users on all kinds of Internet resources. They know only what they need for work, therefore, they often express their subjective opinion, in which they evaluate the technique, from the point of view of the possibility of providing a convenient and fast process of PHOTOMATERIAL production. As a rule, Nikon is not favored (my subjective opinion, although there are exceptions).
And finally, the third category. They rarely sit on photo forums, and even less often publish their opinions there (there are exceptions)), because in view of the prevalence of the first two categories of photographers there, they are always in the minority. They have a little strange judgments about photographic equipment, rarely have a good income from their hobby (because all warm places are clogged with the second category), therefore they are forced to earn money. They shoot from the heart, for the soul, therefore they do not react to criticism, do not follow the news, everything is done by hand, therefore the technique is chosen FOR YOURSELF, FOR THE SOUL, which gives the maximum number of opportunities for a non-standard look. They are looking for such. They find it, they discover it and they become famous. It was this category of photographers that was the target audience for Nikon technology in those “pre-war” times, when marketers had not yet begun their fierce battle for the first category buyer. Precisely because there are fewer such artists, and there are more “users”, the technique of this brand is increasingly criticized in photo forums. However, only with a creative approach, it becomes possible to turn the features of this technique into absolute advantages that cannot be found in any other manufacturer of photographic equipment. Fact!
PS: How many people have so many opinions. There are no two identical photographers, as there are no two identical photo works. Therefore, all the judgments made by me above are only my strongly generalized assumption, based on subjective observations.)))
I agree with you, though I'm a canonist,))) I do not consider myself a pro. Filmed on both tits. Excellent shots can be removed on the phone))) I have lenses of different systems, horror !!!))) even nicorras. I am more concerned about the issue of beauty than speed, and Nikon, on the contrary
This is all true if only a photo is taken. But now video is also very often important for the amateur. And this is where the real bathert begins with a choice ...
all DSLR videographers focus manually, which means poor autofocus on video from Nikon does not count
Speak the truth! Just some people need a reason :)
Are color blind photographers calibrated?
No.
All the author said correctly, it is not so important on scho knowledge.
Technique in one price range + motherboard - similar parameters and functionality.
Naikrasha camera that in your hands!
NIKON liked the form and visually. In principle, I will not take CANON, because I do not like outwardly
The same thing, just the opposite :)
I liked Nikon more, but not outwardly, but rather with tactile sensations (I laid down in my hand better than Kenon), therefore I use it.
I love NIKON. somehow .. it is warmer .. something ... I like the ergonomics and controls. Canon simply did not fit in the hand .. but in general, you need to treat the fotik as a tool. no more .. but you need to understand that you need to learn how to work with each tool. my sister, for example, takes pictures on an old canon 5d mark 1. and does not consider it necessary to change it while it is working. and she shoots for Vogue, jewelry collections of famous European brands, her exhibition is now underway in Norway. therefore, it is not important what to shoot, but what is important to shoot and How to shoot. and you need to be able to squeeze the maximum out of the technology that is. :) peace for everyone!
P / S
Arkady, thanks for the site! I keep an eye on updates and recommend bookmarking to novice photographers and anyone who is tormented by the choice of technology .. :) you are doing a great job! thanks again.
when choosing the first DSLR faced a choice: Boot or Nikon. Having listened to the fact that the cameras of one price segment are almost similar, I decided to trust the tactile sensations. In the hands of these cameras are different as foreign cars from the pelvis. It seems everything is the same 4 wheels, 2 doors and the difference is noticeable. The assembly and quality of the material, plus ergonomics as a whole, did not play in favor of the Boot. PySy: You know, I prefer my wife’s choice according to a set of qualities, and not based on her ability to cook borsch with a naturally Ukrainian skin
Now I'm filming Fuji. Initially, when choosing the first camera, between Nikon and Canon, I was led by tactile sensations and chose Nikon based on the quality of the body. Then Nikon was sold to Fujik. If now I chose between Nikon and Canon, I would definitely take Canon, tk. I'm more interested in the quality of the images, not the case. I made a conclusion after viewing a bunch of photos from various resources, and in addition to Canon, this is an excellent L optics. Nikon is autofocus, the quality of the body and budget class lenses!
There was a choice - Nikon or Canon. Holding both chose Nikon. Yes.
As a camera “always with me” I use SAMSUNG GT-S5300, but I changed my mind completely to switch from film to digital, since life in Crimea is gradually improving: http://www.photo-lavka.com.ua/dostavka-po-krimu... Cameras: Zenit-3, Zenit-3m. Their "highlight" is that by setting the shutter speed "B" on the self-timer, you can shoot night pages with the preliminary raising of the mirror (the film does not "make noise" at night).
Kodak 400 ISO, Zenit-3m, Industar-50-2, “B” on self-timer.
Outrageous colors and lively, film drawing as a whole. That's it, I turn to film, film is our everything)) Not like this digital photograph today ...
)) Well, yes ... to say that the film is our everything, you have to be able to squeeze EVERYTHING out of it! :))
I fully understand when the unsurpassed quality of the film says .. Joe Buessink for example. :)))
Why should I be able to "squeeze" everything out of the tape? It is enough for me to look at the final result to draw some conclusions. Or is there no other way to see the whole masterpiece of the picture? :)
I agree with you!
It is very strange that dear Valentin Kalenichenko, talking about the “raisins” and “noiselessness” of the film, cited this, forgive me, a terrible photo as an example.
Do not be so critical. Judging by the quality, the photo from the mobile phone mistakenly got here.
))) it looks like ...
here is a photo from night shooting on the Nik7100
here is also a night shooting ...
Everything was actually like that.
Well, excuse me, not everyone has it. Any replacement options? Is Yuki there, Haruhi?
KODAK ISO 400, 1/30s
It would be better if you removed this ... it is difficult to find the word and did not dishonor the film, with which they really get great photos.
Ardently indignant at the really far from brilliant quality of the film photo presented by me, respected opponents did not notice the complete absence of noise, similar to digital (there are no color fluctuations in the sky). But if a similar scene is shot on the most "advanced" sensor with a shutter speed of four seconds, the noise will be visible already at ISO 400.
And now I really add some oil) a little bit)
ahhh !!!! my little picture !!
And the film will not make noise even if the photo was taken by a can (remember Cartier-Bresson!).
And it seems to me now the film is used not so much for night photography, as for all kinds of fashion, however, starting from the medium format. Anyone have any thoughts?
Valentine, of course I am subscribed to the filmmakers mailing list. I certainly love it when professional film frames are shown.
But in the overwhelming majority, what is laid out is just masterpieces of jambs. And what you posted is an example. As it is impossible to assemble a modern computer on lamps, so the film is outdated. Yes, there are “interesting” colors, but they are not so easy to repeat in Ps and Lr and that's it. By the way, when these colors are constant, I get tired, they are not real and the number seems to me more natural.
The noise from the film is nicer, but the film noise is much stronger than modern matrices and they showed you this.
Unfortunately, your photo is of such mediocre quality that I did not see film noise there. Of course, you can scratch the film for the effect and apply light (such an ala old shutter), then under this the quality may not be noticeable either.
Sorry for such a comment, but I once again scrolled 3 photos (yours and two alternative ones from the matrix, and I think that the comment is still appropriate).
you understand that the result is important first of all! overall impression of the picture! if the picture, forgive me, mr, then no one will look closely at the presence / absence of noise and aberration!
I am very respectful of the film. and even want to get some good NIKON film. but to get a beautiful picture from the film you need to be really a pro! and not to say that yes, the picture turned out .. g .. so-so, but then I shoot it on tape! ))) you will not impress anyone.
here, by the way, too, late evening. iso 100
“But if a similar scene is shot on the most“ advanced ”sensor with a shutter speed of four seconds, the noise will be visible already at ISO 400.” - probably the most advanced matrix you have used was in a digital camera 10 years ago.
In digital photography, two types of noise are distinguished: brightness and chromatic (http://www.colorpilot.ru/reduce_noise.html). Film has no chromatic noise at all. That’s all. The rest is a matter of taste.
And what is the connection between what you said about the types of noise with the stupidity about the "advanced matrix, noisy at ISO400"?
If you will, I will insert my "5 kopecks". Once upon a time (well, a long time ago) I shot on film. The concept of "noise" did not exist then. We talked about graininess. The minimum "grain" was obtained on a film with a sensitivity of 32 ISO. It was difficult to buy "Kodak-200" at that time, but it was believed that the film at ISO 250 was an incredible graininess. Now the question of processing. For the film it was more important than the processing in the shop now. At home, only a fanatic could contact color film processing, and even more color printing:) (it is impossible to describe the complexity of the process, the amount and cost of reagents). Now, as I understand it, fans of the film simply send it to the laboratory, and there everything is on the “automatic” (even the “curvature” of the hands does not matter). I don't even know what to say about cropping :). In other words, today the result of working with film resembles working with a digital machine.
One type of noise reduction is blur. Do not you think that noise is not visible just because of the lack of sharpness. You have solid soap there, but you are talking about some kind of noise.
Is soap also here? Kodak ISO 400.
well then it's better to let the matrix make noise ...
http://s019.radikal.ru/i633/1506/c1/28070e180599.jpg
http://s017.radikal.ru/i419/1506/55/3ee7551850d3.jpg
cruel ... :)
And for the sake of such a result, fussing with the film? My mobile phone shoots better.
Here is the film, Kodak 200, Helios 81N lens, without a tripod, I checked the Nikon N8008s, and decided to take a couple of shots at night. Not a masterpiece of course, but I’m sure that a digital camera with a good matrix would be much better.
Here are a couple of film photos, not night ones. Filmed on Zenitar 16 2,8, I am filming it as an inexpensive full-frame. But with current film prices, it’s not cheap either.
and here
and more
You're wrong.
Maybe :)
The photos on the preview look normal, but it's worth opening ... the impression that the photo was taken by a smartphone of average lousy ...
You are also told that the photo was taken on the Kodak 200. This is the most wretched film. I myself photograph on it, besides the cheapest. I have 5 films shot and everything is in that quality, the grain is just huge. I don’t know whether to go to the materiel or something.
Why should I teach materiel? I ascertained the fact of the wretchedness of these photos, what did I say wrong?
Canon is more on the market for objective reasons. The company is larger. 256 branches of 190 thousand employees against 19 Nikonovsky factories with 23 thousand poor people. Simple math.
At one time, choosing a system, I chose Nikon for two reasons. Firstly, before that he used Nikon optics (sights, binoculars, rangefinders) and was delighted with it. I thought that the lenses would be no worse. Secondly, the company produces only optical and photographic equipment. Kenon does everything in a row. I love narrow-cut instruments.
About skipping, trying, nothing sweeter than carrots ... Why? I sit in my system and it suits me so much that there is not even a desire to try something else. I'm just happy. And yes. I'm probably a Nikon fan. I see nothing wrong with loving what brings you pleasure.
The argument (Kenon does everything in a row) is at least not logical the more the company produces the more experience it has in engineering, technology, resources, and so on ...
In theory, yes. In practice, the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing.
I agree that the argument is weak. Sony also rivets everything. But even “she has more experience in engineering, technology, resources, and so on ...” is not convincing. The photography department has nothing to do with the fax department. And the experience of engineers from different fields does not complement each other. And the current advantage of Kenon is explained by the correct and timely decisions of the marketers of this company. I got acquainted with the detailed history of the Nikon and Kenon company. I came to this conclusion. Nikon several times very seriously "slowed down". And now Nikon's conservatism is evident.
NIKON also produce medical equipment)
Microscopes, digital cameras for diagnostic equipment. Profile equipment. No printers with copiers. I myself work in a company manufacturing medical equipment. Now I understand why I'm drawn to Nikon. ;)
Nikon is part of Mitsubishi. And this is more omnidirectional than Canon!
Someone taking pictures at POLO ..
Yes, after a review of Arcadia is unlikely. :)
Kodak ISO 400, KIEV-19, MC HELIOS-81N, F / 2, 1/30 S FULL FRAME
From smart as well ...
Oh, wake up your shoulder, wave your hand! I went to a friend, and took Kenon 650d from him with a lens 24-105 f4 L. Unfortunately, he has no other glasses. I’ll pounce for a week, if they don’t forget the topic, I will unsubscribe.
I wonder how this lens on crop looks
Zhenya, if it's not difficult, unsubscribe. This lens is very curious. It seems to be "L" and there are very positive reviews, but when I went to the site where you can see examples of photos ... Creepy chrome. aberration and soap. And on the crop, the lens should show itself especially advantageously.
What about leica?
Leica number one always!
Number one
The result from the article, as expected, is none. Everyone, it seems, remained with their beliefs and systems. Except for the ubiquitous Yarkiy, who suddenly doubted Nikon, and Arkady. Is Arkady really changing religion? …… Or throwing firewood?
I have already indicated that I am constantly asked about the system - here is an accurate and visual rating of systems in my opinion. Use it.
Arkady! Well, at least for the sake of objectivity ... (joke) could indicate with an arrow where this number 1 hid in the crowd ... -;))
In a white shirt, it is immediately visible by the expression on the face of the owner of the watering can)
Nothing, Arkady, this photo does not prove. Unless just: Such a number of flies can not be mistaken :-) Although Evtifeev writes well of course. Look at the samples from the Tour de France, everything is there on Nikon, and what follows from this? Never mind. You as a wedding designer need to show the client that you are really cool, but I, for example, do not need to exhibit. I can stupidly enjoy photography.
it was about a watering can, and not about nikon / kenon, just carefully follow the comments), otherwise the nikon / kenon syndrome has already overcome many)
In general, Canon has released a new camera with 50 megapixels - "won" the race and now we need to sell this miracle at a high price and a lot, monetize, so to speak, an advantage. But that's why this should be done in the Russian manner - throwing mud at others is completely incomprehensible. Unless there is a certainty that something worthwhile is being done.
Tree sticks! How much money is there in one photo !? :)
People! If you like your photos and your customers, then we are ... a host (sorry Arkady, but can’t wait any longer) what kind of camera (and even system) someone has! The psychology of a person is like that, he always wants to change shoto, it's boring! Make you at least a perfect skin tone and have a hundred bucks on camera, but if you take a picture of a clumsy PERSON then you are worthless! See what pictures are taken on ordinary phones. Don't bother! But it’s interesting to try on different systems, it’s all the same how you have a cool car and on a sidekick a wheelbarrow you still want to screw up even if it’s a Lada! Good luck!
what is there to take a picture - pressed the button - and that's it
Here is a man from Cherkassy on Nikon takes off http://www.denisbond.com/ there you have skin tones and colors and ...))
About skin tones, Kenon has always been hot. It was the Kenonists who took over the "baton" and the return flow flew. Although in fact this is all nonsense. People are simply sick and cannot live peacefully in any way. I strongly recommend NOT to READ this thread. This is especially true for novice photographers. You will not find anything interesting here and you will only boggle your head with all sorts of rubbish.
I agree to all 100%
Tosno. Arkady recently likes srach, they entertain him. That is life.
Friends, maybe I missed something, but a kind request. State the name of any internationally renowned Bombila wedding photographer. :)
Jerry Geonis is there such a thing?
I am reading and wondering. How can I get into such a fight over a system? What tastes better than Coca or Pepsi? Which guitar is better than Gipson or Fender? Etc.Nicon and Cenon are two whales in their field. I had a regular Change in the 80s in the army, and now I admire those pictures. Now the possibilities of the cameras are almost endless but the number of good photos this didn’t increase much. Sometimes a random shot does half the work. And believe me, there’s no difference what to shoot, the main thing is to get high from the result and sometimes profit.
Cola
Tastier and this and that if mixed with viscar
sergey.
The argument (Kenon does everything in a row) is at least not logical the more the company produces the more experience it has in engineering, technology, resources, and so on ...
Ha Ha. According to this logic, one who sews socks is, of course, capable of making a spaceship. Ha ha.
Dezdecado
for starters, tell me at least one company that sews socks and makes spaceships at the same time. Take at least the same Samsung does a lot and photos including, mobile phones are no worse than the same email, and components like memory chips the same email to their phones sets, very high-quality telly and much more, but I agree that there are not successful models, but all companies have it.
there someone else said that in practice the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing, GUYS, let's not compare the organization of work in our country and among Koreans, the Japanese, even in China, it is much more organized than with us
If you haven’t noticed, then Canon launches digital imaging technology. These are related areas. I have no complaints about printers and scanners of this company, except for the price of consumables. (with our budgets) And I bought a camera which I could afford (1100), albeit outdated, trimmed from dull plastic, but it became my favorite toy and outlet. Would Nikon be the most affordable at that time or Sony would take them, I think I would not be disappointed. The main thing is that the tool is convenient.
A company that produces everything in a row will never achieve mastery (perfection) in any of its products.
It’s all the same if Stradivarius did not only violins, but also pianos and balalaikas, is it not funny? And gentlemen! Real art and skill are not massive. Alas!
Nikon remains a name and Canon has become a Boot. With all due respect. IMHO
In Japan, traditionally there are large universal corporations: Mitsubishi, Yamaha, Canon, Sony, Panasonic, Fuji (if I'm not mistaken, Subaru), etc.
Do you have any doubts about the quality and popularity of their products? In the world, there is a free market, competition, democracy and other civilizational benefits, not a tender won for a rollback ...
Nikon is a structural division of Mitsubisi.
ikon Corporation (Jap. 株式会社 ニ コ ус kabusiki gayikayas nikon ?, pronounced "Nikon" listen (inf.)) is a Japanese company specializing in the production of optics and electronic devices for image processing.
Nikon is part of the Mitsubishi Group. Founded by Kōgaku Kōgyō on July 25, 1917 under the name Nippon Kogaku KK (Nippon Kogaku Kabushiki Kaisha), renamed in 1988 [1]. The President is Michio Kariya. Headquarters in Tokyo.
I fully agree with Dezdechado. For a very long time the same opinion. This is how to compare the quality of universal zoom and fix.
By the way, he also made violas, cello, and even one guitar came to our time.
For Sergey. I don’t know about socks, but Nokia is the main business-wood and woodworking, so think about it.
What is there to think? That Nokia flew into the ass, it was lucky that Microsoft pulled them up. And then, they really do not represent competition as such, and they are far from leading in the industry.
First of all, I ask Arkady to make the arrow of rapid rise to the top. By topic. It’s not about Nokia, but the fact that there are a huge number of companies with a small capital that make decent lenses.
There is a button :)