5 ms·

Really? How so? Lenses are pretty close in price & the D600 had a much better sensor than the 6D for example.

by mahyarm 10y ago

slantyyz 10y ago
Don't Nikon DSLRs generally beat Canon with their DxO sensor scores?
- jdietrich 10y ago
  Nikon have better sensors, Canon have better lenses. Neither company can keep pace with Sony and Zeiss.
  - slantyyz 10y ago
    >> Neither company can keep pace with Sony and Zeiss. I'm a fan of Sony cameras, but I would only go so far as to say that Sony's sensors are great. I find some of Sony's handling and physical camera design choices to be a little questionable, especially when compared to Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji.
    - Veratyr 10y ago
      Not just their sensors but also their lenses. Their Zeiss collaborations are some of the best lenses around and their new G-Master lenses are fantastic. Agree that their ergonomics and UI are pretty bad though.
      - slantyyz 10y ago
        I'm sure their lenses are just great (I was plenty happy when I was an Alpha DSLR user). I have no illusions about being a pro or serious amateur, so having the best optics isn't even remotely enough to sway me over to Sony, especially if I don't like the handling or UI of the body itself.
      - reneherse 10y ago
        Here's a $2600 G-Master lens that finishes last in comparison to its Nikon and Canon peers. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/01/an-update-and-comparison-of-the-sony-fe-70-200mm-f2-8-gm-oss/ https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/01/an-update-and-compa...
        Veratyr 10y ago
        And here's one that matches or beats them. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/04/sony-goes-world-class-the-24-70mm-f2-8-gm-mtf-and-variance-tests/ https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/04/sony-goes-world-cla...
        jdietrich 10y ago
        The DxOMark rankings are distinctly unflattering for Canon and Nikon. The Canon and Nikon zooms measure up fairly well, but Zeiss primes are utterly dominant. Sigma are highly competitive at much lower cost. That's not good news for prestige brands that have long been "industry standard". https://www.dxomark.com/lenses/launched-between-1987-and-2016/launch_price-from-0-to-13000-usd https://www.dxomark.com/lenses/launched-between-1987-and-201...
        slantyyz 10y ago
        >> That's not good news for prestige brands that have long been "industry standard". Well, that's possibly exaggerating the situation. The only people it truly matters to are people are specs people and pixel peepers. There may be a significant number of them, but most people will stick with the established brands, including pros. Canon and Nikon have well established support infrastructures for their working pros. Sony... not so much. I loved the Alpha DSLR line, the mirrorless line, not so much. The cameras are technically fantastic and excel statistically, but they seemed to be designed by people who don't spend a lot of time taking photos.
        jdietrich 10y ago
        >Canon and Nikon have well established support infrastructures for their working pros. Sony... not so much. That infrastructure is, to a great extent, a marketing expense. It's not very profitable to sell cameras to professionals, but you make your money back from the trickle-down to amateurs. The R&D expense of designing flagship cameras and lenses for a tiny group of professionals is amortized over a vastly greater number of amateurs. If a rift opens up between those user groups, Canon and Nikon's camera businesses are in real trouble.
  - iamatworknow 10y ago
    Even with Nikon struggling, I would (and have) choose them over Sony. There are a lot of people frustrated with how they've treated the whole A-mount lens system. One of the things I love about Nikon is that the lens my dad shot with in 1993 works perfectly well on my camera from 2016. People spend a lot of money on glass (with good reason), and to have the camera manufacturer get wishy-washy on whether or not the line will be supported in the future must be concerning.
    - jdietrich 10y ago
      E-mount is significantly superior to A-mount for MILC cameras. The extremely short flange length means that it's compatible with pretty much any lens with a suitable adapter. Your dad's old lens F-mount lens will work perfectly on an E-mount camera, with full AF and aperture control. So will any A-mount or EF-mount lens.
      - slantyyz 10y ago
        >> work perfectly Isn't the AF is slower and less accurate with those adapters than on their native platform?
        jdietrich 10y ago
        If you're using a Metabones or LA-EA4 adapter on a camera with phase detect AF, there's no practical difference. AF will be slower on a camera that only has contrast-detect AF.
        slantyyz 10y ago
        The LA-EA4 doesn't count since it doesn't cover your statement "Your dad's old lens F-mount lens will work perfectly". Every Metabones review I've seen had slightly slower AF. "Perfectly" still does not apply. Also, not all lenses work with Metabones, i.e., the lenses that don't work with teleconverters because their backs stick out too much. While I appreciate the benefits you're selling, those adapters aren't perfect.
- mahyarm 10y ago
  Thats what I was saying. The Nikon D600 vs the Canon 6D had a better sensor. The canon 6D had built in wifi & GPS. Nikon could of put that in for $5 although, so I'm at a bit of a loss as to why they would not do that. The add on modules are a pain in the ass to use.

Really? How so? Lenses are pretty close in price & the D600 had a much better sensor than the 6D for example.

by mahyarm 10y ago

Really? How so? Lenses are pretty close in price & the D600 had a much better sensor than the 6D for example.

slantyyz 10y ago

Don't Nikon DSLRs generally beat Canon with their DxO sensor scores?

jdietrich 10y ago
Nikon have better sensors, Canon have better lenses. Neither company can keep pace with Sony and Zeiss.
- slantyyz 10y ago
  >> Neither company can keep pace with Sony and Zeiss. I'm a fan of Sony cameras, but I would only go so far as to say that Sony's sensors are great. I find some of Sony's handling and physical camera design choices to be a little questionable, especially when compared to Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji.
  - Veratyr 10y ago
    Not just their sensors but also their lenses. Their Zeiss collaborations are some of the best lenses around and their new G-Master lenses are fantastic. Agree that their ergonomics and UI are pretty bad though.
    - slantyyz 10y ago
      I'm sure their lenses are just great (I was plenty happy when I was an Alpha DSLR user). I have no illusions about being a pro or serious amateur, so having the best optics isn't even remotely enough to sway me over to Sony, especially if I don't like the handling or UI of the body itself.
    - reneherse 10y ago
      Here's a $2600 G-Master lens that finishes last in comparison to its Nikon and Canon peers. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/01/an-update-and-comparison-of-the-sony-fe-70-200mm-f2-8-gm-oss/ https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/01/an-update-and-compa...
      - Veratyr 10y ago
        And here's one that matches or beats them. https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/04/sony-goes-world-class-the-24-70mm-f2-8-gm-mtf-and-variance-tests/ https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/04/sony-goes-world-cla...
      - jdietrich 10y ago
        The DxOMark rankings are distinctly unflattering for Canon and Nikon. The Canon and Nikon zooms measure up fairly well, but Zeiss primes are utterly dominant. Sigma are highly competitive at much lower cost. That's not good news for prestige brands that have long been "industry standard". https://www.dxomark.com/lenses/launched-between-1987-and-2016/launch_price-from-0-to-13000-usd https://www.dxomark.com/lenses/launched-between-1987-and-201...
        slantyyz 10y ago
        >> That's not good news for prestige brands that have long been "industry standard". Well, that's possibly exaggerating the situation. The only people it truly matters to are people are specs people and pixel peepers. There may be a significant number of them, but most people will stick with the established brands, including pros. Canon and Nikon have well established support infrastructures for their working pros. Sony... not so much. I loved the Alpha DSLR line, the mirrorless line, not so much. The cameras are technically fantastic and excel statistically, but they seemed to be designed by people who don't spend a lot of time taking photos.
        jdietrich 10y ago
        >Canon and Nikon have well established support infrastructures for their working pros. Sony... not so much. That infrastructure is, to a great extent, a marketing expense. It's not very profitable to sell cameras to professionals, but you make your money back from the trickle-down to amateurs. The R&D expense of designing flagship cameras and lenses for a tiny group of professionals is amortized over a vastly greater number of amateurs. If a rift opens up between those user groups, Canon and Nikon's camera businesses are in real trouble.
- iamatworknow 10y ago
  Even with Nikon struggling, I would (and have) choose them over Sony. There are a lot of people frustrated with how they've treated the whole A-mount lens system. One of the things I love about Nikon is that the lens my dad shot with in 1993 works perfectly well on my camera from 2016. People spend a lot of money on glass (with good reason), and to have the camera manufacturer get wishy-washy on whether or not the line will be supported in the future must be concerning.
  - jdietrich 10y ago
    E-mount is significantly superior to A-mount for MILC cameras. The extremely short flange length means that it's compatible with pretty much any lens with a suitable adapter. Your dad's old lens F-mount lens will work perfectly on an E-mount camera, with full AF and aperture control. So will any A-mount or EF-mount lens.
    - slantyyz 10y ago
      >> work perfectly Isn't the AF is slower and less accurate with those adapters than on their native platform?
      - jdietrich 10y ago
        If you're using a Metabones or LA-EA4 adapter on a camera with phase detect AF, there's no practical difference. AF will be slower on a camera that only has contrast-detect AF.
        slantyyz 10y ago
        The LA-EA4 doesn't count since it doesn't cover your statement "Your dad's old lens F-mount lens will work perfectly". Every Metabones review I've seen had slightly slower AF. "Perfectly" still does not apply. Also, not all lenses work with Metabones, i.e., the lenses that don't work with teleconverters because their backs stick out too much. While I appreciate the benefits you're selling, those adapters aren't perfect.
mahyarm 10y ago
Thats what I was saying. The Nikon D600 vs the Canon 6D had a better sensor. The canon 6D had built in wifi & GPS. Nikon could of put that in for $5 although, so I'm at a bit of a loss as to why they would not do that. The add on modules are a pain in the ass to use.