• Welcome to Photography Forum. Our photography community!

    Photography-forum is dedicated to those who have passion, desire and love of photography and want to improve their photographic technique. It doesn't matter what you photograph, landscapes, weddings, portraits or your photographic experience, it's about learning and loving what we do. Photography!

    If you want learn and expand your photography skills then there is one place to do it Photography Forum !!!

    You are viewing photography-forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view most forums and enjoy other features. By joining our free community you will be able to post photographs for critique, join in the monthly photography competitions, respond to polls, upload content and enjoy many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please join Photography Forum.

    If you have any problems please contact us.

    The Photography-Forum Team
  • PLEASE SEE RULES BEFORE POSTING LINKS
    Click here to see Forum Rules

NIKON vs CANON (nothing new)

the voyager

Here a lot
I have been using Nikon for 9 years, and currently own a Nikon d7100. It's done me well and I can certainly use it but I need to make the move UP!

I am going to start weddings next year, and will probably buy a 1.8 zoom and 1.8 fixed 50mm to guarentee low light success.

I love the Nikon images, I seem to think they resemble film tones more, perhaps muted somewhat and Canon seem to be way more vibrant and poppy, anyone else agree?

I am unsure what brand to go for, I know Nikon well and not Canon so much, but that can't be the only factor...

Any help is welcome.
 

Roger S

Crazy Canuck
Administrator
I love the Nikon images, I seem to think they resemble film tones more, perhaps muted somewhat and Canon seem to be way more vibrant and poppy, anyone else agree?
The tones are determined by the algorithms programmed into the manufacturers' JPG settings. If you shoot RAW or NEF, those algorithms don't exist and you can make you images whatever you like. Every brand has their own interpretation of what you as a consumer are likely to like and most times those are wrong assumptions.
 

the voyager

Here a lot
The tones are determined by the algorithms programmed into the manufacturers' JPG settings. If you shoot RAW or NEF, those algorithms don't exist and you can make you images whatever you like. Every brand has their own interpretation of what you as a consumer are likely to like and most times those are wrong assumptions.
Oh yes I always shoot RAW, and understand it's the same as using studio monitors to mix music in the studio.. But still images with NIKON raw and Canon RAW are different..? I know there's a lot to consider with both systems, and I just don't know where to begin.
 

Phill104

Always on
Premium Member
A lot gets said about Canon colours and particularly how well they render skin tones. However, I am certain that either brand could be made to look like the other, or like any type of film etc with a few simple clicks in photoshop or Lightroom. So to me that would never be a worry.

What is for me the biggest two reasons for sticking with a brand, Canon in my case, are lens availability and ergonomics. The lenses for me are only really available from Canon, and by the looks of things the way RF is going will be more so in the future. Ergonomics of Canon cameras is what I am used to, my muscle memory built up over many years with the brand. That is very hard for many to re-train, at least in high stress situation. It will be when you are making a quick adjustment of the ISO, aperture or shutter speed in a once only opportunity that you will turn the dial in the wrong direction that I pers would regret changing brands. In fact when borrowing friends kit I have done just that, even after a month exclusively sticking to the borrowed kit almost every day. All goes well at first then just as an opportunity arises bang, you screw it up.

So if the lenses are available in Nikon, and you like the camerA’s then stick with what you know and are used to.
 

SeanNeedham

Ol' Sparky
Honorary Life Member
Aside from the difference in the layout of the cameras (but same could be argued between a D5600 and a D500), the only things I've seen in using both Nikon and Canons in my time is the differences in high ISO noise, with my personal tastes sitting towards the Nikon.

To what @Phill104 mentions about muscle memory, that is notable and quite difficult to break; it takes time to go from one camera to another of the same manufacturer and it's going to be a lot more going to a different manufacturer, especially when the adrenaline levels go up. I do it regularly when I'm packing my little Fuji, I still do it sometimes on my D810 or D700 where I'll be going for buttons that haven't been since three or four cameras back (just daft things like shifting the odd control, or an extra button here or there).

If you can get the lenses you want on Nikon and get the results from them, as Phil says, stay there.
 

imagesBV

Well-Known Member
The overall impression I get from either brand is that Nikon is king in the electronics area with better hi ISO and Canon better in lens character especially their fast primes...I stick with Canon for familiarity of the intuitive controls mainly and I would loose too much in changing lens collection
 

Newbandit

Always on
If you shoot Raw colours aren't such a big deal. I used both Nikon and Canon for weddings and would happily use either again if I was crazy enough to shoot weddings again that is. Saying this I'm really sold of mirrorless cameras, Sony is my camera of choice now. If I was shooting weddings I would go for Sony A7III bodies. Don't get too hung up on fast glass either 2.8 is plenty fast enough as cams can shoot at crazy fast ISO now with no problems. I could do a wedding with a 24-70 f2.8 all day with a Nikon D700. I just had a 35, 50 and an 85 as back up lenses. ( never used them )
 

Mike Singh

Always on
Premium Member
Are you looking to invest in an entire new system: camera and lenses? If so then the mirrorless systems are the way forward it would seem. Sony, Fuji and Olympus have some outstanding mirrorless cameras and lenses. Canikon mirrorless cameras are still lagging behind. You could stick with Nikon and a get their mirrorless camera and use an adaptor for your current lenses.
 

oldgeezer

Always on
Premium Member
If it's for weddings then instead of super fast lenses, which I never use, get to grips with a flash on your camera.
Your present camera is more than up to the job and a 2.8 small zoom will do you ok.
Most weddings, unless in a church where flash is usually frowned upon to no reason by some jobsworth minister, the use of flash is essential. Even outside of can look great, making it stand out from so called 'Natural Light' photographers.
Ettl or ittl is great in shady or dull areas that have a great background but the light is bad.
Once learned it can make your life easier in pressure situations when you are struggling for more light.
 

oldgeezer

Always on
Premium Member
I agree, getting to grips with flash is a good point....especially if you have high speed sync flash.
Honestly, I have never used HSS although 2 of my speedlights have it in.
played with it but had no need in real life situation.:)
 

the voyager

Here a lot
If it's for weddings then instead of super fast lenses, which I never use, get to grips with a flash on your camera.
Your present camera is more than up to the job and a 2.8 small zoom will do you ok.
Most weddings, unless in a church where flash is usually frowned upon to no reason by some jobsworth minister, the use of flash is essential. Even outside of can look great, making it stand out from so called 'Natural Light' photographers.
Ettl or ittl is great in shady or dull areas that have a great background but the light is bad.
Once learned it can make your life easier in pressure situations when you are struggling for more light.
My first weddng (of 2) was done with fill flash on the hot shoe... definitely different to the 'natural light' one I did.

BIKE HEAD TUBE BADGES FOR BMX BIKES STUDIO DAIS (1 of 1).jpg

When people call themselves 'natural light wedding photographers' are they just saying 'I don't know or understand flash photography' wedding photographers?

My friend got charged £1700 for a 'natural light wedding photographer' and on her ABOUT ME page she literally put "left uni not knowing what to do, did some photos for a frineds wedding and they liked em, so started shooting full time'.... honestly justa good camera saved her, no understanding of the basics that are rule of 3rds, composition, lighting, mood, emotion, subjects... Made me realise I could be cleaning up here!!

The above image was shot on my Nikon d7100 and a zoom (not a 2.8).. I still want to upgrade thoigh, maybe if I stick with the same body and just update the lens to a faster one with better glass?!

If it's for weddings then instead of super fast lenses, which I never use, get to grips with a flash on your camera.
Your present camera is more than up to the job and a 2.8 small zoom will do you ok.
Most weddings, unless in a church where flash is usually frowned upon to no reason by some jobsworth minister, the use of flash is essential. Even outside of can look great, making it stand out from so called 'Natural Light' photographers.
Ettl or ittl is great in shady or dull areas that have a great background but the light is bad.
Once learned it can make your life easier in pressure situations when you are struggling for more light.
I have only ever used TTL on my nikon... Seems to do the job everytime.

For what it's worth... I like to keep the imags that did not work out and try do somethig with them... (never waste anything).

I like these blury, black and white shots as they seem to tell more of an honest story, kind of like a fly on the wall... They look great as a set say in a different folder or presented in a different section of the final wedding album, printed on textured paper.

1BIKE HEAD TUBE BADGES FOR BMX BIKES STUDIO DAIS (1 of 1).jpg
 

the voyager

Here a lot
Are you looking to invest in an entire new system: camera and lenses? If so then the mirrorless systems are the way forward it would seem. Sony, Fuji and Olympus have some outstanding mirrorless cameras and lenses. Canikon mirrorless cameras are still lagging behind. You could stick with Nikon and a get their mirrorless camera and use an adaptor for your current lenses.
I'll be honest, I like the weight and size of a big camera, and although it may not be a good valid point, I think it puts more trust in your customers. Though I have heard these new mirrorless are up there! I am going to stick to the nikons / canons..

ZOOM or FIXED?

Do you really risk loss of quality on zoom lenses? What would be best? A fast zoom or perhaps 2 fast fixed?

I am probably going to mix up flash with 'natural light' and definitely feel comfortable with both.
 

oldgeezer

Always on
Premium Member
I have never been asked about what camera i use apart from another photographers who want to show off their full frame and fast lens gear. Means nothing to me what others use, knowing your setup is the most important issue.
I'm afraid most of what you see online is bulls##t and loss of quality from modern zoom lenses is just not noticeable if you do the job correctly and understand how much light you need to make a clean, sharp image.
 

Mike Singh

Always on
Premium Member
I'll be honest, I like the weight and size of a big camera, and although it may not be a good valid point, I think it puts more trust in your customers. Though I have heard these new mirrorless are up there! I am going to stick to the nikons / canons..

ZOOM or FIXED?

Do you really risk loss of quality on zoom lenses? What would be best? A fast zoom or perhaps 2 fast fixed?

I am probably going to mix up flash with 'natural light' and definitely feel comfortable with both.
Choose and camera that feels good in your hands. Zooms are far more versatile and practical for everyday use, especially at events. For indoor events get a 2.8 lens as the ambient light will be to low.
 

the voyager

Here a lot
Modern zooms are amazing. This was shot at f2.8 bounced flash off the ceiling View attachment 306768
Saucy.

Nice shot. Do you tend to mix all your focal lengths through the day, so say with a 24-70 you will have 24mm, 32mm, 41mm, 58mm and so on, or do you try to keep it regimental? You think it matters? I used to shoot with a 50mm when I travelled and the album hung together tight, as there was massive consistency.
 

oldgeezer

Always on
Premium Member
Saucy.

Nice shot. Do you tend to mix all your focal lengths through the day, so say with a 24-70 you will have 24mm, 32mm, 41mm, 58mm and so on, or do you try to keep it regimental? You think it matters? I used to shoot with a 50mm when I travelled and the album hung together tight, as there was massive consistency.
I don't really understand what you are saying as it defies logic. If you are using a zoom then you will be framing all the time so regimentation has no place in the focal length in that way.
 

Newbandit

Always on
Saucy.

Nice shot. Do you tend to mix all your focal lengths through the day, so say with a 24-70 you will have 24mm, 32mm, 41mm, 58mm and so on, or do you try to keep it regimental? You think it matters? I used to shoot with a 50mm when I travelled and the album hung together tight, as there was massive consistency.
This was some years ago. I no longer do weddings. No regimentation just use what zoom length that works. I got to the point where I shot with a Nikon 24-70 F/2.8 all day usually at f/2.8 other than for group shots. That lens was worth every penny. 95% was with either flash of HSS flash outdoors too. Flash helps to freeze motion really well. shooting this way I don't recall ever having a soft image. Flash also helped with focus tracking indoors. I don't like swapping lenses all the time. You risk dropping them and getting dust in places it shouldn't go too.

Also consider you can crop images quite well. This is like post digital zoom. Very few images ever get printed bigger than 10 x 8 in a wedding album often way smaller. Web use you can really get away cropping a lot. And that was with a 12mb camera. The Sony I have now can create images within images with ease with 42mb to play with.

Good luck with the weddings
If you're serious about doing them
Learn how to use flash. It's vital IMHO ( Godox do some good stuff at good prices now)
Have backup gear that you know how to use quickly
Shoot in RAW. Learn Photoshop
Practice first and a lot
 
Last edited:

the voyager

Here a lot
I don't really understand what you are saying as it defies logic. If you are using a zoom then you will be framing all the time so regimentation has no place in the focal length in that way.
I suppose it's subjective what I meant... I always feel happier when I have an album that has been shot on one lens / focal length, just seems to be more consistent and pleasing, but that's just me.
 

oldgeezer

Always on
Premium Member
I suppose it's subjective what I meant... I always feel happier when I have an album that has been shot on one lens / focal length, just seems to be more consistent and pleasing, but that's just me.
Shooting a project in can see your point but shooting an event of any kind with a fixed focal length is not giving the full coverage and certainly not a wedding.
Apart from making life difficult for yourself you are not giving the couple the variety that is expected from the day.
 
Top