Digital BW, The Print

Settle down now folks, I have Nikon leneses from 1965 that I can still
use - do I hear anyone mentioning their Canon Breech lock lenses - or
the other incarnations they've had to dump? Perhaps Nikon isn't so
bad.
-- 
Peter Tucker
Roomboxes Etc  www.roomboxes.com
3675 West 29 Ave
Vancouver BC Canada V6S 1T5
604 224 3928

On 4/26/05 10:58 AM, "Peter Tucker" <peter@...> typed:

> Settle down now folks, I have Nikon leneses from 1965 that I can still
> use - do I hear anyone mentioning their Canon Breech lock lenses - or
> the other incarnations they've had to dump? Perhaps Nikon isn't so
> bad.


So do I and I don¹t see what apologies Nikon has to make.
I just picked up a 55 macro AI yesterday yesterday made I think in the late
70¹s a honey of a piece of glass which I¹ll use on every Nikon body I¹ve
bought in 30 years.  Including my D100 digital.
The thread could be ³dump Canon for Nikon² as far as I go.

For a company one tenth the size of Canon there are plenty of innovations in
Nikons favor.

Off the top of my head the 12-24mm (18-36) which I used for two years on my
D100 before Canon got around to coming up with a ³match² for it.
A 10-22.

Nikons flash was well ahead of Canons until the past year and a half when
they may have finally caught up.
Before that ask any Pro you could never trust your Canon flash.

And this was well after Canon came out with their brainwashing campaign with
the white lenses for the fashion runway and other high profile photojournist
photographers giving the impression that everyone had switched to Canon.

When the F4 came out the EOS which also came out had faster AutoFocus.
When the F5 came out it was faster than Canons offerings.
We are now on the F6.

The Rebel was a toy compared to Nikons D70 which solidly won the sweeps last
year.

³Full Frame² digital (24x36) is blown way out of proportion in it¹s
usefulness. And people forget you can shoot full frame digital with Nikon.
The photojournalist I always run into in my neighborhood who shoots for the
Oregonian shoots with a Nikon D2H.
4 megs!
The Opposite of a full frame!


Mark Rabiner
Photography
Portland Oregon
http://rabinergroup.com/





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

"Off the top of my head the 12-24mm (18-36) which I used for two years on my
D100 before Canon got around to coming up with a ³match² for it.
A 10-22."

Keep in mind that Canon didn't 'need' a wide angle like this, because it had
a full frame sensor already in the marketplace. The 10-22mm just filled in
the gap in the marketplace for those who could not or would not purchase a
1Ds.

"Nikons flash was well ahead of Canons until the past year and a half when
they may have finally caught up.
Before that ask any Pro you could never trust your Canon flash"

Very true. I would still make the argument that the Nikon flash system is
still superior.

"And this was well after Canon came out with their brainwashing campaign
with the white lenses for the fashion runway and other high profile
photojournist photographers giving the impression that everyone had switched
to Canon."

Canon has white / tan exteriors to help on reducing the amount of heat
inside of the lens housings. Apparently the flourite inside is adversly
affected by heat buildup, and the light-toned nature of the exterior paint
helps reflect the heat away.

"When the F4 came out the EOS which also came out had faster AutoFocus.
When the F5 came out it was faster than Canons offerings.
We are now on the F6."

You are forgetting that the 1-series Canon cameras have 45 autofocus points.
Accuracy is just as important as how fast the camera can focus.

"The Rebel was a toy compared to Nikons D70 which solidly won the sweeps
last year."

True, but the newest Rebel offering isn't as crippled as the first one. This
was more of a marketing routine than what Canon or Nikon 'can' produce for x
dollars. Just more about offering more than the other guy. Canon came to
market first with their Rebel, so they blinked first and had to guess what
the D70 would have.

"³Full Frame² digital (24x36) is blown way out of proportion in it¹s
usefulness. And people forget you can shoot full frame digital with Nikon."

Oh really? Which model, because Nikon doesn't have a full frame digital
camera. The Kodak accepts Nikon mount lens designs, but it isn't a Nikon
camera. It is a solution for people who have Nikon lenses, but it isn't a
Nikon camera. Full frame, in my opinion, is quite useful and not blown out
of proportion. The problem lies in the current lenses that are on the
market. Ask anybody who used to use a 24mm tilt/shift lens on 35mm film what
he thinks about doing the same with a 1.3 or 1.6 crop camera. Or a portrait
photographer that uses the 85mm f/1.2 or 135mm f/2 lenses. My point is that
at this current time there are no alternative lenses to use, other than a
few zooms, that can be used for these types of purposes. So full frame
really can be important for those who make a living actually taking
photographs.

Sorry for the rebuttal, but making passionate and one-sided 'drink the
cool-ade' debates should be pointed out as such. I am a former Nikon
shooter, and I just don't care what equipment I shoot with. I just want
equipment that fits my own individual needs. I choose the right tools for
the right job.

Peter Tucker wrote:
> Settle down now folks, I have Nikon leneses from 1965 that I can still
> use - do I hear anyone mentioning their Canon Breech lock lenses - or
> the other incarnations they've had to dump? Perhaps Nikon isn't so
> bad.

Just as long as you don't expect better than match-needle metering from 
those lenses on the D70. Same attitude that has created the Adobe vs. 
Nikon wars. Let's cripple *this* so we can sell more "X".

Canon learned from the firmware hackers on the Rebel. Nikon doesn't show 
the same capability.

-Zandr
  Still sitting on the fence, but leaning more towards Canon with each 
passing day.

To Quote Mars Attacks:


AK, AK! Ak, AK, Ak! can't we all be friends.....


Canon has better marketing, Nikon better glass:)

Yep, and I bought my first one in 1965.  "But facts is facts!"

Pros are switching like flies.  And, the odds of most of them moving back
isn't good.

The only thing holding ME back is money.  Quality is the name of this game
if you make your living at it.

Seth 

==-----Original Message-----

==Behalf Of Peter Tucker
==
==Settle down now folks, I have Nikon leneses from 1965 that I 
==can still use - do I hear anyone mentioning their Canon 
==Breech lock lenses - or the other incarnations they've had to 
==dump? Perhaps Nikon isn't so bad.
==--

Look, this really doesn't belong here, but there is a BUNCH of
mis-information here.

I shoot Nikon, BUT:

Nikon's flash hasn't been AHEAD of Canon since the D1.  The SB-800 is the
first one that worked as advertised on digital.
In the world of PJ and other "have to have the shot" their stuff was iffy.
And, Nikon kept putting out new rounds of "we haven't seen that before,"
followed by a new flash.  I have to hand it to Canon.  THEY fixed it with
software.

Whatever the initial reason for the white (and Nikon makes some also) Canon
uses the color ONLY on their professional lenses.  It's their "mark."

The D70 won WHAT sweeps? I wasn't aware either company let out their sales
figures.

All this full frame, third frame, hal frame stuff is getting old.  How many
people even used to own a 20mm?  VERY few and it was rarely used.  So, now
we have a 10 or 12 that becomes an effective 14-18 and everybody's still
crying.  The advantage on the LONG side is incredible for the photographers.
And, using the center "sweet" part of the lens is a plus.

Canon/Nikon, so what? At least you don't have to worry about Minolta and
Olympus also.

Nikon's problem is not their product; it's their attitude.

Seth


==-----Original Message-----
==Behalf Of Andy Biggs
==Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 6:37 PM
==
==
=="Nikons flash was well ahead of Canons until the past year 
==and a half when they may have finally caught up.
==Before that ask any Pro you could never trust your Canon flash"
==
==Very true. I would still make the argument that the Nikon 
==flash system is still superior.
==
=="And this was well after Canon came out with their 
==brainwashing campaign with the white lenses for the fashion 
==runway and other high profile photojournist photographers 
==giving the impression that everyone had switched to Canon."
==
==Canon has white / tan exteriors to help on reducing the 
==amount of heat inside of the lens housings. Apparently the 
==flourite inside is adversly affected by heat buildup, and the 
==light-toned nature of the exterior paint helps reflect the heat away.
==
=="The Rebel was a toy compared to Nikons D70 which solidly won 
==the sweeps last year."
==
==True, but the newest Rebel offering isn't as crippled as the 
==first one. This was more of a marketing routine than what 
==Canon or Nikon 'can' produce for x dollars. Just more about 
==offering more than the other guy. Canon came to market first 
==with their Rebel, so they blinked first and had to guess what 
==the D70 would have.
==
=="³Full Frame² digital (24x36) is blown way out of proportion 
==in it¹s usefulness. And people forget you can shoot full 
==frame digital with Nikon."
==
==Oh really? Which model, because Nikon doesn't have a full 
==frame digital camera. The Kodak accepts Nikon mount lens 
==designs, but it isn't a Nikon camera. It is a solution for 
==people who have Nikon lenses, but it isn't a Nikon camera. 
==Full frame, in my opinion, is quite useful and not blown out 
==of proportion. The problem lies in the current lenses that 
==are on the market. Ask anybody who used to use a 24mm 
==tilt/shift lens on 35mm film what he thinks about doing the 
==same with a 1.3 or 1.6 crop camera. Or a portrait 
==photographer that uses the 85mm f/1.2 or 135mm f/2 lenses. My 
==point is that at this current time there are no alternative 
==lenses to use, other than a few zooms, that can be used for 
==these types of purposes. So full frame really can be 
==important for those who make a living actually taking photographs.
==