Hi Everyone, We need some fresh topics, so here's an attempt :-) As a current and past owner of various models from both Canon and Nikon I've put together a list of things that gripe about one camera/system that are done well (or at least better) in the other. In no particular order:
Battery Packs: Canon's battery packs should have an easy to access battery insert like the Nikon packs do (also like the PB-E1/2). Nikon on the other hand could make it possible for anyone having easily removed the battery insert to be able to actually remove the batteries without the aid of a screwdriver and/or a tyre lever. They could also put a few vertical controls on them. Canon also offers the options of dual power sources (camera's lithiums or AAs) in many of their battery packs - the BP-E1 can even have a 2CR5 and 4xAAs onboard at the same time! Note to Canon - how about a revised version of the BP-E1 (BP-E2?) with the same vertical controls as the PB-E2. After all the 3 and 1V bodies have the connectors for them. Please! Viewfinders: The higher end Nikons have nice high point viewfinders, but they cut off the viewfinder LCD display very, very easily. The lower end bodies are not a bad compromise. The rubber surrounds on the Nikons don't fall off like the Canon versions do, but Canons are more comfortable in use. My favourite viewfinder feature (apart from the red AF rectangles that Canon use) is the on demand grid lines available on the Nikon F80 (N80). No changing of screens etc, just a CF to switch it on or off. Come on Canon. Switches and dials. I must say that the Nikon on/off switch around the shutter button is very ergonomic and easy to use. The 2 input dials that Nikon uses however are no match for the front main dial and rear control dial on the mid range and better Canons. With Canon if you're in AV the main dial changes aperture, if you're in Tv it changes shutter speed. The rear dial is used for manual and exp. compensation. Very easy. The Nikon system of one dial for aperture, the other for shutter speed is ok, but not as easy to get used to. Shutter/Mirror Some EOS models have very quiet shutters and mirrors, but the damping action on the Nikons "feels" better than the EOSs. I haven't noticed any discernable differences in results though. The 3 has a very loud shutter in comparison to most cameras (these days) but maybe that's the price you pay for longevity. I hope that Canon has fixed the crappy bump stop rubbers that melt with old age and smear goo all over the shutter blades. I'm not aware of this being a common problem with older Nikons. Lens compatibility. I'm talking OEM lenses here, not third party. Both have their share of problems with some 3rd party brands but at least all EOS models work with all EF lenses - no caveats, exceptions or contradictions. Urban myth or whatever, the Nikon lens compatibility reputation doesn't hold water. Flash: No 1 gripe with Nikon is high speed sync. Sure some of their bodies and flashes support it, but with NO ttl flash metering. Manual calculations are the rule here. Canon and Minolta can do ttl + hss, Nikon needs to catch up. Apart from that the flash systems are (in practical use and results) very similar in performance. I guess because I don't use flash in P mode very often I haven't seen many differences (if they exist). The Nikon SB-28 and SB-80 are usefully smaller than the 550EX with similar power output. Another personal preference is the way that Canon defaults to fill mode when using Av or TV. With Nikon you have to tell it that you want to sync at slow speed in AV mode, otherwise it uses flash as the primary light source. Built in ( body) flash exposure compensation is another thing generally lacking from the Nikons (all the models I've used except the F-601/N6006). Lenses: What can I say? Affordable USM, FTM and IS in a wide range of lenses. Pricing is a bit less expensive than Nikons with equivalent build quality in the prosumer to pro class lenses. Focus speed across the board is better with Canon (and quieter). Nikon needs to make AF-S and VR more widely available and AFFORDABLE. AF: The 1V/3 and F5/F100 reputedly have fairly similar (and good) AF capabilities, but with the mid range bodies Canon wins with AF speed (maybe because of ring USM lenses) but loses out in low light capability (particularly the 30/Elan 7e and variants). Even old 2nd generation Nikons like the F801s/N8008s can focus much more quickly and accurately than the 30. That is the single major reason I sold my EOS 30 and kept the 3 and 55. Both are much more capable low light performers (although the ECF on the 30 was the best of the three). Even the entry level Nikons (and maybe Canons too) could do better than the 30. The multi point AF systems on the Nikons are easy enough to use, but give me ECF any day! Not an exhaustive list by any means and NOT meant to start a Canon Vs Nikon war/bitch session. I'm just of the opinion that each could learn a few things from the other - and undoubtedly from Minolta etc as well (if only thing like patents and licence fees didn't stand in the way). I only have experience with those two. Regards Gary This mail has passed through an insecure network. All enquires should be directed to the message author. * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
