Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
11/9/2018 9:21:38 PM
Posted: 8/1/2018 10:36:23 AM EST
Hi all, I've read through a lot of the threads here and it seems like most in the forum here prefer Nikon. Any particular reason?

I'm looking to start into photography as a new hobby. I've done some reading and have mostly narrowed myself down to the Canon 80D or the Nikon D7200, but I'm open to other suggestions.

Mostly what I want to shoot is scenery when traveling (landscapes), street views, and slower moving action like trains or people in normal paced activities like walking through a pumpkin patch or dogs playing. Also potentially would shoot a little at night for things like snow falling in town, etc.

My typical MO when jumping into something new is to find the mid-range of the quality/price scale and get something in the higher end of mid-grade. That way I can grow into it rather than out of it, without emptying my wallet on the top of the line.

Do the cameras I'm considering fit into what I've described? Are there others you would recommend instead for my intended use? Are there any other factors I should be thinking about that I've missed?

I appreciate any help you can give a newbie!
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 10:50:32 AM EST
just my 2cents the D7200 is a VERY complicated camera. I just bought the D7100 holy shit there is going to be a big learning curve going from a D40X to this one. I am having issues getting the auto focus to work the way Id like. the D40X auto focus is A LOT simpler. not too sure a D7200 is the best to start out with unless you have a strong background in photography. Its a sweet camera for sure though as close to a pro camera as you can get without spending 4K on a full frame
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 11:24:14 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 11:36:06 AM EST
I think the D7200 is great camera. I don't know about the Canon stuff, but I think the D7200 is more advanced than anything that Canon has to offer in the DX/APS-C format.
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 12:33:53 PM EST
@zak3g can I hit you up then to have you help me figure out the focus settings
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 1:28:31 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 1:29:37 PM EST
Op. I take the same approach to new hobbies and purchases as you. I was in the same place as you a few years ago. I wound up with a Nikon D7000. One of the main reasons I bought into Nikon was because a friend who is a professional photographer recommended it because he was most familiar with the brand. Also, he had a good stable of lenses and lighting I could borrow. Now we pool our decisions and run our own loaner pool for each other.

Like you, I was intimidated by the step up into the “pro-sumer” world, but like you my reason was it was a less expensive hit if I decided to get out of it. I didn’t get out of it. After playing around (a lot) with it, I’m finally making the transition from taking pictures to composing photographs. I’m still learning all of the different ways to make a great capture look even better with post editing in Lightroom.

After my recent trip to Oshkosh, I’ve got the long range bug pretty badly now. I’m lusting over 400mm plus long lenses and considering a full frame body. I found a lot of useful information on the web. Guys like Ken Rockwell who does pretty in depth gear reviews and Jarod Poulon (fro knows photo) who is entertaining and informative. I also like to look at sites like 500 PX for inspiration and try to reverse engineer some of that work to challenge myself.

The D7200 will allow you to take baby steps into the hobby but will expand with you as your skills grow. Oh...as Fro says...shoot in RAW.

Buy the D7200 and don’t look back!
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 1:38:44 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 1:53:40 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Zack3g:

Ken Rockwell is not a reputable or reliable source for information. He is known to review products that he's never had and his photography advice in general is...questionable at best.

Tip - if long lenses are what interest you, skip the full frame. Once you get into long lenses you'll soon figure out that no matter how much lens you have, it's never long enough. A crop body helps with this.
View Quote
Ken’s an acquired taste for sure. I only check his site for some of his research because he keeps it up. I don’t care for how preachy he gets and tune that out. I didn’t know about the rest, but hadn’t really looked at his site in years until the bug bit me again last week. I take him with a grain of salt and cross check his opinions against other net experts. I don’t rely on any single site.

I know what you’re saying about the crop vs full sensor too. I was at my absolute gear limit with my DX and 300mm kit lens, not to mention my skill level, trying to shoot moving aircraft. I used the burst mode quite a bit, but my focus sucked on about a third of what I shot. I’m giving myself a pass on loosing shutter discipline since I was way over stimulated by the show! [img]/images/smilies/smiley_abused.gif[/ima

What are your thoughts about a step up from the 300mm kit lens?
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 2:02:22 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 2:06:38 PM EST
This site seems to be almost all Nikon fans. Early on I got the Rebel XT and then began collecting glass. Today, there would have to be something earth-shattering come along for me to give up my lenses and start over and I'm used to the Canon now with no real desire to switch. Having said all that I would advise you to take a serious look at Nikon gear if you are brand new. They do have some significant advantages in specs with the entry and semi-pro (heavy hobbyist) bodies now. Canon lags a bit in a few key areas.

I have the 80D and it's so far been an impressive and nice upgrade from the 50D I was previously using although Canon seems to be consumer-izing the XXD line into expensive Rebels with a thumb-wheel rather than the step towards pro gear they used to be. They are pushing those customers to the expensive 7D line. Not sure how I feel about that. I like the lighter bodies of the XXD line, but don't care for loss of the nub-stick and large easy to find thumb wheel.

I handled Nikons before I committed to the 50D and I didn't care for them as my first impression and then it was neck and neck really, but today it's got enough going for it over the similar Canon bodies that were I to pick today I might well just learn to like the Nikon.
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 2:07:24 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/1/2018 2:09:27 PM EST by magilla]
thank you Zack ! ill look at these the problem I seem to have is the AF-A af-s and af-c modes don't seem to work well in the AUTO mode. I'm sure its something I am doing wrong or have set wrong
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 4:52:27 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Grunteled:
This site seems to be almost all Nikon fans. Early on I got the Rebel XT and then began collecting glass. Today, there would have to be something earth-shattering come along for me to give up my lenses and start over and I'm used to the Canon now with no real desire to switch. Having said all that I would advise you to take a serious look at Nikon gear if you are brand new. They do have some significant advantages in specs with the entry and semi-pro (heavy hobbyist) bodies now. Canon lags a bit in a few key areas.

I have the 80D and it's so far been an impressive and nice upgrade from the 50D I was previously using although Canon seems to be consumer-izing the XXD line into expensive Rebels with a thumb-wheel rather than the step towards pro gear they used to be. They are pushing those customers to the expensive 7D line. Not sure how I feel about that. I like the lighter bodies of the XXD line, but don't care for loss of the nub-stick and large easy to find thumb wheel.

I handled Nikons before I committed to the 50D and I didn't care for them as my first impression and then it was neck and neck really, but today it's got enough going for it over the similar Canon bodies that were I to pick today I might well just learn to like the Nikon.
View Quote
Could you expand on the blue a little bit?

I stopped at the notable camera shop in town on my way home from work to try and get a feel with these two cameras as Zack suggested. The guy at the shop didn't say much to push me one way or the other, other than to say that the Canon probably has a slight edge when it comes to video, and the Nikon probably has a slight edge for low light.

Honestly I keep teetering back and forth. The people I actually know (not online) are mostly Canon people, and everyone on here seems to be mostly Nikon. I talk to people in person and lean towards Canon, then check back in here and come back towards Nikon. This is becoming more stressful than I anticipated.
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 5:22:58 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/1/2018 5:59:02 PM EST by magilla]
well holy cow I found my problem the last video zack recommended talked about cleaning the AF sensor. well I did and as soon as I blew out the area out comes a piece of plastic. the gal I got it from mishadled the 18-55 lens breaking off one of the alignment lugs that then made its way into that AF area and got stuck. the camera only has 1100 exposures ...Now it works Awesome I am so re leaved. now I can kick ass with this awesome camera. AF modes all work as they should got it for 600 with 2 VR lenses 18-55 and 55-300
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 6:47:36 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/1/2018 8:15:36 PM EST
Jumping in late to the party....

Originally Posted By ajtayl03:
Hi all, I've read through a lot of the threads here and it seems like most in the forum here prefer Nikon. Any particular reason?
View Quote
Ergonomics. Many of us prefer the feel of Nikon's shape and weight and size.
Your best bet is to go to a store where you can see what feels best in YOUR hands.

Originally Posted By ajtayl03:
I'm looking to start into photography as a new hobby. I've done some reading and have mostly narrowed myself down to the Canon 80D or the Nikon D7200, but I'm open to other suggestions.
View Quote

Both are good. Both will easily get the job done.
Your best bet is to go to a store where you can see what feels best in YOUR hands.

Originally Posted By ajtayl03:
Mostly what I want to shoot is scenery when traveling (landscapes), street views, and slower moving action like trains or people in normal paced activities like walking through a pumpkin patch or dogs playing. Also potentially would shoot a little at night for things like snow falling in town, etc.

My typical MO when jumping into something new is to find the mid-range of the quality/price scale and get something in the higher end of mid-grade. That way I can grow into it rather than out of it, without emptying my wallet on the top of the line.

Do the cameras I'm considering fit into what I've described? Are there others you would recommend instead for my intended use? Are there any other factors I should be thinking about that I've missed?
View Quote

The D7200 (or newer) will certainly give you room to grow while having a relatively small learning curve.
As a Nikon guy, I cannot really speak to the Canon, but I would assume the same thing.

Good links to auto-focus videos from Zak!

Originally Posted By magilla:
thank you Zack ! ill look at these the problem I seem to have is the AF-A af-s and af-c modes don't seem to work well in the AUTO mode. I'm sure its something I am doing wrong or have set wrong
View Quote
When the camera is in "auto" mode, it does all the decision making, not you. The semi-auto modes are a much better place to be (shutter priority or aperture priority). The scene modes can be interesting, but it is good to know what they are doing for and to you.
Link Posted: 8/2/2018 6:33:40 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/2/2018 6:37:12 AM EST by NorthPolar]
IMO, for stills on a budget it’s damned hard to beat a D7200. God knows how many I put through mine before going full frame. In low light, Nikon’s prosumer and professional cameras will usually spank Canon pretty well. On the other hand, Nikon’s AF sucks compared to Canon for video. So it comes down to which you prefer.

Personally, if I wanted a camera for video, I’d get a real video camera. My gear is for stills, so I went with solid photo gear. YMMV.

Edit: I had a longer response typed but I accidentally reloaded the page and lost it. Short version is I pushed my D7200 about as hard as you could in pretty much any weather from 100f to -40f, high shutter speed, frame rate, max ISO, long exposure, etc. It handled it all.
Link Posted: 8/2/2018 8:46:11 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ajtayl03:

Could you expand on the blue a little bit?

I stopped at the notable camera shop in town on my way home from work to try and get a feel with these two cameras as Zack suggested. The guy at the shop didn't say much to push me one way or the other, other than to say that the Canon probably has a slight edge when it comes to video, and the Nikon probably has a slight edge for low light.

Honestly I keep teetering back and forth. The people I actually know (not online) are mostly Canon people, and everyone on here seems to be mostly Nikon. I talk to people in person and lean towards Canon, then check back in here and come back towards Nikon. This is becoming more stressful than I anticipated.
View Quote
Sensor noise is a big one. The Nikon sensor is much better than previous Canon models and still a bit better than the improved sensor in the 80D. That gives Nikon a pretty big edge in dynamic range and latitude in post processing RAW images. I hate sensor noise so that’s a big one to me.

More autofocus points are available on the Nikon body. Bigger LCD and better resolution. Better battery life. Dual SD card handling.

Some things the Canon has going for it are faster burst speed and all 45 AF points are cross type. Canon has better live view focusing (so it is said). The tilt swivel screen is nice and the touch screen is more useful than I thought it would be. The Canon has good video features and autofocus while shooting but can’t shoot 4K. I don’t do much with video so it’s not a big feature to me. More of a nice-to-have.

Now keep in mind I have not laid hands on a Nikon beyond testing it in a store so I can’t really expound on this much. But the low noise sensor really gets my attention because I hate digital noise in outdoor pictures with blue sky. It stands out to me as a landscape shooter and I hate it. Also it crops up in indoor non-flash shots where detail is prized.

But now that I have EF glass that costs 3X what the body does... I’m a Canon man. Once i get the 70-200 2.8L the deal is all but sealed forever.

Good luck. Neither one is a poor choice in any case so don’t stress too much.
Link Posted: 8/2/2018 11:53:49 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/2/2018 11:54:26 PM EST by NorthPolar]
Btw, if you want new, B&H has a solid deal on the D7200 right now. Body, 18-55mm, 70-300mm, and bag for $1197 ($350 Nikon instant rebate on it right now)

Although if you're okay with refurbs you can save a lot of money and/or get better glass for the same price.

B&H also has a refurb body for $739 ($850 Nikon refurb when not on sale)
Nikon has the 18-55mm kit lens (it's a kit lens but pretty decent for the $$$) for $100
And the best bang for your buck for longer lenses, the 70-300mm IF ED VR for $400. Hands down probably one of the best sub $1000 telephotos for Nikon. I haven't tried their new AF-P one, but have heard it's even better, hence the 'probably.' Before that came out, IMO it was the best bang for your buck.

So a little more money, but for the longer stuff, way better glass.
Link Posted: 8/3/2018 1:26:06 PM EST
OT/BTW a bit of interesting news:
=====================
2018 Nikkei interchangeable lens camera market share report (Canon: 49.1%, Nikon: 24.9%, Sony: 13.3%), top 3 makers have 87.3% of the market.

Read more: https://nikonrumors.com/#ixzz5N8oXgIXC
Link Posted: 8/11/2018 1:56:55 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NorthPolar:
IMO, for stills on a budget it’s damned hard to beat a D7200. God knows how many I put through mine before going full frame. In low light, Nikon’s prosumer and professional cameras will usually spank Canon pretty well. On the other hand, Nikon’s AF sucks compared to Canon for video. So it comes down to which you prefer.

Personally, if I wanted a camera for video, I’d get a real video camera. My gear is for stills, so I went with solid photo gear. YMMV.

Edit: I had a longer response typed but I accidentally reloaded the page and lost it. Short version is I pushed my D7200 about as hard as you could in pretty much any weather from 100f to -40f, high shutter speed, frame rate, max ISO, long exposure, etc. It handled it all.
View Quote
The 7200 is a solid choice. Mine is married to a 24-70G 2.8 zoom and it is epic. It is a great camera.
I recommend it highly and gave one as a gift recently. For most, it is well beyond what they will ever need.

I like my D500 more, but it is much more expensive and needs the weird (and expensive) Sony XQD card in slot 1. I use it as
a one slot camera with a SD card. The D7200 is dual SD slot...and it is superior to me in this regard.
Link Posted: 8/11/2018 9:41:20 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NorthPolar:
IMO, for stills on a budget it’s damned hard to beat a D7200. God knows how many I put through mine before going full frame. In low light, Nikon’s prosumer and professional cameras will usually spank Canon pretty well. On the other hand, Nikon’s AF sucks compared to Canon for video. So it comes down to which you prefer.

Personally, if I wanted a camera for video, I’d get a real video camera. My gear is for stills, so I went with solid photo gear. YMMV.

Edit: I had a longer response typed but I accidentally reloaded the page and lost it. Short version is I pushed my D7200 about as hard as you could in pretty much any weather from 100f to -40f, high shutter speed, frame rate, max ISO, long exposure, etc. It handled it all.
View Quote
Ditto on that. Nikon cameras are tanks, I have put through hundreds of thousands of shots on my Nikon DSLRs, and they have never been in the shop; can't say that for some of the P&S cameras that I've own, Canon S100 and Panasonic ZS50, those cameras with the self-extending and retracting lenses are $h!t, it got to a point where Panasonic's warranty contractor refused to repair their ZS50 even though it had a year left on their extended warranty. Canon wanted 2/3 the price of new updated camera to repari, so now they are expensive paper weights.
Link Posted: 8/11/2018 1:36:52 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/11/2018 1:41:01 PM EST by iroc409]
I love Nikon. I started with a F100 (which I've since acquired another), to a D40x after a hiatus to a D80 and now a D7200. The D7200 is pretty amazing, and though I just bought it I chose it over the D7500 for a few reasons--mostly price.

I really like Canon's smaller cameras, and have owned a couple (and will probably buy another like a G9x or G7x). I was recently playing with a few of their DSLRs, and honestly I couldn't hardly make the thing work. The controls layout is so different, I could figure it out eventually but it was so incredibly foreign. Most of that is from years of Nikon use, but a few of the buttons the way they are laid out, I really think the Nikons would be faster to use with someone well versed in both--and mostly I'm talking about Nikon's twin command dials. Canon seems to put them in an odd place. Canon and Nikon also have reverse direction on their zooms I think, which is just an interesting difference to get used to.

That being said, the biggest thing for me is the Nikon models with the front command wheel. I'm so used to using that one, which Canon has theirs in the front it's just in an awkward spot, but I don't know if I could use a Nikon without that wheel. I was looking pretty hard at the D5600, as it was recommended, but the twin command dials and the built-in focus motor were the two items that really clinched it for me. There are so many older lenses to use as well, that the built-in motor is a big deal to someone that's serious about it. I have a few Nikon D lenses that still provide pretty good results for the money. They may not give as good results as the latest G gold ring lenses, but you can get huge bang for the buck with them. I've been using a 28-105 F3.5-4.5 Macro D lens on my D7200 a little lately, and it gives pretty amazing macro capability and pretty good range. No, it doesn't provide the sharpness of the new Tamron G2 lenses or the 105MM Macro, but for $150 for a perfect, like new example off eBay is not too shabby.
Link Posted: 8/11/2018 2:58:50 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By magilla:
well holy cow I found my problem the last video zack recommended talked about cleaning the AF sensor. well I did and as soon as I blew out the area out comes a piece of plastic. the gal I got it from mishadled the 18-55 lens breaking off one of the alignment lugs that then made its way into that AF area and got stuck. the camera only has 1100 exposures ...Now it works Awesome I am so re leaved. now I can kick ass with this awesome camera. AF modes all work as they should got it for 600 with 2 VR lenses 18-55 and 55-300
View Quote
Just curious, where is this AF sensor that you are talking about?
Link Posted: 8/11/2018 3:11:49 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/12/2018 12:26:33 PM EST by warlord]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By cistercian:
.
.
I like my D500 more, but it is much more expensive and needs the weird (and expensive) Sony XQD card in slot 1. I use it as
a one slot camera with a SD card. The D7200 is dual SD slot...and it is superior to me in this regard.
View Quote
If you can get by with only 32GB, the Sony XQD card $90 with shipping, and a XQD card reader ~$60. Higher capacity XQD cards are pretty pricey.
Link Posted: 8/11/2018 6:33:04 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/12/2018 12:12:54 PM EST
Zack3g: Thanks
Top Top