World Photography Forum - Canon or Nikon can you tell

World Photography Forum (https://www.worldphotographyforum.com/index.php)

- The Photography Forum (https://www.worldphotographyforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=21)

- - Canon or Nikon can you tell (https://www.worldphotographyforum.com/showthread.php?t=999)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stephen Fox

I simply cannot tell so I need more information to be certain. Stephen Anstey's website informs me he has been using Nikon and Canon gear but more recently Canon. I am going to pin my answer on Nikon as in post 1 it was taken a few years back. I assume Stephen switched to Canon for the 20D and now 1DSMkIIn and I think the photo predates this move.

I wonder if I am correct :)

Hi Stephen, I actually spilled the beans in post 10. The camera was a Canon 10D.
My first dSLR was a Nikon D1 the first truly affordable dSLR, prior to this there had only been the models done in conjunction with Kodak, but they were far to expensive and not as good as the D1. It was a Pro spec camera but only 2.7mp. Prior to this I had been using a Nikon F5.

I moved from the D1 to a Canon 10D, basically because as a Pro I needed to move up in the pixel stakes and as I could not afford the D1x which was the obvious step up, I had to look at either the Nikon D100 or the Canon 10D. To be honest the D100 was for me not a patch on the Canon, being plasticky and lightweight by comparison. The 10D had a better build quality and with a battery grip attached felt much more substantial in the hand. So I came over from the 'Dark Side' jumped ship and invested in Canon gear. To be honest I have never looked back, and after upgrading to the superb 20D I have decided that I needed to get back to a genuine 'Pro Spec' camera and so am now using a 1DMkIIN (not the FF 1DsMkII)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adey Baker

They certainly used to, but I think the two camps have come much closer together nowadays

Basically the high contrast Nikon-types sacrificed ultimate resolving power of finest detail in order to give the photo a 'punchy' look whereas the Leica types used to resolve very fine detail but at the cost of lower contrast which made the photos appear less sharp at first sight.

This is probably one of the main reasons, apart from motor-winders, why Nikon became the No. 1 press photographers' camera as they didn't need the finer detail for shots that were printed coarsely in newspapers but the 'snappier' Nikon shots looked sharper on the page

I think another somewhat important reason was cost. Leica have always been expensive. I think it was during the Korean war that Western photographers discovered that Nikon lenses performed well and were cheap compared to Leica and Zeiss. That is certainly the reason why Japanese companies took over the market for film camera lenses that was once dominated by German, and at least one English, companies.

Leif

Hi Stephen,

I like the picture too and I think the camera is a Canon 10D, 17-40mm. :-))

Luc