|
|
|
|
 |
ben_ben
 2006-02-20 16:24:48
|
414
|
én nem (értem:)
A lényeget a légyszí írd le, pár mondatban. |
|
A hozzászólás:
 |
|
Kúper
2006-02-20 16:06:49
|
413
|
Egy pro véleménye a témáról (egyet értek vele):
"On the whole, if you currently use a modern Nikon or Canon, and have a reasonable lens selection, I would stay with the system you currently have. Otherwise, you have a tough decision to make. Both are superb overall both mechanically and optically however each does have some special advantages that may sway you in a given direction. Here are my takes on the two systems
The D2x is superb for most shooting and focuses like a dream. With high speed crop mode, it is both a versatile high frame rate sports camera and in normal 12mpix mode a super fine studio/bright light camera. Compared to the Canon 1D-IIn, it is much easier to use with better ergonomics. For example, the majority of important camera settings can be adjusted without moving your eye from the viewfinder very easily whereas the Canon must be removed from the eye and the top/back LCD displays examined.
Button use on the Canon is not consistently done - some buttons are held down while a parameter is dialled. Other buttons are pressed-released and the the parameter is dialled.
Canon does not have a consistent way of allowing you to control the shutter speed and lens aperture. This can be frustrating particularly if you shoot the camera in manual mode - this can be truly awkward in a rush.
Deletion of images is much quicker and more logical than the Canon. If you shoot and chimp a lot, this very much reduces time. On the Canon, I virtually never delete images because of the amount of time it takes with poor logic. With the Nikon, I do delete since it is so easy.
A number of other specific attributes of the Nikon make it easier and more logical to operate.
Image quality of the Canon and Nikon systems are absolutely superb - and essentially pixel count and lens quality are the limitation for most shooting situations. Choose your pixel count and choose your price :-)
Canon's image virtue is that it operates better at high ISO (1600, 3200) for both noise and image quality. Although the Nikon is quite useful at ISO 1600, the Canon is clearly superior. The D2x is marginally useful at 3200 while the Canon still yields good results. The Canon noise has significant chroma components. The Nikon noise is quite neutral on the D2x and D200.
Canon's other virtue is the availability of full frame with the 1Ds-II and 5D.
Full frame on the Canon is a mixed blessing. Aside from vignetting issues which can be somewhat annoying, the lens quality of Canon is quite variable. For example, my friend (who happens to own a camera emporium) tried four different 24-105 zooms before he found one that was good enough. I am trying to select a sharp 35mm F1.4 for myself.
Another issue with the Canon is how to select a second body. If you choose a 1Ds-II, an obvious choice is a 5D. If you choose a 1D-II, there is no obvious Canon to choose as a second body.
If you shoot two cameras in a single event, it is much easier to shoot and select lenses when the sensor size (i.e. crop factor) is the same on all cameras. For example, I shot a performance last week with the 1D-IIn and the 5D. I had to be very careful selecting camera-lens combinations since each lens behaves differently on each of the two cameras. This can cause missed shots because of incorrect lens/camera selection - particularly if you have to do the lens swaps in the dark. Canon lenses are easier to mount/dismount in the dark by feel alone because of their red "bayonet" dot and the placement of the AF/Manual switch.
Of course, in the Nikon line, all sensors are the same size (crop factor). It is trivial to mix and match lenses with cameras. The D2x and D200 are a very fine pair. For low light, the D200 is superior to the D2x (although does not measure up to the Canon at ISO 3200). I had no problem mixing the D200, D2x and D2h.
In very low light (ISO 3200, 1/30 sec, F1.4) the Nikon focuses more reliably and on lower contrast subjects than the Canon. Even though I prefer the image quality of the Canon at very high ISO, the Nikon can yield a larger number of sharply focused images.
Optically, both lens are pretty good. I prefer Nikon for the wide angles - they are good and consistent with little variation among samples. Canon wides are not quite as good, however you can find very fine samples of the 24mm F1.4 and 35mm F1.4 (but watch out for some poor samples). The same relative comments can be said for the Nikon and Canon wide angle zooms. In the mid range, the 24-70 Canon is almost consistently better than the Nikon 28-70 although I have used one bad 24-70.
The mid range and short tele lenses from both are equally fine - however the Canon 50mm really suffers from flare at F1.4. The cheap 50mm F1.8 seems to be a better choice for difficult lighting. Nikon's 50mm F1.4 is more usable.
For tele lenses, the 70-200 F2.8 zooms from both are superb as are the 300mm F2.8 primes. The Canon longer lenses might be considered better than the Nikon counterparts because of the image stabilization. If you use a tripod for longer lenses, the difference vanishes (in fact, Canon turns of IS if it senses it is on a tripod).
The 200mm F2 VR from Nikon is truly superb.
Of course, you will get some Canon and Nikon foks who will completely disagree with me." |
|
|
Ha kedveled azért, ha nem azért nyomj egy lájkot a Fórumért!
|
