Rock and Hard place Nikon/Canon

[Allan Ryan]

you appear to have more invested in Canon than Nikon
Why not pick up a Canon film body to replace your Nikon and recoup the money buy selling the Nikon Body and lens
You may come out in front

just make sure the body you get accepts the Canon Lenses you already have.

Cheers

[Gollum]

When it comes to the novice end of the market, where most of us are, there is little difference between any make. The real difference between Canon, Nikon and the others is when you get to the pro range.

A story often told, but I don’t know if it’s true:

A top studio photographer was having a retrospective exhibition at a gallery. On the opening night while mingling with his guests, one asked what equipment he had used to take such a great shot. The photographer replied “What’s important is the person behind the camera and in the darkroom… but good equipment helps.”

While this is an arrogant response, if somebody is willing to pay thousands of dollars for a print of one of your photos, you can afford to be. What he is really saying is that the photographers eye is what makes a top photo, not what equipment you have.

So work on your technique to get the best out of what equipment you have, but most of all, have fun.

[Xenedis]

When it comes to the novice end of the market, where most of us are, there is little difference between any make. The real difference between Canon, Nikon and the others is when you get to the pro range.

Even at the top end of town as far as equipment, the difference can be very little.

A story often told, but I don’t know if it’s true:

A top studio photographer was having a retrospective exhibition at a gallery. On the opening night while mingling with his guests, one asked what equipment he had used to take such a great shot. The photographer replied “What’s important is the person behind the camera and in the darkroom… but good equipment helps.”

And that is absolutely correct.

While this is an arrogant response, if somebody is willing to pay thousands of dollars for a print of one of your photos, you can afford to be. What he is really saying is that the photographers eye is what makes a top photo, not what equipment you have.

That's right, and really, I cannot see why anyone cares what equipment was used, unless the person aspires to produce the same level of image and doesn't know that the equipment is the least important factor, all else considered.

Of utmost importance is the concept/story, the light and the composition. Only then does the equipment matter.

When you buy a beautiful piece of wooden furniture from the supplier of high-quality European furniture, would you care what brand of lathe the craftsman used to turn the legs, or what brand of plane he used on the side pieces?

My guess is "probably not".

If you could step back in time, would you ask Leonardo da Vinci what brand of paint he used to paint the Mona Lisa?

Again, probably not.

To that end, I cannot see why the equipment matters when viewing an image. I certainly don't care or even think about it. I'm more interested in the image and achieving the same kind of results than what camera the bloke used. If the guy at the exhibition had shot his image with a Canon, a Nikon, a Pentax or even a Phase One, it would still be a beautiful image.

So work on your technique to get the best out of what equipment you have, but most of all, have fun.

Indeed, and very sound advice.

I'd like to be clear on one point, though: equipment does matter, and can allow a photographer to achieve results that lesser equipment cannot. I use only pro-grade lenses because I like the quality and capability that these lenses deliver; but if someone gave me an entry-level DSLR with a consumer-grade lens, I would:

1. be just as fussy about my subject and the light;
2. set it up just the same;
3. compose my image the same way; and
4. post-process my image the same way.

Depending on the quality of the lens, the pro-grade lens would almost certainly deliver better colour, contrast and sharpness, but the only people who would pay much attention and lose sight of the beauty of the image would be gear junkies who place more emphasis on the gear than the idea.

If I shot the same image with pro-grade gear and consumer-grade gear, you'd be able to tell the difference if you lost sight of the image itself and looked at the technical aspects, with image quality being your only concern.

As far as gear, one must compare apples with apples.

If it comes down to Canon gear vs. Nikon gear of the same market-level or quality level, the difference between them, in practical terms, is very little.

Sure, one consumer-grade standard zoom may be softer in the corners than the other brand's offering, or there could be other differences, but the first priority is to bring one's artistry and technical skill to a certain level before becoming too fussy about the differences between equipment.

The best gear on the planet won't allow a bad photographer to produce great images.

[TOM]

you have a mix of lenses, and if you want the option of using them all, then consider an EVIL camera like a Sony NEX or an Olympus EP-3. With the appropriate adaptors you can use all of your lenses with the one camera, and have all of the control you have with your current cameras. You'll even gain a significant weight loss advantage, so you may be inclined to take more photos.