Canon vs Nikon

Discuss the technical side of photography
Peter Betts
Posts: 2569
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:28 am
Country: RSA

Re: Canon vs Nikon

Post by Peter Betts » Mon May 21, 2012 5:03 pm

mikef wrote:Peter I think you are jumping the gun to assume that the D4 will be better for wildlife photography when compared to the 1DX as afaik neither are available yet (excluding pre-production units) and on paper at least based on the specs I have seen the 1DX is ahead of the D4. Until proper reviews are available it would be premature to conclude that one is better than the other. Both seem to be fantastic cameras and unfortunately both out of my price range. Not sure where you got your raw buffer info as I suspect you have been misinformed – even Canon’s current 1D range are 14 bit. :?
Peter Betts wrote: I think the more consumer cameras there is no real difference but at the top end Its Nikon all the way as I have experienced for 40 years where not one lens or camera has ever had to go in fora service...I know what my next camera will be :)
Were you not stating a short while ago on another forum that you would not be changing your D3S for the D4 as you did not consider it to be an improvement? :o :)
Mike you are correct as when the D4 came out all it looked like was that the Video had been improved on the D3S and I dont want Video on my DSLR..I then did some reading on both cameras and jotted down the similarities and the disparities. For me in Wildlife these are what are critical for me:
- RAW Buffer (D4 more than double and more than the 1DX which is itself coming in below the current champion D3S)
- Noise (D4 will be completely noise free @ 6400 ISO wheras the 1DX will be the same as the 3 year old current N01 D3S at 3200 ISO Noise Free....Its just a gimmick to say that it can achieve 204000 ISO..at what cost)
- Be able to focus f8 lenses...The D4 can and the 1DX cant...maybe with a firmware fix still being developed???
- The D4 has a card slot for the still to arrive in March XQD card that can transfer @ 125 mb sec...I struggle with Extreme CF cards at times @ 60 Mb Sec ..sure maybe Extreme Pro @ 90 will be far better and I was about to get some from B&H but seeing CF will no doubt drop off at the pro end I will get these when needed and live with Extreme for now..Both Nikon and Canon replace their Pro cameras every 4 years and the Canon guys will have to wait that to get the Technology the Nikon guys will be enhjoying next month

Sure The D4 only comes onto the shelves next week and the 1DX who knows when and it was announced well before both the D4 and D800 (Nota wildlife camera)..This isanother canon knockoff..In their rush to try and keep up with Nikon they announce good stufff and then the guys WAIT!!!! Take the 200-400 f4 for example..Nikon is busy with version 4 having brought out the first version in 1985 Manual Focus....Now the third version VRII is about to be replaced in the future. Canon announced their first version at the beginning of 2011 (26 years after Nikon) and 12 months later the guys are still waiting ....I mean how long does it take to copy a proven optical path of your main competitors 200-400?? Okay yes there will be great comparisons between the 2 and it will be great to read the reviews on the similar features like Video, build quality, etc but the crtical for me features mentioned above are a fact..the cameras can or they cant...no review needed :)[/quote]

ceruleanwildfire
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:26 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Canon vs Nikon

Post by ceruleanwildfire » Mon May 21, 2012 5:03 pm

An informed opinion. Exactly what I was talking about earlier. Yet still an opinion. Each person is different and Mike shows how this can differ...
mikef wrote:Both seem to be fantastic cameras and unfortunately both out of my price range.
To each their own. The D4 is a spectacular camera which most, including myself, are unlikely to even breath over, let alone caress in our sweaty paws. This also highlights the Toyota/Lamborghini thing. Toyota markets for the masses and Lamborghini, while producing a better car, only sells to the rich (no offence meant Peter ;-) , us black sheep need to flock togther).

User avatar
PRWIN
Posts: 2115
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 7:38 am

Re: Canon vs Nikon

Post by PRWIN » Mon May 21, 2012 5:22 pm

Peter Betts wrote:
Mike you are correct as when the D4 came out all it looked like was that the Video had been improved on the D3S and I dont want Video on my DSLR..I then did some reading on both cameras and jotted down the similarities and the disparities. For me in Wildlife these are what are critical for me:
- RAW Buffer (D4 more than double and more than the 1DX which is itself coming in below the current champion D3S)
- Noise (D4 will be completely noise free @ 6400 ISO wheras the 1DX will be the same as the 3 year old current N01 D3S at 3200 ISO Noise Free....Its just a gimmick to say that it can achieve 204000 ISO..at what cost)
Can some one please help me when you speak of the raw buffer is that the compression from raw to jpeg or am I totally lost. ;-) ;-) Help

mikef
Posts: 54
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:57 am

Re: Canon vs Nikon

Post by mikef » Mon May 21, 2012 5:22 pm

What Peter refers to as the raw buffer is the number of raw exposures that the camera can record at full speed before slowing down the frame rate in hi speed mode. I have not seen much info on the 1DX ratings however he maintains it is less than half that of the D4. I have seen an internet comparison where it was maintained that when shooting in jpeg that the D4 slows down after about 100 exposures - the 1DX was still at full speed when the shutter was released after more than 400 exposures.

I have never needed more than about 10 exposures so I am not sure how relevant this spec is as both cameras seem to far surpass my requirements. At the Canon expo when I played with the 1DX in hi speed mode and set to raw it seemed to keep up the 12fps until I released the shutter - though I doubt that this was for longer than 2-3 seconds or more than about 30 exposures.

User avatar
PRWIN
Posts: 2115
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 7:38 am

Re: Canon vs Nikon

Post by PRWIN » Mon May 21, 2012 5:22 pm

Thanks Mikef

I have another question which I hope someone can answer and this goes for Canon and Nikon, plus other Camera’s as well .

When you shote in Raw the MB is about 24mb, BUT WHEN IT IS CONVERTED TO JPEG it drops according to the camera you use to about 4 to 6mb and that is using adobe as well. That why I asked about the buffer as I thought it was that.

Still trying to figger this one out :? :? :?

mikef
Posts: 54
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:57 am

Re: Canon vs Nikon

Post by mikef » Mon May 21, 2012 5:23 pm

PRWIN wrote:Thanks Mikef

I have another question which I hope someone can answer and this goes for Canon and Nikon, plus other Camera’s as well .

When you shoot in Raw the MB is about 24mb, BUT WHEN IT IS CONVERTED TO JPEG it drops according to the camera you use to about 4 to 6mb and that is using adobe as well. That why I asked about the buffer as I thought it was that.

Still trying to figure this one out :? :? :?
The raw file contains all the data available to the camera and recorded at the time of pressing the shutter button. This includes 3 types of information namely camera data (model, serial no, exposure settings-aperture, shutter speed and ISO, etc.), image data (White balance, colour space, contrast, sharpness, saturation, etc.) and the image itself (the light values recorded by each pixel of the sensor grid in a non-interpolated Bayer pattern form). This pixel data (12 or 14 bit) comprises the majority of the information recorded in the file and the file size is directly proportional to the megapixel size of the sensor.

These raw files are generally manufacturer specific and cannot be displayed as an image on a computer without the necessary conversion software.

The JPEG file is an industry standard picture file (generally 8 bit) that is created by converting the raw data above according at the specified size and quality settings (lossy compression) and using the image data listed above in the conversion process. Once converted all the pixel data not needed to define the picture is discarded (The camera and image data used are retained in the files EXIF data).

IN summary consider the raw file to be the digital negative allowing maximum control to extract the very best image during post processing while the JPEG is the processed image based on the cameras settings when the picture was made.

User avatar
PRWIN
Posts: 2115
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 7:38 am

Re: Canon vs Nikon

Post by PRWIN » Mon May 21, 2012 5:23 pm

Tue Feb 14, 2012

Thanks Mikef

Looks as if that is one of the things I will be on the lookout for when I upgrade as I am looking for +- 12mb jpeg when converted \O

Peter Betts
Posts: 2569
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:28 am
Country: RSA

Re: Canon vs Nikon

Post by Peter Betts » Mon May 21, 2012 5:24 pm

mikef wrote:What Peter refers to as the raw buffer is the number of raw exposures that the camera can record at full speed before slowing down the frame rate in hi speed mode. .

I have never needed more than about 10 exposures so I am not sure how relevant this spec is as both cameras seem to far surpass my requirements.
I never shoot in Jpeg and most Wild Life Togs dont either but in RAW my D#S at 14 bit gives me 36 and yes I have run out..like when that leopard walked down the path at me..36 frames at 9 FPS is only 4 seconds..I need far more ..but yes an ellie standing still looking at you only needs a bracketed 4 shot burst.

mikef
Posts: 54
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:57 am

Re: Canon vs Nikon

Post by mikef » Mon May 21, 2012 5:24 pm

Peter Betts wrote: I never shoot in Jpeg and most Wild Life Togs dont either but in RAW my D#S at 14 bit gives me 36 and yes I have run out..like when that leopard walked down the path at me..36 frames at 9 FPS is only 4 seconds..I need far more ..but yes an ellie standing still looking at you only needs a bracketed 4 shot burst
\O Not disputing that the ability to have a large RAW buffer is great - also I will be first to say that I don't have your experience in shooting wildlife and I hope to one day shoot a sequence such as the leopard you refer too :D

Also if someone would sponsor me with a D4 or even a D3s I would gladly switch to Nikon - until then or until I win the lotto and can buy a 1DX my 7D and 40D will have to suffice. I would love the additional capabilities of either of the top-end bodies but find that missed shots are most frequently caused by my lack of experience and not some defect of my existing cameras :oops:

Return to “Technical Photography Discussion Forum”