Are you a Canon or a Nikon SLR-shooter?

Are you a Canon or a Nikon SLR-shooter?

  • Nikon

    Votes: 628 56.0%

  • Canon

    Votes: 471 42.0%

  • other

    Votes: 368 32.8%

  • none

    Votes: 19 1.7%
  • Total voters
    1,121
I used to use a Canon EOS 3 and an EOS 50 with 70-200mm f2.8L, 16-35mm f2.8L, and Tamron SP 90mm Macro. I would say the Canon system is fantastic. Top optical quality, fast and quiet AF. However it was too heavy and bulky. So I added a Nikon FM2 with 105mm f2.5and AIS 28mm f2.8. Later on, I was seduced to Leica M and cleared all my Canon gears. I bought a used F3 which together with the 28mm lens has become my main SLR gear. Then I added a used 300mm AIS ED f2.8 at a very good price, but seldom use it. Think it would go soon. But the robust build of the Nikon F3 is just incredible!!! If I want to collect a SLR, I would definitely go for a Nikon F2, ideally with AS finder.
 
F2's

F2's

photocrazy said:
I used to use a Canon EOS 3 and an EOS 50 with 70-200mm f2.8L, 16-35mm f2.8L, and Tamron SP 90mm Macro. I would say the Canon system is fantastic. Top optical quality, fast and quiet AF. However it was too heavy and bulky. So I added a Nikon FM2 with 105mm f2.5and AIS 28mm f2.8. Later on, I was seduced to Leica M and cleared all my Canon gears. I bought a used F3 which together with the 28mm lens has become my main SLR gear. Then I added a used 300mm AIS ED f2.8 at a very good price, but seldom use it. Think it would go soon. But the robust build of the Nikon F3 is just incredible!!! If I want to collect a SLR, I would definitely go for a Nikon F2, ideally with AS finder.
Click to expand...

I wanted to get an F2 without a prizm to get the Voigtlander 12mm and prizm cap thing for the finder, It'd go well with my nikkors
 
My first SLR was a Pentax K1000. I now own a K2DMD. I recently was given a Canon Rebel II. I've got a Porst--a rebranded Praktica Super TL3--but don't use it much.
Rob
 
2 Canon F1's and a heavy handful of glass to go with them (it is so cheap now). Those 50's are sweet. Shoot the 28 alot too. Funny my rf prferences are more around 35. Wonder if that might change wth experience.
 
My core system is Contax RTS: 5 bodies, 15 lenses. Have no interest in Nikon lenses (bad bokeh), but liked my old FM2. Tolerate poor ergos of Canon EOS for the digital, and quite like the lenses.

For pure fun, I turn to RF.
 
i've owned around 10 EOS cameras, from my first (rebel G) to the most recent (1D)... with pretty much everything in between. Also had an A1 (it was sweeeeet) and an FM3A (i just wasn't very happy with the FM/FE viewfinder)... i really love the FD system, but don't like the fact that it's one of the FEW lensmounts which can't be used (with adapters) on my EOS cameras.
I'm a Canonite, through and through.
 
Nikon F3. I mostly stick to prime lenses, but I have been considering a zoom of some sort for the sake of conveniance. I used to shoot canon, first an AV-1 and then an EOS 650, but they didn't last very long. Hopefuly my newfangled F3 will.
 
Well, i voted "Nikon" because that's currently my main SLR system, although the phrasing of the question (what *have* you used) really can only be answered by a long list (i.e. have tried or used to shoot many different manufacturers' gear. Still have many med format SLRs too, which of course are neither Nikon or Canon....)

j
 
Used to shoot a Pentax MX ... gave it to my girl when I found RF cameras. I still shoot a roll of colour film with it from time to time.
If I had to buy another 35mm SLR, definitely it would the Pentax LX, a beauty. Marc
 
If we are talking Canon vs Nikon SLRs, I have had two AE-1p and a FTBn, but nowadays, there's one Nikon F2 on the table beside me here and one F3 in the closet. Both of them has their own annoying quirks, but they are clearly built for professionals.

But if I had to take one SLR, I'd have to toss a coin between the F2 and the Pentax Spotmatic (basic camera but it does what it should and that 50 1.4 Takumar... good one!).
 
Nobody shoots any OM stuff? Seems to be highly underated or maybe people are pissed at the way Olympus just up and dumped the system. My black OM-2 is solid--a nifty little machine and the 1:4 50 mm zuiko is mighty fine. Love using it.
Steamer
 
My largest SLR kits are Minolta manual focus and Canon EOS (film and digital).

M42, K-mount, Canon FD, Nikon, Contax/Yashica are also present somewhere.

The quirky little Contaflex is probably the most interesting camera tho.
 
When I started getting back into film around the same time as getting into rangefinders, I added an A-1 to my Canon T70. My father in law had a bunch of Nikkor lenses and so added an FM2n to this and started down a path of NAS to add to GAS in general. For more snap and go situations I wanted something with at least aperature priority so added an F3 to the roster and got hooked on Nikon SLR gear. It's my favorite SLR. I did borrow a very used F2 once and was blown away with its rock solid feel and precision. I think my FM2n is a nice compact camera but think that an FM3a would be more versatile for the way I shoot.
 
I can't vote for one over another. I started with Nikon, and I still have the most Nikon SLRs and lenses of any of the brands. Then I got into Minolta (the SRT 101 is just a lovely camera), then Konica, which is greatly underrated and the lenses are as good as anyone's. After that came Canon. Next, Pentax screw mount and S-M-C Takumars. In the last couple of years I've added Leicaflexes and OMs to the stable. I have a Topcon RE-2 and several lenses as well; a Yashica in Contax/Yashica mount, and a couple of Mamiyas in M42. Early on I got several Mirandas but really haven't used them. Pentax K mount could be next.

Each of these systems has much to recommend it, and I get a kick out of using them all.

I have only one autofocus SLR, a Nikon F100, and only one lens, a 24-120. (Oh yes, I got my wife a Sigma SA-7 and a couple of zooms -- a nice little kit indeed.) I think I'd like to add some more AF Nikkor lenses, but I'd feel better about that if I knew which way to go when I decide to get a digital SLR.
 
wildwildwes,
The myth of "bad bokeh" for Nikons has been out there for years. It seems to originate from two lenses that emphasized sharpness at the expense of out-of-focus highlights. The classic Nikkor 5cm/1.4 lens of the 1950s, which was faster and sharper than anyone else's lens at the time, achieved its exceptional close-in performance by optical choices that resulted in harshly doubled lines for out-of-focus areas at middle apertures. The 85mm/1.8 lens of the SLR era was notable for out-of-focus highlights that strongly resembled the shape of the aperture blades. None of the "bad bokeh" crowd ever talks about the Nikkors with outstanding out-of-focus rendition, such as the 105/2.5 or the 50/2 (both SLR and RF versions of both lenses).
 
I am devoted to my Nikon stuff. I dote on the FE with the 50/1.4, but I also have a black Nikkormat EL and half a dozen beautiful lenses, including an enchanting 85/1.4. I can't imagine this kit not sufficing.

I did click the "other" option as well, though, considering the (SLR's every one) Bronica SQ-A, and the Great Wall DF-2, and the lovely Jon-Goodman-Miranda-Sensorex in my cupboard. All are a delight to use.
 
VinceC said:
The 85mm/1.8 lens of the SLR era was notable for out-of-focus highlights that strongly resembled the shape of the aperture blades.
Click to expand...

Nikkor seemed to fix that problem with the AF-D lenses ... Although the 85mm 1.4 is considered the end all be all of portrait lenses, the 85 1.8 AF-D has the same basic bokeh characteristics even though its slightly less sharp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom