Consolidating with Nikon?

[wakarimasen]

Hello Folks,
Posting this here, in the hope of getting some advice. I didn't get a sniff during the last 24 hours on another forum! 😱

I am a Canon digital user (1D Mark III and 5D Classic) plus a film user (still)! On the digital side, I mostly use the 1D for sports: my sons rugby, cricket and hockey matches. A long reach (lens-wise) is important - especially with rugby - and I recently bought a 100-400L lens, as I was disappointed when using my 70-200 F4L IS with a 1.4 extender. The new (old) lens has been an improvement in one regard (reach) but it does suffer in low light. I guess this is because the 1D series rewards users of F2.8 lenses (in terms of focus accuracy) as the majority of points revert to 'non-cross type' at F4 or above. This - I believe - is an advantage of the D3 and later Nikons, where F5.6 lenses still 'enjoy' cross-type focus accuracy.

As a film user too, I tried to stay with Canon, and went through a number of FD cameras (AE1, AE Program, A1 and F1N) before realising that I didn't really like the bodies for one reason or another. Additionally, I tried to use the FD lenses (with an adapter) on my Canon digital cameras, and found the results to be a little haphazard. As such, I tried other models (Olympus and Minolta) and eventually settled on Nikon. I really like using these cameras for fun on holiday, and they proved to be reliable last year when I used slide film for the first time.

My obvious course of action is to sell-off my Canon gear, and buy a Nikon D3 with a 70-200 F2.8 and the 1.7 extender. Instead of the 130-520 F4.5-5.6 range that I currently have, this setup would allow for a 119-510 F4.8 (approx.) range, with the longer end utilising the DX crop function. For everything else, I could either use my older cameras, or the older manual focus lenses on the D3. This seems pretty appealing to me, but would involve selling all of my Canon gear in order to fund the switch. Obviously this is a risky business, and I don't want to 'back the wrong horse.'

Has anyone any experience in using both the D3 and Canon 1D Mark III, and can comment on:

• frame rate - I have read that the D3 runs at 9-11 fps, but has a buffer that is small, meaning only 2 or 3 seconds capture is possible. If this is true, then the Canon is better with a 110 jpeg burst at 10fps providing approximately 11 seconds of 'action.' Is this correct?
• I also read that the frame rate is highly dependant on the camera settings - i.e. higher ISO values slow things down, as does using the Auto ISO function (which I like very much!). Can anyone comment on this?

I'd also be interested to hear from anyone using their D3 with legacy Ai and Ai-S lenses. This is another driving factor for me, as I want to have one system for - digital and film - without the need to use stop-down metering etc. I know that the EOS mount is (arguably) better for mounting legacy lenses, but from what I read this always involved stop down metering, which I prefer not to do. I know that the 5D Mark III and 7D Mark II improve the 'AF focus situation' but they would not help with regards to the use of legacy equipment. Of course, the 1DX would be the other alternative, but it is still expensive (used) and I would suffer a little in 'reach.'

For reference, my current gear list:
Canon:

• 1D Mark III
• 5D Classic
• 1V 17-40 F4L
• 70-200 F4L IS
• 100-400 F4.5-5.6L
• 1.4 Extender (Version II)

Nikon:

• F4
• F3
• FE
• 28, 35, 50 and 105mm mm Ai lenses

Apologies for the long post, but I have been procrastinating about this for a year or two now. Indeed, I've considered the third way of sticking with Canon for digital and Nikon for film, but the thought of buying similar lenses in two different formats is not appealing.

Best regards, RoyM

 

[Timmyjoe]

I'm a bit biased as I shoot Nikon. Was a Canon shooter from 1976 until 1994 when I finally threw in the towel because Canon had obsoleted about $10,000 of my FD gear with the EOS system. Have been shooting Nikon for film and digital ever since. Like you, I appreciate buying lenses that I can use natively on both my film and digital bodies.

I shoot the D4 and have never had buffer issues, and I shoot RAW for basketball, football, soccer, etc. The D3 may be somewhat different.

I use a 300 f2.8 with a 1.4 TC all the time for football, and the equivalent f4 of the combo has no issues with the auto-focus speed on the D4. It is plenty snappy.

As far as selling your Canon gear, especially the digital bodies, prepare to take a hit on those. That's just the market.

Good luck with whatever you decide. And if you have specific questions about specific Nikon body and lens combos, post them here and maybe some of us can advise.

 

[filmtwit]

What's wrong with picking up the Canon 70-200 2.8L IS v1 or v2?

 

[ray*j*gun]

I have used Nikon since the 60's and have never had to deviate from the line of lenses. My current list of Nikon gear is mostly film but I also have a D610 and a D7000. (dont ask me why both). ALL my old glass works well on both digis and the IQ from both new Nikon lenses and the legacy glass are superb. The ONLY drawback is the heft of SLR's but given that Nikon is king in my book. BTW tried Canon and only held onto the early RF's.

 

[bigeye]

A lifelong Nikon user, I'm headed the other way. I don't think there is much difference between them as a system*, but I'm coming up on the time to choose and Canon seems to have a more coherent platform to my use.

The differences are relatively small, but collectively are significant as I can't find many that I prefer with the current Nikons. MP of the 810 is all that really stands out for me and I'm perfectly fine with 20mp.

Nikon concentrates very hard on splitting consumer and enthusiast/pro gear. Canon gear is pretty much expensive or less expensive, but all operates similarly. The lens lineup suits me better too (pro 'trinity' are all a smidge better, wide is no longer a weakness, there is an excellent range of teles), with Roger at lensrentals seeming to prefer the construction/design of newer Canon glass a bit better.

Your need for old lenses and film might take me back to Nikon and their heyday. But, the current Canon stuff is trending as a more coherent platform for my needs.

* - Really important. Which you use doesn't matter a whit. No one can tell the difference between a Nikon or Canon 16-35 image. It comes down to your frustration/enjoyment/ease of use.

 

[kxl]

Lifelong Nikonista here as well, currently with twin D800e's, F100 and FM2N.
There are significant benefits to being able to use AIS lenses on the latest DSLR bodies. However, you need to know that the body-lens backward compatibility is not 100%. There are constraints.

 

[wakarimasen]

What's wrong with picking up the Canon 70-200 2.8L IS v1 or v2?

I could, but as soon as I use an extender, I lose the cross-function focussing (greater than F/2.8). Plus, I don't get the reach that I currently have with the 100-400 lens.

 

[wakarimasen]

Lifelong Nikonista here as well, currently with twin D800e's, F100 and FM2N.
There are significant benefits to being able to use AIS lenses on the latest DSLR bodies. However, you need to know that the body-lens backward compatibility is not 100%. There are constraints.

Can you comment a little more on the constraints? I know that the Ai lenses operate in aperture or manual mode only, but that would be fine for me.

 

[kxl]

Can you comment a little more on the constraints? I know that the Ai lenses operate in aperture or manual mode only, but that would be fine for me.

Off the top of my head:

1) Non-AI lenses should not be mounted on the majority of the latest bodies. There are exceptions, of course.

2) Some of the latest consumer DSLR's require AFS lenses, i.e., the focusing mechanism is in the lens not the body. You can mount non-AFS lenses but have to manually focus.

3) 'G" lenses (no aperture ring) can mount but won't have full functionally with some older film bodies.

4) AI/AIS lenses will mount but not meter on some consumer DSLR's

5) VR lenses mount, but the VR itself won't work on some film bodies, such as the N90.

I'm sure there are other limitations, but those limitations are vastly outweighed by the benefits. Also, since you are interested in the higher end bodies, most of the above won't apply to you except for the NON-AI lens constraint.

 

[lawrence]

At the weekend I was shooting with my Nikon D700 and two AIS lenses, the 24mm f2.0 and the 35mm f2.0. As far as I'm concerned both these lenses are superb on the digital body in aperture priority mode, the only bugbear being that I often forget (or don't have time) to dial in which lens I'm using so the lens info on my files is usually incorrect 😱

 

[lawrence]

Oh yes, before I forget, focussing in dim light with AIS lenses on the D700 is a breeze because there's a little focus confirmation dot down at bottom left that actually makes using the 24mm easier than with a split image screen.

 

[wakarimasen]

At the weekend I was shooting with my Nikon D700 and two AIS lenses, the 24mm f2.0 and the 35mm f2.0. As far as I'm concerned both these lenses are superb on the digital body in aperture priority mode, the only bugbear being that I often forget (or don't have time) to dial in which lens I'm using so the lens info on my files is usually incorrect 😱

Its the use of the Ai and Ai-S lenses on a digital body, that really attracts me towards Nikon. I bought a D300 last year to try this out and the use of the lenses (once the data was 'dialled-in' to the body) was simplicity itself. I baulked shifting at that point, because when I compared images from the Nikon to my 1D Mark IIN (which I had at the time) the Canon seemed to be preferable.

 

[Bille]

Hello Folks,
Posting this here, in the hope of getting some advice.

You may find this helpful
http://www.photographybay.com/2010/10/31/canon-1d-mark-iv-vs-nikon-d3s-autofocus-performance-part-4/

 

[wakarimasen]

Great read - thanks for posting the link. Nice photographs in your blog by the way.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Do a search for my posts on how great my D3 is with a modified Canon Ec-B screen. I shoot exclusively manual focus Ai and AiS lenses from 17mm up to 300mm and have no problem catching action. The burst modes of the D3 are great when capturing only raw or jpg. I actually think it's faster using raw but i also hate editing so I shoot as little as possible but in a fast game like rugby that high frame rate would be good.

One issue with the DX mode on the D3 is that you are getting a much smaller file with a lot less flexibility with regard to enlargement. A very inexpensive option would be to get a D2X/s and use that for your long lenses. The image quality is extraordinary and the pixel pitch is still the highest of any Nikon sensor. They are available very cheaply and are still very viable cameras for anyone's use, professional or amateur. Shooting a D2x alongside a D3 would be a superb kit. It's slower than its much-maligned though extraordinary older sister, the D2H. Go try to find a D2Hs (the s variant had a better processor and a buffer upgrade) for sale and you'll be hard pressed since they are still used professionally although the youngest one is eight years old.

I used Canon for a few years at the very end of my Navy career and afterwards. Both digital and film. My favorite Canon camera was the EOS 1NRS. The problem I had was that Canon had shot itself in the foot and FD lenses weren't usable on the digital bodies without optical adapters which degraded the image quality. At the time I still had a few Nikon lenses and an FM but using an F-EOS adapter on the Canons was a kludge.

I've come to a comfortable level of gear that is all interchangeable between a few digital bodies and a few film bodies. All Nikon (aside from the film rangefinder stuff and medium format.)

Phil Forrest

 

[wakarimasen]

Hi Phil
Funny you mention the D2HS, as I've considered this camera also. It's image quality at ISO 6400 put me off a little, as I found myself needing to use this setting during the Autumn rugby games, due to the low light levels. However in evey other aspect I think it would be a good fit. A D2HS plus a D700 would be an interesting combination!

 

[CameraQuest]

There is no right or wrong, just choices.

some you did not mention ..

1) shoot your EOS lenses on an EOS film body instead of the FD's

2) use Nikon bodies for film, and a Rayqual Nikon to EOS adapter to shoot Nikon lenses on your EOS bodies (manually of course)

3) if you have no done so, try the Canon T90 body and the 300TL flash. The T90 is one of the best film cameras ever and might change your mind about FD cameras. hell, even I love the T90 - and I HATE Canon!

4) all of that said, Nikon in my view has the best overall digital SLRs since the introduction of the D800. Add to that their flash system is generally considered the best.

Stephen

 

[Phil_F_NM]

Hi Phil
Funny you mention the D2HS, as I've considered this camera also. It's image quality at ISO 6400 put me off a little, as I found myself needing to use this setting during the Autumn rugby games, due to the low light levels. However in evey other aspect I think it would be a good fit. A D2HS plus a D700 would be an interesting combination!

ISO 6400 from a D2Hs isn't good at all. I'd stick with below ISO 3200, shoot raw and adjust the gain in post processing. You get a much cleaner file that way. The full frame capability and extraordinary high ISO performance of the D3 are the two main benefits of that newer camera over the older D2 bodies. I had actually been searching for a D2x and D2Hs to replace mine that were stolen in 2013 when a friend put me in touch with a seller of a D3 for pretty cheap. I still want a D2Hs though. That camera has a kind of magic to it and I think that is why people don't sell them.

Phil Forrest

 

[wakarimasen]

Many thanks for all of the responses folks. I've had more on here in one afternoon, that I did in the last 36 hours on another forum!

I have tried a T90, but I forgot to mention it in the original post. Its a great camera in terms of functionality, but for me it was too much like an EOS 1 that used FD lenses. I'm sure for some that represents heaven on earth, but I think i prefer a more classic design when it comes to manual focus SLRs.

I have thought of trying some primes on my 1V with a Ec-B focus screen. Truth be told I think I'd still find that odd. The simplicity of an F3 or an FE - when you press the shutter button, and there isn't a loud whirring that follows - is what I think I enjoy.

As Stephen said - there isn't really a right or wrong answer. Maybe I just need to try a few more options!

 

[Baby of Macon]

I recently bought a D2HS with less than ten k shutter count and condition to match from my friendly camera store for 249 Euro. Perfect sports camera as long as lighting conditions allow.

However, your specific requirements, how about considering a D3S and the Tamron 150-600. Its a bit slow but with the D3s's high iso capabilities that shouldn't be a problem.