A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Canon EOS > EOS EF L - Lenses vs. Nikon...

Featured Equipment Deals

Basic Photo Tips: Aperture, Shutter Speed, and ISO Read More

Basic Photo Tips: Aperture, Shutter Speed, and ISO

Just as it was 100 years ago and just as it is today, every camera—be it film or digital—is nothing more than a lightproof box with a lens at one end and light sensitive film or a digital...

Latest Equipment Articles

Sun Position Tracking Apps Read More

Sun Position Tracking Apps

These 5 apps, ranging in price from free to $8.99, are our top picks for tracking sun (and moon) light. Also ranging in complexity, some help you keep tabs on the ideal lighting of the day while...

Latest Learning Articles

Basic Image Development in Lightroom: Color Editing (Video Tutorial) Read More

Basic Image Development in Lightroom: Color Editing (Video Tutorial)

Learn basic HSL (hue, saturation, and luminance) color adjustments as well as split toning (adjusting color in highlights and lowlights) in this next video.


EOS EF L - Lenses vs. Nikon lenses

George Duncan , May 10, 2005; 04:17 p.m.

I use a Canon EOS 10-D with the 17-40 f/4 L and a 70-200 f/4 L. Some people I know often say that the top of the range Nikon- lenses produce sharper results then there Canon- L counterparts when used at medium and wide open apertures. I also learned that National Geographic Magazine mainly uses Nikon glass. Is there a reason for that? Are the top of the range Nikon zooms and fixed lenses actually better in terms of resolution and sharpness then their Canon L- counterparts,especially when used on a digital body?

Responses


    1   |   2   |   3     Next    Last

Billy Ness , May 10, 2005; 04:25 p.m.

Name some specific lenses and you might get some useful responses, but otherwise it will just be a N vs C debate which is pointless. Each lens model will perform differently than another model in the same line so you can't make a generalization for the whole line. Both canon and nikon have lenses that out perform the equivalent from the other brand, but there's no universal rule of which brand is better, compare specific lenses to each other and you'll see that some are better than others, and the better ones will come from both camps depending on the focal length and aperture.

Bill Van Antwerp , May 10, 2005; 04:32 p.m.

photodo will let you know the objective data, subjective look is something else entirely

Bob Atkins , May 10, 2005; 04:34 p.m.

If you can't produce top notch, commercially viable work with either if those lenses, it's not the lenses that are at fault. Ditto for any of Canon or Nikon's top lenses. They are both excellent.

"Comparisons are odious" - Sir John Fortescue

Bartek B , May 10, 2005; 05:02 p.m.

Billy i have a lens testes , Canon EF 70-200 mm f/2,8 L USM vs Tokina AT-X 80-200 mm f/2,8 PRO vs Minolta AF 80-200 f/2,8 Apo G vs AF-S Nikkor 80-200 mm f/2,8 D IF-ED Tamron SP AF 70-210 mm f/2,8 LD vs Pentax SMC FA* 80-200 mm f/2,8 ED. i have attached it as jpg , This test was in polish photo-magazine.


Attachment: forum.jpg

Bartek B , May 10, 2005; 05:05 p.m.

In tabele left side 70mm 135mm 200mm right side

Ken Papai , May 10, 2005; 05:09 p.m.

The majority of Sports Pro photographers use Canon. If Nikon were so much better you'd think that might tip the other way? Nikon and Canon both make excellent glass. Nikon has profoundly better DSLRs, especially for sports shooting (*all* of the 1D and 1Ds Canons).

Jon Austin , May 10, 2005; 05:31 p.m.

"Nikon has profoundly better DSLRs, especially for sports shooting (*all* of the 1D and 1Ds Canons)."

Did you mean to write, "Canon has profoundly better DSLRs..."?

Ken Papai , May 10, 2005; 05:55 p.m.

Argh.. Yikes! Not trying to diss Nikon or anything but the Canon 1D* cameras are best of class (8MP to 16MP). Nice error on my part reversing the two.

Patrick (Washington, DC) , May 10, 2005; 06:04 p.m.

unfortunately it is impossible to generalize, both Nikon and Canon produce some top glass, each with their own advantages.

in a perfect world the mount would be the same and you could pick and choose the glass that you prefer, but that is as you know impossible.

from what i know, NG photographers using Nikkor glass are primarely shooting 35mm film. Most/may pros are using Canon these days due to full frame sensors, but many pros will find the new D2X (albeith encryption issues) will produce more the adequate output for pro use.

"Legendary" glass modern glass from Nikon include 17-35/2.8, 28/1.4, 135 DC, 70-200/2.8 VR and a few others. "Legendary" Canon glass examples are 24-70/2.8 L, 85/1.2 L, 135/2 L, 70-200/2.8 L IS etc.

Interestinly enough, neither Nikon or Canon seem to want to produce a true superlative 50/1.4 these days, e.g. matching a stellar manual lens like the modern Leica-R 50/1.4 or Contax/Zeiss 50/1.4.

I even know pros that keep both systems because the like/need the look of a particular lens. Who am I to argue with that - the make a nice living...

Regarless, this is all nit-picking because if someone is chiefly concerned with highest quallity output they would use a larger format system anyhow.


    1   |   2   |   3     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses