# Tony wanted to switch to Nikon but Couldn't



## jaayres20 (Dec 5, 2014)

After the release of the D810 Tony was ready to sell off all of his Canon gear and go to Nikon. Then he found out that switching to Nikon required you to also buy Nikon lenses, which are just not as good. So reluctantly he has to stay with Canon. Amazingly it turns out that Canon lenses are hands down major winners head to head. I guess the little extra DR couldn't overcome the lens issue. This really amazes me that you would sell all of your stuff as new technology comes out not knowing what is going to come next. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jva08HY6uLE


----------



## Sporgon (Dec 5, 2014)

Guess Tony will just have to be content with posting his images on Facebook then.


----------



## jrista (Dec 5, 2014)

Personally, I would never switch brands. I would just expand my kit. Especially if there is an option to adapt my existing Canon lenses...that makes it easier and cheaper to add something non-Canon to your kit.


I'm considering doing this with the NX1. I still need to see how the testing pans out over the next couple of months, as I am in no rush, but if the camera tests well, and even more so if Samsung releases firmware updates to fix a couple of the known issues with AF in low light, I'd totally add an NX1 to my kit. I'd probably also eventually add some lenses as well. 


The same goes for the successor to the A7r...I'd add that as a landscape camera if it fixes a couple annoying things.


But, I wouldn't sell my Canon kit.


----------



## raptor3x (Dec 5, 2014)

jaayres20 said:


> After the release of the D810 Tony was ready to sell off all of his Canon gear and go to Nikon. Then he found out that switching to Nikon required you to also buy Nikon lenses, which are just not as good. So reluctantly he has to stay with Canon. Amazingly it turns out that Canon lenses are hands down major winners head to head. I guess the little extra DR couldn't overcome the lens issue. This really amazes me that you would sell all of your stuff as new technology comes out not knowing what is going to come next.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jva08HY6uLE



That's not quite what he said. He said that there are certain lenses (most notably the 70-200ii) in the Canon lineup that are important to him that don't have an equal in the Nikon lineup; he does't make any sort of blanket comment about the Nikon lenses being not as good.


----------



## DRR (Dec 5, 2014)

This is why I don't buy cameras, I buy systems. You can always chase the best sensor or the fastest ultrawide zoom or the most technologically advanced camera with the best AF - but the pendulum will swing the other way eventually and you'll have to buy everything over if that's your priority.

When you invest in a system you balance the strengths of the lens lineup with the bodies available and third party support. That's why I'm with Canon, their sensors are not the most advanced but I'm using a 6 year old sensor so what do I care? The strength of the company and the lens lineup more than makes up for it for me.

I am with jrista, if anything I would supplement my kit with specialized equipment, not replace it altogether.


----------



## steepjay (Dec 5, 2014)

+1 to jrista's comment about running multiple systems... 

I was a Nikon guy when I started shooting SLRs in film, my first body was an FM2n. Developed a lens and body collection and then discovered the wonder of Canon white glass and AF with an EOS 3... In the world of digital, Canon had a pretty healthy advantage across the board for a while but the 14-24 Nikon tempted me into a D700 and I still use that wide angle combo a lot, although the absence of easy filters is a bit disappointing sometimes. 

There's definitely an argument to be made for one system for familiarity reasons, but I figure I control enough other technology in my life without being confused, I should be able to handle two camera menu / button systems! LOL And on the Nikon, I'm only shooting WA so sub-second config changes aren't in the cards very often.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 5, 2014)

Lucky for him that he's an Internet personality. If you straddle a fence like that in real life, it's painful...especially if there's barbed wire on it.


----------



## jaayres20 (Dec 5, 2014)

raptor3x said:


> jaayres20 said:
> 
> 
> > After the release of the D810 Tony was ready to sell off all of his Canon gear and go to Nikon. Then he found out that switching to Nikon required you to also buy Nikon lenses, which are just not as good. So reluctantly he has to stay with Canon. Amazingly it turns out that Canon lenses are hands down major winners head to head. I guess the little extra DR couldn't overcome the lens issue. This really amazes me that you would sell all of your stuff as new technology comes out not knowing what is going to come next.
> ...


I guess technically you are correct, but it is true that there are a lot of really good lenses that Canon has that are simply not avalible in the Nikon variety. He didn't even mention the 132 f/2. Also if he is right and the Nikon 70-200 only goes to 130 that is a huge difference.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 5, 2014)

steepjay said:


> +1 to jrista's comment about running multiple systems...
> 
> I was a Nikon guy when I started shooting SLRs in film, my first body was an FM2n. Developed a lens and body collection and then discovered the wonder of Canon white glass and AF with an EOS 3... In the world of digital, Canon had a pretty healthy advantage across the board for a while but the 14-24 Nikon tempted me into a D700 and I still use that wide angle combo a lot, although the absence of easy filters is a bit disappointing sometimes.
> 
> There's definitely an argument to be made for one system for familiarity reasons, but I figure I control enough other technology in my life without being confused, I should be able to handle two camera menu / button systems! LOL And on the Nikon, I'm only shooting WA so sub-second config changes aren't in the cards very often.



I am absolutely not interested in anything outside of a single system, it becomes difficult to maintain backup capabilities efficiently and basic things like batteries and chargers, cable releases, flashes etc etc get doubled up when there is no need. It just isn't an efficient, or necessary, way of working for many working pros.

As for the 14-24 filters, look at the WonderPana system, I have one for the 17TS-E and it is a very good, and reasonably priced solution.


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 6, 2014)

I think going to a dual system is very restricting 

Mostly, I shoot Canon... but for the Kayak there is nothing in Canon land that comes close to the ruggedness of the Olympus "Tough" series of p/s cameras. Despite the improved weather sealing of the 7D2, it does not have underwater modes  ... and for use on a kite or a drone, it is very hard to beat a GoPro.

To my way of thinking, it is the task that dictates the equipment choices, not brand loyalty.


----------



## slclick (Dec 6, 2014)

I was really hoping the OP was writing in third person. Then I saw the link. Made me think of 'The Jimmy'


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Apa0nG1OfUc


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 6, 2014)

*Tony Northrup Attacks Again -- Run For Your Lives*

Our favorite camera pundit is at it again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=subDtZIRmnE

Best witty comeback to his latest opus earns my undying respect.

...annnnnnd Go!

- A


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 6, 2014)

While Some of the Nikon lenses are definitely lacking, their mainstream lenses, the 14-24, 24-70, 80-200 are pretty much the equal of Canon. Since the photographer makes most of the difference, its not really a factor in the long run.

What does bother me about Nikon is their long repair turnaround.

I'd be happy with either system, each has its strengths and weaknesses, but I would definitely be the limiting factor.


----------



## SPL (Dec 6, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lucky for him that he's an Internet personality. If you straddle a fence like that in real life, it's painful...especially if there's barbed wire on it.


+1


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 6, 2014)

GraFax said:


> raptor3x said:
> 
> 
> > jaayres20 said:
> ...




+ 1. That's what he said on a podcast I listened to today.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2014)

GraFax said:


> No respect given to the big whites at all. For a sports/wildlife budget over $10,000. He says go Nikon.



He found that the D810 was better than the 5DIII for sports...his "sports test" was his co-host walking sedately toward him, shot with a Tamron 24-70/2.8. Really credible recommendation... </sarcasm> :


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 6, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> GraFax said:
> 
> 
> > No respect given to the big whites at all. For a sports/wildlife budget over $10,000. He says go Nikon.
> ...




Lol that's pretty bad. He also wrote in his buying guide that photographers don't need to buy calibration devices or calibrate there monitors that that's for designers or graphic artist not photographers. Which is really bad advice. I agree with him on some things and other times I really disagree. He really brags up the canon 400 5.6 lens which is a great lens for the price and very sharp.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 6, 2014)

GraFax said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > GraFax said:
> ...



+1....it's weird defending him. He seems like a nice guy and I think he does a pretty good job for the market you described he's aiming at. At least he try's to be impartial or seems to be anyway.


----------



## zlatko (Dec 6, 2014)

This is the guy who made a video to claim that Panasonic and Olympus "cheat you" by labeling their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 6, 2014)

zlatko said:


> This is the guy who made a video to claim that Panasonic and Olympus "cheat you" by labeling their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses.




I didn't see that but is he trying to say 2.8 lenses are a little different on that sensor size compared to what it's like on ff or crop sensors? My iPhone is a f2.2 but I'm not going to get bokeh with it since the sensor is so small. Do you think that's kinda what he's trying to say?


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2014)

Poor tony. Guy can't get no respect.  I have a hard time listening to him, he sometime has a halting way of talking that kind of jerk at your years/ But in geneal I think he is a pretty nice guy, even if he isn't the sharpest lens i nthe kit. 


s/[sloppywriting]/[goodwriting]/g  8)


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 6, 2014)

jrista said:


> Poor tony. Guy can't get no respect.  I have a hard time listening to him, he sometime has a halting way of talking that kind of jerk at your years/ But in geneal I think he is a pretty nice guy, even if he isn't the sharpest lens i nthe kit.
> 
> 
> s/[sloppywriting]/[goodwriting]/g  8)




Lol I like the not the sharpest lens in the kit.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 6, 2014)

GraFax said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > This is the guy who made a video to claim that Panasonic and Olympus "cheat you" by labeling their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses.
> ...




No worrys


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2014)

GraFax said:


> I think the point he was trying to make there was that the D810 is a D800E you can actually use. It sounds like the AF is comparable to the 5D3 although I don't think it surpasses it. No it's probably not as good of a camera for tracking moving subjects.



His point was actually that the D810 had much better tracking than the 5DIII. Of course, he only managed a keeper rate slightly higher than 60% with the 5DIII in the sport of slow walking. He went in to conclude that if you have a 5DIII but you aren't a pro and you only post your pictures to Facebook, it's _probably_ not worth switching to the D810. Yeah, that's an impartial, unbiased review. :


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2014)

zlatko said:


> This is the guy who made a video to claim that Panasonic and Olympus "cheat you" by labeling their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses.



The Panasonic FZ200 has f/2.8 24-600mm printed on the side of the barrel, that's a lie.


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 6, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > This is the guy who made a video to claim that Panasonic and Olympus "cheat you" by labeling their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses.
> ...


If the last lens element isn't 215mm across, it isn't 600F2.8......


----------



## TeT (Dec 6, 2014)

jaayres20 said:


> After the release of the D810 Tony was ready to sell off all of his Canon gear and go to Nikon. Then he found out that switching to Nikon required you to also buy Nikon lenses, which are just not as good. So reluctantly he has to stay with Canon. Amazingly it turns out that Canon lenses are hands down major winners head to head. I guess the little extra DR couldn't overcome the lens issue. This really amazes me that you would sell all of your stuff as new technology comes out not knowing what is going to come next.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jva08HY6uLE



Oh its him... I would wish to have a notary and tape recorder handy any time I was in serious conversation with that guy.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2014)

GraFax said:


> Not to quible, but I think bias implies that he favored the D810 to the 5D3 prior to side by side testing.



I suspect he was biased, which is why I used the word. If a product has been on the market for a while, many potential buyers will have already become owners. Anyone who earns money through website affiliate link sales has a vested interest in recommending the newest products. Northrup is becoming the East Coast version of Ken Rockwell. 




GraFax said:


> The Facebook comment, although poorly phrased, is accurate. If you primarily use electronic media the differences between the 5D3 and D810 are trivial, if you print large they are not.



If you're posting to Facebook, there's little enough difference between the D810 and an iPhone. The issue is with the corollary – if you are a pro or do more than share images electronically, it _is_ worth switching (or maybe not, if you shoot portraits with a 70-200/2.8).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2014)

GraFax said:


> I just don't think it's a pervasive anti-Canon bias.



Nor do I, and I haven't suggested that. If a 5DIV comes out in early 2015, with a 24 MP sensor, 11.5 stops of DR, and 8 fps, I bet it would be deemed a better camera than the D810 for pros and anyone doing more than posting to Facebook.


----------



## windsorc (Dec 6, 2014)

I don't think it matters what system you use. Can you really tell the difference between Nikon and Canon equivalent lenses? 
most of the time probably not. I use Nikon for senior pics and paid work, Canon for wildlife because of the 400mm f5.6 for which there is no 
Nikon equivalent and I don't want to pay 2700 for their new 80-400, yes I'm a budget wildlife shooter, and I use Fuji for hiking.
What should be embarrassing for Canon is the way that Nikon sensors (or Sony's or Fuji's) appear to be improved over the Canon one's, for years and years.
There's no excuse for that after all these years. If you can't beat them, you may as well join them and use Sony sensors like everyone else.
The Samsung nx1 comes along and everyone should be asking how Samsung can have a 15fps burst rate,
and Nikon and Canon have nothing close (for the cost).


----------



## zlatko (Dec 6, 2014)

Ryan85 said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > This is the guy who made a video to claim that Panasonic and Olympus "cheat you" by labeling their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses.
> ...



Yes, that's what he was trying to say. But to say that manufacturers "cheat you" about this is wrong in a number of ways. No, it's preposterous and quite unfair to the manufacturers. Aperture is not a measure of depth of field or bokeh. If you input f/2.8 or any aperture on a light meter or flash, it doesn't ask how big the sensor/film is or which lens or camera you're using, or how much depth of field you want. An exposure of, say, f/2.8, 1/250, ISO 400, is the same, regardless of the capture format. Manufacturers absolutely have to label their f/2.8 lenses as f/2.8 lenses (or use T-stops). To label an f/2.8 micro Four Thirds lens as "f/5.6" or "f/5.6 equivalent", because that's the effective depth of field in full-frame, would just be wrong. It's like stating distance based on how fast you want to go: a soccer field is 100 meters long if you're running, but "200 meters" long if you're walking. No, it's still 100 meters even if you're walking. So manufacturers don't cheat anyone with correct aperture labels. It's up to the photographer to know what depth/blur their lens & sensor will give — that's not the purpose of the aperture label on a lens.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 7, 2014)

zlatko said:


> Ryan85 said:
> 
> 
> > zlatko said:
> ...



I agree with the point your making. He' used a poor choice of words by saying they cheat you. I didn't watch the video where he said that so I'm not sure what context he was saying it in. Your right It's up to the photographer or who ever is buying the camera/lenses to do the research and know the difference in the apperture on different camera systems and sensor sizes. I've seen a couple videos from the guy but I don't follow everything he does so I don't really get why so many people take shots at him. The times I've heard him he's given his opion and sometimes I've agreed and other times I havent. I've heard him say both good and bad things about both canon and nikon. Im just not going to take a shot at the guy for saying they cheat you, I got what he meant.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 7, 2014)

zlatko said:


> If you input f/2.8 or any aperture on a light meter or flash, it doesn't ask how big the sensor/film is or which lens or camera you're using, or how much depth of field you want. An exposure of, say, f/2.8, 1/250, ISO 400, is the same, regardless of the capture format.



Even exposure is irrelevant. The f/number is an intrinsic property of the lens, no imaging device needed. Focal length (distance from focal plane to rear nodal point at infinity focus) divided by entrance pupil diameter (iris diaphragm diameter). 

Where the trouble comes in is when an arbitrary standard format is picked (generally 35mm film aka full frame) then try to define the parameters of a given lens on another format in those terms, because such definitions are rarely complete. An equivalent FoV is given, and the exposure is the same. The DoF is not the same, nor is the perspective, nor is the noise. The problem is even worse when a manufacturer prints that 'FF equivalent' focal length on the barrel of the lens.


----------



## JorritJ (Dec 7, 2014)

Ryan85 said:


> I agree with the point your making. He' used a poor choice of words by saying they cheat you. I didn't watch the video where he said that so I'm not sure what context he was saying it in. Your right It's up to the photographer or who ever is buying the camera/lenses to do the research and know the difference in the apperture on different camera systems and sensor sizes. I've seen a couple videos from the guy but I don't follow everything he does so I don't really get why so many people take shots at him. The times I've heard him he's given his opion and sometimes I've agreed and other times I havent. I've heard him say both good and bad things about both canon and nikon. Im just not going to take a shot at the guy for saying they cheat you, I got what he meant.



Apparently you understand the actual point of communication, where the larger part of the internet merely bickers over the words used.


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 7, 2014)

Yep


----------



## zlatko (Dec 7, 2014)

JorritJ said:


> Ryan85 said:
> 
> 
> > I agree with the point your making. He' used a poor choice of words by saying they cheat you. I didn't watch the video where he said that so I'm not sure what context he was saying it in. Your right It's up to the photographer or who ever is buying the camera/lenses to do the research and know the difference in the apperture on different camera systems and sensor sizes. I've seen a couple videos from the guy but I don't follow everything he does so I don't really get why so many people take shots at him. The times I've heard him he's given his opion and sometimes I've agreed and other times I havent. I've heard him say both good and bad things about both canon and nikon. Im just not going to take a shot at the guy for saying they cheat you, I got what he meant.
> ...



Why bicker over words? Would you mind if someone unfairly accused you of cheating? 

The actual video is titled: "How Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Canon, Nikon & Fuji Cheat You". Cheating is acting dishonesty or unfairly, in order to gain an advantage. Cheating is deceiving or tricking someone. 

In the video, he quotes user reviews on Amazon.com and makes fun of people who were "misled" into buying the Panasonic 12-35/2.8 lens. "They paid $1,000 and they didn't get what they thought they were getting," he says; "Shame on Panasonic for marketing the lens like this."


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 7, 2014)

Like I said I didn't see the video. I think his videos and buying advise are targeted towards the husband shoping for his wife or people just wanting a first camera as a hobbyist. I see what he's saying the 12-35 2.8 seems like a great buy for 1000 dollars compared to what a canon or nikon would charge. So for someone starting out that may seem the better buy. The focal lengths and different sensor sizes are going to produce a different result compared to a ff or crop sensor. I don't know how they market those lenses but he's giving his opinion for free. I wouldn't have used the word cheating like he did but I get the point he's trying to make. He's entitled to his opinion even if we don't agree with him. Some things I've seen I agree with him on and others I dont. At least he's not coming across as a fan boy of just one brand.


----------

