Canon's Big Advantage Over Nikon

It has come to my attention that NIkon has discontinued all (except 1)
of their medium zoom lenses that are reasonable priced leaving
themselves with a fine but expensive group of FX lenses plus some of the
less expensive DX lenses.

On the other hand Canon has a better line of reasonable price medium
range zoom EF lenses (not L designatged) that are still available. It
seems, at leaset on the surface that the Canon lense line is more
complete with more choices.

measekite wrote:
It has come to my attention that NIkon has discontinued all (except 1)
of their medium zoom lenses that are reasonable priced leaving
themselves with a fine but expensive group of FX lenses plus some of
the less expensive DX lenses.

On the other hand Canon has a better line of reasonable price medium
range zoom EF lenses (not L designatged) that are still available. It
seems, at leaset on the surface that the Canon lense line is more
complete with more choices.

Doubtless you can still get many of these discontinued lenses second-hand,
or as shop stock. But I'm interested to know just which lenses you are
missing? With lenses like 18-200mm and 16-85mm zoom, I find the Nikon
range superior. I just got the 70-300mm f/4.5-f/5.6 VR (image
stabilised), and that's a great lens which is not too heavy. Full-frame
as well.

From reading this group, I get the impression that only the L-series of
Canon lenses give results as good as their Nikon equivalent, and non-L
series are noticeably worse. Perhaps this is a false impression?

Both lens ranges appear significantly wider than those from other
manufacturers, though.

David

measekite wrote:
It has come to my attention that NIkon has discontinued all (except 1)
of their medium zoom lenses that are reasonable priced leaving
themselves with a fine but expensive group of FX lenses plus some of the
less expensive DX lenses.

On the other hand Canon has a better line of reasonable price medium
range zoom EF lenses (not L designatged) that are still available. It
seems, at leaset on the surface that the Canon lense line is more
complete with more choices.


Surely someone who has been trolling as long as you have can do better than
that? Have you ever made so much as one post that wasn't trolling?

How come you have popped up here? Get too much egg on your face after being
caught lying a few days ago?

Tony

"measekite" wrote in message
...
It has come to my attention that NIkon has discontinued all (except 1) of
their medium zoom lenses that are reasonable priced leaving themselves
with a fine but expensive group of FX lenses plus some of the less
expensive DX lenses.

On the other hand Canon has a better line of reasonable price medium range
zoom EF lenses (not L designatged) that are still available. It seems, at
leaset on the surface that the Canon lense line is more complete with more
choices.

Hardly matters anyway, most buyers of either system will only ever buy one
or two lenses and there is plenty of range for them, only the top tier of
buyers want or indeed need more. In fact this is true of all the D-SLR
manufacturers except maybe Sigma.

measekite wrote:
It has come to my attention that NIkon has discontinued all (except 1)
of their medium zoom lenses that are reasonable priced leaving
themselves with a fine but expensive group of FX lenses plus some of the
less expensive DX lenses.

On the other hand Canon has a better line of reasonable price medium
range zoom EF lenses (not L designatged) that are still available. It
seems, at leaset on the surface that the Canon lense line is more
complete with more choices.

Lens selection has always been a big selling point for Canon over Nikon,
it's just gotten even more pronounced more recently. Canon maintains
three lines of lenses, the L, the mid-range "prosumer," and the low end
consumer.

One good thing about Canon is that many of their "prosumer" lenses have
L quality optics, so you can get a very good lens for a reasonable
price. With Nikon you have the two extremes of low end and high end with
little in the middle.

Nikon must have found is that the market for those medium zooms wasn't
sufficent to warrant continuing to offer them, but With Nikon's
increasing market share (they should catch, if not pass, Canon in D-SLR
sales in 2008), you'd think that they wouldn't want to be trimming their
lens offerings, since lens sales are where the big money is. Nikon's big
sales increases came mostly in low-end bodies whose owners aren't going
to be buying many expensive lenses.

David J Taylor wrote:
measekite wrote:

It has come to my attention that NIkon has discontinued all (except 1)
of their medium zoom lenses that are reasonable priced leaving
themselves with a fine but expensive group of FX lenses plus some of
the less expensive DX lenses.

On the other hand Canon has a better line of reasonable price medium
range zoom EF lenses (not L designatged) that are still available. It
seems, at leaset on the surface that the Canon lense line is more
complete with more choices.


Doubtless you can still get many of these discontinued lenses second-hand,
or as shop stock. But I'm interested to know just which lenses you are
missing? With lenses like 18-200mm
I believe this is a DX lens
and 16-85mm zoom, I find the Nikon
range superior.

I just got the 70-300mm f/4.5-f/5.6 VR (image
stabilised), and that's a great lens which is not too heavy. Full-frame
as well.

Correct but I believe this is expensive like the Canon L series. Read
www.kenrockwell.com

That is where I read about this.
From reading this group, I get the impression that only the L-series of
Canon lenses give results as good as their Nikon equivalent, and non-L
series are noticeably worse.
In some cases but not in other cases. Many times the standard lenses
are sharper and produce better results. The L series lense have
superior build and are usually faster. Slower lenses are cheaper to
produce and are many times sharper.
Perhaps this is a false impression?

Both lens ranges appear significantly wider than those from other
manufacturers, though.

David

SMS wrote:
measekite wrote:
It has come to my attention that NIkon has discontinued all (except
1) of their medium zoom lenses that are reasonable priced leaving
themselves with a fine but expensive group of FX lenses plus some of
the less expensive DX lenses.

On the other hand Canon has a better line of reasonable price medium
range zoom EF lenses (not L designatged) that are still available.
It seems, at leaset on the surface that the Canon lense line is more
complete with more choices.

Lens selection has always been a big selling point for Canon over
Nikon, it's just gotten even more pronounced more recently. Canon
maintains three lines of lenses, the L, the mid-range "prosumer," and
the low end consumer.

One good thing about Canon is that many of their "prosumer" lenses
have L quality optics, so you can get a very good lens for a
reasonable price. With Nikon you have the two extremes of low end and
high end with little in the middle.
That is similar to what I posted and what I have been reading. Many
standard lenses produce images as good as the L series but they are
slower and the build quality is not as good. And if you are sure you
are going to stay with the APC sensor then the EF-S Canon lenses are
smaller, lighter, cheaper and produce as good a results on those cameras
as the EF lens line.

Nikon must have found is that the market for those medium zooms wasn't
sufficent to warrant continuing to offer them, but With Nikon's
increasing market share (they should catch, if not pass, Canon in
D-SLR sales in 2008), you'd think that they wouldn't want to be
trimming their lens offerings, since lens sales are where the big
money is. Nikon's big sales increases came mostly in low-end bodies
whose owners aren't going to be buying many expensive lenses.
That may be true with the likes of the D40 and D60 but I think Canon
450D aka XSI is better. But basically and for the most part I do not
think you will see much difference between comparable priced Nikon and
Canon 11x14 prints. Of course you may see differences in color etc but
that does not mean one is better than the other; just different.

As for the cameras themselves most have similar features. If you need
one feature that the other does not have then the choice is easy. Other
than that just buy the one that feels better but make sure the tail does
not wag the dog. Choose the potential lenses first. And if all of that
is the same then choose on price and looks.

measekite wrote:
David J Taylor wrote:
[]
I just got the 70-300mm f/4.5-f/5.6 VR (image
stabilised), and that's a great lens which is not too heavy. Full-frame
as well.

Correct but I believe this is expensive like the Canon L series. Read
www.kenrockwell.com

That is where I read about this.


I didn't think it expensive, and neither do others. Perhaps you are
thinking of a larger aperture lens?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0608/06...-300vrlens.asp

Cheers,
David

measekite wrote:
[]
As for the cameras themselves most have similar features. If you need
one feature that the other does not have then the choice is easy. Other
than that just buy the one that feels better but make sure the
tail does not wag the dog. Choose the potential lenses first. And
if all of that is the same then choose on price and looks.

For something which you use regularly, ease of use may actually be the
most important factor. Ability to see and use the viewfinder, size,
weight and control layout may matter a lot. However, I don't believe that
in the range of lenses commonly-used by amateurs, either Canon or Nikon is
lacking. Add in the choice of 3rd party lenses ... and the picture
becomes even more confused!

BTW: I recently advised someone to consider a Pentax DSLR, because he had
a set of Pentax lenses.

David

measekite wrote:

One good thing about Canon is that many of their "prosumer" lenses
have L quality optics, so you can get a very good lens for a
reasonable price. With Nikon you have the two extremes of low end and
high end with little in the middle.

That is similar to what I posted and what I have been reading. Many
standard lenses produce images as good as the L series but they are
slower and the build quality is not as good.

Exactly. The Canon EF-s 10-22 falls into that category. Plus it's a lot
less expensive (street price) than the closest equivalent from Nikon. I
got mine for about $600 when Dell had a sale, and even not on sale it's
under $700 from