Diff Nikon and Canon Lens System

In message 2009041510065825228-savageduck@savagenet, Savageduck
writes
On 2009-04-15 09:10:05 -0700, Chris H said:

In message 2009041508540411967-savageduck@savagenet, Savageduck
writes
On 2009-04-15 07:34:44 -0700, Chris H said:

In message , measekite
writes
Basically what is the primary differences between the Nikon and Canon Lens
Line?
Does it just boil down to the fact that each as a few lenses that
are
marginally better than the other with the remainder being comparable or is
there a significant difference?
It's all irrelevant. God uses a Nikon and all Canon users are going
to
Hell. Mary uses an Olympus as it's a girls camera.
Just go and try a Nikon and a Canon in the shop and see which one
feels
better in YOUR hands. It is personal preference on handling that is
more important than the 10'th decimal place. Especially when humans
(i.e. pedants not on this NG) can only resolve to 5 decimal places.
Technically A is slightly better than B this month and B will be
better
than A next month. Both A and B are several orders of magnitude better
than anything you could afford 5 years ago.
Chris,
Mease has no intention of ever buying a camera or lens or anything else.
He is going to continue to troll these NGs with Ken Rockwell citations,
strange propositions and personal observations.
He will ask for opinion and not take any action. He will talk about
making massive prints and pixel peeping and all of it amounts to
nothing.
Once he finally buys any damn camera, be it P&S or DSLR of any brand
and submits proof of such purchase, I might be prepareed to take him
seriously.
I know but I thought I would just put it up as general guidance to
others asking the same question.
BTW I like what I can see of your web site but most of the links are
broken.

My web site??

Www.savage.net

Thanks for the compliment but, I am afraid my photographic ego hasn't
pushed me to produce a web site yet. There is a reason for the broken
links.

Ok.

http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DSC_0386-3Ec.jpg

I like that one
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

In message , Timmo
writes
"measekite" wrote in message news:zSeFl.4905$im1.2
...
Basically what is the primary differences between the Nikon and Canon Lens
Line?

Does it just boil down to the fact that each as a few lenses that are
marginally better than the other with the remainder being comparable or is
there a significant difference?



With Canon there is usually a lens to suit your needs in their range.
With Nikon, this isn't always the case.

I have found the reverse to be true. But then I have a Nissan.


--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

In message , Timmo
writes
"nospam" wrote in message news:1504200910353248
...

With Canon there is usually a lens to suit your needs in their
range. With
Nikon, this isn't always the case.

nonsense.


Care to elaborate?

Your statement re Canon and Nikon lenses was wrong.

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:47:11 -0700, Savageduck wrote:

On 2009-04-15 10:37:16 -0700, measekite said:

On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 01:34:49 -0700, Savageduck wrote:

On 2009-04-15 01:08:25 -0700, Chris H said:

In message , Ray Fischer
writes
measekite wrote:
Basically what is the primary differences between the Nikon and Canon Lens
Line?

One works best with Nikon cameras and the other works best with Canon
cameras.

OK... So which works better with Canon and which with Nikon?

It doesn't matter. Mease hasn't quite figured out which DSLR he is
going to buy yet.

I have decided to wait for the D90 replacement. I want a 3" articulating
lcd and after the D5000 I think it will be coming.

I wouldn't have expected anything else of you.

When you want to fork over you money than you get a chance to run your
mouth. With my money I make my decisions based on my needs and desires.

On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 15:34:44 +0100, Chris H wrote:

In message , measekite
writes
Basically what is the primary differences between the Nikon and Canon Lens
Line?

Does it just boil down to the fact that each as a few lenses that are
marginally better than the other with the remainder being comparable or is
there a significant difference?

It's all irrelevant. God uses a Nikon and all Canon users are going to
Hell. Mary uses an Olympus as it's a girls camera.

One does not know if in actuality there is a God or if the entity is just
a belief existing in the believer's mind.

Therefore that entity would use what the believer likes.


Just go and try a Nikon and a Canon in the shop and see which one feels
better in YOUR hands. It is personal preference on handling that is
more important than the 10'th decimal place. Especially when humans
(i.e. pedants not on this NG) can only resolve to 5 decimal places.

Technically A is slightly better than B this month and B will be better
than A next month. Both A and B are several orders of magnitude better
than anything you could afford 5 years ago.

On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 08:54:04 -0700, Savageduck wrote:

On 2009-04-15 07:34:44 -0700, Chris H said:

In message , measekite
writes
Basically what is the primary differences between the Nikon and Canon Lens
Line?

Does it just boil down to the fact that each as a few lenses that are
marginally better than the other with the remainder being comparable or is
there a significant difference?

It's all irrelevant. God uses a Nikon and all Canon users are going to
Hell. Mary uses an Olympus as it's a girls camera.

Just go and try a Nikon and a Canon in the shop and see which one feels
better in YOUR hands. It is personal preference on handling that is
more important than the 10'th decimal place. Especially when humans
(i.e. pedants not on this NG) can only resolve to 5 decimal places.

Technically A is slightly better than B this month and B will be better
than A next month. Both A and B are several orders of magnitude better
than anything you could afford 5 years ago.

Chris,
Mease has no intention of ever buying a camera or lens or anything else.
He is going to continue to troll these NGs with Ken Rockwell citations,
strange propositions and personal observations.
He will ask for opinion and not take any action. He will talk about
making massive prints and pixel peeping and all of it amounts to
nothing.
Once he finally buys any damn camera, be it P&S or DSLR of any brand
and submits proof of such purchase, I might be prepareed to take him
seriously.

Like I said. Fork over the money and I will buy today. Anyway I can wait
for what I want and decide ever so slowly because my Canon currently gets
me buy. If I did not have it I would get the best compromise out their
today.

On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:06:58 -0700, Savageduck wrote:

On 2009-04-15 09:10:05 -0700, Chris H said:

In message 2009041508540411967-savageduck@savagenet, Savageduck
writes
On 2009-04-15 07:34:44 -0700, Chris H said:

In message , measekite
writes
Basically what is the primary differences between the Nikon and Canon Lens
Line?
Does it just boil down to the fact that each as a few lenses that
are
marginally better than the other with the remainder being comparable or is
there a significant difference?
It's all irrelevant. God uses a Nikon and all Canon users are going
to
Hell. Mary uses an Olympus as it's a girls camera.
Just go and try a Nikon and a Canon in the shop and see which one
feels
better in YOUR hands. It is personal preference on handling that is
more important than the 10'th decimal place. Especially when humans
(i.e. pedants not on this NG) can only resolve to 5 decimal places.
Technically A is slightly better than B this month and B will be
better
than A next month. Both A and B are several orders of magnitude better
than anything you could afford 5 years ago.

Chris,
Mease has no intention of ever buying a camera or lens or anything else.
He is going to continue to troll these NGs with Ken Rockwell citations,
strange propositions and personal observations.
He will ask for opinion and not take any action. He will talk about
making massive prints and pixel peeping and all of it amounts to
nothing.
Once he finally buys any damn camera, be it P&S or DSLR of any brand
and submits proof of such purchase, I might be prepareed to take him
seriously.

I know but I thought I would just put it up as general guidance to
others asking the same question.

BTW I like what I can see of your web site but most of the links are
broken.

My web site??
Thanks for the compliment but, I am afraid my photographic ego hasn't
pushed me to produce a web site yet. There is a reason for the broken
links.
I am fortunate enough to be able to afford some mac.com storage space
which I can use to put up a Lightroom produced web gallery for as long
as it seems appropriate to share with friends and family.
It also gives me the ability to post links to individual files stored
at mac.com and remove them once the original post has become stale.
I certainly have the server space, software and ability to establish a
web site, and might consider that some time in the future. I just have
no real need to right now.

Until then this kind of thing is what I can do to get some of my files
and images out the

http://homepage.mac.com/lco/Sites/Fe...V-1/index.html

http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DSC_0386-3Ec.jpg

You guys should try an instant messenger

On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 10:35:32 -0700, nospam wrote:

In article , Timmo
wrote:

With Canon there is usually a lens to suit your needs in their range. With
Nikon, this isn't always the case.

nonsense.

why

On 2009-04-15 11:00:28 -0700, Chris H said:

In message 2009041510065825228-savageduck@savagenet, Savageduck
writes
On 2009-04-15 09:10:05 -0700, Chris H said:

In message 2009041508540411967-savageduck@savagenet, Savageduck
writes
On 2009-04-15 07:34:44 -0700, Chris H said:

In message , measekite
writes
Basically what is the primary differences between the Nikon and Canon Lens
Line?
Does it just boil down to the fact that each as a few lenses that
are
marginally better than the other with the remainder being comparable or is
there a significant difference?
It's all irrelevant. God uses a Nikon and all Canon users are going
to
Hell. Mary uses an Olympus as it's a girls camera.
Just go and try a Nikon and a Canon in the shop and see which one
feels
better in YOUR hands. It is personal preference on handling that is
more important than the 10'th decimal place. Especially when humans
(i.e. pedants not on this NG) can only resolve to 5 decimal places.
Technically A is slightly better than B this month and B will be
better
than A next month. Both A and B are several orders of magnitude better
than anything you could afford 5 years ago.
Chris,
Mease has no intention of ever buying a camera or lens or anything else.
He is going to continue to troll these NGs with Ken Rockwell citations,
strange propositions and personal observations.
He will ask for opinion and not take any action. He will talk about
making massive prints and pixel peeping and all of it amounts to
nothing.
Once he finally buys any damn camera, be it P&S or DSLR of any brand
and submits proof of such purchase, I might be prepareed to take him
seriously.
I know but I thought I would just put it up as general guidance to
others asking the same question.
BTW I like what I can see of your web site but most of the links are
broken.

My web site??

Www.savage.net

Not me. Just coincidence.
I have been using Savageduck at a pseudo domain of savage.net as a
spambot avoidance and anonymity measure for some 8 years now.
I suppose, now that I have retired from Law enforcement I could start
posting with my name, but old habits die hard.


Thanks for the compliment but, I am afraid my photographic ego hasn't
pushed me to produce a web site yet. There is a reason for the broken
links.

Ok.

http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/DSC_0386-3Ec.jpg

I like that one

MOPAR man should get a thrill out of that and will probably call me a
Euro-centric, unpatriotic, liberal lefty for not driving a piece of GM
crap.


--
Regards,
Savageduck

In article , Timmo
wrote:

With Canon there is usually a lens to suit your needs in their range.
With
Nikon, this isn't always the case.

nonsense.

Care to elaborate?

canon has no equivalent to nikon's 14-24mm. in fact, this lens was one
of the lenses that motivated someone to design an adapter that converts
the electrical protocol so that it could be used on canon cameras like
any other canon lens.

nikon also has a wider selection of kit lenses, including the 18-70,
18-105vr and 18-135, which canon doesn't have.

there is also the 10.5mm fisheye and 105mm vr macro. canon has a 100mm
macro but it lacks stabilization. both nikon and canon have a 60mm
macro but the nikon 60mm macro is full frame while canon's is ef-s.

until recently, nikon had an 18-200mm vr and canon didn't. sigma
capitalized on that and introduced their own (and not very good)
18-200os, which sold to a *lot* of canon users.

also, nearly all of nikon's older manual focus lenses work just fine,
whereas canon manual focus lenses are orphaned. one of the more
esoteric ones that nobody else has (or had) is the 6mm fisheye (220
degree angle of view):

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography...ses/images/6mm
fish.jpg

basically, canon and nikon are fairly close. either one is a good
choice.