User ratio Canon DSLR to Nikon

Does anyone have an informed view on what percentage of pro's use a
Canon DSLR as opposed to a Nikon ... and why?

I am thinking of things like overall image quality, feature set,
reliability, cost-effectiveness, resale value, lens selection
(including third party), availability of secondhand bodies and lenses,
etc.

Disregarding specific models, is one brand name inherently more
suitable for certain types of photography, eg. landscape, portrait,
etc?

I know some of the Canon's are full frame, but let's put that
advantage aside for this discussion since not everyone can afford
them.

Thank you,

Ken Litton

Ken Litton wrote:
Does anyone have an informed view on what percentage of pro's use a
Canon DSLR as opposed to a Nikon ... and why?

I am thinking of things like overall image quality, feature set,
reliability, cost-effectiveness, resale value, lens selection
(including third party), availability of secondhand bodies and lenses,
etc.

Disregarding specific models, is one brand name inherently more
suitable for certain types of photography, eg. landscape, portrait,
etc?

I know some of the Canon's are full frame, but let's put that
advantage aside for this discussion since not everyone can afford
them.

Thank you,

Ken Litton


The statistics below won't directly answer your question, but I thought
was quite interesting. I got a book last year called "Love" that
contains photographs compiled from (mostly professional) photographers
all over the world. In the back it lists each photographer's credentials
and their equipment. Most of the photography is traditional portraiture,
some is street photography. The book was first published in '02 so a bit
before the digital revolution really took hold - there isn't a single
digital shot in the entire collection. I suspect that if the same thing
was done today, Canon digitals would be the most common (I also suspect
the photography would be far more boring and dull, with every photo
having that "sameness" about them that comes from all being taken with
the same sensor - much like a recent exhibition held here where the only
standout photo was the only non-Canon-digital).

Anyway, results from this book are as follows:
Nikon 37
Canon 15
Leica 14
Hasselblad 7
Rollei 5
Pentax 4
Minolta 4
Olympus 2
Bronica 2
Contax 2
Unknown 2
Noblex 1
Zenit 1
Ricoh 1
Weathermatic 1
Konica 1
Linhof 1

"Ken Litton" wrote in message
...

Does anyone have an informed view on what percentage of pro's use a
Canon DSLR as opposed to a Nikon ... and why?

I am thinking of things like overall image quality, feature set,
reliability, cost-effectiveness, resale value, lens selection
(including third party), availability of secondhand bodies and lenses,
etc.

Disregarding specific models, is one brand name inherently more
suitable for certain types of photography, eg. landscape, portrait,
etc?

I know some of the Canon's are full frame, but let's put that
advantage aside for this discussion since not everyone can afford
them.

The PBase camera database shows the number of members who use each camera,
and I'd guess that this must be a representative sample.

http://www.pbase.com/cameras/canon&sort=users
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/nikon&sort=users

(Pity there is not a way to filter out all the p&s!)

A quick glance seems to show that there are more Canon 1D series shooters
than Nikon D2 series shooters. The results will be distorted as wealthy
hobbyists also use these bodies and not just pros, and pros will also shoot
with "non pro" bodies like the D5 & D200 or even entry level bodies, on the
basis is that it's the glass that has much more effect on image quality than
the body, but it looks like Canon has a bigger overall market share.

"Ken Litton" wrote in message
...
Does anyone have an informed view on what percentage of pro's use a
Canon DSLR as opposed to a Nikon ... and why?

I am thinking of things like overall image quality, feature set,
reliability, cost-effectiveness, resale value, lens selection
(including third party), availability of secondhand bodies and lenses,
etc.

Disregarding specific models, is one brand name inherently more
suitable for certain types of photography, eg. landscape, portrait,
etc?

I know some of the Canon's are full frame, but let's put that
advantage aside for this discussion since not everyone can afford
them.

About equal, according to: http://www.bythom.com/2006predictions.htm

Ken Litton wrote:
Does anyone have an informed view on what percentage of pro's use a
Canon DSLR as opposed to a Nikon ... and why?

I am thinking of things like overall image quality, feature set,
reliability, cost-effectiveness, resale value, lens selection
(including third party), availability of secondhand bodies and lenses,
etc.

Frankly I would guess the biggest factor is what they are use to using.
Having the same location of controls and same general feel of the user
interface is important to the professional. I have never heard a
professional worry about re-sale value or availability of used lenses. Some
might worry about availability of rental lenses.


Disregarding specific models, is one brand name inherently more
suitable for certain types of photography, eg. landscape, portrait,
etc?

No.


I know some of the Canon's are full frame, but let's put that
advantage aside for this discussion since not everyone can afford
them.

Thank you,

Ken Litton

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia 's Muire duit

I think it varies significantly by area. Below are my estimates from
observation and interviews:
Sport - 90%+ Canon
Wedding/Portrait - Nikon higher than Canon (I'd say 60/40 between these
two only, but then you must add in the Blads, etc)
News - I would guess 50-50 here, but Canon on the rise due to sport
Commercial/industrial - 60/40 Nikon/Canon

Cheers,

Wayne

--
Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/
Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/

Joseph Meehan wrote:
Ken Litton wrote:
Does anyone have an informed view on what percentage of pro's use a
Canon DSLR as opposed to a Nikon ... and why?

I am thinking of things like overall image quality, feature set,
reliability, cost-effectiveness, resale value, lens selection
(including third party), availability of secondhand bodies and lenses,
etc.

Frankly I would guess the biggest factor is what they are use to using.
Having the same location of controls and same general feel of the user
interface is important to the professional. I have never heard a
professional worry about re-sale value or availability of used lenses. Some
might worry about availability of rental lenses.

Disregarding specific models, is one brand name inherently more
suitable for certain types of photography, eg. landscape, portrait,
etc?

No.

I know some of the Canon's are full frame, but let's put that
advantage aside for this discussion since not everyone can afford
them.

Thank you,

Ken Litton

I think you might have added considerations about what existing
accessories one has. I would presume a pro moving from film to dslr
would have a closet full of stuff with emphasis on lenses.
My only direct experience with a pro was curiosity seeing a guy taking
pics in a supermarket of all places, for some sort of store promotion.
Since I couldn't identify what he was using I asked. It was a Hasselbad
with a digital back. He said the outfit was worth about 30k, very
impressive with hookup to a laptop for instant feedback. A little more
than I would ever need (or know how to use).
Dave Cohen

"Ken Litton" wrote in message
...
Does anyone have an informed view on what percentage of pro's use a
Canon DSLR as opposed to a Nikon ... and why?

I don't think anyone has done a proper survey, not that it would mean
much these days. I notice a lot of Canons at sporting events and I
believe this is because a lot of sports shooters chose Canon IS lenses
since at the time of introduction, Nikon did not have VR lenses
available.

But today that doesn't apply, and I've noticed more and more Nikons at
sports events the last few years.

I am thinking of things like overall image quality, feature set,
reliability, cost-effectiveness, resale value, lens selection
(including third party), availability of secondhand bodies and
lenses,
etc.

None of that matters at all.

Both Canon and Nikon have a good selection of quality bodies, lenses,
and accessories that it generally doesn't matter which system you
choose. Prices, performance, and quality are all very similar, and you
will be happy with gear from either company.

I've owned both Canon and Nikon, and I've used a fair number of lenses
from both camps, and I can say there is no image quality difference
between brands. Your decision will need to be made based on other
factors.

Disregarding specific models, is one brand name inherently more
suitable for certain types of photography, eg. landscape, portrait,
etc?

No, I don't believe so.

One thing you will want to check before you buy is how the various
cameras feel in your hands.

I've found I prefer the ergonomic layout of the Nikon bodies,
especially the hand grip, shutter release button, and front control
dial. Others will prefer the feel of the Canon bodies...it's a
personal choice and is one of the factors I referred to above.

Originally Posted by Ken Litton

Does anyone have an informed view on what percentage of pro's use a
Canon DSLR as opposed to a Nikon ... and why?
(snip)
I know some of the Canon's are full frame, but let's put that
advantage aside for this discussion since not everyone can afford
them.

Thank you,

Ken Litton

Ken,

You seem to want your cake & eat it too. Pros= get paid for shooting. So the cost of a camera for a pro is not as big an issue as it is for the dilettante. Its not clear that you can put aside full frame, any more than you can put aside MF digital (or MF/ LF format film for that matter). The smaller sensors DO effect the creative side of shooting and DO speed digital processing in camera. Your ability to control DOF is much greater with a larger sensor, and that's why a lot of pros converted from Nikon systems to Canon when the 1Ds came out.

-Mark