www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - Do shoot-outs like this influence you?
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Do shoot-outs like this influence you?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum and Community Announcements
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
DaveW



Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 1702
Location: Nottingham, UK

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:18 am    Post subject: Do shoot-outs like this influence you? Reply with quote

Are you influenced by the photo press when you buy a camera and buy into a photo system, or do you make your own choice based on hands on use?

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-11396_7-6654246-1.html?tag=lnav

I declare an interest being a Nikon D200 user, but I am sure I would be just as happy using Canon equipment. Modern camera's seem to do all we really need and most of the extra's the photo press loves to use to rank one model above another we may never use.

DaveW
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Carl_Constantine



Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 304
Location: Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And I declare this review biased. For example, round 3 they state that Nikon supports many wireless flashes. Well, Canon does as well. I've seen people use 2 or 3 wireless flashes with Canon (1 wireless transmitter, several other flashes in a master/slave setup). The reviewers made a couple good points (weight being one of the first that I actually agreed with) but they show their bias later.

For me, I bought a Canon Rebel (300D) for the simple reason, I have some good friends that use Canon and can help me out, and from whom I can borrow and try lenses. I agree, I would probably be just as happy with a Nikon but I may not be as far along in my understanding with it.
_________________
Carl B. Constantine
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Epidic



Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 137
Location: Maine

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Everyone can make objective opinions about subjective critera. Everyone has good taste. And all generalizations are false.

You need to realize these types of articles are aimed toward the amateur. And specifically, the amateur gearhead. I never bother with them.
_________________
Will
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DaveW



Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 1702
Location: Nottingham, UK

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Plus I suppose it sells magazines because everybody is curious as to who will win a fight, even if they don't agree with the result. As I said before most modern camera's are far better specified than we will ever need.

The body after all is only basically a box, I always considered the lens, and now the sensor as well, the most important parts of the camera. Most shutters, metering and autofocus have been fairly well developed over the years so are good enough for our needs.

No doubt manufacturers will keep leapfrogging each other as they bring out their new model, but do we need most of these "advances" anyway. I was quite hapy with my totally manual F2 Photomic I used for 30 years. It was only the decline of slide film and Kodak closing down it's European processing plants, plus the need to go digital that made me change.

DaveW
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 19253
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I read reviews like this for the same reason I read any other article -- to get information. "Biased" or not, they summarize the experience of several hours of hands-on comparison. That's probably much more time and wider conditions than I would be able to get using equipment borrowed from a photo store. So they're likely to call to my attention some aspects that I might overlook in a short session of personal hands-on. Canon's continued lack of spot-metering comes to mind. I'm so used to that limitation that I don't think about it anymore, although when I do think about it, it annoys me.

The flash issue is interesting. It's unlikely (in my judgement) that the authors were simply clueless about Canon's capabilities. So I presume they're trying to tell me about something they think is important, and they just don't have enough space to do it right. But now I've got a handle -- Nikon's "Wireless Commander" -- and if I were in the market I'd do some more study to find out what it really means and decide if I care.

The part about "decide if I care" is really important. I study reviews to help decide all kinds of purchases. Most of the time, the things I care about are different from the reviewers'. I seldom end up choosing whatever the reviewers ranked #1. But the reviews are helpful anyway.

That said, there are reviews and there are good reviews. This one strikes me as the former -- brief and subjective, with fancy graphics and huge navigation bars and lots of advertisements, but not much useful info.

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
georgedingwall



Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 207
Location: Invergordon, Scotland

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi all,

I'm mainly a Nikon man, although I do have other cameras in my collection. Bronica ETRSi, Olympus OM1, Pentax Spotmatic F and a few Fuji cameras.

When I was working as a Photographer back in the Seventies, I used most of the then available camera types, and found I prefered the feel of the Nikon to other makes when I was using 35mm cameras.

So when I retired and decided to get back into leisure photography for myself, I decided to go the Nikon route. I started with a F90X Pro, and then added a F100. I also made the beginnings of a lens collection at this time, and obviously my choice having been made, the lenses were from Nikon.

Since then, I've really had no choice but to stick with my Nikon fit kit. Even if I thought that Canon, or some other brand, were better than what I now have, I have too much invested in Nikon lenses and other accessories, to justify any change. SO if it doesn't have a Nikon fit body, I wouldn't consider it. My first DSLR was the Fuji S1 Pro, which is based on a Nikon body.

If I was starting fresh today, I certainly would consider Canon. From what I read in the magazines and online sources, there's not much difference in the quality of the output you can get with Nikon and Canon cameras. I'm not exactly sure how I would choose between them if I had too.

So when I read reviews or comparrisons like the one in the article, I tend just to concentrate on how the Nikon performed, and if there were any quirks or tips that I might need to think about.

So unless I win the lottery, I'm going to continue to be a Nikon man for the forseeable future.

Bye for now.
_________________
George Dingwall

Invergordon, Scotland

http://www.georgedingwall.co.uk/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
DaveW



Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 1702
Location: Nottingham, UK

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rik

Not sure about Canon's flash system but Nikon's so called "wireless" description fooled me at first. To the Brit's wireless usually means radio controlled and not merely devoid of wires as Nikon's is.

The Nikon system uses light not wires to connect all the flashes in the system. It is an optically pulsed pre flash system that determines the exposure required and sets the flash guns in an istant before the flashes fire.

On the Older Nikon's this was done by putting a master commander flash onto the camera's hotshoe which provided this optical control. In most of the new Nikon's it is built in because the pop up flash provides this control function. Even Nikon's macro flash lights are controlled like this with no wires to the camera. I believe Canon's system uses wires from the guns to the camera but I am not that familiar with Canon's system?

One drawback with the Nikon system is it has been said that if you are using flash on dogs their reactions are much quicker than humans so even the minute preflash can be enough to get them to blink and close their eyes when the main flash goes off? But I suppose that problem would arise with any form of pre or ranging flash.

DaveW
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Carl_Constantine



Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 304
Location: Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DaveW wrote:
Rik
The Nikon system uses light not wires to connect all the flashes in the system. It is an optically pulsed pre flash system that determines the exposure required and sets the flash guns in an istant before the flashes fire.

On the Older Nikon's this was done by putting a master commander flash onto the camera's hotshoe which provided this optical control. In most of the new Nikon's it is built in because the pop up flash provides this control function. Even Nikon's macro flash lights are controlled like this with no wires to the camera. I believe Canon's system uses wires from the guns to the camera but I am not that familiar with Canon's system?


Canon's is the same. sounds like a standard E-TTL flash setup to me. There are NO WIRES in the canon wireless system. The wireless transmitter sends out an IR pulse (as opposed to light) to sync the flashes in the system.

I believe Canon can also do the pop-up flash trigger to a remote flash as well, but it's not something I've tried, just heard about.

It does depend on the flash unit used, not all flashes support wireless E-TTL http://www.kjsl.com/~dave/wireless.html but most of the new ones do. My Sigma 500-DG Super does as well.

All that said, there might be more substance to the Nikon wireless flash system, I really don't know as I've never used it. Though, I know a professional photographer that does use Nikon, I should ask her about it as I'm sure she's used it.

Now, you can also get a cable system to connect a flash to the hotshoe with a wire if you need to get the flash closer but your flash doesn't support wireless E-TTL, but these are getting fewer. Can't speak for the macro flash on Canon, as I don't have one.
_________________
Carl B. Constantine
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
DaveW



Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 1702
Location: Nottingham, UK

PostPosted: Wed Nov 01, 2006 11:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As said Carl, I am not familiar with Canon's system, I had to catch up with Nikon's again after changing camera's. The only thing I had to go on was the Canon Macro Flash has two wires from the hotshoe unit to the flash heads:-

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Macro-Twin-Lite-MT-24EX-Flash-Review.aspx

Whereas the Nikon does not:-

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/r1c1.htm

In the case of the Nikon the hotshoe commander unit SU800 is only needed for camera's where the pop up flash does not act as a commander unit.

I would think the Canon's infra red pulse would avoid dog's seeing it and blinking, so may be better in that respect!

DaveW
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Carl_Constantine



Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 304
Location: Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 10:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ok, that's cool. Wireless macro. Though, IMHO, it doesn't matter for that kind of flash head, I'd prefer the wire there. I would really love the twin macro flash but that's not going to happen any time soon, so... ;-)

thanks for the insight Dave. Appreciated.
_________________
Carl B. Constantine
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Mike B in OKlahoma



Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 1048
Location: Oklahoma City

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 6:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't find US print magazines to do reviews that are worth much. Websites may or may not get credibility with me, depending on past experience and knowledge of the reviewer. Cnet has credibility with me for electronic gizmos in general, but not particularly for SLR-type photo equipment.

As for the bigger question of systems, I think the range of equipment in a system is more important than the specifics of an individual piece of gear, especially for a product that's changing at the rate DSLRs are right now.

When I got into this stuff, I went with Canon because I was most interested in taking photos of large wildlife at the time, and Canon's large stabilized telephoto lenses looked very attractive. Since Canon was also seemingly far ahead in DSLRs at the time (I don't consider them so now) the decision was pretty easy. But I'm sure I'd be content shooting Nikon, and probably Minolta/Sony or one of the other brands with a reasonable range of lenses. I do like very much one specific lens Canon has that nobody else replicates, the MP-E-65, though.
_________________
Mike Broderick
Oklahoma City, OK, USA

Constructive critiques of my pictures, and reposts in this forum for purposes of critique are welcome

"I must obey the inscrutable exhortations of my soul....My mandate includes weird bugs."
--Calvin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mike B in OKlahoma



Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 1048
Location: Oklahoma City

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I forgot to address something in your original question--Hands-on use doesn't influence me much, too difficult to arrange for something I'm pondering buying, plus I _HATE_ handling other people's photography gear, I'm always afraid I will drop something!!!!

So I usually end up going basically on testimonials from people I trust, in forums like this, or in more formal reviews.
_________________
Mike Broderick
Oklahoma City, OK, USA

Constructive critiques of my pictures, and reposts in this forum for purposes of critique are welcome

"I must obey the inscrutable exhortations of my soul....My mandate includes weird bugs."
--Calvin
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DaveW



Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 1702
Location: Nottingham, UK

PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2006 11:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, the one thing I envy you Canon users for is the MP-E-65. We Nikon users did have the unique 70-180 micro nikkor zoom, which was the only true general photography zoom lens designed and optimised for close-up work, rather than being optimised for infinity as standard camera lenses are, even so called macro zooms which simply have a close up facility but whose design is still infinity optimised. However even that has now been discontinued though I managed to get one just before it was!

It's a pity somebody like the Royal Microscopical Society did not get in early on to photography and standardise the lens mount and mount to film distance then we could have all used each others lenses on our camera's! Though I notice from many posts on this forum even microscopes do not just use the old RMS thread now, so much for standardisation!

DaveW
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum and Community Announcements All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group