Canon vs. Nikon: Why I want to switch to Nikon, but can't fully

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Watch the updated version here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fp7RlmeigsZrhsU 📚 Buy Our Books on Amazon! 📚 📕Stunning Digital Photography: help.tc/s 📘Lightroom 6 Book: help.tc/l 📙Photoshop Book: help.tc/p 📗Buying Guide: help.tc/b

[@AndrewLitton]

Chelsea, this link is not working..

[@xenoduck3189]

So... no more 70-200mm problems?

[@DominiqueKooper666]

this link doesn't work..

[@lakhwinderbahl9205]

Tony & Chelsea Northrup love your work sir...... Hope that one day ,i could meet you and chelsea together and we all have a good photography time.....with a cup of tea...

[@MarioEnriqueAg]

Portrait photographers generally use 85mm or 105mm. In every poll those prime lenses appear like the king lenses for portrait photography. So, I think if you want to give a recommendation for this kind of photography you need to separate your personal preference (70-200) and compare the most common and recommend prime lenses. I miss that.

[@evir440]

Can you please make an update video on that? A lot has changed since 2014 and I'm facing the Canon vs. Nikon dilemma...

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Yep, will do.

[@simonarnet4654]

Same here, this would be great. Thanks!

[@kittenfan]

i am gonna share you my experience, if you got tons of money or money is not a concern, please go for nikon. but if you are like me who care about money, then easily canon. their lenses is cheaper by quite huge amount. and also, if you like shooting wide angle, nikon wins but slightly. but if you are telephoto person (shoot sport, wildlife, etc) , then CANON wins big time.

[@evir440]

+kittenfan thanks! I'm mainly interested in portrait photography though, maybe some travelling photos-landscape. Trying to decide between Canon 80D and Nikon d7200...

[@kittenfan]

Hi there, let me advise you about many things here so you can make better decision. I was on your boat 8 years ago. alright between 80D and D7200, i just searched it online, NO BRAINER, go for d7200. WHY? more AF points 51 vs 45. also same ISO performance but nikon d7200 is cheaper too in amazon, i looked. however, photography is about LENS. are you looking to upgrade your lenses? if yes, this is what you should be worried about. this makes the situation tricky. for your question on body, D7200 no brainer. for Portrait, it is about the same, but i still favor canon more since they got more selection on lenses and trust me, Their lenses are A LOT CHEAPER than nikon. nikon lenses break the bank. sure, their lens is more lovely like they give you the hood free and the design is nicer, better build quality arguably but damn expensive. For landscape, nikon wins but slightly though (this is only when you decide to go for full frame) . if you stay in crop sensor APSC camera, you better served with canon (again canon wins). if i were you, i would go for canon. but again. IF MONEY IS not an issue, HELL go for nikon. the lens is better designed, more robust in general and i just love the handling personally

[@jeremiahdauphinais7186]

This video was an emotional roller coaster.

[@itsMido2]

damn yer handsome! just sayin

[@keblakev]

I totally agree

[@aaronleung2732]

Hey Tony, Can you do an update on this subject? Will be good to see if this Nikon vs Canon has changed and how does Sony now fit in?

[@MrJueKa]

+Aaron Leung and of course the Micro Four Third system of Olympus and Panasonic ;)

[@nicotolvanen5079]

I would like that too

[@Raima888s]

+Nicolas Otero did u know Jesus used to walk everywhere and now people drive and fly in planes? It's only a matter of time before the transition happens to mirrorless. To think otherwise is to be short sighted.

[@Raima888s]

+Nicolas Otero I'm a Nikon shooter too, but if you think 5fps is something to be proud of vs a inferior Samsung NX1 15fps then you really are short sighted. Only the d5 is starting to catch up in terms of what the nx1 has to offer. Sadly the nx1 is no longer made, but it provides a glimps to what 1 year old mirrorless camera can do. D5 wins in sensor size, dual memory slots, better iso performance and better stills AF and that's about it for a camera that's more than 3x the price tag. NX1 is the best apsc camera out there. The new d500 may only beat it in AF. Everything else like cine 4K (6.5k down scaled to 4K), h265, 15fps, touch screen, touch focus, wifi updates, better video AF, 4K to sdcard, MP, NX1 wins hands down.

[@aaronleung2732]

JohnReviewer112 can you name another apsc camera that shoots 15fps and is 28mp or greater? The NX1 can stand on its own for stills. It just happens to be amazing at video as well.

[@naderm1396]

Thank you Tony and Chelsea for setting a new standard for KZbin photography education. I really enjoy your work and wish you great success in all that you do :)

[@BrocSheldon]

I love your guys's stuff....I literally don't watch tv....if i have time to watch something I watch what you guys and other top photographer youtubers have to offer. thanks for putting so much time into this!

[@mainlymusicman]

cant believe you cant find a nikon lens for portraiture!!!?? what about the 180 mm f2.8 or the 135mm f/2D???

[@Desert_Rat_19]

Or even the 200mm f2. All great lenses for portraits.

[@qsanat]

He must be looking for zoom lenses.... don't you think.. When in need, you don't want to be changing lenses....

[@gearsau]

I have both Nikon 135mm f2.0 AF-DC and the Nikon 180mm f2.8 .Both great lenses. Have owned them since the 90's .

[@cammac444]

nikons 105mm f1.4 is a solid portrait lens, and 105mm is the sweet spot for portrait work

[@randytesch7664]

My Nikon D810 makes for an outstanding portrait camera with both my Nikkor 105mm f1.4e and my Nikkor 200mm f2.0. I am not shackled to my 70-200mm f2.8.

[@ShenaniganZone]

I have been researching DSLRs for a few days now, always have liked messing around with point and shoots, but the more I learn about cameras and DSLRs the less I know about what one I want to buy.... By the end of this I'll know everything about cameras and have no idea what one to get.

[@UncleMichaelable]

Get an older nikon d3 or d700. You’ll be happy. Worry about getting the best glass you can afford.

[@winstoncavalcante]

Just a question. Why, why the comparative picture between 70-200 lenses used a Tamron lens instead of the Nikon 70-200mm?

[@mortschubert3909]

Winston Cavalcante Good point!

[@caleidoo]

+Winston Cavalcante Making the model smile in the Canon picture and looking depressed in the Tamron isn't adding to credibility either.

[@BloodpactORG]

Because he is illustrating the focal length compromise that is identical between the Tamron and Nikon lens, on the same camera for an apples to apples comparison. It's literally the one thing that would make sense to support his argument.

[@NinhLyUK]

This is the best +Tony Northrup video, as this proves what I've thought for years but could not definitively prove. Nikon = superior bodies, Canon = cost effective everything else. Fantastic video Tony, I've shared this through my social media pages :)

[@D800Lover]

Got at least ten grand worth of Nikon glass. I am locked in. Nothing against Canon.

[@sergiodjf]

I like these videos! Just bought my first DSLR; it helps to translate all the technicalities into meaningful information for beginners like me. Still a lot to learn.

[@berwickgabriel4670]

Tony you had mentioned in this video that you love the Canon 200mm f/2.8 and you stated that Nikon does not have a equivalent. Nikon has had a 200mm f/2 ED VR II lens for some time since at least 2012 before this video was made. I do realize it is rather expensive. Thought you should know so you are giving correct information. www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera-Lenses/AF-S-NIKKOR-200mm-f%252F2G-ED-VR-II.html

[@PillsGrabber]

The 200mm f/2.8 is much cheaper than a f/2, which is like $6000

[@JerryPHcom]

+Lourenço Montibello he doesn't mention that price is a factor. If you want the best, you will pay for it. The 200 F/2 is world class, especially the V2. If you shoot Nikon and want a fun experience, rent it out for a weekend one time. Al other lenses will never look the same to you. :)

[@MrJackZhan]

+JerryPHcom Obviously you haven't used Canon's 200/2 or 200/1.8 yet :)

[@jeisson0001]

The problem is not the camera the problem is the photographer. Guys I have canon I I never will switch to Nikon or another company, not because I'm a fanboy certainly it's because I got a lot of accessories and batteries for my canon then if I change I will Lose my money. That is why buy to be honest a good Photografer will make nice pics with any camera cause my talent is on my head the rest is crap believe me guys.

[@DJMavis]

+jeisson vasquez guzman That's a big thing. When I first got into photography I bought the cheapest decent looking 2nd hand entry level DSLR I could. It was a 400D. It lasted me a long time until it was restricting some things I could do. By that time I had accrued 6 lenses, flashes, remotes, which I would have to ditch for a switch to Nikon. Though at the point I could afford L Glass or a 400mm lens, the expense isn't much relatively, but that time isn't now.

[@Pinoysoundmachine74]

That's the best comment i've read bar none. These cameras are just tools. In other words even if you have the most expensive camera in the world and if you don't have the skills and the eye for photography then you'll better off shooting on your phones. A good n skilled photographer can shoot better images with low end camera compare to someone who does not have the skills with very expensive high end cameras. Remember, it's not about what camera you shoot with, it's all about your skill enough said.

[@jeisson0001]

+Philip Ypon well I don't want to seize the moment to promote myself but I got a canon 50D since a long time ago. And if you want to see the kind of photos and video that I have been making just go to my KZbin Chanel that is digitalflex5x1 and just take a look, you don't have to subscribe to my Chanel I'm not looking for followers or something like that.

[@risingempireentertainment]

I love canon, but apples for apples Nikon has better images at low light and has more dynamic range.

[@DaveMcKeegan]

Slight error - the 5DIII is 22MP not 24, Which means you get a higher percentage of its resolution becoming usable than the D810

[@vondalaffey3619]

My cousin turned me onto your channel...glad to learn I (inadvertently) bought your recommended best beginner DSLR. YAY! Now, I have to learn how to use it. Thanks for all your offerings.

[@barbwirepupp]

Damn, just discovered you yesterday. Your knowledge and summaries are just awesome.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

+barbwirepupp Thanks!

[@TerenceKearns]

Tony, that is the most intelligent discussion on Cameras that I have heard to date. Very practical and useful. I've been shooting canon since 2005 and wanted to switch to Nikon more than a few times and you have cleared up all the details for me. I never switched because I wasn't sure about my reservations. Of course I want to do ALL kinds of photography, so remain frustrated like yourself because I want to have my cake and eat it. Love the way you dropped the GH4 in there as the best for video. Totally nailed it. GH4 is super flexible and truly professional in it's array of options - particularly with it's grip extension. You're really outdone yourself this time. Good job.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Terence Kearns Thanks, Terence!

[@firecloud77]

6:00 To say that a jump from 20 MP to 24 MP is a "20% increase in detail" isn't an accurate statement. It is actually a 9.5% increase in detail, and would be like getting 9.5% closer to your subject. Detail is a linear (distance) measurement (lines per mm), not an area measurement (MP). In other words, all other factors being equal, to double detail requires a fourfold increase in total pixels.

[@rdebari]

Tony, Have you considered trying the new version of Nikon's 80-400 AF-S VR on your D810 as a substitute for the Canon 7D with the 400 f/5.6? You could use the 1.2x or 1.5x crop modes on the D810 if you need more magnification. DXoMark rates the 80-400 excellent sharpness at 400mm. I know a local photographer who shoots BIF with that combo(D800+80-400) and his results are pretty damn good and sharp. You would be getting the added feature of VR and multiple focal lengths with the 80-400. That would be a big benefit for wildlife shooting, especially handheld. The only downside would be the higher cost of the 80-400 vs the Canon 400mm. But if the new setup works you could sell your old Canon gear.

[@MoysyTech]

But if you get the D810 you will probably just switch back when the 5D MK 4 comes out

[@TonyAndChelsea]

The Hardware Cove Maybe. We'll review it when it comes out.

[@allusernamestaken01]

That's the idea, sell, sell, and sell again!

[@stevenygz]

Tony Northrup I guess the 5D3 is already pretty good.... and I have it.

[@_Just_Some1]

And once you switch to the 5D mk4, you probably will want to switch back to nikon once the D820 comes out. That train of thought is really bad.

[@YoungLordz666]

Lol no

[@StevenRPictures]

Good video. I'd say the game has changed a bit again and would welcome an update. Canon has resolution now, but still poor DR. Nikon has a better lens lineup with the 1.8 primes and more variety across the board in terms of 35mm photography.

[@JerryPHcom]

+Steven Robinson The game in general has become really tight, but still not changed all that much in the last 4 generational revisions... Canon has the lenses, Nikon has the cameras. Throw in good 3rd party lenses (like the Sigma Art series of lenses), that blow them both out of the water, and the choice again, becomes a step easier. The thing is, when discussing lens "breathing", Tony can say the Canon lenses breathe less, and that is true, however, with lenses at the long end, one needs to step back... you don't have to, but you do to get the effect (highly blurred backgrounds, clear subject) that he wants. But no one states the obvious, that there is no rule that Canon and Nikon lenses must be used at the exact same distances, and that if you take 3-4 steps closer with the Nikon lens, you get the same "apparent" zoom level, same apparent background blur... and that kind of makes Tony's reason for selecting the Canon, not a real reason in real life usage in the manner that he says his photography depends on.

[@yuenglingking]

+JerryPHcom lol actually there is a rule that says you have to shoot the nikon and the canon from the same exact distance. the point is to remove variables not create them in order to compare. Also, as was mentioned in the vid you dont always have the luxury to use your feet to zoom in and out in real world shoots.

[@yuenglingking]

+JerryPHcom lol actually there is a rule that says you have to shoot the nikon and the canon from the same exact distance. the point is to remove variables not create them in order to compare. Also, as was mentioned in the vid you dont always have the luxury to use your feet to zoom in and out in real world shoots.

[@lainfofie]

I always wondered why I couldn't get as close with my Nikkor 300mm than a friend that has a Canon 200mm! I'll research my next lens more before buying. Thank you for your wonderful videos!

[@calvinchann1996]

The lesson to learn from this is to buy into the system that works for you rather than just the body, or you'll be continually changing systems with the ebb and flow of technical progress. Nikon D810 then, but now Canon 5DSR?

[@michaelklodos4045]

As a full time freelance photojournalist i never use zooms for stills. I know that i am a bit old fashioned, but i started with Nikon and primes in the beginning of the 80´s, and i will probably retire with my primes and my Nikons. For close up portraits i use the 200mm 2,0 VR2 or the old 180 2,8. further away i use the 85 1,4 AF-D or the 105 2,8 VR macro. It depends a lot of my mood on the given day which i choose. All these lenses are tack sharp and focal lengths are what they should be. For video i use my only zoom a 24-120mm 4,0 VR.

[@russells509]

BTW, unless you're a professional photographer, you're insane if you buy brand new camera bodies and lenses. The used market is flooded with perfect condition gear for 50% or less of its value when new. I recently bought a barely used Nikon D80 body as a backup body while traveling for $125. Despite the fact that it is "only" 10.2 MP, it is far more camera than most people need, and with the right lens, it will outshoot 20+ megapixel cellphones easily. With the right lens, it will also outshoot a 20+ MP DSLR being used by someone who never changes their lens based on what they are shooting or what the lighting conditions are, and just leaves the kit lens on. My primary camera is a D7100, also bought as a Nikon factory refurb for $580. Save your money, do your research, and buy wisely!

[@bucksellers5364]

You can say that again! ....I am perfectly happy with my Canon 50D...I paid 400 bucks for it when it was just 4 years old....saved around 1000 bucks...I don't need the latest greatest...I just want nice photos....You don't have to mortgage the farm to make nice photos.....

[@Dance1617]

Russell S really well said and the refurbished from manafacturer are great too. besides as you advance in skill you'll be able to resell most your stuff for about the same price and you will lose less of anything on investment

[@viperx7262]

whoaaa i never even thought to buy a used one, you blew my mind right now.

[@jsong21]

Nikon = Action & Landscape. Canon = Portrait. But everything is personal preference. Nikon has a better build. Canon does better with video. But in terms of IQ... whether you shoot action, sports, landscape, portrait, or product.. it really doesn't matter as much anymore since post process can pretty much emulate any type of style, color, and feel. I shoot Canon because the color straight out of the box is better on skin and is warmer. The Nikon tends to have a bit more yellow tones in shots - would be great for sunsets and outdoor shooting. But both brands are awesome. Nikon or Canon for DSLRs. Fuji for Mirrorless. Sony for P&S. Everyone else kinda sucks.

[@Greetz108]

just go out and take photos !

[@TechSeller]

Sony is great!...for high end cameras....nikon!

[@guitarstalkandtech9085]

jsong21 Exactly right! Either way post processing is basically everyone will use with both cameras.

[@alvinjoint]

Nikon: landscape and portraits Canon: sports

[@4ieu]

LOL

[@freddieslaughter1107]

I think you would be making a big mistake to switch to Nikon, I had Nikon for years, but when everything started going digital, Canon was just way head of the game. Also pictures I was taking with my D3X didn't seem to be as good as my friends that had Canon, so I sold all my Nikon equipment and switched to Canon and never looked back, just my 2 cents.

[@tonypower9315]

Hi there Tony. Great info thanks. But what about us amateur moon, star and planet gazers? Would we benefit from the better Nikon picture quality, as you could say we are less lens dependent . Or would would you still push canon with specific lens combinations.? Don't forget we do where money permits, stick these cams onto telescopes. Look forward to hearing from you.....or maybe another video !

[@melfeliciano8449]

This has been an “eye opening” video for me. I’m infatuated with the Canon 70mm-200mm f2.8 IS II for portraits. It is so flattering. As a techie myself, I really enjoy your detailed explanations, but what I like the most were the real life examples. This video was posted 11 months ago…Have you found a replacement for the Canon 70-200 on Nikon or Sony yet?.

[@elmerdeloso594]

Hi Tony, do you have plans to update this comparison anytime soon? Thank you.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Here ya go: kzbin.info/www/bejne/fp7RlmeigsZrhsU

[@nic12344]

Nikon has the 200mm f/2 prime lens wich is way better at f2.8 than Canon's 200mm f/2.8... But it is also much bigger and heavier!

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Nicholas R.M. Yeah, that's the problem--it's $6k and 6.5 lbs.

[@jwonsehleay5]

Tony Northrup the

[@0M9H4X_Neckbeard]

But what about Leica? My father was a Leica guy, I'm not a big photographer myself but I'm just curious.

[@0M9H4X_Neckbeard]

Alan Unrau Does Leica not make "regular" DSLRs? Honestly, if I would win a camera of my choice in a lottery I'd take a Lytro Illum just because it must be so interesting to shoot with it, but that's a different story and the technology has not matured yet.

[@shouldiworry]

+0M9H4X leica is a specialty camera brand, very expensive without any fancy features.

[@RicardoPestana]

+0M9H4X Overated. If you want something similar buy Fuji.

[@chrischrosmelimelo]

+0M9H4X +Alan Unrau I agree with Alan for the most part. I will add that Leica is not only a brand that produces rangefinders - the M line - but also dslr like - the R line- and medium format - S line -. Leicas are all high end cameras produced for the wealthy amateur or very successfull professionals. Any field where who you are and what you do needs a tag of exclusivity on it, a statement of luxury and uniqueness. If you might consider getting in serious photography, first buy the best bang for the buck you can afford, train your skills and work the ladder for bigger jobs and better gear. If you just love photography and like to document your everyday life, friends, family and journeys, pick up a great film camera its cheap and very rewarding or just get a Fuji X for the closest feeling to it. Cheers

[@JerryPHcom]

+Alan Unrau Leica used to be something special, something unavailable anywhere else. They've spent the last 30+ years living on that reputation without really being innovators and they lost a lot of ground. especially in performance and quality. You pay for a well designed, industry leading box that just doesn't give you the photos that Canon or Nikon can give you at 1/2 the cost or less. Leica does make dSLR cameras, in medium format sizes, but for full frame sensors, you will be stuck with the range finder sized format. What is funny is that the Fuji cameras can almost match and often beat a lot of the specs of the Leica cameras. It is very much a specialist camera for a very tiny and specific market segment.

[@Fendervana]

Tony Northrup 15:47 Nikon does have a cheap $100 1:1.8D which has AF and it's super sharp - see Ken Rockwell's review.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Fendernirvana Yes, and in fact we own it (and love it). But it doesn't AF on entry-level Nikon bodies, and I was discussing low-budget options.

[@Fendervana]

Tony Northrup Strange, because that lens works on my old film cameras, F5 and F100. It should would on newer DSLRs..

[@theRombus]

Fendernirvana Screw drive focus was later replaced with internal-motor focus. The cheap new cameras don't have a screw drive motor and won't AF. Only the more expensive pro-level ones or older models (before internal silent motors) will.

[@agm5148]

Tony, I just bought a Nikon D5500 based on your prior testing and although I have only taken a few shots they're all very sharp. I ordered your book on Amazon and I should get it next week. Thanks for all your information.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

A gm you're welcome, and thanks! Enjoy!

[@markdstump]

Wow, Much better than some of the other equipment reviewers! Much more informative and much less goofy. I didn't actually learn anything about the Nikon line, but I learned something about the Canon line. (You might have mentioned the difference between the tilt-shift lenses on each side. But then you might also have mentioned the Nikon 135mm DC lens) As for the Nikon 70-200 F/2.8 VRII, there I think you were somewhat short on details. I may end up doing my own tests. because I've never seen (and always wanted to know) what the true focal length is when focused at various distances (a chart would be nice). ~Mark

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Mark Stump You can google 'nikon 70-200 effective focal length'--the focus breathing problems are universally accepted. Here are the measurements (focusing distance, actual focal length at 200mm): 1.27m (closest); 128mm 1.4m; 132mm 2m; 147mm 3m; 164mm 5m; 176mm 10m; 186mm Honestly, nobody ever asks me about tilt-shift, and I prefer to do that correction in post, anyway... it's just not as common a need as portraits, wildlife, macro, landscapes, etc.

[@markdstump]

Tony Northrup Thanks for the reply: darn it, I just spent the afternoon doing my own test. I've known for a long time that it wasn't 200mm up close, I just wanted more data. As for tilt shift, you can't change the plane of focus in post. I know you can straighten things, I agree w/ you there.

[@GlueFactoryBJJ]

Tony Northrup - Thanks for posting this. I searched and found the information on the DPReview Forums after you mentioned it: www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/2708229 I noticed that it was primarily at shorter distances and thought, "what's the big deal if you are a wildlife photog as the focal length thing is practically resolved?" Then I realized that it would be bothersome in the studio where the changes between 1.5 and 3 meters is so large that getting consistent compression, etc. would be problematic. While I gather from the thread above that internal focus (IF) lenses have this problem to some degree, this is a rather egregious example. It is a shame because the DxOMark scores on the lens are so stellar. Especially its corner to corner sharpness. Just out of curiosity, have you used the lens to see how it works in your shooting environment? Ironically, in the thread above, a tester said they got sharper pictures at the shorter focal length, even when upsized to match the focal length of the older VR lens. Then again, that same tester wasn't using/comparing it to the Canon L lens.

[@MMaven]

Nice work Tony!

[@cooloox]

Superb video, thanks for making it and sharing it, Tony.

[@AnimilesYT]

You say that 60 fps is way better than 30. And I completely agree. So I wonder, why didn't you shoot and upload this in 60fps? xD

[@NickWithford]

Animiles shooting in 60fps gives much more editing freedom, exporting and viewing in 60fps doesn't have much effect

[@AnimilesYT]

Nick Withford 60 fps looks way better. Action scenes give way more information, pan shots look way smoother, talking looks more realistic. Since it is a video there is movement, and any movement looks way better when it has more fps. Pretty much all gamers want at least 60 fps for a reason. I can also see if a video is 60fps or 30 within 5 seconds. Especially when I see someone talking or in a pan shot. Conclusion, it gives more freedom while editing. It doesn't have much effect on exporting and it looks way better. I see no reason not to use 60 fps :D

[@zacharywilliams39]

60 fps makes it look more unrealistic. 24/30fps give a motion blur that makes it look a lot closer to what we would naturally see.

[@AnimilesYT]

Zachary Williams That is not how it works. That is not how it works at all.. Humans do not see in fps. It is a constantly changing input. When you record at 30 fps the camera will record a picture with the motion blur that happened in the last 1/30 of a second. After that it records the next 1/30 of a second for the next frame. But when you view the video it will show a still frame for 1/30 of a second and the next one afterwards. You'll lose a lot of movement in between. Unless we can record motion blur in a dynamic way with very high fps we could mimic the way our eyes work. Otherwise the motion blur recorded by a camera won't look real. The funny thing is, we will perceive motion blur when something is 'moving' on a screen if the fps is high enough due to the way our brain interprets the signals :) On camera's it's not as bad as in games though. Many games have an option for motion blur, and that just looks horrible.

[@oleglego3655]

60fps is useless for studio stuff, talk show, etc. Extra useless bandwith used. Spots, action? Yes. Interviews? No.

[@redtails]

5:28 you can interpret this two ways, though. When comparing the 5Dmk3 with the D800E, you see that with the same lens, the Nikon can extract more useful data. However, the Canon camera has a larger percentage of useful data and therefore is (in this way) better designed than the Nikon. After all, 18 out of 24 is still better than 21 out of 36. So at the end of the day, the Nikon will be more wasteful of your resources, require more of your time and money, for a gain in useful megapixel data.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

***** Yes, if you're limited by storage space, that makes sense. But storage is cheap nowadays, and more detail makes a visible difference in the final image.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

***** Yes, if you're limited by storage space, that makes sense. But storage is cheap nowadays, and more detail makes a visible difference in the final image.

[@redtails]

Tony Northrup It's not just storage space, it's all of your resources, including time and money. I'm not denying it contains more detail, but I'm stating Nikon requires 50% (36 instead of 24mp) more resources for a 16.6% increase in detail. Whether it's worth it is arguable. If a photog requires high mp count, you're better off with medium format. If you require the high mp for cropping your pics, you're better off getting suitable lenses that don't require you to crop. All in all, my opinion is that the small increase in detail is not worth the additional resources considering all the other things that influence your pics. Thanks for commenting and giving your insight, nonetheless.

[@SBAjordan]

***** But 36 MP isn't really more resources I mean both cameras pretty much cost the same and you get nothing better on the 5dmkIII body besides the buffer and video features. It all depends on what you're shooting though, as you can see that Nikon sure does do well in low light. Plus that's just the stats for one lens. And I kinda have a theory that like the more mega pixels you have the harder it is to be more efficient. A good example would be: CPU A uses 100 watts to achieve 3.00 Ghz CPU B uses 150 watts to achieve 4.00 Ghz CPU B has to use 50% more watts for just a 33.33% Ghz boost. Therefore efficiency has dropped however performance has increased. At the end of the day what matters to the consumer efficiency or performance? I like that your argument at least has reason behind it and your not a rude fuck like that (Intel and Nvidia Suxxx) guy.

[@redtails]

Jordan Darby How can 36mp not require more resources? Modern computers are fast, but it still requires real time to process photos. If you have 5000 photos to edit from a big wedding, you're looking at 120 gigapixel for the Canon and 180 gigapixel for the Nikon. It'll cost you real time and money in editing time and storage. As for your comparison with CPUs, I don't think it can be translated to cameras. The big difference in useful resolution between Canon and Nikon is likely due to their different approaches to sub-pixel rendering and anti-aliasing. After all, a sensor doesn't contain pixels, it contains light sensors for the 3 base colours, and in many known schemes, many of the miniature sensors are reused between pixels to acquire a higher resolution than the sensor could factually produce if you'd simply divide the number of light detectors by 3. As for wanting performance at the expense of resources.. well, you can argue about this. It doesn't make a difference for hobbyist or enthusiast, but photographers have to make a living you know. So there still needs to be efficiency in your workflow at the expense of performance

[@georgemerkulov4805]

Which to buy, for commercial photos: Canon 6D M2 or Nikon 750??? Please., help to decide

[@jimmymifsud1]

Tony, now that I've used the Canon 5D MkIV I must say the Dynamic Range, Higher MP and Autofocus make the camera on par and if not better than the D810 in most areas. Also with the new Canon 24 - 105 F4 II and it's unbelievle sharpness it's a much better improvement over the previous Canon and current Sigma.

[@mohxinntech1205]

Canon 24-105 II is not sharper than the Sigma 24-105 Art. You compare them here: www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1072&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=918&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

[@robertbrody4032]

As a former canon owner (and still a big fan) I have to say that a lot of the video is not correct. Basically my Nikon D810 with ANY of the fast G primes gets me better results than my Canon gear did. Period and end of story. Even with a 24-84vr kit lens the D810 is superior in many ways to my previous 5D3. The Nikon always carries more detail (Yes, it IS visible), better color at higher ISO and hugely superior dynamic range with the D810 at low ISO and my Df all the way to ISO 12600. I am a professional still shooter, so I go with what works best. Canon sensors are so far behind the D810 now that a few lenses at certain price points do not make for the winning system. Nikon is also being more aggressive as of late in sealing holes in the lens lineups over Canon. Also missing is the serious fact that Nikon's flash system is a lot nicer. At lower budgets picking what feels better is more important than anything else, but if you're serious about shooting Canon has a lot of sensor work to do before they can be taken seriously against the D810/D4s combo or D810/Df combo. Most of my pro canon shooting friends have either switched or added Nikon to their systems.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Robert Brody What about the video isn't correct? I raved about the Nikon image quality and recommended it for everything in the medium focal range. The D810 slaughtered the 5D Mark III in our review. We totally agree about all of this.

[@johng7410]

Hey Tony, Just as a quick comment, I bought my first DSLR for a holiday to Antarctica. I got a Pentax K-50. I got it specifically because it was rated to -20 degrees celcius and weather resistant (both body and kit lens). I also picked up a second WR 55-300 lens for it as well. As it happens, I ended up having a slight emergency on some 'fast ice' (frozen sea ice). Upshot of it was I fell into the Southern Ocean. My camera was around my neck at the time, and tossed it lens first into the ice/snow. I got pulled out of the water and and the camera was covered in ice/snow. Took it back to the ship dried it off (after I dried myself off) and the camera was working like a charm. I agree that buying the right camera for the right job is a great idea, and I'm glad that I got one that was weather resistant. :-)

[@bigdave46148]

+John Grayson That's the great thing about Pentax camera's. They take a licking and keep on shooting. Not only that but also you can put any lens from a screw mount all the way to todays lens on a Pentax. Try doing that with Nikon or Canon. I do agree though that Pentax does not have the lens line up that Canon or Nikon does but lets be honest here, how many times do you need a 800mm lens? Or a 1200mm lens? Not very often.

[@DJMavis]

+John Grayson That's a really odd place to go on holiday! I saw DPReview doing some destruction testing. an old EOS 1D was left in the freezer, defrosted with I think hot coffee and was just peachy! I am amazed some of the abuse these cameras can take. Also I would have been far too worried about dying to think about tossing the camera.

[@johng7410]

I tossed the camera because it was around my neck (read: on my chest). As I fell I landed on my chest on the ice, on purpose, to minimize how much of my body went into the Southern Ocean. This was below the Antarctic Circle so it was cold. Point is, given I was landing my chest on the ice, I didn't want a chunky metal object in the way.

[@DJMavis]

John Grayson Ah, I thought you'd gone for camera preservation as a priority, which would be kind of heroic, as long as you survived!

[@johng7410]

+mavis cruet Nope. Camera be damned I was running on pure animal instinct.

[@Kodiac117]

Great video, Tony. Getting my first full frame soon, D750. Got a Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 with VC and sticking with all tamron lenses. Just can't afford to pay the outrages prices of Canon and Nikon lenses. Next lens after full frame the Tamron 150 - 600 mm.

[@resoftw]

+Peter Landman and a tokina 16-28/2.8 :)

[@lkat718]

the 70-200 is not the most superior portrait lens.. what about all of the ultra sharp primes...?

[@TonyAndChelsea]

It's a matter of style. If you shoot weddings, kids, or anything where you need to be able to move quickly, a zoom really gets the job done much better.

[@terenas1986]

Prime: 135mm f/2L :)

[@DougVandegrift]

For 90% of the photographers out there the choice between Canon and Nikon shouldn't affect your ability to take good shots. I think this nit picking is more for the 10% of pros who really take it to the extreme level. So I'd say unless you're in that 10% best not to lose sleep over it.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Doug Vandegrift Yeah, I totally agree. We regularly switch between Canon, Nikon, and Sony, and we get the job done with whatever we have. People are spending thousands, so it's worth putting some thought into, but if you've already bought, just shoot with what you've got.

[@MegaYuzer]

+Doug Vandegrift how you know pros are 10%. Whats your source for this state

[@VallanTommy]

yeah , just going to bed, time is the same as you guys now. lost an hour sleep

[@BloodpactORG]

It can be frustrating though to have to compromise. Ask any concert/ culture photographer, always with a Nikon body they're really happy with but just not quite the right glass in front of it. When noise performance is king... Thankfully an 85mm does the job.

[@skeightboon9116]

Nikon do have a cheaper 50mm. It's the 50mm f1.8D with no focus motor...

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Yeah, we have the 50mm f1.8D, and it's a great lens. But I was discussing lenses that would autofocus with entry-level bodies, and that lens won't autofocus with entry-level Nikons.

[@Bsaint]

even a mid range sub $1000 d7000/d7100 etc will auto focus non AF lenses so argument is pretty invalid.

[@MuhammadKilany]

yes and i am selling my Nikon tomorrow for worse canon for that reason , and with the difference am buying a used STM 50mm .

[@AngeloDau]

why should you care when you're going to use it on a D810??? how can it be even an argument? and if you shoots at 200m F2.8, why should be the 70-200 your preferred lens and not the nikkor 200 F2.0 VR II ? nonsense to me

[@tr3v87]

Interesting video. Just looked on DXOMARK and it says that the Nikon is better in most of the tests. And at f2.8 at 200mm the Canon is also worse? Plus i think the focal length information you've provide about the reduced focal length on the Nikon 70-200 is a little misleading as this only happens at minimum focal length (and if i'm not mistaken within the specification for MFD). This is actual good for a number of reasons because if the focal length reduces when you get to close to allow focusing that means you will get the shot. I'd rather have an in focus image at 1.1 meters at 135mm than an out of focus 200mm image at 1.2... Correct me if i'm wrong but at anything other minimum focusing distance the Nikon is still 70-200. After comparing both the Canon and Nikon i'm unable to get any 'closer' with the canon. There is nothing to choose between them with sharpness either.

[@tr3v87]

***** A very good point. However the info provided in this video could and probably will influence someones decision when it comes to buying a new camera/lens.

[@Flabeaches]

+SLWassets - Exactly

[@leolorenzosoon4600]

16:25, can't I just buy an adapter for the canon lens to attach to my nikon body? Or will the autofocus on the lens not work anymore? Sorry if this is a noob question, just curious.

[@FabianKagy]

There is a Nikkor 200mm f 2 and there is a 400mm f 2.8

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Fabian Kägy Well, yeah, but they're $6k and 6 lbs. Not workable for portraiture.

[@FabianKagy]

Tony Northrup Thats true! But I think that you should at least mention that they are out there, even if they are not workable. Instead of saying that there is no option from nikon.

[@Randolph5286]

***** He also says that not one of the other manufacturers produces a 70-200mm F2.8, despite there being two sony versions, so treat his absolute statements with a grain of salt.

[@adrboe3027]

There actually is / was a cheap 50mm 1.8 for Nikon

[@MikeGInternetPhenomenon]

+Adro Pulverize Yup - I've got exactly that one - yes it's manual focus... and I love it - it's great for portraiture and it's got wicked short DOF to play with... I got mine for like $90, the next lowest is 1.4 which goes for like $500 or more

[@AbasikMusic]

I can't do this any more... Its not 'Nike-On' its 'Nik-On'...

[@TonyAndChelsea]

***** Just so you know that I'm always open to feedback, I looked up official Nikon USA videos and they say 'Nike-On', just like I do. It's possible they prefer a different pronunciation in other countries.

[@AbasikMusic]

Tony Northrup Ahh that's probably it I'm from England was not to offend but that is probably the only foreign pronunciation that I dislike, anyway's great video, I've always been on the side of Canon but this may have just changed me :)

[@relinquis]

In Japan it's closer to Nik-on, not Nye-con. Either way, people know what you're talking about and Nike-On is accepted in the USA at least.

[@relinquis]

nice video by the way. actually, this is a great video. well thought out. thanks for taking the time to make it. I just wish i knew this stuff before i bought a cheap/slow sigma on my way to my first Safari. haha. I still managed to get some memorable shots and learned a lot so it worked out.

[@mainlymusicman]

but pronouncing it the British way makes it sound like a kids toy company. (ie, doesnt sound as cool.)

[@alyrus]

I would suggest you a Fujifilm X-T1 with a 50-140 mm lens. Stellar sharpness, but at a slightly slower aperture of f2.8 on a crop body. Though not sure why DXOMark does not test a Fuji lens ....

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Jacky Yong Hon Wai It's equivalent to 200mm f/4.2 on the long end, so it doesn't give me what I need.

[@PaivaCine]

I believe this video was published before the release of the 50 Megapixel Canon 5Ds release. Does Nikon have a camera to compare with the 5Ds? Not that I am aware of, but I know nothing about Nikon anyway.

[@notme1998]

d850, z7

[@weo1weo1weo1]

I just got a pentax instead XD

[@DaveDewald]

+weo1weo1weo1 I'm trying to sell my 70D to get a Pentax K-1. The Canon served me well as my first DSLR, but I've discovered I love to shoot landscapes and the K-1 should be awesome for my needs.

[@weo1weo1weo1]

+Dave Dewald i just got a new nikon though now XD i wont be selling ny pentax though, cuz it does take nice photos!

[@TheRcEngineer]

The solution is simple, Canon and/or Sony for video, Nikon for photo.

[@fivish]

Canon became popular as they were given away for free to professionals. Prior to then Nikon had 95% market share on merit alone.

[@Photoid01]

Tony, congrats on another informative video. Your organization and your delivery are excellent. I wonder whether your microphone, however, is partially covered because the audio sounds muffled. Or, maybe you are EQing the audio incorrectly. It just seems that there is way too much bass, and way too little treble in your voice recording.

[@jdm_jadon]

You probably won't see this but what do you recommend for automotive photography? I don't need as big of a lens right so Nikon would be better for me?

[@aleksandrnestrato]

My gosh! Changing system just because of the new camera body?.. Let's imagine a 'Canon guy' that sold his 5DMkIII and switched to the back then brand new Nikon D800(E) because of that 36 megapixel sensor. Resolution, whoa! The guy now has to sell all the Canon lenses (since he doesn't have any Canon anymore) and replace them by Nikon lenses. Ok, let's drop that 'Nikon-doesn't-have-equivalents' stuff. Our guy found lenses of other focal lengths and apertures from the Nikon system and is quite pleased. Now there's the Canon 5DS(r). 50 megapixels. What should the guy do? Change back to Canon family? Ok, he switches back to Canon, sells Nikon body and lenses, buys Canon glass… If in couple of years Sony or whatever manufacturer produces for Nikon a 100 megapixel sensor? Change the whole system again? I think pros will definitely need those extra advantages right here and now, 'cause they earn money and(!)… this is a very competitive field: a pro has to deliver astonishing results, 'cause there are other great pros that deliver astonishing results. If not me, someone else will do this, will reach that new edge. But let's remember about the budgets the pros have. They definitely can afford having both systens: Canon and Nikon. And more… I know about several pros with six digit budgets who shoot with, for example, Nikon/Phase One-Mamiya-Leaf/Leica (one guy), Canon/Hasselblad/Pentax 645/Sony A7R and A99 (another guy). I think there are three philosophies: 1) sticking to a brand; 2) changing brands and gear (whole systems); 3) using several systems. Changing brands and whole systems has its sense: a pro has to deliver. If I don't shoot the highest quality images clients/employers can hire another photo guy who does. But… If I change the whole system I have to sell my current system cheaper, because it is used, and buy new gear. It's more expensive. I have to invest money on this. Besides that I have to get used to the ergonomics of the new to me brand. That decreases my overall quality as a photographer while I'm learning new gear. Sticking to a brand I can spend that money on equipment within that brand and probably that equipment will improve my images significantly. Having several systems is great, but more expensive.

[@bernardmelus54]

Tony, why are you so concerned about pixels! They're not as important as you think. Do you do any real photography or do you just spend your days staring at DXO fart? I have lost all respect for you.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

+Bernard Melus Hi, Bernard! Thanks for writing. I don't think pixels are as important as subject matter, but I've done a great deal of commercial work, where pictures are often rejected for not being sharp enough. Also, if you spend thousands setting up a shoot, it makes sense to choose gear that will give you the best possible results. Yes, I do some photography. Here's my portfolio: northrupphotography.com Where's yours? I couldn't seem to find yours.

[@bernardmelus54]

+Tony Northrup You can pull as much detail as you want but with alot of the newer lenses they are adding more and more elements to correct for chromatic aberration which gives a flat, plain look to the immage. Also you said that Nikon doesn't have a 200mm f2.8 equivalent, have you looked at the Nikon 180mm f2.8? It is a wonderful 8 element lens that is just incredible. There is a reason Nikon is still making this lens. Still working on my portfolio, ill let you know when it is done.

[@alexlucaxxxxxxxxxxxx]

+Bernard Melus Yea lol you are right, like at the T5 vs D3300 comparison he went by the fact thatD3300 has 11AF andd T5 only 9AF points, and that the D3300 has 5fps burst and T5 only 3fps, and a lot of stuff that is not only megapixels. Lol if you care about mega pixels and say that they are the only thing that matters buy a Nokia Lumia 1020 , that thing got like 42MegaPixels and any of these DSLRs or modern point and shhoot will do better xD, sry for long comment but it seems that a lot of people get stuck at MP and think that more MP = better pictuers and don't take in calculation the censor or image processor, anyways I'm not talking like for Tony, he seems to know what he is doing, Im talking to a vast majority, sry for bad English.

[@bensslightnature]

+Tony Northrup why being so defensive? cant you accept criticism? its healthy, and you can grow out of it. maybe he was a bit childish but cmon.. "where's yours" ..

[@njsivee3730]

+Moody Given the criticism was misguided and somewhat untrue. I believe the response was appropriate :)

[@SayWhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat]

Tony does anyone ever said that your videos ALWAYS have bad color grading work?: ) your skin looks like from movie Walking dead :) Can someone add some red color to your skin? :)

[@guitarstalkandtech9085]

Tomas Av. It's the vampire look!!!!

[@WaqasPardesi]

my name is malik and I'm starting make video on youtube which Camara is best ..i have a choice Nikon D3200 if u have batter choice plz tell me same budget like D3200

[@TonyAndChelsea]

+Waqas Malik For video, look for a Sony a5100 or a6000 instead. Enjoy, and good luck!

[@WaqasPardesi]

+Tony Northrup Thank you very much dear sir

[@TedVanBoort]

You're making a percentage assessment based on sensor but if you look at the overall rating Canon lenses are using converting more pixels to sensor size.. where the Nikon is performing at 24mp/ to a 36mp sensor , the canon is outperforming and almost reaching maximum mp 24 mp sensor - 18mp maximum leaves only 6 mp unused whereas the nikon might be using more mp,it isnt coming close to maxing out the range of its sensor. That to me suggests Canon wins for maximum Sensor to lens usage.

[@munishmanu1081]

i use both cameras but i love nikon 😘

[@Cigartutorials]

megapixels is not all quality guy...

[@bgenevcius]

+Cigar Tutorials he is talking about "perceptual megapixels", which ia an objective and efficient way of measuring sharpness. Yes, photography is all about sharpness...

[@CK_edits]

+Cigar Tutorials it is guy, when u need to crop bruh.!!!

[@tomrose2086]

"Perceptual megapixels" might be a useful way of comparing RESOLUTION (not sharpness) but it is a partly subjective measure.

[@HimothyOHooligan]

No it's not. It's on objective metric.

[@tomrose2086]

***** Well I was wrong to assume that it is subjective. Maybe it is objective and maybe it is subjective. The only people that know for sure work at DxO. As wikipedia says: "The Perceptual MegaPixel (P-MP) is a proprietary ranking of lens-camera combinations, created by DxO Labs. It is intended to express the resolution of which a combination of camera and lens is capable. Complete scientific or technical documentation of the process used to compute P-MP values has never been published, and P-MP measurements have never been made without the cooperation of DxO Labs. " But note: RESOLUTION, not sharpness.

[@farouk6564]

What happened to your videos Tony? they used to be interesting and useful now it's all about gear, brands and super technical boring stuff which will never make anyone a better photographer. who cares what camera you use? what is important is the learning the craft but maybe that's boring to most people, so sad... Good luck!

[@TonyAndChelsea]

***** you should watch more of our videos.

[@chosbach411]

***** you're making a lot of assumptions, in my opinion. Taking the time to learn the "technical boring stuff" as you call it is what makes all of us better photographers. Granted we need to have an eye for composition, but if we don't know how to use our gear or why pick a particular lens/body combination, how can any of us become better at perfecting our craft? Personally, I'm grateful for the time put into compiling the data and putting it into an easy to understand and digest format.

[@DanLiveOnUTube]

Tony Northrup This is about the first video in a LONG while that's informative and technical and actually kept my interest throughout! Thank you so much. As you start working on the more professional side, these technical informations MATTERS. Don't be discouraged by the clown remarks.

[@CarmenHargis]

My husband as the D810 and absolutely loves it. He has the 300mm that he uses for wildlife but he sticks with his 58mm for most of his portraits. I have the D5500 since I'm only a (casual/armature photographer) and have really enjoyed it compared to the D5200 that I had. Right now I have the 35mm and the 40mm macro lens and so far have been great as "walk around" lenses. My husband purchased the Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 a couple of years ago. Since he has his 300mm, I use the 70-200mm at times. All are great lens and bodies. We've been very impressed! Thank you for all your tips Tony!

[@surfdaj11]

Tony, more great insight! I've gone through so many of your videos. So glad I subscribed to your page a while back. You're a true Professional, well spoken and patient. Hope the family is great! Keep shooting pal.

[@aitornavarro6597]

Hasselblad anyone?

[@namedjohnsmith6780]

Leica or Phase One? :D

[@Sentrymode]

Hasselblad? i cant even afford a damn entry level dslr and yet i see people talking about medium format cameras haha rip my wallet/life

[@richardrichardsen6611]

You can buy those relics for very little. I think a 500 CM goes for a few hundred bucks on eBay. But why? The idea behind 2 and 1/4 was better detail. You can buy a digital back for that Hass for 5 grand or so and end up with a lens restricted 6000 dollar camera that pales when compared to a used 1200 dollar D800. As for the Leica recommendations sure! Buy a camera and a singe 80mm lens that you can buy an entire Nikon or Cannon system for. That's the ticket.

[@IsaiahSleziak]

I just tossed my headphones across the room. "Nikon Has a cheaper version [50mm] but it doesn't have auto focus and you need auto focus for portraiture" Um... Sid Avery? Alfred Eisenstein? Robert Doisneau!? no?

[@TonyAndChelsea]

+Isaiah Sleziak How about I rephrase... Beginning photographers will have much more success with shallow depth-of-field portraits when they can autofocus.

[@antronk]

+Isaiah Sleziak Modern DSLRs don't have a visual focusing screen to aid for focus. So you relay just on the focus indicator. I have a Nikkor 50mm 1.2 and I have been able to get sharp pictures with my film camera (since my school days). On the other hand I find it very difficult and frustrating to use it on a digital body, precisely because the lack of focusing screen.

[@IsaiahSleziak]

+antronk I also have the 50mm 1.2 I wouldn't recommend shooting it without a tripod at f1.2 on any camera. If I want/have to hand hold at 1.2 I usually get the focus close and then physically rock in and out to focus, that usually does the trick. Besides that manually focusing any other f-stop is not an issue.

[@thekaiser4333]

+Isaiah Sleziak -- … somehow the focus rings had more grip on the old Leicas and Hasselblads compared to modern infinity-focus plastic.

[@IsaiahSleziak]

The Kaiser Haha! that must be it! plus they didn't have to deal with focus by wire back then :P

[@devonfelix3673]

This guy sounds exactly like Ezra from Pretty Little Liars lmao

[@khurramkazim]

The way you've set the stage/studio, lighting and the way you've framed the video, positioned yourself and the presentation display monitor, excellent!!

[@uptownphotography]

I was getting bummed out as I just bought a 5D3 last April....but as your review went on, I started to feel vastly better...Besides, I'm guessing Canon will release a 5D MK IV somewhere down the road with a higher Mega Pixel count...Then it will be a new ball game...Philip

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Uptown Photography Watch my 7D Mark II image quality review. It seems like Canon has mostly caught up with their sensor technology, so the 5D Mark IV should be similar to the Sony/Nikon equivalents.

[@uptownphotography]

Tony Northrup Thanks...I'll check it out. I better start saving pennies now for the 5D Mk IV.....Philip

[@torrepinosapartment]

I agree Philip, I am poised to buy a full frame and it's starting to look like I might have to wait for the new 5D or wind up wishing I had waited... it's getting hard to stay patient at this point but then all good things come to those who wait, right?

[@supersingular]

Nice review, however, I just can't trust a photographer who dislikes Leica so much.

[@BhaskarKashyap]

Stop saying 'Nye-kon' it's wrong and irritating. The correct pronunciation is 'Nee-kon.' It's Japanese.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Nikon USA's official pronunciation is Nye-kon... check their videos. We're in the US. I know it's weird that Nikon uses different pronunciations in different parts of the world. And yes, I'm aware they're Japanese: kzbin.info/www/bejne/al6bdamtarmjaqs

[@batprime9560]

It's same situation if Japanese person was to say yes In English

[@BhaskarKashyap]

Tony & Chelsea Northrup You have to say it like the Japanese since they named it. There is no American pronunciation of Nikon. There is the Japanese way and wrong way and 'Nye-kon' is wrong

[@ziomalZparafii]

Similar with "Raspberry Pi" read as "pie". Always hurt my ears. "We are in the US"? So English words read in eg. European countries should be read in local language, not in English? Nah...

[@hectorrivera2785]

Canon is So overated.

[@Dance1617]

Hector Rivera I bought a d3300 sold it and got back into photography and bought a Canon T6... the Nikon was vastly superior

[@dhiren_verma]

Hi Tony, I would like to get a recommendation about my beginner DSLR purchase. I'm not a pro in photography, & as a hobby I think that now i need to switch to a DSLR, as till this point i felt ok with my point-&-shoot Sony DSC H55. I like to capture landscape, wildlife & small creatures like spiders, bees & similar insects. It blew my eyes wide open while watching the video even at 4:00AM in the morning, when you showed that spider portrait with the Canon MP-E lens. Can U please help me out to pick a good beginner DSLR?

[@funnybugsbunny]

Amazingly insightful. Thanks! However, your updated version's link is not working.

[@ShevillMathers]

I have several Canon & Nikon DSLR's. A big plus for Canon is that their included software includes free software for image download/processing also full camera control by PC- the two pieces of software are free. A big plus for me..

[@chandrashekarv2276]

Dear Tony I have the following queries. I recently bought Nikon D5200 with 18-140 Kit lens. Up to what f-stops we can go? the lens shows a range of f3.5-5.6. From the tutorials, it is clear that you may use even f-11 for landscape photography since ample light is available. I am confused.

[@caseysteffenhagen3639]

I like the outdoors, I am new to photography, but I really have been growing a passion for it. my budget isn't very high at all, I want to shoot landscapes and wildlife almost exclusively. My budget is quite low, I am torn between the T5i and the D3300..... what are your opinions??? I would really like to hear from you, Tony Northrup. thanks!

[@alejandrolisboa9145]

Hi Tony, first of all I'd like to appreciate the way and style of how you educate on your videos. I am planning on purchasing a camera, and after doing some research, the 2 options I am stuck with before making a decision are the Canon D5 Mark iii or the Sony A7R ii. I will be using it for weddings and portraits. Along with some good lenses, such as the Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 ls II. Please advice on what you recommend. Thank you.

[@c312eal]

+Alejandro Lisboa Nikon D750

[@TimSiggs]

Hi Tony, I am changing from a Video camera to either a DSLR or a Micro 4/3 , maybe a GH4 to shoot bird video. Assuming I have a budget of 3-5k, can you recommend a body and lens ? I would like as much focal length as possible and narrow depth of field . I am leaning toward GH4 but I am unsure about the lens and whatever adapters to get. Thanks so much for all your advice.

[@DEADABES]

also, Tony, when you say Canon is a much larger company than Nikon.. are we referring to on a consumer level only? seeing the larger, more expensive applications Nikon is employed to..

[@joemonahan]

I currently have a Pentax K5 and want to make the switch (Nikon or Canon). I've been playing around for 2 years and learning that I love to shoot when I'm hiking/camping. This would be some wildlife (if we see a bear or something in Yosemite), landscapes, and night/astro stuff. I'm stuck in analysis paralysis. My biggest complaint is the K5 with the basic 18-135 DA lens is too soft at the 135 mark. I figure if I'm going to make the switch, now is the time before investing in real glass. Any recs on body/lenses? Let's say on a starting budget of $3500 for the body and a lens or two.

[@justin_clark_photography]

Tamron 70-200 maybe be short due to focus breathing at close distances, but DXO mark has had it sharp at 200mm f2.8 since this video was released. As a Nikon user/lover and a Canon 70-200 user/lover, I would love to hear your updated thoughts on this topic.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

We've tested it and it's very sharp! kzbin.info/www/bejne/hmmTc6OJhq58qtE

[@t.alexsmith]

Tony, I currently live in Alaska and am wanting to get into photography. I'm looking for a decent entry(ish) DSLR to shoot with. I am trying ţo decide between the Canon t5i, and Nikon D5300. Which would you recommend for shooting outdoors, and possibly for shooting sports activities with friends? Lense suggestions also? Thanks!

[@redbuzzardbass]

Just a thought, how about a Nikon mirrorless body with the Canon lens. I haven't looked to see if they make Canon to Nikon adapters but I can say they sure make Nikon to Canon adapters. One limitation is you have to use the lens totally manually. Might be an option.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Andrew Jackson There really aren't Nikon to Canon adapters, unfortunately.

[@funkathustra]

How did you come up with your focal length numbers for the Canon? I've seem conflicting information that the Canon is actually about 230mm when focused closely -- i.e., it has severe focus breathing, but in the opposite (arguably more useful) direction. I totally agree that the Canon looks better at 200 than the Tamron (and consequently, Nikon) does, but I'm curious about the actual focal length numbers.

[@Berus7777]

I was in a similar position last year, but made the switch anyway. Finally, I just decided that any problem(s) I encountered after switching, I would just find a workaround for. Guess what? It worked. I miss a couple of things about Canon (mostly that 5x macro lens and that 85mm f/1.2) but overall I gained a lot of things I loved by switching to Nikon, and I just enjoy shooting with Nikon more. It's just a better experience overall - for me, at least.

[@LaviCor-md7ks]

I just bought my first dslr (nikon d5200), and what youre basically telling me is: "you have the better body! great for you. too bad you dont have good lenses to put on it...", beacuse at the end, thats how i feel after watching this video also, i cant find the data about the focus breathing you mentioned on dxomark site... where does it appear?

[@TonyAndChelsea]

DxOMark doesn't cover focus breathing, unfortunately. Here's some info on our site: northrup.photo/gear-basics/lens-features/focus-breathing/

[@yhangr]

I didn't understand the "actual focal length at headshot range" concept for the lenses. So, even if the lens is rated as 70 - 200 mm, it means the actual focal length changes according to the distance to the subject? Where can i find more information about this?

[@garywooden8689]

Hi Tony, I know that you usually ony test newer lenses but it would be nice to see how the older Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-D ED works on a new body like a D810 or D750 compared with the newer Nikon 70-200 and the Canon setup. You can still find this older lens for a reasonable price but I have only seen qualitative reviews and never a real comparison.

[@stevendeane5331]

Tony, how can you see anything on the Dell ? It's like using bad glasses ? Lightroom nice, but I don't use that program, you can see it on the photo's ? You can't even see dynamic range on the blind monitor ? I hope they paided you for the being even in your video !

[@stevendeane5331]

+Steven Deane You might try editing with a blind folded on !

[@MohanJan1954]

I don't understand one thing. When you say Nikon lens does not go to 200mm when shooting close range what do you mean? Why do you want 200mm at close range when 85mm would be enough? Is it for shallow depth of field? Can you kindly calculate the DOF at short range distance for the focal lengths you mention and see if they matter so much as to break the deal? I can see that the DOF is about 1 inch for the following parameters: Nikon D7000 camera- f/2.8; 200mm and distance between camera and subject is 10 feet. The DOF becomes 2 inches when you use a 135mm focal length all else remaining constant. Is that 1 inch difference on a portrait shot going to make such a huge difference? In a portrait we want at least 6 inches DOF to get the entire face in focus from nose to ears or am I missing something? I think on a Full frame sensor the difference may be even smaller. If you are a Nikon shooter and want 200mm most of the time then Nikon has a 200mm f/2 prime lens which is expensive. I checked the facts on DxoMark and am surprised that your review is not supported by DxoMark. Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 on D810 has a score of 31 and sharpness of 27 while the Canon lens on 5D MkIII scores overall of 27 and sharpness of just 21. Please check for yourself on DxoMark website.

[@MrJackZhan]

He is talking about focus breathing. When focused close to minimum focusing distance, the Nikon gives you the view of a 130mm lens instead of a 200mm lens. When you stand at the same distance to the subject, this means the Nikon gives you a wider view than the Canon. Since he is shooting head shots, this means you need to step closer with the Nikon to get the same shot, and you won't be able to do this every time. Also, instead of the difference in DOF, I think he cares more about the background blur, which is a more noticeable difference.

[@BobbyGiggz]

Tony, you've mentioned before that full frame lenses on APS-c bodies are cropped in both focal length range AND aperture. I've managed to confirm the focal length crop when I used a 50mm F1.4 on a Sony A55 and a A99. The picture on the A99 was much bigger than the A55 which is APS-c, as was the angle of view. However I had no way of confirming if the Aperture control range had been reduced in anyway. Does the cropping apply to prime lenses, or is it just in the variable Aperture range? Cheers.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Bobby Giggz This should help, and look for Crop Factor Part 2 and Part 3 if you want more detail: kzbin.info/www/bejne/nGbdf2mEi91gnrs

[@BobbyGiggz]

Tony Northrup I checked out the links, thx. I think your argument would hit home if you argued from the position of Angle of view. This is much more practical to all photographers. I have a 24mm, a 50mm, and a 100mm. I get about 86degrees angle of view on my widest lens, and that value gets halved on the 50mm, and even more narrow on the 100mm. This fact means so much more to me because i know exactly what lens to use in any given circumstance. having to make a 30% compensation on my angle of view because of APS-C pisses me off. Let them know this and I guarantee they will come round to the rip-off. Cheers again.

[@WakizashiSabre]

How about Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC USD? Rated higher than VR2. Bit sharper and much less breathing.

[@IPDomino]

WakizashiSabre nope, same breathing

[@gennidee]

You know, a question that always bothered me is: why do so many professional photographers use full frame cameras when a maximum reach is desired, namely for wildlife? I never got that ... Even you suggested a D810 and the 500mm lens for wildlife photographers, while you use the 7D and a 400mm lens on the Canon side - which makes more sense to me. Fullframe never beats a crop sensor in terms of reach because you always have this crop factor. So as long as the lens is sharp enough that using smaller pixels is not only quantizing a blur gradient more accurately i would always go for a crop camera when i want to maximize the zoom, which - again - is what wildlife photographers tend to do.

[@TonyAndChelsea]

We do cover this at sdp.io/ffcrop

[@Edinwildlifetog]

I shoot both FX and DX with the 500mm F4 VR and shoot wildlife. Full frame is great for wildlife. You just need to work harder in getting closer. I use the DX as a Teleconvertor mainly. :)

[@octobarra]

Use a full frame and you'll understand why. Crop sensors are not maximizing zoom in a lens, or reaching further. Crop sensors are essentially cropping out information. The appearance of getting closer to the subject is a side affect of this. You lose dynamic range and depth of field advantages, sharpness, and an overall noticeable difference in photo quality. You are better off getting a D810 and cropping a photo 40% in post than getting a 7D with already lost advantages.

[@gennidee]

Sorry but this answer doesn't address my question. It is not about dynamic range or cropping away informations by using only a part of the image circle of the full frame lens. Firstly dynamic range is really just a small issue nowadays, especially if you trade dynamic range for reach. There are differences, sure, but compared to DSLRs from 10 years or so this is like argueing whether a Mercedes E AMG or Audi S8 gets faster from 280 to 300. But ok, since you threw that "sacrificing informations" argument at me: The whole point of my question is why do you deliberately throw away informations by using bigger pixels if you could also use smaller pixels that, at a given focal length and maximum resolution of the lens (i know that smaller pixels will just yield a better quantization of the lens blur at some point), will give you more detail of the subject? You could of course use a 5DS that has the same pixel size as a 7D2 and then crop in and get exactly the same pixel x pixel dimensions of your subject as if you used the 7D2 in the first place. But then you don't get better dynamic range since the pixels are the same. For every purpose there is a specialized camera and you might also want to have a fast frame rate and a dense AF field distribution so 7D2 wins for sports and wild life over a 5DS. More so the D500 vs. the D810 since the D500 indeed has smaller pixels and hence renders the subject in greater detail as long as the lens doesn't limit this by it's resolution. So to cut a long story short: If we're talking about "normal" focal lengths, for instance 85mm on the 7D2 vs. 135mm on the 5D4, then the bigger pixels of the 5D4 really are to your benefit. But in this situation where all you want is getting as close to the subject as possible and if it's by cropping I really don't see why one should use full frame other then simply not owning a crop camera. .... Many sports photographers use camera JPEGs, btw. So much for the dynamic range advantage of full frame vs. crop.

[@octobarra]

Sure I did. You asked why so many professional photographers use full frame when a maximum reach is desired. The answer is image quality... period. Regardless if you are using a crop sensor to get "closer" with smaller pixels you are still sacrificing image quality that you would have otherwise had with FF. Dynamic range is absolutely important, and until the camera can catch up to the human eye there will always be a push for something better, especially in the art industry. No artist wants to be limited on creativity! For MOST professional photographers image quality is king. For you, maybe not. That is fine. It's all just about what is important to the person behind the camera. For me I would rather start with high quality images that obtain more potential. Then, according to my needs I simply work harder to get closer to the subject. If I'm still limited to what I can do, I can always fork out the money to purchase a longer lens (you can always go longer). If in the rare instance I've done all three and still didn't get close enough in a moments time, I would rather crop a quality FF image in post to get closer then to sacrifice the quality of all of my work. You can always obtain reach, it's the foundation of your images I'd be more worried about. But that's just me. Furthermore, I wouldn't make a decision to shoot in JPEG because some sports photographers have to quickly dispense unedited images to the media so they can post headlines of recent sporting events to the general public. If you care about image quality and want to be creative through the process of ART, shoot in RAW and do some post.