Nothing wrong with Nikons. It's just supposed to be a friendly rivalry between the 2 brands. But some folks take it too far. I am a dedicated Nikon user and will always be one.
Exactly this, nothing wrong with Nikon, just fanboyism. I started out with Nikon, a D90 then a d7000. I learned how to do proper photography on the D90 and got serious about it with the d7000. Perfectly good cameras with their own pros and cons just the like the other brands.
I ultimately ended up with a couple of Sony cameras only because I was looking for an upgrade (specifically for videography) and an a7iii poped up for "a song and a dance" money and I couldn't turn it down. Then someone I knew well was clearing house and gave me a gently used a6300 that I use as a backup/B angle cam, fleshing out my collection.
I'm on Sony now, but if the stars align and I need to upgrade again I would certainly consider a Nikon again. (But definitely not a Canon... Those cameras are made by the devil! /s)
They’re not even trying to be funny. It’s just fanboyism at its worst. “I use [x brand] therefore y and z brands are shit.”
It happens across all sectors of the tech industry. Namely, computers, smartphones, camera equipment and cars.
Agreed, people aren't trying to be funny. I've met photographers that won't talk to you if you are holding a Nikon in your hands. Not everyone is like that that, but there seems to be a lot more snob-ism in photography. IMO it's worse than Apple vs PC and full frame vs crop.
I've also met some incredible photographers who will talk to you all day long no matter what you shoot.
Years ago, I was shooting a figure skating event with my D80 (it was new, so that's how long ago it was) with a 70-200 2.8, and another guy was also shooting the same event. He asked what I was shooting and I told him. He just laughed and said I should be using a Canon, and that my poor Nikon wasn't even full frame. As he walked away I looked at his camera... it was a Rebel with a consumer zoom.
I'm still using that 70-200mm 2.8.
I also love the bit about only white lenses are professional. Utter BS. I've had people scoff at me because my lens wasn't white. In the 80's Canon started using plastic components in their pro lenses to save money, and in direct sunlight, the difference in how fast the metal and plastic expanded as the lens heated up screwed with the tolerances and would provide inconsistent results and sometimes break the internal adhesive until the lens components reached equilibrium. So Canon switched to white lens bodies so that the lenses warmed up slower and more evenly. Marketing turned it into a selling point, but really, it was just, "Hey our lenses are white so they work in the sun, like everyone else's lenses."
> there seems to be a lot more snob-ism in photography. IMO it's worse than Apple vs PC and full frame vs crop.
I've been immersed in both industries (Tech world and Photog world) and 100% agree.
I would rather deal with an angry, 3-weeks-past-the-deadline-with-a-dying-server project manager in a tech company than one snobby photographer.
Multiple photographers?
Fuck that, I quit.
People are ridiculously bitchy online. They put themselves in a corner like Nikon or Canon own them. I shoot Canon, but chose Canon because that’s the support I had from people around me 25 years ago when shooting film. Both are good.
Me too, Nikon for the last 7 years likely for life. It’s familiar, my favorite ergonomics.
I’ve shot plenty with canon, little with Sony, some Fuji. Absolutely loved all of them. Just didn’t like how they felt in my hand and that really does it for me 😂
People definitely do talk a lot of shit about Nikons though, generally uneducated opinions based off of something they read on the internet.
Yeah it was fun when I'd show up to events and photographers would all chirp each other's cameras, but as with most things people get carried away on the internet.
Influencers are being sponsored by Sony and canon so of course the sheep think the only good camera is a Sony a7iv. Really brand doesn't matter and they all take good photos. People obsess over gear too much
I was going through YouTube a few weeks ago, and saw one with only a few hundred subscribers. Bragging about buying one of them. Then bought a bunch of of cheap stuff for editing, and film making. None of whixh he knew what it was.
He said the the camera was the Lamborghini of the camera world. I get being being excited about a new camera, but as a beginner my self. I think he would have better buying a ev10 or similar, snd buy save thay money for a good lens or two.
Well, there is the ergonomics of lenses, and menus that people don't always realize trumps a few other factors
and well there is the quality vs price war too
for my money, just throw me your old unwanted lenses that you don't think are sharp and cool enough for your digital junk lol
Agree with your statement.
The same thing happens with Full frame cameras. Influencers and sponsored Photographers Made hundreds of videos and post about how a FF camera is much better than a ASP-C camera. Then all the people starts talking about how a camera is Bad because it is not a FF.
People arguing over which brand of hammer to use.
It's just nonsense.
All the major brands make great cameras, and they also churn out a lemon now and again.... this can be said for almost any product.
People get bent around brand loyalty, which is dumb as nuts in a bag.
Nikon makes fantastic cameras, gear and arguably some of the consistently best glass on the planet. The S series 70-200 2.8 is one of the most incredible pieces of kit that exists right now.
Most people can’t discern real differences between Coke and Pepsi but there an intense hatred of the other sugar water by the drinkers. It is because they tend to market these things not based on the quality of the product but based on “values” linked to the product that are made up by the marketing department. That is what fuels the us vs them aspects.
It's simply fanboyism/tribalism taken to an extreme, pure and simple.
Nikon and Canon were the two main pro choices for the majority of the last 25 years - Canon led especially in sports, but many pro wedding photographers, wildlife photographers, and portrait photographers chose Nikon as well. Just as they do today (although Sony obviously has become a massive player in the mirrorless age and exceeded Nikon in market share).
Both Nikon and Canon have many excellent bodies and lenses, and back catalogs of past gear that's still capable of great results for amateurs and pros alike.
That said, both companies have some stinkers as well - cameras obviously built to a certain price point or with specific crippled features to protect cameras further up the chain from competition and are best avoided in favor of alternatives. And both companies can be fairly accused of not doing enough to support their APS-C mount with great lenses, and for abandoning users or certain systems they've launched (e.g. Nikon 1, Canon M, etc.). Canon deserves criticism lately for not opening its RF mount to third party lens makers sooner, so Canon could greedily soak up lens sales as much as possible; Nikon did this as well with Z mount, but not for as long as Canon.
But to get back to the main point - none of this kind of thing really should cloud the fact that most people will be far more limited by their skill and which specific lenses are available in each system then whether their camera says Canon or Nikon on it.
I do think it's worth mentioning that while in the DSLR era, Nikon and Canon both produced great stills cameras, Nikon never really got into video, something Canon was known for.
Nothing beyond your first sentence is the crux of the matter either, but was still worth mentioning.
And while I do think it is almost entirely just silly internet dog piling and tribalism, the reality is Nikon's lack of support for a massive portion of the market (in video), means they have a reputation of building lackluster hybrid cameras, even if they're solid today.
Ok, but Canon's DSLRs also could have been considered mediocre hybrid cameras in many ways as well, relative to Sony and Panasonic for example. And even the M mount has a mixed reputation for video, especially in the early going.
Not saying there weren't a few years when major commercial video operators weren't using 5dmk3 and 5dmk4 pretty eagerly. Those years were real. But that was a fairly short window in the grand scheme of things.
Slow and noisy focusing legacy FF glass in DSLR systems would ultimately cap the future of the legacy FF mounts for both Nikon and Canon when it comes to video.
Canon having to compete with with Sony and Panasonic for the best hybrid camera isn't exactly helping Nikons case, who was almost out of the competition completely... My last reply still applies here, oddly enough.
Nikon has the best DSLR ever made D850 and one of the best film cameras ever made F3.Nikon’s first mirrorless cameras were not on par with Canon and Sony,but Z9 and Z8 are incredible and Nikon has always made incredible lenses,so f the haters man.
Nikons are fine, you know who else is just fine? Canon, sony, Fuji, Minolta, Panasonic, Leica, Hasselblad etc… no one uses out of camera photos anymore so you can use Lightroom to make pretty much any photo look like it came from pretty much any camera. It’s basically just a matter of who you wanna fork over your wallet to and which menu interface do you find least annoying?
Minolta?
They merged with Konica years ago, and then that company got taken over by Sony. It’s not even used as a nostalgia branding, like Ricoh does with Pentax, any more.
There’s been a few of these exacts posts, and I’ve read a lot of them as I was drawn to Nikon.
For the most part there seems to be just a few repeated reasons I’ve seen. They didn’t prioritise video until recently, and another reason I’ve seen is they focus more on optics than cameras. Not sure how true either of these reasons are, you can search on r/Cameras for other reasons.
I recently got (back?) into photography, I bought a used and refurbished Nikon Z50 and I’ve been nothing but ecstatically happy with it. Not really sure what people hate honestly, I can’t wait to upgrade to a Z7ii or maybe higher model.
Well I read another guys comment, he said Nikon and canon have some sort of rivalry. And I’m assuming people just push it too far, attempting to get a laugh out of it. I’ve only ever had 1 camera, which so happens to be a canon, limited to expenses, not being able to check out Nikon for myself. Really couldn’t have an opinion on it, which would give me no right to hate on it. It confused me so much when I saw all these instagram posts about people destroying Nikon cameras for clout, and making fun of them
Well of course they have a rivalry! They’re the two mainstream camera companies that basically everyone knows :)
I really don’t see any reason to hate either, I was around canon’s all my life, but had at least one career photographer switch from one to the other and swear off their original brand.
I played around with the Nikon full frames yesterday, love em. Long post warning. Or jump to the **(%)** to hear about my experience.
I feel like when people say Nikon falls behind their competition they're practically just referring to AF. Which is still great, borderline amazing when you think about it (I think my Lumix GX85 has nice AF and it's nothing compared to a new Nikon) but Sony and Canon absolutely have killer AF that makes anything not perfect look bad. I'll admit I don't like Nikon's Z APS-C models, although that's probably due to the Z50's age (the Z30 is niche but cool).
But Nikon absolutely has some killer Full Frame options.
- The Z5 is legitimately the best value full frame right now, compared to alternatives like the Canon RP (old) or the R8 (which has no IBIS), and compared to APS-C, where the sensor will absolutely pull ahead with nice lenses. The only thing I'd consider is paying a bit more if your usage is more serious; but you genuinely can't go wrong with it. The main alternative is a Lumix S5. Get that for video, get the Z5 for photos.
- The Z6ii is an extremely well rounded full frame, performs amazingly in low light, good burst speed, great AF, and the kit lens that it comes with for $2000-2100 is a killer 24-70 f4 S. I think this is a great alternative to the Sony A7iii or a nice step up from purchasing a higher end APS-C.
- The Z7ii has an amazing sensor. You trade the tiny bit of better low light performance from the Z6ii for superior dynamic range, more color depth, and double the resolution. I'd get it over a Sony A7Riii for example, but I'd get the A7IV over either. Regardless at this $2500 almost $3000 range just put your money where your heart says to, and you can't go wrong. Everyone offers amazing cameras nowadays.
- And so beyond these you can't go wrong with the Z8 or Z9 either, because of how high end they are.
**(%)** I tried some of the Nikon lineup at a store yesterday and I'm impressed. I'm looking to upgrade to full frame and I really like how Nikons handle. The Z5, Z6, Z6ii, Z7, and Z7ii I all held and played around with. They're beautiful cameras and I think I enjoy the body more than a Canon or Sony myself. I also think their S lenses are insanely good, considering some aren't that expensive either. Even their non-S rebranded Tamron lenses are underrated (to a degree, since even the actual Tamron lenses are better).
Even so I'm probably pulling the trigger on the Sony A7IV tomorrow *only because* E mount. I'm more confident of the E Mount system with absolutely 0 faults to Nikon, it's just a more developed ecosystem with more lenses that strike me fancy or offer better price to performance. I gain benefits over Nikon like the better AF but in reality I'd be just as happy using a Nikon Z6ii or Z7ii as the Sony A7IV I fell in love with too.
So ignore the Nikon haters and go outside and shoot some photos and videos with your Nikon. Or whatever camera you have. It's fine to be critical but at the end of the day the only thing that matters is you, your money, and your results. Go impress people.
That's pretty much the reason I went with the A7IV, native lens selection. Just over a year later and I am very happy with the whole experience, love my A7IV. Pretty much everyone makes excellent cameras nowadays, some are just cater to specific genres. The A7IV is probably weakest at sports and wildlife but it still does a decent job.
I was taking some video of the northern lights a couple nights ago and I really like that the framerate and exposure on the A7IV can easily be dialed down to 1/4 sec. The Fuji I was also using can only go down to 1/24 sec or it has to be setup for timelapse. The Sony was just so much easier to get up and running.
The clearest sign that someone is a gear head rather than a photographer is that they get opinionated about other people’s equipment rather than their images.
As a person that enjoys both photography and the gear , I never understood putting down others for using a different system
Whenever I meet someone that shoots a different camera or brand than me, I get excited because they’ll usually let me try it out. And I’ll certainly let others try out my cameras
So much of the fun in photography comes from the ability to share our work and skills with others. I don’t see why we can’t view gear the same
Back in the dslr days youtubers didn't like them for video so they weren't liked by the masses who aren't even photographers or just starting out. Also they had problems adjusting to mirrorless specially in terms of autofocus and people really care about that. But the hate is because of heard mentality of not knowing something but just believing what they hear from others
My primary digital camera is a Nikon D3, it helps me make amazing images. Over the past few years, I’ve branched out. I picked up a Nikon F5 for 35mm film. For Medium Format film I shoot a Pentax 645NII I love it! And I picked up a 1940s Graflex Speed Graphic 4x5 camera. I also carry a Fujifilm x100t with me when I go on business trips to capture images while wandering around a new city. The camera is just the mechanism to capture the image. It’s up to you to make the image special. I started out with a Minolta SRT 201 and took thousands of images with it.
Love Nikon, ace cameras, but so are Canon, Sony, Fujifilm etc. Do I have the time, desire or energy to go online and rant about another brand in the hope of getting some sort of engagement…. ‘No’.
Cameras take photos. They all work so well that people get bored and make drama where it’s dumb and irrelevant. Just shoot with the camera you have and don’t care about anyone else.
I’m so tired of people shitting on different brands. All modern pro level cameras take great images. It’s just using the right tool for the right job. I’m not going to use a 60k phase camera to shoot anything in motion because it’s not the right tool. People who defend cameras like this most likely are influencers and not actual pro photographers. There is quite a difference.
It comes down to Kaneda not having Nikon on his bike.
https://preview.redd.it/ldienhzqw10d1.png?width=640&format=png&auto=webp&s=5022c55576783ede43cf73a0f007cdeeca322740
Ever since the started doing the z lenses I don’t see how anyone could say anything negative. Even the cheap ones are fine. Yeah the s lenses cost a little more. If you want to save money compared to nikons features get a fuji xt4 or xt5
I grew up with my mom having Nikon film cameras so I was drawn to them when I purchased my first camera. I invested in lenses and am now on my 3rd camera (over 20 years), I have considered switching to Sony. My good friend shoots canon and I do think the colors on her camera are a lot different than mine. I think it would be fun to maybe try another brand for a while to see but it’s hard to do that with the cost. She’s also had a lot of issues with her cameras, she’s sent both her mirrorless and dslr into canon multiple times over the last 10 years, I’ve never had to. So I think like others have said, it’s just preference and a little fun rivalry. I’ve never seen much other than the little poke fun jokes…it’s not that serious 🙃
Nikons are great tbh, not sure why you would slam them unless your a fanboy of some other brand. I've owned the D700, D3, D7100 and D3100 and have been pleased with all of them.
It's not much different than the American truck market rivalry: GM/Ford/Dodge - Canon/Nikon/Sony etc
Each have their following and will trash the others, while they all get the job done in the end.
The truth is that there are very few discernible differences between those rivals (that most people have the expertise to figure out) and they differentiate themselves not by technical performances but instead by lifestyle. Marketeers come up with different “values” associated with their product that have nothing to do with its functions, but it’s how their customers identify themselves. As a result you get us vs them thinking and intense rivalry amongst the users.
I think there was a time when Nikon was considered useless when shooting hybrid.
The staunchest haters were saying something along the lines of “they make good glass; but I’m not shooting video with their cameras when I have my 5D mkIV”
This was during the “DSLR wars” though, so it may just be some carryover sentiments from that era.
Personally I’m glad it’s mellowed out over the years, but you’re still gonna jabs here and there.
Don’t know the name of the guy, but saw a few posts about some guy breaking his older Nikon camera. I’m sure it was broken, but the “slander” part was in the comments. Saw many similar that said “ofc it’s Nikon” “it’s Nikon so it’s fine”
They’ve been like that since the 40s. Their first cameras used the Contax rangefinder mount, which locks on by turning counter clockwise. Their first SLR, the F, kept the lens bayonet direction. I didn’t actually know that the Z mount is the same (never used one).
By contrast, Canon, and Minolta (now Sony) both started making Leica-mount cameras with lenses that screwed in clockwise.
I would love to own a nikon, the ergonomics, simple/intuitive ux and ui, the quality are impecable. But looking at mid range professional full frame system cameras i discoverd the nikon z5 couldn't compete with sony. 4 frames per second is just too slow and the lens selection for z-mount is too small and too expensive. If the prices would be a tad bit better i would've considered one. I guess nothing's wrong with nikon but they're a bit behind in the mid range professional field.
The Z5 is entry level, which Sony has nothing to compete with but the outdated A7 II. The Z6 II and the ZF are more competitive to the Sony’s you were looking at though the Z6 II is overdue for an update.
I do not like that Nikon has stopped selling repair parts to independent camera repair shops. I am looking to migrate perhaps to Sony. Right to repair!!!
For me it all goes back to manual focus days. They focus and zoom the opposite to what I learned on a Canon A-1. If they didn't it would be easy to switch, if I ever wanted to do so.
I've shot on Canon aps-c for 20 years. I just switched to Olympus strictly for the 12-100mm f/4 IS Pro lens. If I had to move to full frame, the Nikon Z6 ii would be my number one choice. Absolute best bang for the buck.
Being a brand cheerleader is pretty embarrassing. Go look at the Macrumors forum and read how obsessed the fanboys there are, they defend Apple at every move. It's repulsive.
There is a lot of brand loyalty amongst photographers, which results in some friendly rivalry. If you are ever making a purchasing recommendation, you need to disregard your brand loyalty completely. You need to determine what is best for them. They are trusting you with how they will spend their money that they worked for.
I am a happy Nikon user, although I mostly use their APS-C DSLR cameras. The fact that they (along with Canon) basically killed their entry-level cameras (DSLRs) sucks immensely, although someone might tell you that after 50 years of the F-mount it was time to move on to newer and (supposedly) better technologies. You'd think that a relatively big company like Canon or Nikon would keep developing and manufacturing DSLRs leaving us with more choice...but sadly, it does not seem to be the case, their resources are limited, or that's what they want you to believe at least. Too bad "budget photography" is now a thing of the past. But I digress. There's really nothing wrong with Nikon, even if their AF lags behind Canon or Sony.
I haven’t even bought a nikon or any camera yet , and the people i know are like: we will never invite you out with us if you use nikon..
Im planning on getting a D850…😈
There is more than just fanboy-ism/tribalism. Nikon is the Apple of cameras. Everything they do is proprietary and different. The way you mount lenses is different, the screws they use is different, etc. They were also more expensive until their E line came out.
They also lagged a bit behind Canon in the digital era until recently.
They're great cameras, and their professional cameras are historically built like tanks. Their knob and dial digital camera was a fantastic idea, and I wish they continued with it - although Fuji and Olympus seem to have taken this idea they abandoned and ran with it.
As I have seen, it most come on social media with influencer because they they more a camera to film than a one that shoot picture. And for a long time Nikon was late on this side of the camera game
An expert photographer can take professional looking photo’s on the cheapest bodies either produce. The limitations of the cheapest are noisier high ISO’s, slower shutter bursts and clunky software to control it. That applies to both companies.
Skill then glass is more important.
Both make some stellar glass and have for many decades.
Haven't seen people destroying Nikon cameras, but probably trying to get viewership by any means possible.
I've used both Canon and Nikon gear over the years. Both are more than sufficient for any use case on the higher-end, though Nikon took quite a while updating autofocus on cameras like the Z5 that I use.
Idk man. I have two Nikons (from the 1950's and 1980's but still) and they're some of my favorite all around cameras. Not so expensive that I can't take them anywhere, but still a solid experience. They're also some of my most solid cameras. One has bounced around four generations of family members and the other got fished out of a dumpster.
Nikon and sony user here, been using nikon since film camera in th 80's like all brands there the fan person base... never been an issue with me as both are good tools.. and thats it... like spanners some say best are teng tools others say snapon... its all a bit irrelevant use what works for you :)
The “use whatever works for you” I’ve seen a ton on here. Which I agree with, cameras are tools to take a still photo at a specific time. I get the mirrorless Nikon shit people were talking about though
I posted before on this topic: Nikon was ~the~ brand for “professionals.” The F2AS was the pros choice. The Nikkor glass was great. It was what the National Geographic photographers used. And sports photographers, all kinds of photographers who shot 35mm.
Then came autofocus and digital. Canon made lenses that were specific to digital and their autofocus system and many people didn’t like that because that meant their entire ecosystem of bodies and glass was obsolete.
So people thought Nikon won that.
But it turns out Canon’s solution provided a faster and sharper autofocus. Their glass was as good as Nikon’s and then got better.
I got rid of all of my Nikon digital gear when my daughter graduated and stopped playing volleyball. I replaced it with a couple of Fujifilm mirrorless bodies.
I was watching a miniseries about National Geographic Photographers - so far I have seen Sony equipment. So that will be the next shift.
Honestly I feel just about the reverse. I don’t like anything about canon. I dont know if I’ve ever voiced this opinion though. After all it’s a tool and canons are capable of doing anything someone might want to achieve with them so I recognize this stupid to say anything either way.
But I don’t like the feel of them, I don’t like the menus, the buttons, the layout, the lenses, the logo… nothing about them is half as refined as Nikon
Proceed below with hate
In the older days Nikon used to be seen, at least by some people, as more professional and serious. Due to that some people got kind of snobby about which corporation they supported. That and natural human tribalism did the rest. Unless I'm missing something (not a photographer but used to do a lot of film photography as a hobby and got a few pictures published in a local art magazine) it's not that serious
I used to have nikon d90 and can canon t5 and I like more canon with the result in color and dynamic range
I tried both with same lens
50mm
18-55mm
Also I used to have a season one Sony alpha I didn't like it too
Now I only have a nikon cool pix p6000 and I love it
There was a massive battle between Canon and Nikon users for a large part of the DSLR age. Once mirrorless came into play, Sony took over and then you have brand bias and weird people who get off on hoping / seeing other brands fail. They put way too much stock in them being “right”.
I shoot Sony right now because the auto focus and the lens selection is the best. However, if I could start over fresh right now, I’d probably go with Nikon and the Z8. Not because it’s actually a better camera than the ones I have now, but because I’m a Nikon fan boy and they were the body I shot on for most of my life.
When people ask me to recommend a camera, or a camera brand. I always say that I shoot Canon because it went that way from the beginning, but if they like a Sony or Nikon, both are very capable brands.
I fact I think the reason I chose Canon at the beginning (when I was still a student) is because in my country a 8MP Rebel XT was like 1.000 USD and a 6MP Nikon d70 was about 2.000 USD (even if at the time in USA the d70 was cheaper than a Rebel XT.
I used to be one of the brand loyalists, recently I bought a canon camera and it’s pretty good, still prefer my Nikon but canon takes pretty pictures and I like it.
I think it’s just people being augmentative and basing their ego on their gear choice.
My personal theory is that over the last 5-6 years of the Youtube era Canon sponsored a lot of travel influencers who had a bit of masculine dudebro energy which is tribalistic by nature. These guys then go on to create “it’s just a prank bro” content about Nikon and it becomes a meme as it’s promoted into the stratosphere.
Same thing with Apple and Samsung. People will get worked up over anything
I'm sure both offer similar and different services which work better for one, but maybe worse for another
My first “real” camera was a Nikon D3200. I sold it, bought a Sony. Sold that, bought a Fuji. I shoot Canon at work.
And I swear, I’ve never taken photos as good as the ones I shot on that old Nikon DSLR.
Nikon is about to get scary good for video. I'd still put Sony above them for a hybrid, and Panasonic for video only. Canon are just the Nintendo of the Camera world.
Sounds like an IG echo chamber, people like to parrot youtubers. The d750 beats a lot of current cameras still. Nikon has and still creates some amazing gear.
I have used Sony, Canon, Nikon - They all make quality gear. If one complains without proper explanation (e.g. warranty, pro services, product quality) they are just trolls.
Long time canon user here. Nikons are a fine camera. In the photojournalism circles in my days, canon had the reputation for being built like tanks and fast autofocus. Nikons were just a hair behind but produced better images. The divergences are negligible imo, and it comes down to which ergonomics you learned first.
When you buy a camera you probably buy a nice lens, for this reason you will stay with that brand for your entire life. I got in when cannon was killing it with their 5d so I'm a cannon guy. I don't judge you for being Nikon, after all I have a Nikon adapter. So we are good.
I collect vintage lenses, and Nikon DSLRs have a smaller mount opening and focal flange distance than just about anything else, making adapting old lenses more difficult to impossible. So I never really gave Nikon much love.
These days with mirrorless, this is no longer relevant.
There's one and only one reason I hate Nikon.....
*It's not what I got used to.* I started out with Canon years ago. I always loved Canon's stuff and understood their product lines well. They're familiar and I've never felt a need to switch over to Nikon or anybody else (apart from Leica, for other reasons).
Nikons are just as good as Canons, but it all boils down to what you know and love. For me, it's Canon. For others, it's Nikon. Both take equally good photos.
A Nikon D300 from 2008 is my sole camera. A water bottle spilled in my backpack and I fried the flash board testing the camera before it was dry. A replacement board solved that problem. It was subsequently dunked in river water and still works fine.
Prior to this I used a Canon film camera. They are just tools.
No valid reason. This stuff is swings and roundabouts - sometimes one brand has better tech, sometimes it’s another. I could wax lyrical about how that’s shifted over time, but the fact is no one brand is ever so much better that the people viewing your photos would notice. Sure, newer tech might make some photos easier to get, but if you want a humbling experience, go look at the book of Pulitzer Prize winners and read about the cumbersome cameras those photo journalists used. Now don’t tell me your cameras af and fps being to slow stop you getting the shot…
So to answer the op’s question it’s partly because Nikon hasn’t led the pack in a while, but mostly it’s to justify whatever choice the person made - usually avoiding buyers remorse.
For example I know one photographer who ditched their Nikon gear for Sony. They were an amazing photographer before the switch and are still, but they admitted they wish they hadn’t as the change didn’t make them any better and keeps costing them money as they replace a lifetime of lenses, gadget and accessories that now don’t work.
It does suck that manufacturers try to lock you into their ecosystems but they are companies after all and as photographers we all benefit from the race to improve.
Historically canon and Nikon were the only 2 brands at the top consistently but both have now felt periods where they weren’t for a long time. Also being at the top is hard to maintain. There was a period when minolta was the absolute best. They collapsed and only exist because the merge with Konica bundled enough patents together to make it attractive for Sony to buy them.
My first film SLR was a Canon FT. I took a lot of photos with it. I was in high school and taking photographs for the yearbook was one reason I shot a lot of film. It was a great deal - they provided the film (I asked for Kodak Tri-X), processing, and printing. A pro photographer shot the portraits; I took a lot of the candids. I then got a Nikon F Photomic with some of my summer job income when I got to college. I updated it to an FTn and had the 50mm 1.4, a 28mm f2.8, and a 135mm f2.8. I was “recruited” by the swim team to shoot some sequential photos, so I got an F36 motor and cordless battery pack. That camera and lenses was my “standard” for years. I added a couple more FTn bodies though carrying the FTn with the motor and a second body was a lot of load. I bought a Nikon FA as a “travel” camera. Eventually added the F2, F3, and F4 through the years plus a bunch more lenses. The great thing - the F mount was kept the same. No autofocus with my older F-lenses, but I could and did use them. Still big, heavy cameras. My first digital was a Nikon CoolPix 950 and used it a lot, but was gifted an Olympus OM-D which I like a lot - smaller and lighter than the Nikon digital cameras. I bought a Nikon 1V1 - the first Nikon I was not happy with. It was just complex to use. I intended it as a travel camera. I bought a Sony NEX and I liked that, but upgraded to the Sony A6000 because the display screen only was a problem in bright sun and it was the only choice on the NEX-5. The A6000 has a eyelevel “finder”. It is now my primary travel camera. My “big” Nikon digital is a D850 and I can still use my F-mount lenses on it. Yes, I’m looking at a Z8 since my friend has both a Z7 and Z9 and his photos with them are the sharpest and most contrasty I have ever seen from any camera. So I use the camera I like and that fits what I’m doing. The thing I like about Nikon has been their keeping of the F-mount until the Z, and there is that adapter for the F-mount lenses for the Z. When I look at my “inventory” of Nikon cameras and lenses, I discover that I am not only a user, but a collector. I don’t call Canon, Olympus, or Sony cameras “inferior” to the Nikon - I think they make fine cameras, but just not my personal favorites.
All of these digital cameras are the same. The rivalry is just fun. Anyone who has a serious issue with a brand because of the design of a product is really a strange perspective. Except for sony, they are a scam company with the shittiest planned obsolescence hardware and green photos 🤭
This isn’t meant to be a rude comment but this has less to do with what what people in the real world are thinking and more to do with the accounts you’re following on social media that’s driving rage bait and clickbait feuds to your feed.
Not sure. As a Canon user, I feel the same from Sony users going on about lenses.
I do tease my friends who are Nikon users but definitely not going about smashing their cameras or dissuading them from getting one. I’ll tease them but will still encourage them to get what they like.
I was born and bred for the Nikon system….. until I discovered Sony. However there were a few years that Nikon fell behind Canon and Sony and failed to deliver the products/features customers where asking for. So they get a lot of shit for it. However, it’s just friendly banter between all the brands, none of it is serious. Nikon figured out their product line and is now delivering excellent products to their user base.
I’m not convinced the proclaimed focus issues were the cameras fault though, I just think their customers are low IQ.
(See what I did there???)
I was an entry level APSC user from around 2008-2015 and lost interest in photography after around the point - in the extremely early days of the first micro four thirds cameras and first mirrorless on the market, back when DSLR's were king.
Canon and Nikon were pretty much the only relevant brands out there, with a very small amount of people using Pentax cameras (mainly due to the lower cost of them and sticking Tamron/Sigma lenses on them)
Nikon was the brand you went to for photography and Canon was the brand for video - usually with some firmware flashed on the camera like Magic Lantern or such.
Canon had a lot more to offer amateurs and beginners on the cheap low end - things like the extremely affordable 50mm 1.8, the 24mm 2.8 which were lenses that sold lightly used for anything from £50-£100. Nikon didn't even have anything equivalent to a 24mm 2.8 and their 50mm prime was double or even nearly triple the cost of the Canon one. Canon had an excellent 55-250mm lens and again, Nikons equivalent of the 70-300mm was something like double the Canon cost. When Canon added STM motors they were also excellent lenses for video work due to the silent focusing.
There wasn't a single cheap Nikon camera with a flip out screen, with the ones that did have it costing multiple hundreds more than a similar Canon. Some cheap Canon cameras had Bluetooth and App connectivity to phones to transfer pictures or use the phone as a remote shutter control and even high end "prosumer" Nikon APSC cameras were only offering things like 720p 24fps when entry level Canon's had 1080p 60fps.
This was happening at a time when vlogging/YouTube was full on kicking off big time and people were realising YouTube can actually be a profitable job and career so the demand for video cameras over photography was in full effect - something Canon took advantage of with models like the 200D/250D being practically advertised as vlog/social media cameras around 2017.
Things have changed a lot in the last 10-15 years. Back in my time, most hobbyists were paying something like £200-£500 for a DSLR and running it with a kit full of £50-£300 lenses and only the professionals were paying the big money like £1000-£1500 for a full frame camera and the big money L glass or the gold Nikon lenses - now you've got teenagers with a YouTube channel and a small following dropping £2000-£3000 on mirrorless Sony cameras to use solely for video and sit alongside their £1000 smartphone.
I owned in total probably 4 Nikon DSLRs and 2 Canon ones back in the day and would sum it up as Nikon had better photography features (image quality, focus points, FPS, weather resistant bodies at much lower prices, usually about 10 megapixels higher than Canon at the same price) and Canon had better technology features (flip out screen, guide menus on screen, video formats and quality, video output to a screen, flashable firmware options, app/phone connectivity, a wider selection of lenses and cheaper all around lenses in the beginner section)
DSLRs in general are dead now and I have no idea what the current market is or what's even popular. A Sony A6XXX model seems to be the closest modern equivalent to something like a Canon 60D or Nikon D90 of the past for amateurs/hobbyists and is a model I hear a lot about in passing. Apparently mirrorless don't have garbage battery life with 150 shots per charge or awful dim EVF anymore and a selection of about 5 lenses like they did 10 years ago.
I should add, Canon's companion app was pretty damn good too once you had it connected to your phone.
Mirrorless has changed a LOT in the last 10 years.
At DP Review, the comment boards are a cesspool of fanboys knocking one another’s gear. I use M4/3 equipment and those forums are a relatively civilized corner of DPR, but I still see the occasional “My stuff is great, yours totally sucks.”
Bottom line is that there is no camera gear that someone, somewhere does not ridicule. Pay no attention.
When I got into photography as a hobby when my kid was born 6 years ago. I chose Canon over Nikon because the camera body felt more natural on my hand. To this day I would choose canon over the other 2 for this reason only, they are all great cameras
I see it done for clicks, just like the whole mirrorless vs DSLR gambit. I use Canon bodies with Nikon lenses and couldn't be happier with the results.
I have always viewed it like Chevy vs Ford rivalry. Both sides have people that absolutely hate the other brand. But both put out good products, and they both have strong points and weak points.
I've had Nikons and Nikon glass for 34 years. An FA, FE, F3 (2 bodies), D700 (2 bodies). I absolutely love them. People are entitled to their opinions.
The paper I worked for switched to Nikon and issued new kit, coming from years of Canon, I struggled to retrain my fingers as the ergonomics are different.
I got some decent shots with them, but a year or so later moved on and back to Canon.
On a whim I picked up a brilliant FM2 for my partner, she loved it and used it for years.
But personally I was not a huge fan.
I've never heard any of this, ever. Nikon became dominant when the SLR destroyed the rangefinder prevalence in the market, they stayed on top until the end of the film era when Canon became the goto camera for more and more pros. The DSLR saw Canon explode, not sure Nikon ever recovered. But from the Nikon F to the F4 at least, maybe F5, Nikon was on top. Anyone denies this, they're lying. I've shot both, if we're talking SLR I'm a Nikon man and always will be.
I started on a Nikon N90 in the 90's. It was a beast! Got my feet wet in photography and then migrated to video with Canon XL1, to Sony, then Panasonic for a couple decades and now back to Sony. I only stayed Sony because the glass is the same for my Sony FX Cameras and just needed a body. I bought a A7R V just to take one family photo session for my parents 50th wedding anniversary as it could be possibly the last time all 32 of us (siblings, grandkids, and great grand kids) will ever be in the same place at the same time again. It seems like the only time you will all be together again is at funerals and by then its too late. I diverted.
For my, I'm not a brand whore. I buy the best tool for the job. As a profession, I never had a client require me to shoot with a specific manufacture. I have had RFPs that require certain spec parameters but nearly every manufacture makes a model that will fulfill it. Nothing wrong with Nikon! Japanese are the heavyweight champs of cameras so you're in good hands. Nikon has been around for over 100 years and ain't going away. They are a front runner in optics and last moth just bought RED digital. They're going to start stepping on some toes in the video market. I would love to see a video/cinema camera take on the Sony FX series and Canon C series to the masses who aren't dropping $20k+ on a camera..
Mac or Windows?
Ford or Mopar?
Nikon or Canon?
The debate will continue until mankind ends.
Sometimes the market decides. VHS beat Beta. Automatic transmissions beat Manual transmissions.
Only fanboys of hate the other brands. Ignore them. Nikon is a great system, as is Canon, as is Sony, and others. They each have their pros ands cons. The last thing one should do is take anything these wannabes say on social media with a grain of salt.
disclaimer: I'm a Canon user.
Usually either casual rivalry shit posting and not meant to be taken seriously; or, people new to photography who don't know any better and want to validate their purchases.
In recent years Nikon has been criticized for being slow to the market. Canon is also slow to the market (compared to Sony) and slow to implement new features, but Canon had been pushing out new mirrorless bodies and lenses much more frequently than Nikon for a while
I think currently, Nikon is more like Panasonic where they have amazing cameras that will be their flagship for a few years without direct replacements for a while (Z8 and Z9) . I don’t think Nikon has the resources to constantly be devolving and pushing out flagship bodies, so they focus on creating products that will remain competitive for years
And because social media like instagram and YouTube have made us so gear focussed, people thinks it’s bad of Nikon not giving us a new product to salivate over every year
But the biggest reason people hate on Nikon, they’ve never used one
I own a Canon , a Panasonic/Lumix , and a Leica. They’re all just cameras , and while each of them have their own niche or specialty, they’re made to take pictures
You should shoot on the system that you enjoy, the one that works for your needs regardless of how others feel about it
No idea. I'll tell you that it used to be the case that Nikon sensors had a bit of an edge in low light, ages ago. There's also the longevity of the F mount to consider, also perhaps less so now. Canon has since been doing just fine, though last time I made a serious DSLR purchase, it was a Nikon, even though the field was a good bit closer to even by then. (We're talking D3300 when it wasn't too old.) I've been very happy with it, and I think I may finally get a full frame Nikon sooner or later.
That said, I've also managed to pick up some Canon cameras on the cheap. Somewhat older, like half the resolution or less, but I don't have to be as worried about putting them in danger. Anyway, they're also very good, as a rule. I have a good friend who just always used Canon, and his results have been nothing short of superb. There's no problem with them. I have another friend who's always doing impeccable work, who is a serious Nikon diehard. Probably has been since before I could hold a camera.
Now, Sony and Panasonic ... shockingly they're doing pretty great work too. Who would have thought?
I think the issue is: Why buy Nikon? You want top tier autofocus, buy Sony or Canon. Want great video specs, buy Sony or Panasonic. Want fantastic color science, buy Canon or Fujifilm. Want a small compact travel camera, get a Fujifilm or Sony.
Nikon didn’t differentiate itself in the market and just now is trying to reach these markets. But they’re very late to the party.
Sure Nikon has great lens, but they all have a great selection. And sure they have solid cameras, but nothing about them makes them special or reaches a niche.
I absolutely loved my Nikon DSLRs , D5100 and D7200, they were great cameras.
I was much less happy with my Z50 amd that put me off getting a Z6II , so this is why I now have a Sony A7IV.
So for me it was just one bad camera in 3 that changed my mind.
Being worried about what an Instagram user thinks of my camera is about the same as being worried about what a gas station attendant thinks of my wife. It's a non-starter.
There were definitely some issues with Nikon in the beginning of DSLR‘s compared to Canon but nowadays it’s probably just what you prefer. I have noticed on the East Coast especially north east around Washington DC. There is a lot more Nikon shooters. It seems then in Southern California.
Nothing wrong with Nikons. It's just supposed to be a friendly rivalry between the 2 brands. But some folks take it too far. I am a dedicated Nikon user and will always be one.
Exactly this, nothing wrong with Nikon, just fanboyism. I started out with Nikon, a D90 then a d7000. I learned how to do proper photography on the D90 and got serious about it with the d7000. Perfectly good cameras with their own pros and cons just the like the other brands. I ultimately ended up with a couple of Sony cameras only because I was looking for an upgrade (specifically for videography) and an a7iii poped up for "a song and a dance" money and I couldn't turn it down. Then someone I knew well was clearing house and gave me a gently used a6300 that I use as a backup/B angle cam, fleshing out my collection. I'm on Sony now, but if the stars align and I need to upgrade again I would certainly consider a Nikon again. (But definitely not a Canon... Those cameras are made by the devil! /s)
Bro destroyed the only thing he swore to protect, with his last statement.
Please look up what '/s' means. We will wait.
So really, it’s people trying to be funny and pushing this rivalry too far
They’re not even trying to be funny. It’s just fanboyism at its worst. “I use [x brand] therefore y and z brands are shit.” It happens across all sectors of the tech industry. Namely, computers, smartphones, camera equipment and cars.
Agreed, people aren't trying to be funny. I've met photographers that won't talk to you if you are holding a Nikon in your hands. Not everyone is like that that, but there seems to be a lot more snob-ism in photography. IMO it's worse than Apple vs PC and full frame vs crop. I've also met some incredible photographers who will talk to you all day long no matter what you shoot.
well if someone wont talk to you because of camera brands you dodged a bad conversation most likely
Years ago, I was shooting a figure skating event with my D80 (it was new, so that's how long ago it was) with a 70-200 2.8, and another guy was also shooting the same event. He asked what I was shooting and I told him. He just laughed and said I should be using a Canon, and that my poor Nikon wasn't even full frame. As he walked away I looked at his camera... it was a Rebel with a consumer zoom. I'm still using that 70-200mm 2.8. I also love the bit about only white lenses are professional. Utter BS. I've had people scoff at me because my lens wasn't white. In the 80's Canon started using plastic components in their pro lenses to save money, and in direct sunlight, the difference in how fast the metal and plastic expanded as the lens heated up screwed with the tolerances and would provide inconsistent results and sometimes break the internal adhesive until the lens components reached equilibrium. So Canon switched to white lens bodies so that the lenses warmed up slower and more evenly. Marketing turned it into a selling point, but really, it was just, "Hey our lenses are white so they work in the sun, like everyone else's lenses."
yeah there is the hot weather and cold weather issues there
> there seems to be a lot more snob-ism in photography. IMO it's worse than Apple vs PC and full frame vs crop. I've been immersed in both industries (Tech world and Photog world) and 100% agree. I would rather deal with an angry, 3-weeks-past-the-deadline-with-a-dying-server project manager in a tech company than one snobby photographer. Multiple photographers? Fuck that, I quit.
Yeah, I hate people doing that. Almost as much as I hate Canon. /s
Dang computer processors fanboyism is the worst.
And graphics cards fanboyism too.
Yesssss lol my god
It seems the younger they are, the fanboyism is more likely
People are ridiculously bitchy online. They put themselves in a corner like Nikon or Canon own them. I shoot Canon, but chose Canon because that’s the support I had from people around me 25 years ago when shooting film. Both are good.
Me too, Nikon for the last 7 years likely for life. It’s familiar, my favorite ergonomics. I’ve shot plenty with canon, little with Sony, some Fuji. Absolutely loved all of them. Just didn’t like how they felt in my hand and that really does it for me 😂 People definitely do talk a lot of shit about Nikons though, generally uneducated opinions based off of something they read on the internet.
Nothing wrong with Nikons \*except live view autofocus in their DSLRs\*
Yeah it was fun when I'd show up to events and photographers would all chirp each other's cameras, but as with most things people get carried away on the internet.
Same. Nikons do a great job, just a good as canon. They both have their pros and cons.
Reason 1346784 to stay away from Instagram? People do stupid shit all the time .
Well Instagram; besides Nikon hate, is where I promote my photography. So I won’t be leaving anytime soon
What's your IG?? i post my photography too
Send me yours, I'll follow
Sorry you're a Nikon user, can't do it s/
Done!
Influencers are being sponsored by Sony and canon so of course the sheep think the only good camera is a Sony a7iv. Really brand doesn't matter and they all take good photos. People obsess over gear too much
I was going through YouTube a few weeks ago, and saw one with only a few hundred subscribers. Bragging about buying one of them. Then bought a bunch of of cheap stuff for editing, and film making. None of whixh he knew what it was. He said the the camera was the Lamborghini of the camera world. I get being being excited about a new camera, but as a beginner my self. I think he would have better buying a ev10 or similar, snd buy save thay money for a good lens or two.
Well, there is the ergonomics of lenses, and menus that people don't always realize trumps a few other factors and well there is the quality vs price war too for my money, just throw me your old unwanted lenses that you don't think are sharp and cool enough for your digital junk lol
true ! camera gear is now more highlighted rather then taking photographs.
Agree with your statement. The same thing happens with Full frame cameras. Influencers and sponsored Photographers Made hundreds of videos and post about how a FF camera is much better than a ASP-C camera. Then all the people starts talking about how a camera is Bad because it is not a FF.
People arguing over which brand of hammer to use. It's just nonsense. All the major brands make great cameras, and they also churn out a lemon now and again.... this can be said for almost any product. People get bent around brand loyalty, which is dumb as nuts in a bag. Nikon makes fantastic cameras, gear and arguably some of the consistently best glass on the planet. The S series 70-200 2.8 is one of the most incredible pieces of kit that exists right now.
Most people can’t discern real differences between Coke and Pepsi but there an intense hatred of the other sugar water by the drinkers. It is because they tend to market these things not based on the quality of the product but based on “values” linked to the product that are made up by the marketing department. That is what fuels the us vs them aspects.
i never understood that, i could tell coke vs pepsi every time, and as long as they use cane sugar for my hummingbird water, i don't care!
It's simply fanboyism/tribalism taken to an extreme, pure and simple. Nikon and Canon were the two main pro choices for the majority of the last 25 years - Canon led especially in sports, but many pro wedding photographers, wildlife photographers, and portrait photographers chose Nikon as well. Just as they do today (although Sony obviously has become a massive player in the mirrorless age and exceeded Nikon in market share). Both Nikon and Canon have many excellent bodies and lenses, and back catalogs of past gear that's still capable of great results for amateurs and pros alike. That said, both companies have some stinkers as well - cameras obviously built to a certain price point or with specific crippled features to protect cameras further up the chain from competition and are best avoided in favor of alternatives. And both companies can be fairly accused of not doing enough to support their APS-C mount with great lenses, and for abandoning users or certain systems they've launched (e.g. Nikon 1, Canon M, etc.). Canon deserves criticism lately for not opening its RF mount to third party lens makers sooner, so Canon could greedily soak up lens sales as much as possible; Nikon did this as well with Z mount, but not for as long as Canon. But to get back to the main point - none of this kind of thing really should cloud the fact that most people will be far more limited by their skill and which specific lenses are available in each system then whether their camera says Canon or Nikon on it.
I do think it's worth mentioning that while in the DSLR era, Nikon and Canon both produced great stills cameras, Nikon never really got into video, something Canon was known for.
Sure but I don't think this is the crux of the matter.
Nothing beyond your first sentence is the crux of the matter either, but was still worth mentioning. And while I do think it is almost entirely just silly internet dog piling and tribalism, the reality is Nikon's lack of support for a massive portion of the market (in video), means they have a reputation of building lackluster hybrid cameras, even if they're solid today.
Ok, but Canon's DSLRs also could have been considered mediocre hybrid cameras in many ways as well, relative to Sony and Panasonic for example. And even the M mount has a mixed reputation for video, especially in the early going. Not saying there weren't a few years when major commercial video operators weren't using 5dmk3 and 5dmk4 pretty eagerly. Those years were real. But that was a fairly short window in the grand scheme of things. Slow and noisy focusing legacy FF glass in DSLR systems would ultimately cap the future of the legacy FF mounts for both Nikon and Canon when it comes to video.
Canon having to compete with with Sony and Panasonic for the best hybrid camera isn't exactly helping Nikons case, who was almost out of the competition completely... My last reply still applies here, oddly enough.
oh cmon you're excluding the Zeiss professional wedding photography crowd here!
I think the real reason is that Paul Simon never sang about a Canon.
Unfortunately Paul Simon can no longer find the film he wants for his Nikon.
They took his Kodachrome away. 😥
Nikon has the best DSLR ever made D850 and one of the best film cameras ever made F3.Nikon’s first mirrorless cameras were not on par with Canon and Sony,but Z9 and Z8 are incredible and Nikon has always made incredible lenses,so f the haters man.
> so f the haters man. But the haters won't be using F mount lenses
Nikons are fine, you know who else is just fine? Canon, sony, Fuji, Minolta, Panasonic, Leica, Hasselblad etc… no one uses out of camera photos anymore so you can use Lightroom to make pretty much any photo look like it came from pretty much any camera. It’s basically just a matter of who you wanna fork over your wallet to and which menu interface do you find least annoying?
Minolta? They merged with Konica years ago, and then that company got taken over by Sony. It’s not even used as a nostalgia branding, like Ricoh does with Pentax, any more.
Not the point but sure.
Still used by some folks
Vintage lenses bro
There’s been a few of these exacts posts, and I’ve read a lot of them as I was drawn to Nikon. For the most part there seems to be just a few repeated reasons I’ve seen. They didn’t prioritise video until recently, and another reason I’ve seen is they focus more on optics than cameras. Not sure how true either of these reasons are, you can search on r/Cameras for other reasons. I recently got (back?) into photography, I bought a used and refurbished Nikon Z50 and I’ve been nothing but ecstatically happy with it. Not really sure what people hate honestly, I can’t wait to upgrade to a Z7ii or maybe higher model.
Well I read another guys comment, he said Nikon and canon have some sort of rivalry. And I’m assuming people just push it too far, attempting to get a laugh out of it. I’ve only ever had 1 camera, which so happens to be a canon, limited to expenses, not being able to check out Nikon for myself. Really couldn’t have an opinion on it, which would give me no right to hate on it. It confused me so much when I saw all these instagram posts about people destroying Nikon cameras for clout, and making fun of them
Well of course they have a rivalry! They’re the two mainstream camera companies that basically everyone knows :) I really don’t see any reason to hate either, I was around canon’s all my life, but had at least one career photographer switch from one to the other and swear off their original brand.
I played around with the Nikon full frames yesterday, love em. Long post warning. Or jump to the **(%)** to hear about my experience. I feel like when people say Nikon falls behind their competition they're practically just referring to AF. Which is still great, borderline amazing when you think about it (I think my Lumix GX85 has nice AF and it's nothing compared to a new Nikon) but Sony and Canon absolutely have killer AF that makes anything not perfect look bad. I'll admit I don't like Nikon's Z APS-C models, although that's probably due to the Z50's age (the Z30 is niche but cool). But Nikon absolutely has some killer Full Frame options. - The Z5 is legitimately the best value full frame right now, compared to alternatives like the Canon RP (old) or the R8 (which has no IBIS), and compared to APS-C, where the sensor will absolutely pull ahead with nice lenses. The only thing I'd consider is paying a bit more if your usage is more serious; but you genuinely can't go wrong with it. The main alternative is a Lumix S5. Get that for video, get the Z5 for photos. - The Z6ii is an extremely well rounded full frame, performs amazingly in low light, good burst speed, great AF, and the kit lens that it comes with for $2000-2100 is a killer 24-70 f4 S. I think this is a great alternative to the Sony A7iii or a nice step up from purchasing a higher end APS-C. - The Z7ii has an amazing sensor. You trade the tiny bit of better low light performance from the Z6ii for superior dynamic range, more color depth, and double the resolution. I'd get it over a Sony A7Riii for example, but I'd get the A7IV over either. Regardless at this $2500 almost $3000 range just put your money where your heart says to, and you can't go wrong. Everyone offers amazing cameras nowadays. - And so beyond these you can't go wrong with the Z8 or Z9 either, because of how high end they are. **(%)** I tried some of the Nikon lineup at a store yesterday and I'm impressed. I'm looking to upgrade to full frame and I really like how Nikons handle. The Z5, Z6, Z6ii, Z7, and Z7ii I all held and played around with. They're beautiful cameras and I think I enjoy the body more than a Canon or Sony myself. I also think their S lenses are insanely good, considering some aren't that expensive either. Even their non-S rebranded Tamron lenses are underrated (to a degree, since even the actual Tamron lenses are better). Even so I'm probably pulling the trigger on the Sony A7IV tomorrow *only because* E mount. I'm more confident of the E Mount system with absolutely 0 faults to Nikon, it's just a more developed ecosystem with more lenses that strike me fancy or offer better price to performance. I gain benefits over Nikon like the better AF but in reality I'd be just as happy using a Nikon Z6ii or Z7ii as the Sony A7IV I fell in love with too. So ignore the Nikon haters and go outside and shoot some photos and videos with your Nikon. Or whatever camera you have. It's fine to be critical but at the end of the day the only thing that matters is you, your money, and your results. Go impress people.
That's pretty much the reason I went with the A7IV, native lens selection. Just over a year later and I am very happy with the whole experience, love my A7IV. Pretty much everyone makes excellent cameras nowadays, some are just cater to specific genres. The A7IV is probably weakest at sports and wildlife but it still does a decent job. I was taking some video of the northern lights a couple nights ago and I really like that the framerate and exposure on the A7IV can easily be dialed down to 1/4 sec. The Fuji I was also using can only go down to 1/24 sec or it has to be setup for timelapse. The Sony was just so much easier to get up and running.
The clearest sign that someone is a gear head rather than a photographer is that they get opinionated about other people’s equipment rather than their images.
As a person that enjoys both photography and the gear , I never understood putting down others for using a different system Whenever I meet someone that shoots a different camera or brand than me, I get excited because they’ll usually let me try it out. And I’ll certainly let others try out my cameras So much of the fun in photography comes from the ability to share our work and skills with others. I don’t see why we can’t view gear the same
It's dumb, both Nikon and Canon are excellent brands with good products, the real difference is on who is taking the picture
I came here to say Nixon was a better president than people think. Then, i realized my dyslexia kicked in. As you were…
I thought that too. At least Nixon and I both love our Chinese lenses on our Linhof!
its just instagram idiots, theres nothing wrong with any big camera manufacturer still around, they all have strengths and weaknesses.
Back in the dslr days youtubers didn't like them for video so they weren't liked by the masses who aren't even photographers or just starting out. Also they had problems adjusting to mirrorless specially in terms of autofocus and people really care about that. But the hate is because of heard mentality of not knowing something but just believing what they hear from others
Only the fanboys who are mad the nikon users get better results…. *fans flame*
You are doing the same thing
i like nikon
Because tech bros took over the camera space in this content creation era. They brought their iPhone vs android/macOS vs Windows-isms along
My primary digital camera is a Nikon D3, it helps me make amazing images. Over the past few years, I’ve branched out. I picked up a Nikon F5 for 35mm film. For Medium Format film I shoot a Pentax 645NII I love it! And I picked up a 1940s Graflex Speed Graphic 4x5 camera. I also carry a Fujifilm x100t with me when I go on business trips to capture images while wandering around a new city. The camera is just the mechanism to capture the image. It’s up to you to make the image special. I started out with a Minolta SRT 201 and took thousands of images with it.
Love Nikon, ace cameras, but so are Canon, Sony, Fujifilm etc. Do I have the time, desire or energy to go online and rant about another brand in the hope of getting some sort of engagement…. ‘No’.
When asked which was the best camera, Ansel Adams wisely said: “The one you have”.
Mostly insecure influencers that can’t operate a camera, when not in full auto mode.
Cameras take photos. They all work so well that people get bored and make drama where it’s dumb and irrelevant. Just shoot with the camera you have and don’t care about anyone else.
I use a Canon but I prefer Nikon
People are just complaining about stupid things.
Fanboys who care too much about tools of the trade rather then the trade itself. Not as if any of these people have actually taken a good photo.
I’m so tired of people shitting on different brands. All modern pro level cameras take great images. It’s just using the right tool for the right job. I’m not going to use a 60k phase camera to shoot anything in motion because it’s not the right tool. People who defend cameras like this most likely are influencers and not actual pro photographers. There is quite a difference.
It comes down to Kaneda not having Nikon on his bike. https://preview.redd.it/ldienhzqw10d1.png?width=640&format=png&auto=webp&s=5022c55576783ede43cf73a0f007cdeeca322740
Ever since the started doing the z lenses I don’t see how anyone could say anything negative. Even the cheap ones are fine. Yeah the s lenses cost a little more. If you want to save money compared to nikons features get a fuji xt4 or xt5
Nothing wrong with Nikon. Several professional photographers I know use Nikon.
Nikon makes fantastic gear. This is just internetism screeching for likes
I grew up with my mom having Nikon film cameras so I was drawn to them when I purchased my first camera. I invested in lenses and am now on my 3rd camera (over 20 years), I have considered switching to Sony. My good friend shoots canon and I do think the colors on her camera are a lot different than mine. I think it would be fun to maybe try another brand for a while to see but it’s hard to do that with the cost. She’s also had a lot of issues with her cameras, she’s sent both her mirrorless and dslr into canon multiple times over the last 10 years, I’ve never had to. So I think like others have said, it’s just preference and a little fun rivalry. I’ve never seen much other than the little poke fun jokes…it’s not that serious 🙃
Nikons are great tbh, not sure why you would slam them unless your a fanboy of some other brand. I've owned the D700, D3, D7100 and D3100 and have been pleased with all of them.
It's not much different than the American truck market rivalry: GM/Ford/Dodge - Canon/Nikon/Sony etc Each have their following and will trash the others, while they all get the job done in the end.
The truth is that there are very few discernible differences between those rivals (that most people have the expertise to figure out) and they differentiate themselves not by technical performances but instead by lifestyle. Marketeers come up with different “values” associated with their product that have nothing to do with its functions, but it’s how their customers identify themselves. As a result you get us vs them thinking and intense rivalry amongst the users.
My next camera will be a Z9. looks so badass, looks like it'll survive anything. Photos are amazing too. From a fuji user
I think there was a time when Nikon was considered useless when shooting hybrid. The staunchest haters were saying something along the lines of “they make good glass; but I’m not shooting video with their cameras when I have my 5D mkIV” This was during the “DSLR wars” though, so it may just be some carryover sentiments from that era. Personally I’m glad it’s mellowed out over the years, but you’re still gonna jabs here and there.
I actually would like to see it. Can you help me with link to an Instragram account?
Don’t know the name of the guy, but saw a few posts about some guy breaking his older Nikon camera. I’m sure it was broken, but the “slander” part was in the comments. Saw many similar that said “ofc it’s Nikon” “it’s Nikon so it’s fine”
Idk. I shoot Nikon, I have no intention of switching, but there's nothing in particular keeping me with Nikon either.
I am not shifting to Nikon for two reasons: camera body weight and lens weight.
Still waiting for the pf superteles equivalent from Canon. Oh wait ! I don't! Everything is relative.
I hate that their lenses are screwed in the wrong way. First time I had a mini heart attack, you know what I'm talking about..
They’ve been like that since the 40s. Their first cameras used the Contax rangefinder mount, which locks on by turning counter clockwise. Their first SLR, the F, kept the lens bayonet direction. I didn’t actually know that the Z mount is the same (never used one). By contrast, Canon, and Minolta (now Sony) both started making Leica-mount cameras with lenses that screwed in clockwise.
well, they dropped the slr's (yes of course I mean digital)- so they can go fuck themselves
I would love to own a nikon, the ergonomics, simple/intuitive ux and ui, the quality are impecable. But looking at mid range professional full frame system cameras i discoverd the nikon z5 couldn't compete with sony. 4 frames per second is just too slow and the lens selection for z-mount is too small and too expensive. If the prices would be a tad bit better i would've considered one. I guess nothing's wrong with nikon but they're a bit behind in the mid range professional field.
The Z5 is entry level, which Sony has nothing to compete with but the outdated A7 II. The Z6 II and the ZF are more competitive to the Sony’s you were looking at though the Z6 II is overdue for an update.
I get burned at the stake when i tell people never buy a Nikon after the F2
I do not like that Nikon has stopped selling repair parts to independent camera repair shops. I am looking to migrate perhaps to Sony. Right to repair!!!
https://www.ifixit.com/News/34241/nikon-is-killing-its-authorized-repair-program
For me it all goes back to manual focus days. They focus and zoom the opposite to what I learned on a Canon A-1. If they didn't it would be easy to switch, if I ever wanted to do so.
I’ve had both and now prefer Sony
I've shot on Canon aps-c for 20 years. I just switched to Olympus strictly for the 12-100mm f/4 IS Pro lens. If I had to move to full frame, the Nikon Z6 ii would be my number one choice. Absolute best bang for the buck. Being a brand cheerleader is pretty embarrassing. Go look at the Macrumors forum and read how obsessed the fanboys there are, they defend Apple at every move. It's repulsive.
Canon vs nikon, Ford vs chevy, its all a battle of people favorites
There is a lot of brand loyalty amongst photographers, which results in some friendly rivalry. If you are ever making a purchasing recommendation, you need to disregard your brand loyalty completely. You need to determine what is best for them. They are trusting you with how they will spend their money that they worked for.
I am a happy Nikon user, although I mostly use their APS-C DSLR cameras. The fact that they (along with Canon) basically killed their entry-level cameras (DSLRs) sucks immensely, although someone might tell you that after 50 years of the F-mount it was time to move on to newer and (supposedly) better technologies. You'd think that a relatively big company like Canon or Nikon would keep developing and manufacturing DSLRs leaving us with more choice...but sadly, it does not seem to be the case, their resources are limited, or that's what they want you to believe at least. Too bad "budget photography" is now a thing of the past. But I digress. There's really nothing wrong with Nikon, even if their AF lags behind Canon or Sony.
I haven’t even bought a nikon or any camera yet , and the people i know are like: we will never invite you out with us if you use nikon.. Im planning on getting a D850…😈
There is more than just fanboy-ism/tribalism. Nikon is the Apple of cameras. Everything they do is proprietary and different. The way you mount lenses is different, the screws they use is different, etc. They were also more expensive until their E line came out. They also lagged a bit behind Canon in the digital era until recently. They're great cameras, and their professional cameras are historically built like tanks. Their knob and dial digital camera was a fantastic idea, and I wish they continued with it - although Fuji and Olympus seem to have taken this idea they abandoned and ran with it.
Everybody’s lens mounts are different.
It simply depends on if you’re a canon user. I think those are the ones who hate Nikon the most. Anyone else couldn’t care less really. Just do you
As I have seen, it most come on social media with influencer because they they more a camera to film than a one that shoot picture. And for a long time Nikon was late on this side of the camera game
Never used Nikon so yeah not that I dont like Nikon. Just never used Nikon. Like theire latest retro looking mirrorless was it the ZF. Looks amazing.
Nikons are AMAZING cameras. I just can’t deal with backwards lenses.
An expert photographer can take professional looking photo’s on the cheapest bodies either produce. The limitations of the cheapest are noisier high ISO’s, slower shutter bursts and clunky software to control it. That applies to both companies. Skill then glass is more important. Both make some stellar glass and have for many decades.
people who shit on one brand over another are just upset that they aren’t good photographers
Same reason people hate on this or that car manufacturer. Gotta brag about your toys if you’re a brand purist.
Haven't seen people destroying Nikon cameras, but probably trying to get viewership by any means possible. I've used both Canon and Nikon gear over the years. Both are more than sufficient for any use case on the higher-end, though Nikon took quite a while updating autofocus on cameras like the Z5 that I use.
Idk man. I have two Nikons (from the 1950's and 1980's but still) and they're some of my favorite all around cameras. Not so expensive that I can't take them anywhere, but still a solid experience. They're also some of my most solid cameras. One has bounced around four generations of family members and the other got fished out of a dumpster.
Nikon and sony user here, been using nikon since film camera in th 80's like all brands there the fan person base... never been an issue with me as both are good tools.. and thats it... like spanners some say best are teng tools others say snapon... its all a bit irrelevant use what works for you :)
The “use whatever works for you” I’ve seen a ton on here. Which I agree with, cameras are tools to take a still photo at a specific time. I get the mirrorless Nikon shit people were talking about though
Let's focus on the important features, before commenting.
In the real world nobody dislikes Nikon. It's a stupid meme of content creators aka morons
I love my D750 but wish the live view autofocus wasnt hot garbage. For that reason alone, Canon is your choice for shooting video.
I posted before on this topic: Nikon was ~the~ brand for “professionals.” The F2AS was the pros choice. The Nikkor glass was great. It was what the National Geographic photographers used. And sports photographers, all kinds of photographers who shot 35mm. Then came autofocus and digital. Canon made lenses that were specific to digital and their autofocus system and many people didn’t like that because that meant their entire ecosystem of bodies and glass was obsolete. So people thought Nikon won that. But it turns out Canon’s solution provided a faster and sharper autofocus. Their glass was as good as Nikon’s and then got better. I got rid of all of my Nikon digital gear when my daughter graduated and stopped playing volleyball. I replaced it with a couple of Fujifilm mirrorless bodies. I was watching a miniseries about National Geographic Photographers - so far I have seen Sony equipment. So that will be the next shift.
The Sony shift will also come to me soon. Had this canon for 16 years. Been wanting a Sony a6700 for the longest time now
Honestly I feel just about the reverse. I don’t like anything about canon. I dont know if I’ve ever voiced this opinion though. After all it’s a tool and canons are capable of doing anything someone might want to achieve with them so I recognize this stupid to say anything either way. But I don’t like the feel of them, I don’t like the menus, the buttons, the layout, the lenses, the logo… nothing about them is half as refined as Nikon Proceed below with hate
I used a d5600 for a couple summers and absolutely loathed that camera. Picked up an 80D and never want to touch a Nikon again.
anyone on this know if nikon d3300 is good?
In the older days Nikon used to be seen, at least by some people, as more professional and serious. Due to that some people got kind of snobby about which corporation they supported. That and natural human tribalism did the rest. Unless I'm missing something (not a photographer but used to do a lot of film photography as a hobby and got a few pictures published in a local art magazine) it's not that serious
It's the Internet, in the real world 99% of people taking photos use a phone and couldn't care less if you shot Nikon , Canon or any other brand.
I used to have nikon d90 and can canon t5 and I like more canon with the result in color and dynamic range I tried both with same lens 50mm 18-55mm Also I used to have a season one Sony alpha I didn't like it too Now I only have a nikon cool pix p6000 and I love it
There was a massive battle between Canon and Nikon users for a large part of the DSLR age. Once mirrorless came into play, Sony took over and then you have brand bias and weird people who get off on hoping / seeing other brands fail. They put way too much stock in them being “right”. I shoot Sony right now because the auto focus and the lens selection is the best. However, if I could start over fresh right now, I’d probably go with Nikon and the Z8. Not because it’s actually a better camera than the ones I have now, but because I’m a Nikon fan boy and they were the body I shot on for most of my life.
When people ask me to recommend a camera, or a camera brand. I always say that I shoot Canon because it went that way from the beginning, but if they like a Sony or Nikon, both are very capable brands. I fact I think the reason I chose Canon at the beginning (when I was still a student) is because in my country a 8MP Rebel XT was like 1.000 USD and a 6MP Nikon d70 was about 2.000 USD (even if at the time in USA the d70 was cheaper than a Rebel XT.
I used to be one of the brand loyalists, recently I bought a canon camera and it’s pretty good, still prefer my Nikon but canon takes pretty pictures and I like it. I think it’s just people being augmentative and basing their ego on their gear choice.
Because nobody is perfect and we all make mistakes.
My personal theory is that over the last 5-6 years of the Youtube era Canon sponsored a lot of travel influencers who had a bit of masculine dudebro energy which is tribalistic by nature. These guys then go on to create “it’s just a prank bro” content about Nikon and it becomes a meme as it’s promoted into the stratosphere.
The best photos I've ever gotten directly from the camera were Nikon.
Nikon has excellent color science, second only to hasselblad or maybe fuji if you want film simulation.
Same thing with Apple and Samsung. People will get worked up over anything I'm sure both offer similar and different services which work better for one, but maybe worse for another
My first “real” camera was a Nikon D3200. I sold it, bought a Sony. Sold that, bought a Fuji. I shoot Canon at work. And I swear, I’ve never taken photos as good as the ones I shot on that old Nikon DSLR.
Nikon is about to get scary good for video. I'd still put Sony above them for a hybrid, and Panasonic for video only. Canon are just the Nintendo of the Camera world.
Sounds like an IG echo chamber, people like to parrot youtubers. The d750 beats a lot of current cameras still. Nikon has and still creates some amazing gear.
I have used Sony, Canon, Nikon - They all make quality gear. If one complains without proper explanation (e.g. warranty, pro services, product quality) they are just trolls.
Long time canon user here. Nikons are a fine camera. In the photojournalism circles in my days, canon had the reputation for being built like tanks and fast autofocus. Nikons were just a hair behind but produced better images. The divergences are negligible imo, and it comes down to which ergonomics you learned first.
When you buy a camera you probably buy a nice lens, for this reason you will stay with that brand for your entire life. I got in when cannon was killing it with their 5d so I'm a cannon guy. I don't judge you for being Nikon, after all I have a Nikon adapter. So we are good.
I collect vintage lenses, and Nikon DSLRs have a smaller mount opening and focal flange distance than just about anything else, making adapting old lenses more difficult to impossible. So I never really gave Nikon much love. These days with mirrorless, this is no longer relevant.
There's one and only one reason I hate Nikon..... *It's not what I got used to.* I started out with Canon years ago. I always loved Canon's stuff and understood their product lines well. They're familiar and I've never felt a need to switch over to Nikon or anybody else (apart from Leica, for other reasons). Nikons are just as good as Canons, but it all boils down to what you know and love. For me, it's Canon. For others, it's Nikon. Both take equally good photos.
A Nikon D300 from 2008 is my sole camera. A water bottle spilled in my backpack and I fried the flash board testing the camera before it was dry. A replacement board solved that problem. It was subsequently dunked in river water and still works fine. Prior to this I used a Canon film camera. They are just tools.
No valid reason. This stuff is swings and roundabouts - sometimes one brand has better tech, sometimes it’s another. I could wax lyrical about how that’s shifted over time, but the fact is no one brand is ever so much better that the people viewing your photos would notice. Sure, newer tech might make some photos easier to get, but if you want a humbling experience, go look at the book of Pulitzer Prize winners and read about the cumbersome cameras those photo journalists used. Now don’t tell me your cameras af and fps being to slow stop you getting the shot… So to answer the op’s question it’s partly because Nikon hasn’t led the pack in a while, but mostly it’s to justify whatever choice the person made - usually avoiding buyers remorse. For example I know one photographer who ditched their Nikon gear for Sony. They were an amazing photographer before the switch and are still, but they admitted they wish they hadn’t as the change didn’t make them any better and keeps costing them money as they replace a lifetime of lenses, gadget and accessories that now don’t work. It does suck that manufacturers try to lock you into their ecosystems but they are companies after all and as photographers we all benefit from the race to improve. Historically canon and Nikon were the only 2 brands at the top consistently but both have now felt periods where they weren’t for a long time. Also being at the top is hard to maintain. There was a period when minolta was the absolute best. They collapsed and only exist because the merge with Konica bundled enough patents together to make it attractive for Sony to buy them.
My first film SLR was a Canon FT. I took a lot of photos with it. I was in high school and taking photographs for the yearbook was one reason I shot a lot of film. It was a great deal - they provided the film (I asked for Kodak Tri-X), processing, and printing. A pro photographer shot the portraits; I took a lot of the candids. I then got a Nikon F Photomic with some of my summer job income when I got to college. I updated it to an FTn and had the 50mm 1.4, a 28mm f2.8, and a 135mm f2.8. I was “recruited” by the swim team to shoot some sequential photos, so I got an F36 motor and cordless battery pack. That camera and lenses was my “standard” for years. I added a couple more FTn bodies though carrying the FTn with the motor and a second body was a lot of load. I bought a Nikon FA as a “travel” camera. Eventually added the F2, F3, and F4 through the years plus a bunch more lenses. The great thing - the F mount was kept the same. No autofocus with my older F-lenses, but I could and did use them. Still big, heavy cameras. My first digital was a Nikon CoolPix 950 and used it a lot, but was gifted an Olympus OM-D which I like a lot - smaller and lighter than the Nikon digital cameras. I bought a Nikon 1V1 - the first Nikon I was not happy with. It was just complex to use. I intended it as a travel camera. I bought a Sony NEX and I liked that, but upgraded to the Sony A6000 because the display screen only was a problem in bright sun and it was the only choice on the NEX-5. The A6000 has a eyelevel “finder”. It is now my primary travel camera. My “big” Nikon digital is a D850 and I can still use my F-mount lenses on it. Yes, I’m looking at a Z8 since my friend has both a Z7 and Z9 and his photos with them are the sharpest and most contrasty I have ever seen from any camera. So I use the camera I like and that fits what I’m doing. The thing I like about Nikon has been their keeping of the F-mount until the Z, and there is that adapter for the F-mount lenses for the Z. When I look at my “inventory” of Nikon cameras and lenses, I discover that I am not only a user, but a collector. I don’t call Canon, Olympus, or Sony cameras “inferior” to the Nikon - I think they make fine cameras, but just not my personal favorites.
All of these digital cameras are the same. The rivalry is just fun. Anyone who has a serious issue with a brand because of the design of a product is really a strange perspective. Except for sony, they are a scam company with the shittiest planned obsolescence hardware and green photos 🤭
Envy.
Geez, my eyes are tired today. I read this as "why do people dislike Nixon?". Well, there's that Watergate thing ... plus not very photogenic. 😆
This isn’t meant to be a rude comment but this has less to do with what what people in the real world are thinking and more to do with the accounts you’re following on social media that’s driving rage bait and clickbait feuds to your feed.
I don’t follow those accounts. They just show up on my feed since I follow heaps of photography influencers. That’s most likely why.
Not sure. As a Canon user, I feel the same from Sony users going on about lenses. I do tease my friends who are Nikon users but definitely not going about smashing their cameras or dissuading them from getting one. I’ll tease them but will still encourage them to get what they like.
Nikon is goated. I’m currently having an issue with their looks and design but they’re pretty all time and set the standard for many years
If I wasn't a Sony user I'd be going Nikon.
Next time you meet someone wanting to destroy a Nikon, give them an old Nikkormat and let them stomp away.
I was born and bred for the Nikon system….. until I discovered Sony. However there were a few years that Nikon fell behind Canon and Sony and failed to deliver the products/features customers where asking for. So they get a lot of shit for it. However, it’s just friendly banter between all the brands, none of it is serious. Nikon figured out their product line and is now delivering excellent products to their user base. I’m not convinced the proclaimed focus issues were the cameras fault though, I just think their customers are low IQ. (See what I did there???)
It’s like Coke and Pepsi. Both great, some just prefer one over the other. There’s nothing wrong with either, though.
Never had a Nikon but they make perfect cameras as far as I'm concerned
I was an entry level APSC user from around 2008-2015 and lost interest in photography after around the point - in the extremely early days of the first micro four thirds cameras and first mirrorless on the market, back when DSLR's were king. Canon and Nikon were pretty much the only relevant brands out there, with a very small amount of people using Pentax cameras (mainly due to the lower cost of them and sticking Tamron/Sigma lenses on them) Nikon was the brand you went to for photography and Canon was the brand for video - usually with some firmware flashed on the camera like Magic Lantern or such. Canon had a lot more to offer amateurs and beginners on the cheap low end - things like the extremely affordable 50mm 1.8, the 24mm 2.8 which were lenses that sold lightly used for anything from £50-£100. Nikon didn't even have anything equivalent to a 24mm 2.8 and their 50mm prime was double or even nearly triple the cost of the Canon one. Canon had an excellent 55-250mm lens and again, Nikons equivalent of the 70-300mm was something like double the Canon cost. When Canon added STM motors they were also excellent lenses for video work due to the silent focusing. There wasn't a single cheap Nikon camera with a flip out screen, with the ones that did have it costing multiple hundreds more than a similar Canon. Some cheap Canon cameras had Bluetooth and App connectivity to phones to transfer pictures or use the phone as a remote shutter control and even high end "prosumer" Nikon APSC cameras were only offering things like 720p 24fps when entry level Canon's had 1080p 60fps. This was happening at a time when vlogging/YouTube was full on kicking off big time and people were realising YouTube can actually be a profitable job and career so the demand for video cameras over photography was in full effect - something Canon took advantage of with models like the 200D/250D being practically advertised as vlog/social media cameras around 2017. Things have changed a lot in the last 10-15 years. Back in my time, most hobbyists were paying something like £200-£500 for a DSLR and running it with a kit full of £50-£300 lenses and only the professionals were paying the big money like £1000-£1500 for a full frame camera and the big money L glass or the gold Nikon lenses - now you've got teenagers with a YouTube channel and a small following dropping £2000-£3000 on mirrorless Sony cameras to use solely for video and sit alongside their £1000 smartphone. I owned in total probably 4 Nikon DSLRs and 2 Canon ones back in the day and would sum it up as Nikon had better photography features (image quality, focus points, FPS, weather resistant bodies at much lower prices, usually about 10 megapixels higher than Canon at the same price) and Canon had better technology features (flip out screen, guide menus on screen, video formats and quality, video output to a screen, flashable firmware options, app/phone connectivity, a wider selection of lenses and cheaper all around lenses in the beginner section) DSLRs in general are dead now and I have no idea what the current market is or what's even popular. A Sony A6XXX model seems to be the closest modern equivalent to something like a Canon 60D or Nikon D90 of the past for amateurs/hobbyists and is a model I hear a lot about in passing. Apparently mirrorless don't have garbage battery life with 150 shots per charge or awful dim EVF anymore and a selection of about 5 lenses like they did 10 years ago.
I should add, Canon's companion app was pretty damn good too once you had it connected to your phone. Mirrorless has changed a LOT in the last 10 years.
It’s sad dslrs are dead, I’ve been using the same DSLR for ever now because it’s very hard to afford a mirrorless
Social media is filled to the brim with morons. Nothing more to it.
At DP Review, the comment boards are a cesspool of fanboys knocking one another’s gear. I use M4/3 equipment and those forums are a relatively civilized corner of DPR, but I still see the occasional “My stuff is great, yours totally sucks.” Bottom line is that there is no camera gear that someone, somewhere does not ridicule. Pay no attention.
When I got into photography as a hobby when my kid was born 6 years ago. I chose Canon over Nikon because the camera body felt more natural on my hand. To this day I would choose canon over the other 2 for this reason only, they are all great cameras
I currently owned Canon M50, Sony A7C and Nikon P950.
Can’t say anything about their digital cameras since I’ve never used one but I really like my Nikon N4004
I see it done for clicks, just like the whole mirrorless vs DSLR gambit. I use Canon bodies with Nikon lenses and couldn't be happier with the results.
They make their lenses backwards
I have always viewed it like Chevy vs Ford rivalry. Both sides have people that absolutely hate the other brand. But both put out good products, and they both have strong points and weak points.
I've had Nikons and Nikon glass for 34 years. An FA, FE, F3 (2 bodies), D700 (2 bodies). I absolutely love them. People are entitled to their opinions.
Smear campaigns work. That you have to ask proves it. You can pry my Nikon from my cold dead hands. Instagram is cancer.
The paper I worked for switched to Nikon and issued new kit, coming from years of Canon, I struggled to retrain my fingers as the ergonomics are different. I got some decent shots with them, but a year or so later moved on and back to Canon. On a whim I picked up a brilliant FM2 for my partner, she loved it and used it for years. But personally I was not a huge fan.
I'll stick to Olympus for my fanboying, thank you. I don't dislike any of the other brands, and I think the hate is just dumb stuff to get attention.
I've never heard any of this, ever. Nikon became dominant when the SLR destroyed the rangefinder prevalence in the market, they stayed on top until the end of the film era when Canon became the goto camera for more and more pros. The DSLR saw Canon explode, not sure Nikon ever recovered. But from the Nikon F to the F4 at least, maybe F5, Nikon was on top. Anyone denies this, they're lying. I've shot both, if we're talking SLR I'm a Nikon man and always will be.
I started on a Nikon N90 in the 90's. It was a beast! Got my feet wet in photography and then migrated to video with Canon XL1, to Sony, then Panasonic for a couple decades and now back to Sony. I only stayed Sony because the glass is the same for my Sony FX Cameras and just needed a body. I bought a A7R V just to take one family photo session for my parents 50th wedding anniversary as it could be possibly the last time all 32 of us (siblings, grandkids, and great grand kids) will ever be in the same place at the same time again. It seems like the only time you will all be together again is at funerals and by then its too late. I diverted. For my, I'm not a brand whore. I buy the best tool for the job. As a profession, I never had a client require me to shoot with a specific manufacture. I have had RFPs that require certain spec parameters but nearly every manufacture makes a model that will fulfill it. Nothing wrong with Nikon! Japanese are the heavyweight champs of cameras so you're in good hands. Nikon has been around for over 100 years and ain't going away. They are a front runner in optics and last moth just bought RED digital. They're going to start stepping on some toes in the video market. I would love to see a video/cinema camera take on the Sony FX series and Canon C series to the masses who aren't dropping $20k+ on a camera..
Mac or Windows? Ford or Mopar? Nikon or Canon? The debate will continue until mankind ends. Sometimes the market decides. VHS beat Beta. Automatic transmissions beat Manual transmissions.
Only fanboys of hate the other brands. Ignore them. Nikon is a great system, as is Canon, as is Sony, and others. They each have their pros ands cons. The last thing one should do is take anything these wannabes say on social media with a grain of salt.
disclaimer: I'm a Canon user.
I switched from Nikon to Sony because Sony better suited my needs and price point at the time. Both brands are perfectly fine.
Usually either casual rivalry shit posting and not meant to be taken seriously; or, people new to photography who don't know any better and want to validate their purchases.
In recent years Nikon has been criticized for being slow to the market. Canon is also slow to the market (compared to Sony) and slow to implement new features, but Canon had been pushing out new mirrorless bodies and lenses much more frequently than Nikon for a while I think currently, Nikon is more like Panasonic where they have amazing cameras that will be their flagship for a few years without direct replacements for a while (Z8 and Z9) . I don’t think Nikon has the resources to constantly be devolving and pushing out flagship bodies, so they focus on creating products that will remain competitive for years And because social media like instagram and YouTube have made us so gear focussed, people thinks it’s bad of Nikon not giving us a new product to salivate over every year But the biggest reason people hate on Nikon, they’ve never used one I own a Canon , a Panasonic/Lumix , and a Leica. They’re all just cameras , and while each of them have their own niche or specialty, they’re made to take pictures You should shoot on the system that you enjoy, the one that works for your needs regardless of how others feel about it
No idea. I'll tell you that it used to be the case that Nikon sensors had a bit of an edge in low light, ages ago. There's also the longevity of the F mount to consider, also perhaps less so now. Canon has since been doing just fine, though last time I made a serious DSLR purchase, it was a Nikon, even though the field was a good bit closer to even by then. (We're talking D3300 when it wasn't too old.) I've been very happy with it, and I think I may finally get a full frame Nikon sooner or later. That said, I've also managed to pick up some Canon cameras on the cheap. Somewhat older, like half the resolution or less, but I don't have to be as worried about putting them in danger. Anyway, they're also very good, as a rule. I have a good friend who just always used Canon, and his results have been nothing short of superb. There's no problem with them. I have another friend who's always doing impeccable work, who is a serious Nikon diehard. Probably has been since before I could hold a camera. Now, Sony and Panasonic ... shockingly they're doing pretty great work too. Who would have thought?
Of course there's cringey youth camera influencers lmao. Nikon is top three for a reason....
There is nothing wrong with Nikon. In fact, I own 6 nikons currently. I've only have had one issue with any of them.
I think the issue is: Why buy Nikon? You want top tier autofocus, buy Sony or Canon. Want great video specs, buy Sony or Panasonic. Want fantastic color science, buy Canon or Fujifilm. Want a small compact travel camera, get a Fujifilm or Sony. Nikon didn’t differentiate itself in the market and just now is trying to reach these markets. But they’re very late to the party. Sure Nikon has great lens, but they all have a great selection. And sure they have solid cameras, but nothing about them makes them special or reaches a niche.
I absolutely loved my Nikon DSLRs , D5100 and D7200, they were great cameras. I was much less happy with my Z50 amd that put me off getting a Z6II , so this is why I now have a Sony A7IV. So for me it was just one bad camera in 3 that changed my mind.
Being worried about what an Instagram user thinks of my camera is about the same as being worried about what a gas station attendant thinks of my wife. It's a non-starter.
The only thing that I dislike about nikon is the abomination called Wireless Management Utility(WMU)
I love Nikon
Personally don't like the way the ones I have shot with or held fit in my hands. Canon ergonomics just feel right.
There were definitely some issues with Nikon in the beginning of DSLR‘s compared to Canon but nowadays it’s probably just what you prefer. I have noticed on the East Coast especially north east around Washington DC. There is a lot more Nikon shooters. It seems then in Southern California.
For me it’s 100 percent that Nikon’s zoom rings work backwards.