Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Nikon Vs Canon

LighthouseMEdia said:
Does the Birger mount for the EOS lenses change this discussion slightly? Maybe a slight push in the drection of Canon glass? What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

I don't think so, it adds an option for sure, but for an indie filmaker who probably was just able to scape enough together for the Red body, drive, EVF and Batterys it's still not an affordable option. It's twice as much as the Nikon manual mount and you would still need a controller like the super grip (I think). Not to mention good EOS L series glass is expensive and there are only two L series wide primes worth using (24 & 35 1.4s) and they are both over $1K.
Compare that to a used four lens MF Nikkor set 20mm f2.8 ($340), 28mm f2 ($380), 50mm 1.4 ($80) & 85mm f2 ($150) that whole set of lenses can be had for around the price of one Canon EOS L lens. If you already own a bag full of EOS glass then it makes perfect sense. If not then it's much more about individual needs and budget.
 
Evin Grant said:
I don't think so, it adds an option for sure, but for an indie filmaker who probably was just able to scape enough together for the Red body, drive, EVF and Batterys it's still not an affordable option. It's twice as much as the Nikon manual mount and you would still need a controller like the super grip (I think). Not to mention good EOS L series glass is expensive and there are only two L series wide primes worth using (24 & 35 1.4s) and they are both over $1K.
Compare that to a used four lens MF Nikkor set 20mm f2.8 ($340), 28mm f2 ($380), 50mm 1.4 ($80) & 85mm f2 ($150) that whole set of lenses can be had for around the price of one Canon EOS L lens. If you already own a bag full of EOS glass then it makes perfect sense. If not then it's much more about individual needs and budget.
Click to expand...

Hi Evin,
why do you think that there are only two L Primes worth using (24 & 35 1.4s)? Don't you rate the 50mm 1.2, the 85mm 1.2, and the 135mm 2? And what about the 24-70 zoom?
Stills photographers really rate these lenses...:greedy:
 
The 24-70 is a fine lens just not very wide on Red. The new 16-35mm L II looks like it might be as good as the 17-40 f4 (that's an improvement) the 10-22 EFS is highly regarded too. But it's still a more expensive option when an entire set of Nikor primes can be had for under $1000.
 
what's the question Neo?

what's the question Neo?

Yeah will be the "crop factor" with RED? Is it 1.5?
I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the picture looks like when you've actually got a camera to test with, and the Birger mount etc.
It seems you've got all the great Nikkors to test there, I hope some kind local can lend you a set of Canon L series so we can have a look at the difference. It's a zen buddhist test huh.. we must learn patience: "clear our minds of questions" as Master Yoda would say...

Happy Sunday

:matrix:
 
Isn't it true/a possibilty that the Birger mount will also allow for control of the focusing motors in EOS lenses, as well as the iris? If so, the Canons would have a built in remote follow focus. That prospect is exciting to me since I already own Canons and gives Canon a leg up, in my opinion.
 
Birger focus and iris control

Birger focus and iris control

parisrem said:
Isn't it true/a possibilty that the Birger mount will also allow for control of the focusing motors in EOS lenses, as well as the iris? If so, the Canons would have a built in remote follow focus. That prospect is exciting to me since I already own Canons and gives Canon a leg up, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Birger control has both iris and focus control via the RED control handle or one provided by Birger or others. Birger has also said they will be providing a zoom motor as well and since the lens gives feedback as to the position of the zoom - zoom control can be very precise.

In a way, this is substantially more sophisticated than typical cine lenses or the Canon or Nikon manual lenses, so while Evin is right, the very cheapest way to get high quallity lenses would be the Nikons and the manual nikon mount for the RED - a modest jump in cost to the Birger mount may give enough added functionality to make it the overall best bang for the buck. All of that remains to be seen as to exactly what controls you get with the base price Birger mount, how much the added accessories cost, and how well they work.
 
Thankfully this thread has been very civilised and as objective as is possible when it comes to personal preference! :biggrin:

I agree with Evin, it terms of picture quality there is nothing in it. Some Canon lenses beat equivalent Nikons and vice versa. There is absolutely no argument that both systems are used by renowned professional stills photographers everyday to make a living. So it then comes down to personal workflow, type of work etc.

Value for moneywise for Red, the Nikons seem to have an advantage, unless you factor in the possible functions of the Birger mount and controls.

Again, it will come down to what functions you need in your particular workflows, and what system you may already have invested in, as well as how deep your pockets are.

I am 100% sure that there will be great work done with both Nikon and Canon lenses. The agony is only between two good "budget" options - so let's just relax and enjoy the ride! :)
 
Remember there will be a Birger/Red Nikon electronic mount as well, and it will have all the same functionality as the EOS mount. So it might be argued that an investment into Nikkors (If you don't already own EOS lenses) is more future proof because you can use both the manual lenses and in the future the AFS/VR/DX lenses with the same functionality as the EOS system. However you will not be able to use the older Canon FD lenses on your EOS mount.

BTW There is also the possibility of using a good EOS-Nikon adapter to allow your manual Nikkors to be used with your EOS mount (Although I worry about the precision of this) so you may not be limited in your EOS mount choice afterall. I do want to test the rigidity of these adapters though.
 
I hope the Birger Nikon mount is as awesome as it sounds. You could do most of your work with 2 lenses, the 17-55 f2.8 and the 28-70 f2.8, and have remote focus control.
 
If you have some Nikkor and some Canon you just have to use together you can adapt Nikon F mt lenses to canon FD and EOS bodies, so presumably to the Red FD and or EOS mounts. This in fact is one of the current favored setups for stop motion and is how they shot "the Corpse Bride"

cbmaghdr4.jpg


Obviously adapters are not going to be as reliable as origonal mounts.

Matt Uhry
www.mattuhry.com
 
Canon,s glass is fantastic, especially the L series lenses wich I had most of them(unfortunatelly they were all stollen recently) I posted a few test in on other thread, Nikon F mount also are great lenses but not longer have the upper and vs. Canon as it is now the World leader in Digital cameras and camcorders, so there investement in research and delivery of product is far greater the any other manufacture.

To make a comparison of these two manufacturers is no longer usefull, and also this is one of the major reason as whay Zeiss is now making F mount lenses to mount on Nikon, there quality is far better then the Nikon's one.

As Birger engeniring has come out with a adaptor it is now possible to use Canon with RED, but the price I believe will be a massive workflow slodown as you have to controll the lens electronic from a separate device via computer, so for me it would be better to use the Zeiss F mount lenses prior to use Canon, but offcorse if you have the Canon lenses then changes, also remember that the Birger adaptor I believe is colose if no more to a $1,000.00.

My self I'm purchasing the set of Zeiss glass for use with my XH-A1 and a 35mm adaptor, so I can make a film wile the RED's get delivered, but with the RED'S I intend to purchase the RED's Prime set.

Ciao

KETCH ROSSI
www.KETCHFRAME.com
 
Evin Grant said:
The Canon FD series lacks in the wides (except the 24mm F1.4) but offers some very intersting tele options like the 50mm 1.2L and 85mm 1.2L. The 135m f2 is great definately on par with the Nikkor.
Click to expand...

The 135m f2 is great definately on par with the Nikkor.

I do not have anything against Nikon, I owe simple Nikon DSLR (D50), a lot of manual and DX lenses, but I also owe Canon 30D and some Canon EOS lenses.

What makes me nervous that some Nikon "hooked" guys do not respect Canon or even other lens technologies at all and the most its notions finishing in the opinion that some Canons (even FDs) can be par with Nikkor. It sound like a big LENS joke. Somebody has to know that still lens technology leader is not Nikkor or Canon or Olympus or Pentax. It is LEICA in the the past and for the future. Talking about LEICA series of manual focus M and R series of lenses. Looking forward to get Birger Engineering EOS mount to attach my LEICA R to EOS lenses to get the best lens performance EVER with moving images. By by Cooke, Zeiss, Angenieux zoom and primes cine lens monsters. I do not want to listen stories about differencies between still and cine lenses. Finally we have to get the catch that is going to happen with RED. RED is the first 35mm movie making like device to ALLOW attachment of stil photo lenses. And that is great opportunity to BEAT cine lenses ever. LEICA as a leader in 35mm quality and performance (sorry not Nikkor) has to show a new MOVING pictures style using RED. I hope everybody is getting this truth on time. No more Japanese lens advertising. Get it real, get it true. LEICA.

img2188.jpg

LEICA SUPER-ELAMRIT-R 15 mm f/2.8 ASPH
"The extremely wide viewing angle and the clarity of perspective offered by this compact ultra-wide-angle lens make it outstandingly well suited for landscape and architectural work, as well as shooting in tight spaces."
http://www.leica-camera.us/photography/r_system/lenses/503.html
 
Evin, you say the FD Canon lenses in manual won't mount on the EOS Birger mount. Of course they will still be manual, is there some other problem. There are adapters on Ebay etc. for this so I know it's not mechanical joining. Can you explain the problem.
Thanks
Whooops I see the problem, adapter has glass in it!!!! Oh well will work with reds FD adapter?
 
The Third Man said:
It is LEICA in the the past and for the future. Talking about LEICA series of manual focus M and R series of lenses. Looking forward to get Birger Engineering EOS mount to attach my LEICA R to EOS lenses to get the best lens performance EVER with moving images. By by Cooke, Zeiss, Angenieux zoom and primes cine lens monsters.
Click to expand...

LOL, I "luv" LEICA too... It's kinda early to say "bye bye Cooke, Zeiss and Angieneux", but I certainly like your enthusiasm! :spidy:
 
The Third Man said:

Somebody has to know that still lens technology leader is not Nikkor or Canon or Olympus or Pentax. It is LEICA in the the past and for the future. Talking about LEICA series of manual focus M and R series of lenses.
Click to expand...


This may surprise you Sanjin, but I agree with you completely. I was a Leica M shooter until recently (I Can't afford an M8 and the Red 1) and have always been a huge fan of Leitz glass. It's mostly ust a cost issue, it's going to to cost just as much to buy Leica glass for your Red as it would be to buy Red's lenses. However I may have a Leica M mount made for my Red anyway.

But let's get back to the question at hand Nikon Vs. Canon. The reality we can all accept is that both companies make porfessional level lenses that will produce sharp results. But there are real differences in their philosophys. Canon has often prefered to get the newest technology out into the market place even if it's not particularly mature. Nikon has been more conservative, and in my opinion thoughtfull approach. This has favored the overall quality of thier lenses and UI. Conversely it has benefitted Canon in their hyper speed sensor develpment. As well as a IS(VR) and a bunch of other technologies both useful and not that Canon has developed over the past few years. It's interesting but in a real way Nikon's hiatorical dominance of the 35mm SLR market was what forced Canon to become a technological leader in so many other avenues. Which is what gives it such an edge in the new digital era. Nikon started life as "Nippon Kugako" of Tokyo Optical house and has always been at it's heart an optics company. The first Canon camera had a Nikon lens! My own bias toward Nikkors has a history as well. My first good camera was a Canon AE-1. I HATED it! It was hard to use and broke three times before I bought my second camera, the Nikon 8008s with a 85mm f1.8 lens. It's probably not fair to compare a 1970's era Canon 50mm cheapie FD lens to a 1990's era AF Nikkor but I was hooked (As Sanjin put's it). Since then I've shot with lenses from just about every optic house imaginable and I still find Nikkors to be the best price/performance deal out there. I'm very fond of Zeiss (Hasselblad) and Pentax (especially the 6x7cm) as well as the aformentioned Leica which is my #1 choice if it was a choice finacially. I even bought a Canon 5D with some faster Canon lenses when it first came out, it was going to be my low light kit, but I just couldn't get into it. I much prefered my D2x and 28mm f1.4 despite the higher noise. It just came down to charachter. I have seen beautiful work with Canon equipment but I'm a glass-a-holic and I think Canon's strength is really it's sensors not it's lenses. I'm sure many of you will disagree, but that's what's great about a public forum.

Here is my all time greatest hit list of optics houses (Just my overall preference based on experience):
#1 Leica
#2 Goerz
#3 Zeiss/Cooke (Tie)
#4 Nikon
#5 Fujinon
#6 Olympus
#7 Rodenstock
#8 Schneider
#9 Kern
#10 Angenioux
#11 Pentax
#12 Voigtlander/Cosina/Zeiss ZF
#13 Canon
#14 Minolta
#15 Lomo
#16 Tokina
#17 Sigma
#18 Tamron
 
It is most amusing that this debate persists. It gets down to personal taste, They are all so close that in a blind test I challenge anyone to identify them, Canon, Nikon and Leica. I know my favorite but I would be happy with the other two to the point that I would say it is the least important part of a great image. I can produce great images with any of them.
Aloha
-A
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top