Canon vs Nikon?

Cannon isn't image stabilized you have to buy a stabilized lens which by the way increases the price exponentially. The Nikon has image stabilization built into the camera
Oic. I thought there had to be something in the body also. My sigma lenses have the OS and canon calls it IS. Thanks for the info.
 
As a number of people have stated, it's not a question of Canon vs. Nikon. The real question is camera vs. lenses. Most amateurs spend lots of money on a camera, and have little left for good quality lenses. SO HERE'S WHAT YOU DO.

Go to KEH.com and buy an inexpensive used camera. Then, with all the money you save on the camera, you buy the best lens/lenses you can afford.

This is the advice I keep hearing, and I think it's sound. Here's the question. For a rank amateur like myself, with a decent eye, but no practical skill, what camera specs would you suggest as an absolute minimum to achieve some really excellent photos? Is MP important? Sensors? Thanks in advance for the lesson!

Here's what I'm currently working with - my Samsung Galaxy S8:p

20170510_102100_zpsccjoharl.jpg
 
IME and for reefytankpics All cameras are good if you know how to use them.
Under Leds, Filter (ambar, orange, yellow) Try Lee filters if you do not know what to use (Before buying an "expensive" filter), is a MUST. (makes a huge difference)


Under Nikon Coolpix P600 and ambar filter, under LEDS (Not even a pro cam)
 
Last edited:
As an eBay Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This is the advice I keep hearing, and I think it's sound. Here's the question. For a rank amateur like myself, with a decent eye, but no practical skill, what camera specs would you suggest as an absolute minimum to achieve some really excellent photos? Is MP important? Sensors? Thanks in advance for the lesson!

Here's what I'm currently working with - my Samsung Galaxy S8:p

20170510_102100_zpsccjoharl.jpg
The biggest difference will come from the lens. Seriously. MP count, sensor type, sensor size, shutter speed, etc all matter to some degree. But if you want the best photo quality, go for lens first. A Canon L lens on the cheapest camera body you can put it on will deliver great pictures whereas if you put a stock plastic lens onto their 6K, top of the line EOS 1 DX Mark II camera body, the picture will look about the same as the cheap lens on the cheap camera body. I will try to take some pictures to illustrate tonight when my tank lights are all on.

Bruce
 
The biggest difference will come from the lens. Seriously. MP count, sensor type, sensor size, shutter speed, etc all matter to some degree. But if you want the best photo quality, go for lens first. A Canon L lens on the cheapest camera body you can put it on will deliver great pictures whereas if you put a stock plastic lens onto their 6K, top of the line EOS 1 DX Mark II camera body, the picture will look about the same as the cheap lens on the cheap camera body. I will try to take some pictures to illustrate tonight when my tank lights are all on.

Bruce

I'm totally on board with the Lens>Camera concept. I just wonder if there are any specs, below which you'd be shooting yourself in the foot. I mean, I can buy a Nikon D100 camera body for $15. If you said that I wouldn't be an idiot for strapping a fancy lens onto that platform, I'd be thrilled. I just don't want to be the guy who puts $8,000 wheels on a $800 car.
 
I'm totally on board with the Lens>Camera concept. I just wonder if there are any specs, below which you'd be shooting yourself in the foot. I mean, I can buy a Nikon D100 camera body for $15. If you said that I wouldn't be an idiot for strapping a fancy lens onto that platform, I'd be thrilled. I just don't want to be the guy who puts $8,000 wheels on a $800 car.
Well, when it was released it was a $2000 camera, and the lenses haven't changed much in price. Not to say it's still the best choice.
 
I'm totally on board with the Lens>Camera concept. I just wonder if there are any specs, below which you'd be shooting yourself in the foot. I mean, I can buy a Nikon D100 camera body for $15. If you said that I wouldn't be an idiot for strapping a fancy lens onto that platform, I'd be thrilled. I just don't want to be the guy who puts $8,000 wheels on a $800 car.

P1270021.jpg

$200 Lumix. 1960's Minolta 55mm macro.
No tripod. Pumps on.
 
Clove polyps...Mine were from Vietnam...Took three months to almost kill all the hair algae that was on it. Top of the tank filter feeder. Easy.
 
You can definitely tell the difference between a pro shot. Your use of the shadows and the dark in the background is masterful. Maybe one day when I grow up ...
Never grow up dude. Ever.
 
Well, when it was released it was a $2000 camera, and the lenses haven't changed much in price. Not to say it's still the best choice.
put a good lens on a bad camera and you will get a better pic than a bad lens on a pro camera... if you have a decent sensor in the camera and buy a good lens...you will love it
 

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%
Back
Top