_No one_ can look at an image and know what brand of camera it was shot on. The camera brand you choose is completely irrelevant to the outcome of the images you create. It is like saying that if you had Leonardo's brushes you could paint the Mona Lisa too. It doesn't work that way.
RedUnicorn You do bring up a good point. You may be able to tell the type of camera (medium format, large format, 35mm, super 16, etc), but you still wouldn't be able to tell which brand it is. Although even larger formats can be mimicked with things like the Brenizer method (fro might be able to pick that out, but I wouldn't know a shot like that from a real medium format unless something went really wrong in stitching). You still wouldn't be able to make out the _brand_ though, outside of some really specific examples. (like the deep field photos were taken with perkin-elmir glass....dur).
i don't care what anyone else says to this - and i know you are a Nikon user Jared. Your review was informative and unbiased to either brand.I am a Canon user but that doesn't matter, i take photographs and enjoy it. Good job and best wishes for the new year.
food for thought...I went to Iceland in Oct 2015 with 7 other people...3 of us had Nikons and the other used Canons including our guide (5D Mark III, Canon Rebel and Canon 7D I believe were the models they had)...well on day it was raining when we went to check out a waterfall.We all had plastic camera/lens sleeves when we set out...but we didn't stay out too long because the weather was pretty awful....NOW later in the day 3 Canons died from water penetration (one came back to life after leaving it in rice for 3 days), while the Nikons had no issues from the rain....I myself had a Nikon D750 while the others had a D810 and D7000...this to me would be a HUGE determining factor in deciding which brand to go with IF you are traveling and are somehow caught in bad weather...Because if spend a lot on a trip somewhere you sure as hell don't want your camera to die on you...just sayin'
I am a Canon user and if I would be in the market for a new body I would definitely choose Nikon because the dynamic range of the raw files is just much better.
Doesn't matter what people say. You will not go wrong with any Nikon or cannon. Both companies are great. I have shoot with both for long time. Currently on Nikon system but cannon is amazing too.
+Rudy Silva He was debating which one is better. I'm saying that if you have a Canon and suck at taking pictures and have no idea what you're doing or how to use it, the pictures are not going to come out well if you have that Blackberry camera you were talking about and you know how to use it and you know what is what and what buttons do what then that's a better camera.
No body cares. The conversation was never about the abilities of the user. This video is about the capabilities of an object. It's objective. You're missing the point entirely.
Another great video Jared! I get lots of questions this time of year, regarding camera bodies.. thanks to YOU, I can just link them to this video. You provide a great service, and it's greatly appreciated!
Canon is superior in video while for still photography I would vote for Nikon. The light metering is underexposed for Nikon and Over-exposed for Canon, for digital image it under-exposed is easy to solve and over-exposed just kill the details that can't be restored.
This video was extremely unbiased and very informative. For anyone looking to make a purchase, you didn't get the feeling that you were trying to persuade them in a certain direction. Great job!
It's not even a contest. They both have great glass. However, Canon sensors are smaller, and basically suck compared to Nikon and Sony. Canon is still stuck in the 90's in that regard. It's the heart of the camera, and Canon has a pace maker.
Both brands use 36mm by 24mm format in cameras that were compared in this video. I get that you're a fanboy. Just don't make your lies so straight-forward and you will be fine.
Thank you Jared. My 1st DSLR I bought was a D3200, then I got the D7100, and recently the D5. I also think the Nikon is a better looking camera with the red insert, gives the face a bit of character, but honestly, flip a coin, and then stick with your original choice and run with it. The point that I got from this video is that no matter what choice u have made, it was not a wrong choice, and ultimately, thats what everyone wants to know isn't it?
Hi Jared Polin , So ok : no matter which brand or body one uses, it all depends on glass glass glass. Do you plan to make a kind of "glass guide" to help beginners (and probably many others) to make the best decision when choosing a new lens ?
It was a great move for Nikon to keep the f mount..their old manual prime lenses are just as good if not better than the new lenses and are built much better than cannon or Nikon newer lenses. Nikon does offer a 50 1.2 ai lens and it is fantastic. Most people use the 50 for still subjects so who cares about auto focus.
Jared I would argue the d750 is the direct competition for the 5d3 (although cheaper, faster and better) and the d810 is the specialized camera in its own category. For practical reasons the 5d3 and d750 are interchangeable. Weddings,portraits journalists etc
I have to disagree wih you Jared about 6d, i know its missing features like more focus points, more crosstype focus points, faster burst... but if you do an image quality comparison with 5D III, 6D is better (of course, not by much) because it is a newer sensor and it handles high iso noise much better than 5D III. I dont think it is an old camera it came out what, like two years ago, i dont think us photographers with a limited budget would like camera bodys to upgrade so fast, we spend money but we dont want to spend again in a couple years. I think 6D is magnificent i shoot weddings with it as a primary camera and get awesome results. Again, its missing features on the focus system and it is a slow camera but its all about image quality in this one.
Don't forget the inbuilt Wifi and GPS. Both come in very handy. I also found enough customization in Al Servo mode for keep track of moving subjects and the camera does a good job of doing this in good lighting conditions. Also the buffer I found to be very good even on a slow memory card shooting both Raw + jpeg at the same time. It's not rocket fast like some of the other cameras but it still more than capable for many situations apart from sport/wildlife photography. But at the end of the day image quality from this sensor is stellar and for a grand and a bit saving over the 5D Mk III you can buy yourself a nice L lens or some quality flash gear.
Adam Bolt Of course! and you could almost buy two 6Ds with the price of one 5D mark III, sometimes you can find them at $1300 on ebay. I know it lacks of so many features but again, i dont think it is a bad option or an option not to consider and i dont think this is an old camera, it is still young, i will think it is old in maybe two years when ti is a 4 year camera but it was just released september 2012 i think, just 2 years have passed and dont forget it is the NEWEST FULL FRAME SENSOR in the canon lineup.
Go with what brand you can easily acqure. I for one went Canon because I know many more poeple with them and most said I could borrow lenses as well as questions, tips, and thoughts for future gear. Its cheaper in the long run when I can simply borrow a friend's 50mm f/1.2 L :D
Jared, out of hundreds of "top" photography sites/blogs that I read and follow, yours of the Canon-Nikon debate has been the best, honest and most unbiased review I've seen. Thank you! I'm a Canon user mainly but I've used NIkon a lot and now I'm getting into Sony, for the newer features missing from both Nikon and Canon, the only problem is like you mentioned is glass range. In any case this should be a standard educational video to watch for all newbies on the fence in deciding in which system to invest.
Really good video! I like the point that Jared makes that I think many photographers, amateur and even some pro's miss. It doesn't matter what you shoot, get a good glass and you will get amazing results, if you know anything about photography. You should buy and use what you are comfortable with but don't judge other people if they want to shoot other brand. Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, whatever. A good photographer can take good photos with any of them. I am so tired to read all the comments how somebody buys a Sony or Fuji or whatever and suddenly becomes a good photographer because of the gear and how it has Wi-Fi or ISO 2 million or it has special filters or whatever. People were shooting film and got fantastic results with that! I hope this video will make some people to understand that brand doesn't affect the photos, it's the person behind the camera.
The way I see it is like this: DSLRs make shooting easy, and the higher up you go, the easier it gets. For example, the D4s or the 1DX makes sports photography much easier compared to other cameras. With mirrorless cameras, it's a bit more of a challenge, but it's a fun challenge. Sure, they're only starting to get good and the focussing isn't quite on par yet, but in another couple of years it's easy to see them out perform DSLRs in all areas. Currently, they defeat DSLRs in 4 areas; low light, portability, manual focus and video. As for people saying that they're not that much more portable when you stick a big lens on it, they're sort of missing the point. With a mirrorless, you have the option of using it as a large rig, with all sorts of add-ons, or you could just use a smaller prime and have something small enough to take places where a DSLR would be overkill.
DSLM wins DSLR in auto-focus speed as well, but only in single auto-focus mode, but the continued auto-focus is just notch behind top DSLR like D4 or 1DX when it comes to fast action (martial arts) or motor sports (or horses, dog races etc), so it really isn't a bad thing but just like 5-10% off. DSLM wins DSLR in many ways in fast situations, as with EVF alone its huge benefit to see the exposure correctly before you even take the shot. No more taking samples and glance rear LCD how it looks, how histogram looks etc. No more relaying to exposure metering (point, center-weighted, full-frame) as you see exactly how the photo will look like. No more overexposure or underexposure as shadow/highlight clipping like Olympus has (Red for overexposure, Blue for underexposure) tells you immediately what you can recover, wins zebra anyday... No more focusing problems in fast expected situations (snowboarder jumps behind hill etc) as manual focus can't be easier as with focus peaking. No more focusing problems in portraits when face detection AND eye detection (even possible choose left/right or closest one) like Olympus has makes taking street portraits easier than ever (requires auto-focus). No more focusing problems in Macro or landscape when you can just enlarge the view to wanted area and really check the focus, very awesome in astronomy! Throw there all other fancy features like touch screen and you can just touch the point from what you want the shot and its done. Makes very easy to do low and high angle photography. Throw there features like WiFi and you can have multiple cameras in different angles and take shots from other camera with smartphone! Stick the camera on 7m pole and you have secure controllable long-monopod and much better than any UAV for landscape photography. The only place where DSLM lose to DSLR is the battery consumption. While with cameras like Olympus E-M1 you can get 1000-1500 shots with a single charge, you do with DSLR easily 2000-3000 shots. But throw there couple batteries with you and problem is solved (unless you are guest in weddings and you have only suit without anything else than camera in hand). DSLR is dead, in low-light, in strong contrasty or backlighted situations, in sports, in normal landscape etc. (Take a D810 example for landscape photography and you need a very heavy and sturdy tripod to get sharp photos, but there it then wins easily with pixel amount).
"Currently, they defeat DSLRs in 4 areas; low light, portability, manual focus and video." Low light is sensor and processor specific, not mirror based. The mirror, or lack thereof, has nothing to do with high ISO performance. There is only one mirrorless camera that outshines DSLRs, and that's the A7s. Once again, the mirror has NOTHING to do with it. If you remove the A7s, then the high ISOs are the same when comparing similar FF sensors. Also, the big lens argument still holds true for professionals, and experienced amateurs. For those who want to shoot with a 24-70 or 70-200/2.8 (wedding photographers), then they're still going to have to stick large glass on the front of the camera - it's a matter of physics. I wish people would stop acting like there aren't drawbacks to either system. DSLRs are bigger, but they offer better camera/lens balance and deeper grips. Mirrorless cameras tend to be smaller and more portable, but may sacrifice lens selection, and grip.
kingalias clearly you havent tested some other mirrorless cameras than A7 when you say that for grip. The DSLR design like Canon and Nikon has offers worse grip than smaller mirrorless camera. And even Sony A7(r) lose about 11% in SNR (Dynamic Range) to one much smaller mirrorless camera (m4/3) when it comes to same depth of field (required feature to get deeper DOF in almost every portrait photography, just check the libraries) and that offers even benefits to freeze motion with two stops faster. Removing mirror causes that whole camera needs to be redesigned, optics needs to be redesigned and new technology needs to be implemented. Its not possible just remove the mirror and continue as it ain't changed requirements to change other elements. When the mirrorless cameras cons are like 5-10% worse continues autofocus, it doesn't really matter. You can often see samples how praised pros praise DSLR continues focusing speed in sport, where the subject is so far away that depth of field is covering whole subject in almost hundred meter either direction. Then they praise how fast the focusing was and accurate. Well, in many fast situations its just pre-focus and then high framerate. Ultra high ISO is often not needed (over 6400) except by those who are afraid to use flash. The whole photography history has managed to get awesome photos without ever going so high ISO as now many now requires. Its more like there ain't skilled photographers anymore, there are just rich photographers who only wants latest gear and best automation so the camera would do the job to them. Like the lens selection, quality or amount? Nikon and Canon has native lens collection from decades, but quality is good only very few of those. Smaller mirrorless cameras has a smaller collection, but beats most if not even the best ones from Canon or Nikon (and from few other in some cases) in quality and offered angle of view, resulting that the photographer doesn't need to choose between dozens of optics when 1-2 are already the best offerings. Makes the decision making easy when made decision hardly can go wrong and collection covers wider angle of view range same time. Like how many lenses someone needs to give them 46° degree? Or how many to get a 28.5° degree view? Two, five, six, twelve? How many bodies there really needs to be, if one twice smaller and lighter offers 95% of the image quality and rest is possible get covered with software? We can get all kind a fancy tech, but the most important factor still doesn't change, and that is the viewer. Most photos are so low by resolution (like 800x600) and viewed from uncalibrated displays that the DSLR really doesn't offer any kind benefit what's so ever. Even mirrorless are having a problems because a 100-200€ smartphone does well enough for average joe life. It is just the niche small group that repeats "its must be a Full-Frame and a DSLR!" while rest of the world is going by. Many even turns back to film when they want high quality.
paristo I think you just had an argument with yourself.... 1) I own a Pen PL-1, have used NEX cameras (my department just bought one for work), and have held other mirrorless cameras (except from Fuji). Yes.... yes I have used other mirrorless cameras. I own a D600, and still find it more comfortable than any mirrorless camera that I've used, and the D600 doesn't have the deepest grip. 2) I know the optics need to be redesigned for what is called the flange distance, the size of the sensor must also be taken into account. HOWEVER, that flange distance doesn't turn a 70-200/2.8 into the size of an 85mm prime for a FF sensor. Just like the Sony 70-200/4FE isn't substantially smaller than Nikon's. 3) I've seen samples, and they are 5-10% in GOOD light. 4) I don't even know why you're arguing about ISO. I already said that the mirror has nothing to do with ISO. 5) Your lens selection argument is silly. Some people like primes, some people like zooms, some like fast aperture, so don't mind modest apertures. Nikon and Canon have all of those covered. For now, the mirrorless options don't, but will. 6) Depends on the photographer 7) $100-200 smartphones do well enough until people want something they actually care about, which is where higher tech cameras come in.
kingalias Nothing you mentioned is in conflict to what I've written, yet somehow it seems you're disagreeing. Let me address these issues 1 by 1. Firstly, the thing about low light having nothing to do with mirrorless or DSLR camera types. Of course this is true. I'm just pointing out that if you want the best in low light ability, then mirrorless is the way to go (because they have the king of low light cameras for now). In a similar vain, I can say that AF performance has nothing to do with a camera having a mirror, but it just so happens that the 1DX and D4s are better at AF performance and they happen to be DSLRs. I also mentioned about the lenses earlier, but you probably missed that bit. I'll summarise by saying you can make an A7r big but you can't make a D810 small. Finally, I never mentioned that there aren't drawbacks to either system, you just happened to have read it that way.
Sony is getting up there, it should be recognized at least. But with some camera reviewers they are stuck between nikon and canon, and don't notice sony for its power and the ability to change/adapt. And when they do all they want to do is bash it. I have a Sony a6000 and a Sony a7ii and it's a beauty, worth all my money
Enjoyed looking at your comparitive review. It's 2019 now, and everything pretty well pans out. A little history on the Nikon f mount was interesting, oh and ofcourse I am a beginner-novice.
Bought a EOS70D haven't looked back since. Mind you, the lenses I use are what really make a difference for me - especially in low light or city night conditions. No other unit (80D included) has convinced me to move up or move on.
The Japanese don't pronounce their i's like that, Scott Chegg is right, it's 'Neekon". It's how I pronounce it as well, but the company officially uses Jared's pronunciation for NA.
I'm thinking on the 610 or 750 now..its time for me to go into full frame. I have the D5300 and it gets the job done but club shooting and night shooting is horrible...good vid.
I'm with Canon, more like stuck with Canon with a bunch of cameras and glasses, but lately I decided to check with Sony and got me an Alpha 6000, that I have not fully tested yet. I will probably put some metabones adapter for my canon glasses. Same thing here I am used to FF, and once you are used to it, it's very hard to get you out of it. The format APS-C is more for that extra reach that I can't find on the FF, for birding for example on the 7D MK II, it's wonderful.
no offense but the price - feature ratio is just laughable compared with the sony a6000 or the a7 II ... period! sony have a faster auto focus then all of these + focus peaking + apps + 11fps in raw + face detection aso aso aso ... yes they have emount - but thats how they roll - please no feaking out now :D
yep, as i said... its e-mount :D but you know, id really like to see a review from you for the a6000 and lets see how much nikon / canon stuff we'll see after that on this channel :) e.g. jason lanier :-P
The (F)E-Mount gets sub-pro lenses compared to the A-Mount line like the 24-70mm F/4, 35mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/4, 55mm f/1.8 etc. The a6000 however is a nice lightweight camera though. Lens wise it is lacking also. Adapters to put other lenses I think kills the purpose of the system. I want to use a light mirrorless lens that comes with the mirrorless territory, not an adapter and SLR lens-sized glass. I would however use the A7 system with Zeiss F-Mount glass or Leica glass. But that's about it though.
this is a personal opinion but if i knew nothing about cameras i would probably be more attracted to the nikons just because they look cooler with the red highlight XD
One of the best things to do is to borrow or rent the body you're interested in, or just try them out in a store. See which camera or make feels better and more natural for you to handle and use. The xxxD range of Canon bodies are too small for my chubby hands, and this has been a complaint people have made of the smaller Nikon D750 body.
**ATTN: VIDEOGRAPHERS** I've used the Nikon D810 and Canon 5D Mark III side by side. The D810 is far more superior in sharpness, dynamic range, frame rate, low light, file size and colour correction capabilities. I've owned my Canon 5D MIII for 3 years, but when a colleague used his Nikon on a recent shoot I was blown away! The quality is just way better, way more versatile. I was so shocked that I've recent posted my 5D MIII to craigslist. At the moment (May 2016), the D750 and D810 destroy anything below Canon's 1DX Mark III. Please be aware of this before you buy your next Canon product. PS - The D750 and D810 have 2-3 extra stops of dynamic range, which plays a high factor in post production. IMPORTANT TO NOTE: If you are a Final Cut Pro / MPEG Streamclip user, the native NIKON video files run tremendously slow on these two programs. This will add a lot of additional rendering time. Canon video files render way quicker. If anyone has any tips on how to reduce Nikon video footage render time, I'd love to know.
It'd be pretty hilarious seeing one of those with an EF mount adapter with a 70-200 2.8 stuck on it haha! That lens makes even a 5D MkIII look kind of comparatively small. Unless you have the battery grip.
+Elliot Maverick actually I made my mind and it will be a d810.. it's way better than d750 in terms of the dynamic range. 5dm3 falls in a category worse than both the nikons.
evertuber I've seen amazing photos with 3 cameras so you can't go wrong. I'd lean towards the Canon due to their used/refurb lenses being abundant so you can get huge deals, and their lenses can be adapted with the Sony A7 series, which I may pick up in the future.
Honestly, it makes little difference. They are both good brands, however, once you pick a brand, you are there for life, because of glass compatibility. Nikon is great, Canon is great. Canon is horrible if you previously owned Nikon because the UI feels awkward and none of your glass works without adapters. Nikon is horrible if you previously owned Canon because the UI feels awkward and none of your glass works without adapters.
I resisted to watch this video, because it would be the same comparison e.g. Ford vs Chevy. I chose Canon from my film days simply because a friend told me, They have more lenses to choose from. If the glass fits, wear it. You nailed it. What ever you're shooting, choose what suits you, stick with it and glass, glass, glass. Well played sir. I love your enthusiasm.
I'm invested in Nikon, and somewhat happy with that due to their currently superior sensors, but if I could start over I'd still go Canon. While Canon manufactures almost all of their enthusiast-grade stuff in Japan, Nikon has offshored everything but the very most high-end products to countries like Thailand or China. Not that their quality is inferior, but I feel much better supporting a company manufacturing domestically than one that offloads it's manufacturing to low-wage countries for extra profit. The second reason is Nikon's ridiculous spare parts policy. While Canon will happily sell you anything you could possibly need to repair one of their cameras, Nikon won't. They'll instead have you go to one of their few shitty licensed dealers where you'll get your wallet thoroughly and lubelessly raped.
Almost a year and a half after this and we're still waiting for those newer Canon cameras... hopefully the NAB show this month will change that. I'm about ready to take the leap into full frame and I still haven't decided between bloody Nikon or Canon... I want the 5d Mark IV to come out and really kick butt.. if it doesn't.. well Nikon it is.
I know a ton about canon and own a few cameras and quite a bit of their glass, I wouldn't say I'm a fanboy, as about 6 years ago I was faced with the same dilemma and was unsure of which route to take! I was so confused I went with the Lumix GH1 (I was more interested in video at the time). Eventually I went the way of the canon and have been very pleased. A friend of mine loves canon for photos, but when it comes to video, he shoots gh4 rocking only Nikon lenses because of their versatility when it comes to mounting options. Overall, great review! Very non bias
@@charlichimopagainzar The masses do not buy apple. Are you serious? I'm not saying windows is better but windows PC's and Linux PC sales are so much higher than Mac sales. On Mobile, Android has like 9 times as many users. A lot of artists use Mac computers but not the masses at all.
I switched from Nikon to Sony mirrorless (A77) for a brief two year period after being frustrated with the lack of advancement by Nikon/Canon and higher price points. Finally came back to Nikon this year due to a lack of lens selection and the price point of the D750 and I have no regrets. I just wish Nikon or Canon decided to listen to consumers and put more of the features in their newer cameras. I know they hear us but it seems that they purposely push consumers towards compromises. Here is a short list of what I'd like to see... Full frame Nikon/Cannon with at least 36MP, the shutter speed and buffer of a D4s/1Dx, dynamic range and low ISO performance of the latest Nikon, video ISO performance of a Sony A7s, 4K video performance, the autofocus of a Canon, touchscreen , wifi app that is actually useful, two memory card slots that excepts multiple formats, weather sealing, electronic view finder of a Sony, as lightweight and compact as the current technology allows etc... Now that would be worthy of my $6K. Is that too much to ask for? Compromises, compromises...
I switched from a Nikon system, D70s, D200, and Fuji S2 pro, I find the dynamic range of the raw files is better with Nikon than with Canon. IF you under expose a photo or have a photo where there's extreme light/dark areas and you want to brighten the darks, it brings out a lot of noise / interference, where with Nikon you have a LOT more leeway. I don't think this has changed with newer models unfortunately. I have a canon 5d original, but based on tests with the Mark 3 and I believe other cameras as well, it applies to those models as well.
Sort of. As he said, lenses. There's just a bigger, more realised range from Nikon and Canon both first and third party. Sony are doing some great things with their bodies, but they need a few more years to round out the lens range for them to become a proper contender in the "pro" space.
I was a canon only shooter, those days are over. After acquiring the A 6000 and soon the A 7s or in the future the A7sm2, I haven't looked at Canon and Nikon the same way. I kepted all my canon glass (4 L lense in total) and have combine them with the metabones speedbooster ultra. All in all it depends on the amount of lenses you have before you make the switch and have the extra cash for a Speed Booster. *Unrelated side note, Sony makes all of Nikon's Camera Sensors. So it's like you're shooting on a Sony Camera, but in a Nikon Body.*
GundamKicks Sony makes most of their sensors (not all. I think Toshiba make some) but that's only part of the story. A lot is down to the processor and the algorithms they use. Apple use Sony sensors in the iPhone for example, but the rest of it is an Apple thing. The software, the processor, the lens blah blah.
GundamKicks The sensor is just part of the equation. Nikon cameras use superior software/processing. That's why Nikon cameras are rated higher in image quality than Sony despite the fact they both use the same/similar sensors. The A7s is $2500. You'd be better off selling what you have and buying a Nikon D750 for $2300 along with some lenses. It rates way higher and you get access to a huge/better selection of lenses and accessories. If you're going to spend that kind of money, you might as well go with Nikon or Canon and get the complete package. www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Ratings
I personally like canon more than I do my nikon. But I've already put in a good amount of money into Nikon to the point that I don't think I should change to Canon. What do you think I should do stick with Nikon and buy a d750 or buy a canon Mark 3?
IT's coming down to glass and weight. Many pros switched to Sony and Fuji systems because of the weight of the cameras and the lenses, those two companies make very light cameras and lenses so the pros can move around quicker. However those pros usually shoot landscapes, models, or such, they don't shoot wildlife, sports or any type of action. For those cameras you need either a Canon or Nikon heavier camera and with much better lenses to go with it. If you're an amateur photographer and like to shoot flowers or landscapes or your family then you should probably get a Sony or Fuji system, but if you're a pro and need to shoot fast such as wedding, sports, live events then it's a no brainer that you'll go for Canon or Nikon systems.
I think an aspect that I've been struggling with, and was not addressed in this video, is each camera's video capabilities. (I know Jared did mention it briefly, but not in very much depth.) I currently shoot Nikon and do a lot of still and video work, but am seriously thinking of switching because of the video fiction. Nikon, as a company, is not looking to break into the professional video market. Canon has been there with their camcorders for many years. This means that a camera like the c100 c300 or c500 that combines the ergonomics and audio of a professional camcorder with an interchangeable lens system is not something Nikon is going to make. Both brands have excellent glass and excellent cameras, what it comes down to is what you use the cameras for. For me there are too many limitations to making a movie on a dslr; the ergonomics, the lack of bottoms to quickly operate the camera, and the audio, to name the big ones. Therefore, switching to canon where I can have one set of excellent glass, and have two types of bodies, dslrs primarily for stills (and great b cam for video) and a c100 type for video, makes the most sense for me. This is something I will have to invest in over time since I don't have the money to buy all of this at once, but canon dslrs can do excellent stills and good enough video to start. I would be very interested in hearing other people's thought on this...
love all your videos i want to get my first dslr camera for my birthday 2017 if you was in my shoes and only had a max budget of $530.00 to spend what would u get i plan on shooting pictures for my vacation and shots here and there so its between cannon or nikon witch one would u buy
Jared, it was right then and still right today (April 2017) it's all about the glass. I recently purchased a Nikon 24mm f1.8 for my D5300 and although there may be better options, the quality has amazed me. Thank you for your videos they are most helpful.
Something to consider if you want to use strobes outdoors: The 5D3 syncs only at 1/200s whereas the D810 goes to 1/320s( and a bit faster if you don't tell it about the flash). I.e. the Canon requires twice as much power to get the same shot.
Give me all the hate you want: If you want to use your DSLR mainly for video, BUY A CANON. They are by far the best in the video department, all the way down to the T5i vs D3200 battle. A lot of the storage/record length problems on Nikons have almost completely messed up wedding shoots for me. Canon also has better cinema glass and picture profiles (downloadable ones) for really dialing in that film look.
Hey Jared, I've been watching your vids for a while. Thanks for the tips. This video has a much higher production. The hard work shows. Great job buddy!
Predictably there are a lot of heated comments here - this review exists because it is controversial, but excludes other viable brands. Jared is very knowledgeable, so listen to his points, and assess in your own mind, based on your needs and means. Do not make an important purchase like this based on a broad-based video like this alone - there are lots of Nikon vs Canon videos, so listen to a bunch of those and individual reviews of the camera you've chosen before putting your money down. Any brand decision is an expensive road, and most beginners can't afford to switch once they've invested.
You said this a lot in the video, so I would just like to clarify...... What makes glass good? It's the only part that I have trouble understanding. I would like to take my photography to the next level but i dont fully understand what makes one lens better than another.
Hey Jared, great vid. I'm not a professional, I do enjoy photography and as an amateur enthusiast and because of the budget restraints coming with it I want to stick to DX bodies. At the moment I'm using a Nikon D7000 which I like but it would be great if you could do a similar video to this one, just aimed at amateurs and looking at cropped sensor bodies instead :)
nikon for photo and canon for video, im maybe wrong but thats how i see it. But i gotta say youre right its on all in the glass. Im stuck on 600d and a cheap lens for now but hope to have a full frame when i get rich!
Great video Jared. I enjoyed it. I think one other point though with the D810 that no one talks about is calculating the price to upgrade computer, storage, memory cards. That was the deal breaker for me. I was considering either the 600 or 800 at the time but when I just calculated how much more I'd have to spend upgrading my system I decided to purchase the 600. The 800 was a solid camera and in my price range but not worth me upgrading all my computer components.
I love his "I just got struck by lightning" hair look.
9 ปีที่แล้ว
You can focus fast, shoot 10 fps, shoot low light whitout noise, BUT you canT take a good picture if you dont feel your situation. i pick some slow manual focus film camera. Thanks.
No matter how the time and body changes, what generations they are... The question is still the same: What are you going to use the camera for? The problem comes (at least for me) with the vast amount of choices and options you can have, and the number of K you have to spend on it.... (I love your hair!!!)
I am deciding between the Nikon D750 and the Canon 5D Mark 3. I am a hobbyist, but want to eventually make money from it by doing portraits, weddings, etc. Which do you suggest?
loved the video reviews. totally unbiased. great suggestions on which camera to get as of the available cameras out there as of now for nikon and canon on the full frame size cameras.
I would go with any of them as I am tied between them all (except I would take D610 or 7d mark II over the 6d). Although it makes sense for me to get Nikon because I have a D200, (which I love), but I waited almost two weeks after its delivery to find a lens in my price range, and in that time I learnt about the camera and found out how to use nearly every single button, so like I said, I would go for either brand even if I have to wait ages to get lenses because I can find out everything about it first, meaning when the lenses arrive I will just be able to get up and shoot.
is there a problem of sigma with Nikons i have a sigma 105/2.8 os macro but when i shoot portraits it gets a lot of pictures out of focus and it doesn't back focus i made sure of that
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 76 | คู่เอก "ผึ้งหลวง vs สมิงดำ"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9SBshmGQOIM/mqdefault.jpg)
There is no battle. Just buy any camera and go outside. Enjoy your life.
_No one_ can look at an image and know what brand of camera it was shot on.
The camera brand you choose is completely irrelevant to the outcome of the images you create. It is like saying that if you had Leonardo's brushes you could paint the Mona Lisa too. It doesn't work that way.
herranton1979 unless it was shot on that 55k 100mp thing
RedUnicorn You do bring up a good point. You may be able to tell the type of camera (medium format, large format, 35mm, super 16, etc), but you still wouldn't be able to tell which brand it is. Although even larger formats can be mimicked with things like the Brenizer method (fro might be able to pick that out, but I wouldn't know a shot like that from a real medium format unless something went really wrong in stitching). You still wouldn't be able to make out the _brand_ though, outside of some really specific examples. (like the deep field photos were taken with perkin-elmir glass....dur).
Nikon has the red ring of power
herranton1979 it's like coke and Pepsi to me
I thought red ring is a Canon users cult.
i don't care what anyone else says to this - and i know you are a Nikon user Jared. Your review was informative and unbiased to either brand.I am a Canon user but that doesn't matter, i take photographs and enjoy it. Good job and best wishes for the new year.
same thing i said! whats the point of this review as well? i mean he knows he will always go towards Nikon!
royandescartes The point is to give people options to make their own mind up.
Jared Polin sony.
Jared Polin The 5D is not a first generation bud as the name imply's its a Mark III
phourtwenteephorlife I think he knows that, what he was trying to get at is that it's due for replacement soon, but I think you knew that as well.
food for thought...I went to Iceland in Oct 2015 with 7 other people...3 of us had Nikons and the other used Canons including our guide (5D Mark III, Canon Rebel and Canon 7D I believe were the models they had)...well on day it was raining when we went to check out a waterfall.We all had plastic camera/lens sleeves when we set out...but we didn't stay out too long because the weather was pretty awful....NOW later in the day 3 Canons died from water penetration (one came back to life after leaving it in rice for 3 days), while the Nikons had no issues from the rain....I myself had a Nikon D750 while the others had a D810 and D7000...this to me would be a HUGE determining factor in deciding which brand to go with IF you are traveling and are somehow caught in bad weather...Because if spend a lot on a trip somewhere you sure as hell don't want your camera to die on you...just sayin'
Very good observation
+Brandon Morton ñ
robb1138 thank you. I'm going to return my t6i on Monday. Getting the nikon d5600. And going to buy a lumix g7 just for video
I am a Canon user and if I would be in the market for a new body I would definitely choose Nikon because the dynamic range of the raw files is just much better.
Can you do an update for this
+Lit Visions yes right now.
lol everything on his note sheet is highlighted...doesn't that negate the point of highlighting?
+yuenglingking to the top haha
+Thephiliphong what lol
+yuenglingking The guy wears glasses. It probably makes it easier for him to read.
Doesn't matter what people say. You will not go wrong with any Nikon or cannon. Both companies are great. I have shoot with both for long time. Currently on Nikon system but cannon is amazing too.
A camera is only as good as it's photographer.
Really? You ever try shooting with a Potato BlackBerry? No, it's not. Gear matters.
+Kris Vladimirov It does help. But if you don't know your gear it doesn't matter what you kinda camera you got
Yeah but that's not the point of this video. You're not very bright.
+Rudy Silva He was debating which one is better. I'm saying that if you have a Canon and suck at taking pictures and have no idea what you're doing or how to use it, the pictures are not going to come out well if you have that Blackberry camera you were talking about and you know how to use it and you know what is what and what buttons do what then that's a better camera.
No body cares. The conversation was never about the abilities of the user. This video is about the capabilities of an object. It's objective. You're missing the point entirely.
You need to make an updated version
Yeah I think so!
Great video Jared, choosing a pro DSLR, a pro lens and sticking with whoever camera company you choose is common sense advice!
Another great video Jared! I get lots of questions this time of year, regarding camera bodies.. thanks to YOU, I can just link them to this video. You provide a great service, and it's greatly appreciated!
Love how every word of his notes is highlighted
It would be interesting to see an ultimate battle between the glass for each brand. Does Canon have superior glass to Nikon, or vice versa?
Canon is superior in video while for still photography I would vote for Nikon. The light metering is underexposed for Nikon and Over-exposed for Canon, for digital image it under-exposed is easy to solve and over-exposed just kill the details that can't be restored.
This video was extremely unbiased and very informative. For anyone looking to make a purchase, you didn't get the feeling that you were trying to persuade them in a certain direction. Great job!
Is that a fart sound at 6:00? LOL
it is
Hahhaha!
+Nicolas Bertolotti Nah he's attaching a brown filter.
lollllll😂😂😂😂😂
+Nicolas Bertolotti that's why he paused! ahahaha
I didn't like the slanted font on the Nikons so I went Canon
Omg xD
That;s literally as good a reason as any. They're both so great, it may as well come down to that.
Same here 😂
Me either! I also hate the red line on the grip lol
I didn't like the yellow straps too
It's not even a contest. They both have great glass. However, Canon sensors are smaller, and basically suck compared to Nikon and Sony. Canon is still stuck in the 90's in that regard. It's the heart of the camera, and Canon has a pace maker.
+JACKnJESUS premium word usage
Both brands use 36mm by 24mm format in cameras that were compared in this video. I get that you're a fanboy. Just don't make your lies so straight-forward and you will be fine.
Canon has a full frame sensor too. What are you on about?
Thank you Jared. My 1st DSLR I bought was a D3200, then I got the D7100, and recently the D5. I also think the Nikon is a better looking camera with the red insert, gives the face a bit of character, but honestly, flip a coin, and then stick with your original choice and run with it. The point that I got from this video is that no matter what choice u have made, it was not a wrong choice, and ultimately, thats what everyone wants to know isn't it?
This is probably the best FroKnowsPhoto video of all time. Jared, you killed this one!
Hi Jared Polin ,
So ok : no matter which brand or body one uses, it all depends on glass glass glass.
Do you plan to make a kind of "glass guide" to help beginners (and probably many others) to make the best decision when choosing a new lens ?
It was a great move for Nikon to keep the f mount..their old manual prime lenses are just as good if not better than the new lenses and are built much better than cannon or Nikon newer lenses. Nikon does offer a 50 1.2 ai lens and it is fantastic. Most people use the 50 for still subjects so who cares about auto focus.
The vintage lens used old materials glasses that I found the color, sharpness were special and look more natural than cut-edge sharp modern lens.
Jared I would argue the d750 is the direct competition for the 5d3 (although cheaper, faster and better) and the d810 is the specialized camera in its own category. For practical reasons the 5d3 and d750 are interchangeable. Weddings,portraits journalists etc
Why use a highlighter when you highlight everything?
Aaron Fisk he has glasses it probably makes it easier
Aaron Fisk lol ikr
Aaron Fisk, so he knows when he has highlighted everything.
Because it makes it stand out more.
I have to disagree wih you Jared about 6d, i know its missing features like more focus points, more crosstype focus points, faster burst... but if you do an image quality comparison with 5D III, 6D is better (of course, not by much) because it is a newer sensor and it handles high iso noise much better than 5D III. I dont think it is an old camera it came out what, like two years ago, i dont think us photographers with a limited budget would like camera bodys to upgrade so fast, we spend money but we dont want to spend again in a couple years. I think 6D is magnificent i shoot weddings with it as a primary camera and get awesome results. Again, its missing features on the focus system and it is a slow camera but its all about image quality in this one.
Don't forget the inbuilt Wifi and GPS. Both come in very handy. I also found enough customization in Al Servo mode for keep track of moving subjects and the camera does a good job of doing this in good lighting conditions. Also the buffer I found to be very good even on a slow memory card shooting both Raw + jpeg at the same time. It's not rocket fast like some of the other cameras but it still more than capable for many situations apart from sport/wildlife photography. But at the end of the day image quality from this sensor is stellar and for a grand and a bit saving over the 5D Mk III you can buy yourself a nice L lens or some quality flash gear.
Adam Bolt Of course! and you could almost buy two 6Ds with the price of one 5D mark III, sometimes you can find them at $1300 on ebay. I know it lacks of so many features but again, i dont think it is a bad option or an option not to consider and i dont think this is an old camera, it is still young, i will think it is old in maybe two years when ti is a 4 year camera but it was just released september 2012 i think, just 2 years have passed and dont forget it is the NEWEST FULL FRAME SENSOR in the canon lineup.
I agree. 6D's image quality is not outdated at all. Still now, it's probably the best at this price and even higher.
Do you think Canon will announce a new camera line-up in February?
I love my 6D!
Go with what brand you can easily acqure. I for one went Canon because I know many more poeple with them and most said I could borrow lenses as well as questions, tips, and thoughts for future gear. Its cheaper in the long run when I can simply borrow a friend's 50mm f/1.2 L :D
Jared, out of hundreds of "top" photography sites/blogs that I read and follow, yours of the Canon-Nikon debate has been the best, honest and most unbiased review I've seen. Thank you!
I'm a Canon user mainly but I've used NIkon a lot and now I'm getting into Sony, for the newer features missing from both Nikon and Canon, the only problem is like you mentioned is glass range. In any case this should be a standard educational video to watch for all newbies on the fence in deciding in which system to invest.
Love that the green light came on in the background as he said "let's get to the battle" haha
But if you look at video recording then Sony is a great competitor with the A7s II
Sony is such expensive
why does he say ''frodo fhoooto'' is he from shire..
Fro knows photo, thats his website :)
see it works catches peoples attention well! haha
Peter2kx thankyou.
DylanDTrimble 😂😁😈😈😈
Good review!! I used Pentax for quite some time they were great cameras but no full frame I went to Canon and I am very pleased with the transition.
Really good video! I like the point that Jared makes that I think many photographers, amateur and even some pro's miss. It doesn't matter what you shoot, get a good glass and you will get amazing results, if you know anything about photography. You should buy and use what you are comfortable with but don't judge other people if they want to shoot other brand. Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, whatever. A good photographer can take good photos with any of them. I am so tired to read all the comments how somebody buys a Sony or Fuji or whatever and suddenly becomes a good photographer because of the gear and how it has Wi-Fi or ISO 2 million or it has special filters or whatever. People were shooting film and got fantastic results with that! I hope this video will make some people to understand that brand doesn't affect the photos, it's the person behind the camera.
The way I see it is like this: DSLRs make shooting easy, and the higher up you go, the easier it gets. For example, the D4s or the 1DX makes sports photography much easier compared to other cameras.
With mirrorless cameras, it's a bit more of a challenge, but it's a fun challenge. Sure, they're only starting to get good and the focussing isn't quite on par yet, but in another couple of years it's easy to see them out perform DSLRs in all areas. Currently, they defeat DSLRs in 4 areas; low light, portability, manual focus and video.
As for people saying that they're not that much more portable when you stick a big lens on it, they're sort of missing the point. With a mirrorless, you have the option of using it as a large rig, with all sorts of add-ons, or you could just use a smaller prime and have something small enough to take places where a DSLR would be overkill.
DSLM wins DSLR in auto-focus speed as well, but only in single auto-focus mode, but the continued auto-focus is just notch behind top DSLR like D4 or 1DX when it comes to fast action (martial arts) or motor sports (or horses, dog races etc), so it really isn't a bad thing but just like 5-10% off.
DSLM wins DSLR in many ways in fast situations, as with EVF alone its huge benefit to see the exposure correctly before you even take the shot.
No more taking samples and glance rear LCD how it looks, how histogram looks etc.
No more relaying to exposure metering (point, center-weighted, full-frame) as you see exactly how the photo will look like.
No more overexposure or underexposure as shadow/highlight clipping like Olympus has (Red for overexposure, Blue for underexposure) tells you immediately what you can recover, wins zebra anyday...
No more focusing problems in fast expected situations (snowboarder jumps behind hill etc) as manual focus can't be easier as with focus peaking.
No more focusing problems in portraits when face detection AND eye detection (even possible choose left/right or closest one) like Olympus has makes taking street portraits easier than ever (requires auto-focus).
No more focusing problems in Macro or landscape when you can just enlarge the view to wanted area and really check the focus, very awesome in astronomy!
Throw there all other fancy features like touch screen and you can just touch the point from what you want the shot and its done. Makes very easy to do low and high angle photography.
Throw there features like WiFi and you can have multiple cameras in different angles and take shots from other camera with smartphone! Stick the camera on 7m pole and you have secure controllable long-monopod and much better than any UAV for landscape photography.
The only place where DSLM lose to DSLR is the battery consumption. While with cameras like Olympus E-M1 you can get 1000-1500 shots with a single charge, you do with DSLR easily 2000-3000 shots. But throw there couple batteries with you and problem is solved (unless you are guest in weddings and you have only suit without anything else than camera in hand).
DSLR is dead, in low-light, in strong contrasty or backlighted situations, in sports, in normal landscape etc. (Take a D810 example for landscape photography and you need a very heavy and sturdy tripod to get sharp photos, but there it then wins easily with pixel amount).
"Currently, they defeat DSLRs in 4 areas; low light, portability, manual focus and video."
Low light is sensor and processor specific, not mirror based. The mirror, or lack thereof, has nothing to do with high ISO performance. There is only one mirrorless camera that outshines DSLRs, and that's the A7s. Once again, the mirror has NOTHING to do with it. If you remove the A7s, then the high ISOs are the same when comparing similar FF sensors.
Also, the big lens argument still holds true for professionals, and experienced amateurs. For those who want to shoot with a 24-70 or 70-200/2.8 (wedding photographers), then they're still going to have to stick large glass on the front of the camera - it's a matter of physics.
I wish people would stop acting like there aren't drawbacks to either system. DSLRs are bigger, but they offer better camera/lens balance and deeper grips. Mirrorless cameras tend to be smaller and more portable, but may sacrifice lens selection, and grip.
kingalias clearly you havent tested some other mirrorless cameras than A7 when you say that for grip. The DSLR design like Canon and Nikon has offers worse grip than smaller mirrorless camera. And even Sony A7(r) lose about 11% in SNR (Dynamic Range) to one much smaller mirrorless camera (m4/3) when it comes to same depth of field (required feature to get deeper DOF in almost every portrait photography, just check the libraries) and that offers even benefits to freeze motion with two stops faster.
Removing mirror causes that whole camera needs to be redesigned, optics needs to be redesigned and new technology needs to be implemented. Its not possible just remove the mirror and continue as it ain't changed requirements to change other elements.
When the mirrorless cameras cons are like 5-10% worse continues autofocus, it doesn't really matter.
You can often see samples how praised pros praise DSLR continues focusing speed in sport, where the subject is so far away that depth of field is covering whole subject in almost hundred meter either direction. Then they praise how fast the focusing was and accurate. Well, in many fast situations its just pre-focus and then high framerate.
Ultra high ISO is often not needed (over 6400) except by those who are afraid to use flash. The whole photography history has managed to get awesome photos without ever going so high ISO as now many now requires. Its more like there ain't skilled photographers anymore, there are just rich photographers who only wants latest gear and best automation so the camera would do the job to them.
Like the lens selection, quality or amount? Nikon and Canon has native lens collection from decades, but quality is good only very few of those. Smaller mirrorless cameras has a smaller collection, but beats most if not even the best ones from Canon or Nikon (and from few other in some cases) in quality and offered angle of view, resulting that the photographer doesn't need to choose between dozens of optics when 1-2 are already the best offerings. Makes the decision making easy when made decision hardly can go wrong and collection covers wider angle of view range same time. Like how many lenses someone needs to give them 46° degree? Or how many to get a 28.5° degree view? Two, five, six, twelve?
How many bodies there really needs to be, if one twice smaller and lighter offers 95% of the image quality and rest is possible get covered with software?
We can get all kind a fancy tech, but the most important factor still doesn't change, and that is the viewer. Most photos are so low by resolution (like 800x600) and viewed from uncalibrated displays that the DSLR really doesn't offer any kind benefit what's so ever. Even mirrorless are having a problems because a 100-200€ smartphone does well enough for average joe life.
It is just the niche small group that repeats "its must be a Full-Frame and a DSLR!" while rest of the world is going by. Many even turns back to film when they want high quality.
paristo I think you just had an argument with yourself....
1) I own a Pen PL-1, have used NEX cameras (my department just bought one for work), and have held other mirrorless cameras (except from Fuji). Yes.... yes I have used other mirrorless cameras. I own a D600, and still find it more comfortable than any mirrorless camera that I've used, and the D600 doesn't have the deepest grip.
2) I know the optics need to be redesigned for what is called the flange distance, the size of the sensor must also be taken into account. HOWEVER, that flange distance doesn't turn a 70-200/2.8 into the size of an 85mm prime for a FF sensor. Just like the Sony 70-200/4FE isn't substantially smaller than Nikon's.
3) I've seen samples, and they are 5-10% in GOOD light.
4) I don't even know why you're arguing about ISO. I already said that the mirror has nothing to do with ISO.
5) Your lens selection argument is silly. Some people like primes, some people like zooms, some like fast aperture, so don't mind modest apertures. Nikon and Canon have all of those covered. For now, the mirrorless options don't, but will.
6) Depends on the photographer
7) $100-200 smartphones do well enough until people want something they actually care about, which is where higher tech cameras come in.
kingalias Nothing you mentioned is in conflict to what I've written, yet somehow it seems you're disagreeing. Let me address these issues 1 by 1.
Firstly, the thing about low light having nothing to do with mirrorless or DSLR camera types. Of course this is true. I'm just pointing out that if you want the best in low light ability, then mirrorless is the way to go (because they have the king of low light cameras for now). In a similar vain, I can say that AF performance has nothing to do with a camera having a mirror, but it just so happens that the 1DX and D4s are better at AF performance and they happen to be DSLRs.
I also mentioned about the lenses earlier, but you probably missed that bit. I'll summarise by saying you can make an A7r big but you can't make a D810 small.
Finally, I never mentioned that there aren't drawbacks to either system, you just happened to have read it that way.
You should do a video like this for dx cameras
The fact that you threw the 7d mark 2 in with all these full frame cameras has really reinforced my desire for it.
Thanks for your opinion Jared!
Please make a 2017 version
You need to include Sony also in this now ... Sony is a good competitor
Sony is getting up there, it should be recognized at least. But with some camera reviewers they are stuck between nikon and canon, and don't notice sony for its power and the ability to change/adapt. And when they do all they want to do is bash it. I have a Sony a6000 and a Sony a7ii and it's a beauty, worth all my money
True that.. I use a Sony A57 and love it
Well I prefer Nikon/Canon bec they are just camera brands. Sony is best for TVs
+CUTIEPiepixels would you say the same for Minolta? Minolta is now the Sony branch for camera
Gokul Krishna Addanki sony alpha 77 mii is good r bad against d7200 and canon 7d.mii
Enjoyed looking at your comparitive review. It's 2019 now, and everything pretty well pans out. A little history on the Nikon f mount was interesting, oh and ofcourse I am a beginner-novice.
Bought a EOS70D haven't looked back since. Mind you, the lenses I use are what really make a difference for me - especially in low light or city night conditions.
No other unit (80D included) has convinced me to move up or move on.
If the 7D mkII had a full frame sensor it would be called the 5D mkIV
The best photographers know that the camera is just a tool for their vision while the poor ones judges the battle of specs.
I am really confused what to buy.
Nikon D5200 or Canon Eos 700D?
Plase help!
+Matic Barlovic facebook.com/That-guy-with-the-camera-389507577874799/
+Matic Barlovic check the page i just commented all the photos are shot on NIKON D5200
Nicely done, Jared! Real world review leaving out numbers and the like serves us better than the technical stuff.
How he is saying Nikon really hurts me in the feelings. It's Nickon :(
Nickon sounds stupid tho
I find it depends on the region. Think about the word 'fuck'
U.S. - fuh-ck
Western EU. - f-OOK
Australia - fahck
+Propane TreeFiddy I don't say fook 😂 that's only in some parts like up north I live in London in England
The Japanese don't pronounce their i's like that, Scott Chegg is right, it's 'Neekon". It's how I pronounce it as well, but the company officially uses Jared's pronunciation for NA.
I'm thinking on the 610 or 750 now..its time for me to go into full frame. I have the D5300 and it gets the job done but club shooting and night shooting is horrible...good vid.
used to use the d600 for club indoor, just got the d750. while the d750 has a little edge on af in the dark, the d610 might save u more money
xophaser thanks..
Stills 18-105 VR at the moment. Its so versatile. If I spring for the 610 I'm getting the Nikkor 50mm and the tamron 70-200
Curly Crown so you haven't even purchased quality glass, but you're worried about jumping to full frame?
Justin King yes..
I am a Canon user but much respect to this review! It really is nice and educational!
I'm with Canon, more like stuck with Canon with a bunch of cameras and glasses, but lately I decided to check with Sony and got me an Alpha 6000, that I have not fully tested yet. I will probably put some metabones adapter for my canon glasses. Same thing here I am used to FF, and once you are used to it, it's very hard to get you out of it. The format APS-C is more for that extra reach that I can't find on the FF, for birding for example on the 7D MK II, it's wonderful.
no offense but the price - feature ratio is just laughable compared with the sony a6000 or the a7 II ... period! sony have a faster auto focus then all of these + focus peaking + apps + 11fps in raw + face detection aso aso aso ... yes they have emount - but thats how they roll - please no feaking out now :D
en4ce When they have the lenses to compete than there will be a change in guard.
Sony's problem is the lack of good lenses for their mirrorless system. Too much you'll be depending on adapters.
yep, as i said... its e-mount :D but you know, id really like to see a review from you for the a6000 and lets see how much nikon / canon stuff we'll see after that on this channel :)
e.g. jason lanier :-P
The (F)E-Mount gets sub-pro lenses compared to the A-Mount line like the 24-70mm F/4, 35mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/4, 55mm f/1.8 etc. The a6000 however is a nice lightweight camera though. Lens wise it is lacking also. Adapters to put other lenses I think kills the purpose of the system. I want to use a light mirrorless lens that comes with the mirrorless territory, not an adapter and SLR lens-sized glass.
I would however use the A7 system with Zeiss F-Mount glass or Leica glass. But that's about it though.
thanks! villegas24
this is a personal opinion but if i knew nothing about cameras i would probably be more attracted to the nikons just because they look cooler with the red highlight XD
devlin Lynden you get that red line on the Canon lenses though
It's funny, cos it's that same red highlighting that put me off the Nikons. Looks tacky.
jetblakink hmm, interesting, i see it as a point of difference and i guess my eye is just attracted to it. I see where your coming from though.
I liked the red strip on F3. This newer design just looks wacky.
One of the best things to do is to borrow or rent the body you're interested in, or just try them out in a store. See which camera or make feels better and more natural for you to handle and use.
The xxxD range of Canon bodies are too small for my chubby hands, and this has been a complaint people have made of the smaller Nikon D750 body.
**ATTN: VIDEOGRAPHERS** I've used the Nikon D810 and Canon 5D Mark III side by side. The D810 is far more superior in sharpness, dynamic range, frame rate, low light, file size and colour correction capabilities. I've owned my Canon 5D MIII for 3 years, but when a colleague used his Nikon on a recent shoot I was blown away! The quality is just way better, way more versatile. I was so shocked that I've recent posted my 5D MIII to craigslist. At the moment (May 2016), the D750 and D810 destroy anything below Canon's 1DX Mark III. Please be aware of this before you buy your next Canon product. PS - The D750 and D810 have 2-3 extra stops of dynamic range, which plays a high factor in post production. IMPORTANT TO NOTE: If you are a Final Cut Pro / MPEG Streamclip user, the native NIKON video files run tremendously slow on these two programs. This will add a lot of additional rendering time. Canon video files render way quicker. If anyone has any tips on how to reduce Nikon video footage render time, I'd love to know.
I AGREE. TOTALLY RIGHT
I use Nikon and Panasonic for video. I rented both similar bodies and NIkon trumps Canon by miles
My nex 7 with adapted legacy lenses will certainly do the job for me, so many nice, well made and super fast lenses out there for cheap
It'd be pretty hilarious seeing one of those with an EF mount adapter with a 70-200 2.8 stuck on it haha! That lens makes even a 5D MkIII look kind of comparatively small. Unless you have the battery grip.
yeah that would make the nex 7 look like a lens cap haha TalesOfWar
a very quick question: D750 or 5D mark iii? just between these 2.. PLEASE!
I'm in the same position. From what I know the 5D Mk III is on another level. It's should be compared to the D800/D810.
+Elliot Maverick actually I made my mind and it will be a d810.. it's way better than d750 in terms of the dynamic range. 5dm3 falls in a category worse than both the nikons.
evertuber I've seen amazing photos with 3 cameras so you can't go wrong. I'd lean towards the Canon due to their used/refurb lenses being abundant so you can get huge deals, and their lenses can be adapted with the Sony A7 series, which I may pick up in the future.
Honestly, it makes little difference. They are both good brands, however, once you pick a brand, you are there for life, because of glass compatibility. Nikon is great, Canon is great. Canon is horrible if you previously owned Nikon because the UI feels awkward and none of your glass works without adapters. Nikon is horrible if you previously owned Canon because the UI feels awkward and none of your glass works without adapters.
750 is way better. dynamic range topples the markIII but markIII has better autofocus. so depends on what you shoot
I resisted to watch this video, because it would be the same comparison e.g. Ford vs Chevy. I chose Canon from my film days simply because a friend told me, They have more lenses to choose from. If the glass fits, wear it. You nailed it. What ever you're shooting, choose what suits you, stick with it and glass, glass, glass. Well played sir. I love your enthusiasm.
Your videos are really exceptional man
I'm invested in Nikon, and somewhat happy with that due to their currently superior sensors, but if I could start over I'd still go Canon. While Canon manufactures almost all of their enthusiast-grade stuff in Japan, Nikon has offshored everything but the very most high-end products to countries like Thailand or China. Not that their quality is inferior, but I feel much better supporting a company manufacturing domestically than one that offloads it's manufacturing to low-wage countries for extra profit. The second reason is Nikon's ridiculous spare parts policy. While Canon will happily sell you anything you could possibly need to repair one of their cameras, Nikon won't. They'll instead have you go to one of their few shitty licensed dealers where you'll get your wallet thoroughly and lubelessly raped.
do you recommend nikon d5200?
ZEAL FILMS MATRIX im using d5200, i will recomended you to save your money and wait for nikon d7100
Almost a year and a half after this and we're still waiting for those newer Canon cameras... hopefully the NAB show this month will change that. I'm about ready to take the leap into full frame and I still haven't decided between bloody Nikon or Canon... I want the 5d Mark IV to come out and really kick butt.. if it doesn't.. well Nikon it is.
I know a ton about canon and own a few cameras and quite a bit of their glass, I wouldn't say I'm a fanboy, as about 6 years ago I was faced with the same dilemma and was unsure of which route to take! I was so confused I went with the Lumix GH1 (I was more interested in video at the time). Eventually I went the way of the canon and have been very pleased.
A friend of mine loves canon for photos, but when it comes to video, he shoots gh4 rocking only Nikon lenses because of their versatility when it comes to mounting options.
Overall, great review! Very non bias
nikon = bmw
canon = mercedes
i am pretty much going with nikon xD
Nikon: ducati panigale
Canon: kawasaki h2r
I'm a motorcyclist.
most of people buys CANON, is like most of people buys APPLE
+Charlíchimo Pagaínzar Except that's bullshit a fanboy would say.
I dont like Apple, is just how masses behave
this idea helps me a lot
Nah a leica is apple
@@charlichimopagainzar The masses do not buy apple. Are you serious? I'm not saying windows is better but windows PC's and Linux PC sales are so much higher than Mac sales. On Mobile, Android has like 9 times as many users. A lot of artists use Mac computers but not the masses at all.
I switched from Nikon to Sony mirrorless (A77) for a brief two year period after being frustrated with the lack of advancement by Nikon/Canon and higher price points. Finally came back to Nikon this year due to a lack of lens selection and the price point of the D750 and I have no regrets. I just wish Nikon or Canon decided to listen to consumers and put more of the features in their newer cameras. I know they hear us but it seems that they purposely push consumers towards compromises. Here is a short list of what I'd like to see... Full frame Nikon/Cannon with at least 36MP, the shutter speed and buffer of a D4s/1Dx, dynamic range and low ISO performance of the latest Nikon, video ISO performance of a Sony A7s, 4K video performance, the autofocus of a Canon, touchscreen , wifi app that is actually useful, two memory card slots that excepts multiple formats, weather sealing, electronic view finder of a Sony, as lightweight and compact as the current technology allows etc... Now that would be worthy of my $6K. Is that too much to ask for? Compromises, compromises...
I switched from a Nikon system, D70s, D200, and Fuji S2 pro, I find the dynamic range of the raw files is better with Nikon than with Canon. IF you under expose a photo or have a photo where there's extreme light/dark areas and you want to brighten the darks, it brings out a lot of noise / interference, where with Nikon you have a LOT more leeway. I don't think this has changed with newer models unfortunately. I have a canon 5d original, but based on tests with the Mark 3 and I believe other cameras as well, it applies to those models as well.
Just buy a sony Alpha Camera. Best bang for your buck.
Sort of. As he said, lenses. There's just a bigger, more realised range from Nikon and Canon both first and third party. Sony are doing some great things with their bodies, but they need a few more years to round out the lens range for them to become a proper contender in the "pro" space.
I was a canon only shooter, those days are over. After acquiring the A 6000 and soon the A 7s or in the future the A7sm2, I haven't looked at Canon and Nikon the same way. I kepted all my canon glass (4 L lense in total) and have combine them with the metabones speedbooster ultra. All in all it depends on the amount of lenses you have before you make the switch and have the extra cash for a Speed Booster.
*Unrelated side note, Sony makes all of Nikon's Camera Sensors. So it's like you're shooting on a Sony Camera, but in a Nikon Body.*
GundamKicks No, not all of their sensors.
GundamKicks Sony makes most of their sensors (not all. I think Toshiba make some) but that's only part of the story. A lot is down to the processor and the algorithms they use. Apple use Sony sensors in the iPhone for example, but the rest of it is an Apple thing. The software, the processor, the lens blah blah.
GundamKicks The sensor is just part of the equation. Nikon cameras use superior software/processing. That's why Nikon cameras are rated higher in image quality than Sony despite the fact they both use the same/similar sensors. The A7s is $2500. You'd be better off selling what you have and buying a Nikon D750 for $2300 along with some lenses. It rates way higher and you get access to a huge/better selection of lenses and accessories. If you're going to spend that kind of money, you might as well go with Nikon or Canon and get the complete package. www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Ratings
his afro is fake
What do you think of the Pentax K-3? To me...it really seems like great bang for your buck.
I personally like canon more than I do my nikon. But I've already put in a good amount of money into Nikon to the point that I don't think I should change to Canon. What do you think I should do stick with Nikon and buy a d750 or buy a canon Mark 3?
Dude, do you really own all of those cameras? WTF LOL
no, i mentioned where they all came from.
Yeah I posted that too soon!
Jared Polin could you mention it for me by replying back? thanks!
WATCH THE VIDEO
This intro is so fuckin annoying.
my friend has a Nikon camera it is the Nikon d750 I am hoping to get it Canon camera cuz I can afford that great video keep up the good work
can you do a video on what makes a good glass?
JUST BUY A CANON.
That is so deep
Indeed it is. Four words couldn't say more.
Hahahah It is a matter of habit
RSAS media You spelled NIKON* wrong lol
real funny... Dillon Zabarte
IT's coming down to glass and weight. Many pros switched to Sony and Fuji systems because of the weight of the cameras and the lenses, those two companies make very light cameras and lenses so the pros can move around quicker. However those pros usually shoot landscapes, models, or such, they don't shoot wildlife, sports or any type of action. For those cameras you need either a Canon or Nikon heavier camera and with much better lenses to go with it. If you're an amateur photographer and like to shoot flowers or landscapes or your family then you should probably get a Sony or Fuji system, but if you're a pro and need to shoot fast such as wedding, sports, live events then it's a no brainer that you'll go for Canon or Nikon systems.
I think an aspect that I've been struggling with, and was not addressed in this video, is each camera's video capabilities. (I know Jared did mention it briefly, but not in very much depth.) I currently shoot Nikon and do a lot of still and video work, but am seriously thinking of switching because of the video fiction. Nikon, as a company, is not looking to break into the professional video market. Canon has been there with their camcorders for many years. This means that a camera like the c100 c300 or c500 that combines the ergonomics and audio of a professional camcorder with an interchangeable lens system is not something Nikon is going to make. Both brands have excellent glass and excellent cameras, what it comes down to is what you use the cameras for. For me there are too many limitations to making a movie on a dslr; the ergonomics, the lack of bottoms to quickly operate the camera, and the audio, to name the big ones. Therefore, switching to canon where I can have one set of excellent glass, and have two types of bodies, dslrs primarily for stills (and great b cam for video) and a c100 type for video, makes the most sense for me. This is something I will have to invest in over time since I don't have the money to buy all of this at once, but canon dslrs can do excellent stills and good enough video to start.
I would be very interested in hearing other people's thought on this...
love all your videos i want to get my first dslr camera for my birthday 2017 if you was in my shoes and only had a max budget of $530.00 to spend what would u get i plan on shooting pictures for my vacation and shots here and there so its between cannon or nikon witch one would u buy
Jared, it was right then and still right today (April 2017) it's all about the glass. I recently purchased a Nikon 24mm f1.8 for my D5300 and although there may be better options, the quality has amazed me. Thank you for your videos they are most helpful.
Something to consider if you want to use strobes outdoors: The 5D3 syncs only at 1/200s whereas the D810 goes to 1/320s( and a bit faster if you don't tell it about the flash). I.e. the Canon requires twice as much power to get the same shot.
Give me all the hate you want: If you want to use your DSLR mainly for video, BUY A CANON. They are by far the best in the video department, all the way down to the T5i vs D3200 battle. A lot of the storage/record length problems on Nikons have almost completely messed up wedding shoots for me. Canon also has better cinema glass and picture profiles (downloadable ones) for really dialing in that film look.
Jared, do you ever review lenses? Would love to know which ones are your "go-to" lenses.
Hey Jared, I've been watching your vids for a while. Thanks for the tips. This video has a much higher production. The hard work shows. Great job buddy!
Glad to see an unbiased review! I found out a lot about both brands that I didn't know previously.
please make this video again.
Jared definitely should look for Tony Northrup's d810 review to know about its groundbreaking low light capability! =]
Predictably there are a lot of heated comments here - this review exists because it is controversial, but excludes other viable brands. Jared is very knowledgeable, so listen to his points, and assess in your own mind, based on your needs and means. Do not make an important purchase like this based on a broad-based video like this alone - there are lots of Nikon vs Canon videos, so listen to a bunch of those and individual reviews of the camera you've chosen before putting your money down. Any brand decision is an expensive road, and most beginners can't afford to switch once they've invested.
It's mirrorless cam right now! mine is fujifim XT-1.
What are your views about canon 700D???
You said this a lot in the video, so I would just like to clarify...... What makes glass good? It's the only part that I have trouble understanding. I would like to take my photography to the next level but i dont fully understand what makes one lens better than another.
Hey Jared, great vid. I'm not a professional, I do enjoy photography and as an amateur enthusiast and because of the budget restraints coming with it I want to stick to DX bodies. At the moment I'm using a Nikon D7000 which I like but it would be great if you could do a similar video to this one, just aimed at amateurs and looking at cropped sensor bodies instead :)
nikon for photo and canon for video, im maybe wrong but thats how i see it. But i gotta say youre right its on all in the glass. Im stuck on 600d and a cheap lens for now but hope to have a full frame when i get rich!
Nikon's buttons/menus are more user friendly and intuitive -- but, I like better canon for every other reason.
Great video Jared. I enjoyed it. I think one other point though with the D810 that no one talks about is calculating the price to upgrade computer, storage, memory cards. That was the deal breaker for me. I was considering either the 600 or 800 at the time but when I just calculated how much more I'd have to spend upgrading my system I decided to purchase the 600. The 800 was a solid camera and in my price range but not worth me upgrading all my computer components.
I love his "I just got struck by lightning" hair look.
You can focus fast, shoot 10 fps, shoot low light whitout noise, BUT you canT take a good picture if you dont feel your situation. i pick some slow manual focus film camera. Thanks.
No matter how the time and body changes, what generations they are... The question is still the same: What are you going to use the camera for? The problem comes (at least for me) with the vast amount of choices and options you can have, and the number of K you have to spend on it....
(I love your hair!!!)
Hey man, you should do an update to this video. I love your work! greetings from Mexico!
I am deciding between the Nikon D750 and the Canon 5D Mark 3. I am a hobbyist, but want to eventually make money from it by doing portraits, weddings, etc. Which do you suggest?
loved the video reviews. totally unbiased. great suggestions on which camera to get as of the available cameras out there as of now for nikon and canon on the full frame size cameras.
I would go with any of them as I am tied between them all (except I would take D610 or 7d mark II over the 6d). Although it makes sense for me to get Nikon because I have a D200, (which I love), but I waited almost two weeks after its delivery to find a lens in my price range, and in that time I learnt about the camera and found out how to use nearly every single button, so like I said, I would go for either brand even if I have to wait ages to get lenses because I can find out everything about it first, meaning when the lenses arrive I will just be able to get up and shoot.
is there a problem of sigma with Nikons i have a sigma 105/2.8 os macro but when i shoot portraits it gets a lot of pictures out of focus and it doesn't back focus i made sure of that