I use Tamron Adaptall lenses all of the time. The 28mm isn't the best of lenses, but it does its job. I find the 24mm f2.5 to be excellent and the same for the 90mm f2.5 and the 70-210 f3.5. The 300mm f5.6 macro is a good lens too.
Nikon F5 vs. Canon Eos 1n
-
A
- Thread starter funkpilz
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Contax TVS CLA'd w/ New flexcable
- Started by EgawaShiro
-
For Sale FS: Rodenstock Sinar Sironar-N MC 135mm f/5.6 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Komura 152mm f/3.5 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Sinar Norma 4x5 Camera
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale Mamiya RB67
- Started by Rick A
Forum statistics
I agree about the 24/2.5 Tamron. It's the only Adaptall lens I ever owned, but it was really, really good.
I too went looking for a new system a few years ago, after already owning since new a now well-travelled and well-published Tamron SP 300mm f/2.8 Adaptall II (had used it professionally for 15 years). Liked that the Nikon AF bodies all still allow full automation with the Adaptall II mount, unlike the EOS mount for it which is cobbled to stop-down metering.
Tried the F5 on a 200-400VR, liked it much better for balance and ergonomics with that lens over the F6. Briefly considered the EOS Iv with the 400 f/4 DO IS but didn't care for the Canon ergonomics (never liked the EOS layouts).
Took home a mint used F5, two weeks later had rationalized buying a new 200-400VR.
Tried the F5 on a 200-400VR, liked it much better for balance and ergonomics with that lens over the F6. Briefly considered the EOS Iv with the 400 f/4 DO IS but didn't care for the Canon ergonomics (never liked the EOS layouts).
Took home a mint used F5, two weeks later had rationalized buying a new 200-400VR.
To the OP;
I believe both Nikon or Canon systems will have a significantly deep and quality lens lineup to satisfy your photograhpic needs - each bringing their own individual strengths. In determining which body to choose, my first recommendation is to hold/use one of each if at all possible and even better is to do this side-by-side. Likely there are technical differences - trade-offs - between the two you've inquired of, but settling on the best balance of those trade-offs must be established by what you most prefer given the inherent strengths/weaknesses of each model.
To all other readers;
I sincerely apologize, and especially so to the person using the screen name SilverGlow, and any others who are as yet unknown to me and who are/were offended by my immature and unecessary comments. Though initially not meant to be inflammatory, i later responded to SilverGlows replies in an utterly inappropriate manner and will delete/edit my comment(s) from public record as much as possible.
I believe both Nikon or Canon systems will have a significantly deep and quality lens lineup to satisfy your photograhpic needs - each bringing their own individual strengths. In determining which body to choose, my first recommendation is to hold/use one of each if at all possible and even better is to do this side-by-side. Likely there are technical differences - trade-offs - between the two you've inquired of, but settling on the best balance of those trade-offs must be established by what you most prefer given the inherent strengths/weaknesses of each model.
To all other readers;
I sincerely apologize, and especially so to the person using the screen name SilverGlow, and any others who are as yet unknown to me and who are/were offended by my immature and unecessary comments. Though initially not meant to be inflammatory, i later responded to SilverGlows replies in an utterly inappropriate manner and will delete/edit my comment(s) from public record as much as possible.
I strongly disagree.
Some of my very best lenses were designed before 1988.
Possibly my 2 absolute favourites date from around 1970 (Zeiss 35 & 85 f/1.4).
I also have a Tamron 300mm f/5.6, Macro with does its job brilliantly.
Finally, an East German 20mm f/4.0 from about 1962 outperforms a current AF 20mm f/2.8 lens made by a manufacturer who I won't name so as not to upset its fans...
I find the signature of a lens very important and is one reason I no longer use the "big 2" now being discussed.
I might go over to the "dark side" soon (at least for some things) and get a FF digital camera. However I'm planning to use my favourite lenses (with adapters) and am not planning to buy or use a single lens made by that camera manufacturer (again anonymous so as not to offend delicate sensibilities).
As I hope you can see by now, the important thing is not which system you choose. The important thing is that once you've chosen a system, you need to go on the Internet defending it tooth and nail with all the lies, speculation and innuendo you can muster. Otherwise your purchase will be worthless and your life unvalidated.
The reality is of course that both systems are excellent and it probably comes down to ergonomics or corner-case features that will swing it for you. Personally, I'm a Canon man - my first SLR was a (gasp) digital Canon back when Nikon couldn't make a digital camera for toffee, so I stuck with Canon when I upgraded to film, that's the only reason. If I was going the same route now, I'd probably be using Nikon.
Anyway, to add a couple of bits of maybe useful information:
- The Canon 1V (but not 1N) has multi-point metering mode. This is a feature I love - it's a feature I discovered on the T90 and I love it. It's simply the ability to take multiple manual spot readings, and (a) display the readings on a chart in the viewfinder (giving you a guide to the exposure range) and (b) use the computed average for exposure. Such a simple feature, but absolutely brilliant - particularly if you shoot slide film. I don't think the F5 has this, but I could be wrong. This is enough of a reason for me to prefer the 1V over the 1N. (Any modern hand-held meter can obviously do the same thing, but you don't use a 35mm SLR to then use a handheld meter outside the studio - at least, I don't
.) - Someone said Canon film bodies didn't support image stabilising lenses. This is absolutely false, I use an IS lens on my 1V. As far as I know all Canon IS lenses do all the hard work 'in lens' and are compatible with any body; Nikon VR lenses rely on feedback from the camera's focus sensors, and so require support in the body. That said, I believe the F5 is one such camera with the required support.
- Anyone who thinks Canon L lenses are all rubbish should try and pry my 85mm f/1.2L from my hands. One of is is going to end up dead. (This is an outstanding portrait lens, incidentally.)
- Nikon definitely has a better standard flash system; this of course depends on you using all-Nikon flash units. If you are going to hook up to studio strobes etc. there is going to be less advantage.
Edit: I may be slandering Nikon when I say their VR uses the focus sensors as part of the system - someone definitely *does* use that system, but it may well not be Nikon - but it's a fact that only certain Nikon film bodies support VR lenses. AFAIK, the F5 and F6 are the only Fn (i.e. 1-digit) series cameras that VR works with. Nikon lens back compatibility is an excellent thing, as long as you can work out which ones actually are compatible with which cameras...
Last edited by a moderator:
You mean multi-point metering? The EOS 1N has this albeit as a basic 2-point spot reading i.e. point-press-AEL-point-press-jog value) then average manually as you wish with the jog wheel (occasionally I need greater accuracy and this is when the 1N is bypassed and I use a Sekonic L758D fine spot with (up to) 9-point baseline averaging of highlights/shadows and luminance and EV a lot more critical than the rudimentary (but useful all the same) feedback from the 1N or 1V, but this is a subject worthy of a book now!). Note the Sekonic has been around for some time now and is also in use as a matter of course since I bought into large format last week.
The T90 is recommendable. I only ever used the T90 on CWA and AEL (for sports shooting at the time). But there is one other camera that I had a lot of interesting experiences with...
Historically, I set about the methodology of spot metering using the OM4 (1984 to 1987) which I used until a year before before buying the T90. It's highlight/shadow control and multi-spot metering was a trailblazer for the era, and this camera is still much sought after second hand for this feature.
I can only wonder who would make such a poorly-research assumption re film bodies not supporting IS.
A tidbit: the first IS lens from Canon [1996] was hungry for power from 2CR5 batteries (73-300 f4-5.6 IS). Fast forward to today's 24-105mm f4L IS is much better, though I've only seen it in use on a Canon 5D (by quite an eccentric Dr who insists on using IS when his 5D is on a tripod!).
This Nikon-vs-Canon stuff doesn't interest me really. I'd much prefer photographers just got out there and started photographing building an affinity with one, the other or both over time, as I did.
Err, that's what I wrote...
. What I actually meant of course was "multi point spot" metering.
This doesn't sound like the 1V's multi point spot. The MPS mode of the 1V is functionally identical to the memory mode of your Sekonic meter, with up to 9 (IIRC - could be 6) readings in camera.
Nice choice of meter BTW - I've used a Sekonic L758DR for a while now for medium format, large format and studio work. Personally, though, I don't want to take a separate meter with me if I'm out with the SLR - the advantage of 35mm for me is compactness; if I'm going to start taking additional meters and the like I may as well just take the Mamiya MF.
I liked very much the F5, but I'm more a Nikon photographer than a Canon.
The F5 has a terrific metering system and other great features, it is more robust that the Canon, I think. But I eventually gave up my F5 because of its weight. Like another member said, low light conditions penalise the mirror cameras. I use my Leica M6 at low speeds.
The F5 has a terrific metering system and other great features, it is more robust that the Canon, I think. But I eventually gave up my F5 because of its weight. Like another member said, low light conditions penalise the mirror cameras. I use my Leica M6 at low speeds.
i choose the F5.. ive held one.. and it feels like it belongs to my hands..
We have 2 Nikon F5s. Part of the reasoning is that I can use my old lenses, but also because I have not been able to fool the metering system although I have tried. One other point, while heavy, it is like a Sherman Tank. I had a strap break dropping 1 body on the ice, (I live in Canada) and it did not even come out with a dent. If I may suggest if there is a way you can either borrow each body or rent them where you live, try them both out before you buy. Cheers, Don
For me the F 5 was the best analog body Nikon ever made.
But with my age I prefer more and more my 2 choice the F100 because the girl is not so heavy but can almost all what is needed.
Cheers Armin
But with my age I prefer more and more my 2 choice the F100 because the girl is not so heavy but can almost all what is needed.
Cheers Armin
This is a very long thread, but if the EOS1N is on your radar, the EOS3 is an excellent option as well. KEH was recently selling some in BGN condition for under $150. The EOS 1V is also an option, but much more expensive.
The EOS3 is compatible with all current Canon ETTL2 flashes like the 430EX, 580EX. The focus screens are interchangeable. It has 45 point AF with eye control. I haven't been able to get Its quite durable. AF is quite fast in low light and reasonably fast in the dark with AF assist from a speedlight. It can take Nikon lenses with an adapter and stop down metering. They'll be manual focus, but the camera's metering system will still work in Av or M. I wouldn't recommend slide film for adapted lenses on EOS due to minor metering errors, but it works very well with negative films. I use a number of M42 lenses on the EOS mount when I don't want to use my SP bodies.
The big drivers I've always heard on Canon versus Nikon is that Nikon has a much more user friendly integrated flash system, Canon has a better lens selection (generally speaking not referring to quality on a specific lens). But the gap keeps closing as time goes by.
The EOS3 is compatible with all current Canon ETTL2 flashes like the 430EX, 580EX. The focus screens are interchangeable. It has 45 point AF with eye control. I haven't been able to get Its quite durable. AF is quite fast in low light and reasonably fast in the dark with AF assist from a speedlight. It can take Nikon lenses with an adapter and stop down metering. They'll be manual focus, but the camera's metering system will still work in Av or M. I wouldn't recommend slide film for adapted lenses on EOS due to minor metering errors, but it works very well with negative films. I use a number of M42 lenses on the EOS mount when I don't want to use my SP bodies.
The big drivers I've always heard on Canon versus Nikon is that Nikon has a much more user friendly integrated flash system, Canon has a better lens selection (generally speaking not referring to quality on a specific lens). But the gap keeps closing as time goes by.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2015
- Messages
- 1
- Format
- 35mm
Old thread, but I decided to chime in. I am 70% digital shooter at this point, but I still use both, Canon EOS 1V as well as Nikon F5. I have two F5 bodies. I am brand-neutral and have Canon, Nikon and Fuji products.
I think 1V and F5 are very much equivalent cameras. 1V has an advantage of faster (theoretically) frame rate and 41 AF points, while F5 has 3D color matrix metering, which is so good, it is better then my Canon 1Dx meter. It is practically impossible to not get correct exposure on F5. I use it to shoot slides, and every time the exposure comes ou perfect, even when I use it under challenging lighting conditions, with grad ND filters etc. F5's focusing is also wonderful, although all 5 focus areas are located near the center of the field. Interchangeable viewfinders are inexpensive and available, so are focusing screens. The camera is super quiet and although it is large and have, it does not look out of place even in street photography, as long as there is no huge lens attached to the camera. Flash photography is a breeze. 1V has better weather sealing and has home-processing friendly features, such as leaving the film tab outside of cassette after auto rewind. You have to manually rewind Nikon if you want the tab out. Nikon has an ability to imprint exposure data on the film with optional back, while Canon does not. Canon can be smaller, if you attach smaller motor drive. Basically it is hard to point one of then as a "better camera"
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |