Restless — An Alex Hall Portrait (Full Film) | Faction Skis

Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Canon vs Nikon

profile picture
profa_212
Posts: 8909 - Karma: 35,952
Yes I have to ask this question.....but I am looking at getting a dslr and am wondering what would be better, a Nikon d5200 or a Canon t4i. I will use this camera for just all around filming and photography. Quite a bit of hiking and skiing. My friend has a Nikon d5100 so I am kinda leaning towards that since we could interchange lenses and I am familiar with the platform. But any info on the 2 is very well appreciated. And if you need any more info feel free to say so!
Feb 27 2013 10:47PM
1 0
profile picture
SamColby
Posts: 644 - Karma: 2,006
if you plan on filming, definitely go canon. Also, fuck the t4i, get the t2i and save the difference in cost and put it towards glass.
Feb 27 2013 10:55PM
0 0
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31054 - Karma: 29,246
I hear the nikon d5200 has great video quality actually, if you arent invested in a system (but can borrow a buddie's lenses to help you get started) go with that for sure
Feb 27 2013 10:58PM
0 0
profile picture
caspie
Posts: 221 - Karma: 7
I have a D5100 and I love it. I like the feeling of Nikon over Canon. I would do some more research about the T4i. The D5100 does not have focusing, this will cause some more expensive lenses if you are going to be auto focusing all the time. For photography this isn't a huge problem but you might want it for videos.

Hope you can make a good decision and have a nice camera.

See ya out there.
Feb 27 2013 10:59PM
0 0
profile picture
profa_212
Posts: 8909 - Karma: 35,952
Well we use my friends d5100 for filming right now, and I would probably be doing more pictures. Probably like 70 to 30ish photos to videos. Maybe 60 to 40.
Feb 27 2013 10:59PM
0 0
profile picture
SamColby
Posts: 644 - Karma: 2,006
i mean it's up to you in that case. I've heard from numerous people that nikon's optics are better.
Feb 27 2013 11:02PM
0 0
profile picture
profa_212
Posts: 8909 - Karma: 35,952
Thats kinda what I was thinking......And are there any distinct differences between the t3i and t4i other than like the touch screen?
Feb 27 2013 11:13PM
0 0
profile picture
Jewschoolers
Posts: 1785 - Karma: 1,142
no major differences
Feb 27 2013 11:42PM
0 0
profile picture
michael_bc
Posts: 1386 - Karma: 721
If you are debating between a D5200 and a t4i, get a D5200:
Feb 28 2013 7:19AM
0 0
profile picture
michael_bc
Posts: 1386 - Karma: 721
*2.8
Feb 28 2013 7:21AM
0 0
profile picture
profa_212
Posts: 8909 - Karma: 35,952
what if I added a 60d into the mix?
Feb 28 2013 10:46AM
0 0
profile picture
michael_bc
Posts: 1386 - Karma: 721
The 60D would get you a better viewfinder and better ergonomics. This might be more interesting for photo, but not for video.

You could also consider the upcoming D7100...
Feb 28 2013 11:01AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61604 - Karma: 123,131
damn son, where can i get that!?! haha
Feb 28 2013 12:52PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
Canon also has a 17-55 f/2.8... and yeah, that 35 f/1.8 is sweet, but Canon also allows you to use Olympus, M42, and Pentax vintage glass without an element adapter, while Nikon does not.

the T4i, by the way is a piece of shit to use, and you can't get magic lantern on them yet. I'd much rather use a t3i or a t2i.

as for the D5200, dude... the D5100 is pretty much the same thing and is still in stores. My girlfriend got one for like 400 bucks or something. Get that instead.
Feb 28 2013 3:30PM
0 0
profile picture
michael_bc
Posts: 1386 - Karma: 721
The Canon 17-55 f/2.8 is not a professional lens, it does not compare at all.

For video, the D5100 is not the same thing as the D5200 at all. I believe the OP was talking about video, so forget about the D5100.
Feb 28 2013 4:58PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
It's also half the price... and even less than that is a sigma/tamron option.

and if you're going to spend that much, get the 16-35L f2.8 OR the 17-40L f4. Both are sharper with less distortion.. cheaper in good used condition AND have the ability to use it on Full frame cameras when the potential upgrade happens - of which the Nikkor 17-55 is useless for.


He was talking about video and photography. And yeah, having the iso boost from the extra megapixels and the better audio functions is nice (that being said, they both suck at 12,500 and above), but I use a Zoom H4N as well as a Tascam DR40 - which are both far better for controlling your audio in the field than anything built into the camera because you can MONITOR your audio, rather than playing it completely blind.

If the D5200 had an audio out jack to monitor your sound, then that changes the whole game, but it doesn't, so it's audio still can't do more than any camcorder with onboard audio, or any setup with an independent field recorder.


Feb 28 2013 5:26PM
0 0
profile picture
michael_bc
Posts: 1386 - Karma: 721
Nikon's 17-55 is entirely worth the price ($900 used). Optics are stellar. 16-35 only covers half the focal range, and f/4 is a really big hit compared to f/2.8 on a crop sensor. It doesnt matter, but i just wanted to point out that these great DX lenses are one benefit of using Nikon.

D5100 video is the same as D7000 and quite mediocre. D5200 video is beating the GH2 and 5dIII. I really dont think youncan brush this off as insignificant...
Feb 28 2013 7:06PM
0 0
profile picture
jibcrew1
Posts: 1505 - Karma: 522
Can you provide any evidence of this?
Feb 28 2013 10:18PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
the 16-35 has far less distortion - who gives a crap about the zoom range. Nikon's 17-55 has very average distortion that isn't really that much different than Canon's offering. In fact, I don't see very much difference between the two for the most part on crop sensor bodies. I don't even think the Nikon has iS/VR, right?

as for the D5200 being better than the GH2/3? and the 5Diii? LOL... okay, guy. Guess it's even better than the D800 and the 1DC and the RED epic too while we're at it.

D5200 = BEST CAMERA EVAR NO MATTER WHAT ANYONE SAYS!
Feb 28 2013 10:47PM
0 0
profile picture
michael_bc
Posts: 1386 - Karma: 721
http://www.eoshd.com/content/9713/nikon-d5200-vs-canon-5d-mark-iii
Mar 1 2013 5:10AM
0 0
profile picture
michael_bc
Posts: 1386 - Karma: 721
Hahahaha sorry for the typo. Actually Olympus makes a 14-35 f/2.0 which is a crazy piece of glass.
Mar 1 2013 5:19AM
0 0
profile picture
Mag
Posts: 8155 - Karma: 14,809
D5200 doesn't even have manual video exposure.
Mar 1 2013 6:03AM
0 0
profile picture
michael_bc
Posts: 1386 - Karma: 721
With this logic you'd just mount a Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 and get it over with. It wipes the floor with anything Canon.
Mar 1 2013 6:11AM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
actually, I'd probably get a leica vintage lens, since zooms are pretty silly for video, and AF zooms - even more so.

That, and leica/zeiss glass makes anything canon/nikon look like a plastic toy.
Mar 1 2013 1:56PM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61604 - Karma: 123,131
Yeah I got that, I was just joking. only reason the oly lens is f2 is cause its 4/3 but still, pretty cool
Mar 1 2013 4:55PM
0 0
profile picture
marcusandrew
Posts: 25 - Karma: 14
Canon is way better, nikon has a complex interface, horrible accessibility, and costs more. Canon is cheaper, more poeple use it and easy to use, just as good quality, get canon t3i, or if you have the money you should get 7d because its weather sealed.

nikon 3100(body only)= $1000
canon t3i(body only)= $700
canon 7d(body only)= $1100

all are the same video quality
Mar 1 2013 7:11PM
0 0
profile picture
marcusandrew
Posts: 25 - Karma: 14
dont get t4i, a upgrade higher, it has touchscreen and sucks big time
Mar 1 2013 7:13PM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
ahhahahahahahaahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha

fucking dumbass
Mar 1 2013 7:34PM
0 0
profile picture
robotdna
Posts: 1232 - Karma: 2,959
Get a GoPro. Haha xD
Mar 1 2013 9:14PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
Actually, i'd "downgrade" to a T3i or T2i. You can turn the touchscreen off, but really the biggest reason why it's lame is because it just isn't an improvement at all over the other cameras when it comes to video.

Canon got almost everything right when they brought out the T2i and the T3i other than no 60fps@1080p and a really shitty ACG that you can mitigate by getting field recorder with XLR plugs and 4 channel monitoring that is actually made for audio capture.

The T4i is only different than the T3i in that it has the touchscreen, a slightly different button layout, slightly faster continuous burst, and a faster processor that it can't really take advantage of.


Mar 1 2013 10:32PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)