Why do people assume Nikon is inferior?

Question

I can't make my family understand that Nikon DSLRs are a fair competitor of Canon DSLRs, and they are fairly equal in quality... (What i've found in my research).
But their argument is that "Nikon is cheaper because it is of less quality" (Comparing Canon 60D to Nikon D5100). Insisting that "Canon is like Apple, and Nikon is like PC", and "There's a reason why most professionals use Canon, I hardly ever see any Nikon photographers".

What are some points I can make to re-enforce my original argument that Nikon is a good competitor and equal in quality to Nikon?
I already told them that years ago, Canon would use Nikon lenses... And that Nikon makes laboratory equipment.. But I need other concrete information, even if it's something that makes Nikon superior. I just feel like I need to SHOW them the truth, because I also USED to think Nikon was "cheap" in quality.

Thanks

Answer 1

I shoot with a Sony Alpha. If forced between Canon or Nikon I would choose Nikon. And in fact I now own a Nikon D700, my Sony A700 is now my second body.



So let's get to the whole Canon Vs. Nikon thing. You need to understand the difference between the image sensor, that will determine image quality, and the body such as construction, and features like AF points, video, WiFi etc.



When it comes to image sensors, Canon is at the bottom of the pile. Tell your family that, in fact send them right here. Canon has been behind since Nikon dropped the D3 in 2007 with a Sony made FF image sensor, and haven't caught up since.



In their crop sensor bodies, like the Rebel, the 60D and 7D, it's very sad. Canon uses the same sensor in all those cameras, and it's not winning any awards. Only their FF sensors are really good, but still not as good as Sony Exmor sensors, also used in Nikon and Pentax dSLRs.



Body construction and features aside, Nikon beats Canon. It's so bad, that a little Sony NEX C3 for 400 bucks has an image sensor that beats every Canon dSLR with the same sized sensor. Fact, not my opinion.



There a so many Nikon pro shooters, I'm not sure why anyone would say or think otherwise. And Sony is coming up in a big way with major innovations while Canon does the same thing. Their new M series compact looks like a giant flop. So they may be number one in dSLRs, but that doesn't make them the best. Yes Canons make great images, yes pros make money with them, yes they make fantastic cameras, but the best?



The image sensor in the Nikon d600 (2100 US dollars) beats the one found in Canon's 1D X. That camera costs three times more last time I checked. How did that happen? Yes the 1D X is so far ahead in features and construction, but if the image sensor can't keep up, what does that say about Canon? That's their flagship dSLR.



The image sensor in the Nikon D5100, a Sony one by the way, smokes the one in the Canon 60D, but body build and features mean that the 5100 might not be the best camera because you have to weigh in those other factors like AF points, frames per second, AF accuracy, bracketing and so much more.



All the dSLR makers Sony, Canon, Nikon and Pentax make great glass, and all their best stuff is crazy expensive so you have to be willing to pay for that amazing glass. I tend to ignore claims of one maker having better glass over the other. Even the third parties like Tamron and Sigma have gems.

Answer 2

Funny, the last public trip I did (visiting the USS Halsey), most DSLR users had Nikon cameras. I don't think I saw a single Canon, but I did see a cannon.



You can't win the argument. Both manufacturers make great products, and there are other companies who make great DSLRs out there too. You can point to high ISO tests where Nikon will best Canon. You could bring up the problem a few years ago where one of the Canon full frame models had an imaging defect when it first came out, kind of like Apple's new mapping program. During the Olympics, it seems that there were lots of journalist photogs out there shooting Nikon, perhaps outnumbering the Canon shooters. NASA takes Nikon cameras in to space.

http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/metadata/Cameras/D3.htm

http://www.petapixel.com/2012/06/25/astronaut-don-pettit-floating-with-his-huge-camera-collection-on-the-iss/

Answer 3

Nikon was/is "the" camera to have for my 45 years of experience. Canon is excellent and I have made a lot of money as a Canon user. But Nikon has always been the ultimate camera and "system" to own. But in recent years Nikon has entered into the market place with cheaper quality cameras at relatively high prices. But when it comes to DSLR both Canon & Nikon are on relatively equal footing. The choice comes down to cost of accessories (ie. lenses) and which camera is more comfortable for the user (YOU) to locate controls and operate.

Answer 4

PCs are better than Macs. They allow the user more freedom to do whatever they want - and I'm a huge mac user, I love my iMac.



Nikon are kind of kicking Canon's butt at the moment in terms of sensor performance. Only Canon's full frame line of cameras is really competing with Nikon's alternatives - and that's coming from a long time Canon shooter.



You see more wedding photographers shooting Canon because of their amazing prime lenses, and you see more sports photographers shooting Canon because of their amazing telephoto lenses.

Look at press/music photographers - there's a huge amount of Nikon shooters there. Mainly because Nikon have been destroying Canon in terms of ISO performance over the past few years.



The Nikon D3200 is probably the best crop sensor DSLR available. The Nikon D800 is probably the best DSLR in terms of dynamic range, resolution and image quality. The Canon 1DX is probably the all-round best DSLR available at the moment (shame it costs over $6,000).

I own a 1DX, 1D Mark IV, 5D Mark III, 7D and have used a D800 and D4 in the past few months. I can say, confidently, that Canon are only hanging on with professional photographers because of their amazing range of lenses and their high end bodies. In everything else they're losing out to Nikon. Sure, Canon didn't even make a billion dollars last quarter - that's a first for them. The information is there to prove that their camera sales are down because of the poor quality of their consumer level cameras.

Answer 5

Part of your problem is comparing apples to oranges... the D5100 actually is inferior to the 60D. Put it up against a similar model from Canon, the Rebel T1i, and it looks much better. So your own argument is already off to a bad start.



Camera gear is like anything that has multiple possibilities... Ford vs Chevy, Giants vs Tigers, thin crust vs pan pizza. Some people like 1, some people like the other, and there is absolutely nothing you can do to change their minds.



And in the grand scheme of things... it makes no difference at all what camera you use to take the picture. Nobody cares but photography snobs. And if you show them a print, they can't tell you which camera brand, let alone model, was used to capture the image.



Use what makes you happy. I'll use what makes me happy, and we can get along just fine.

Answer 6

It's simple prejudice, Nikon partisans are just as bad.



It should be noted that Pentax built the first Japanese SLR, produced the first successful instant-return mirror, pioneered TTL metering and built the first AF SLR (OK the ME-F was a bit of a dog, but it was the first).



Minolta (now Sony) built the first multimode SLR and the first successful AF SLR. They also had AI before Nikon.



Konica (later absorbed by Minolta) produced the first Shutter-priority SLR.



Fujica (Now Fujifilm) were the first to put an LED in a viewfinder.



Olympus were the first to measure ambient light and flash from the film plane.



Without these innovations, both Canon and Nikon would still be knocking off German rangefinders.



Of course, it was the Germans who invented both the rangefinder and 35mm SLR, the three-claw bayonet mount and first added the pentaprism to the SLR as well as innovating the, 'Pentax screw,' mount - but nobody cares to remember that.



Actually, Vinegar Taster, Nikon did make some lenses for Canon early on, during the US occupation.



As you can see from my rating, I've upset both sets of partisans - such a shame. :p

Answer 7

Much, if not all what you said, is non-sense. Nikon / Canon corner about 80 % of the digital market.

And are about equal in use by pro photographers. Neither is cheaper than the other, either in cost or quality.

Canon has never used Nikon lens. They use different lens mounts.

Answer 8

The only people you are talking about are Canon people. Am I right or am I right?



From where I am, more pros use Nikon because of the more technical layout of controls. Most everyone else use Canon because they get swayed by the multi-million dollar ad campaign launched by Canon itself. Then there are the small set of people who just want to take pictures. They use Pentax.