RonFrank
Contributor
the Canon processor is above the Nikon.
Ron.
Messing with you Buddy.
Actually, if you read the material posted by maged_mmh, you will discover that Nikon is LIGHT YEARS ahead of EVERY manufacture!
D-SLR choice: Nikon D90 vs Canon D50
- Thread starter RJP
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
Actually, if you read the material posted by maged_mmh, you will discover that Nikon is LIGHT YEARS ahead of EVERY manufacture!
Great read!!
"Was", in the first years of the digital era.
Today even the 40D sensor is better than the 50D.
And every current Nikon is better than that.
RonFrank
Contributor
Actually NIkon lead the digital age for a while. They had a D1 out, then the D1x, and D1h. These were all pro level cameras,and they shot well. At the same time Canon was working on putting out a budget level DSLR, the D30. Then Canon came out with the EOS 1D. It had major sensor issues, horz lines across the frames. They fixed those issues, and from that point forward Canon did a good job, and their noise and in camera processing was excellent.
Nikon however was no slouch, but they have always had a more RAW type of philosophy, and did less in camera processing. However Nikon took some hits for their higher noise at high ISO's, and weaker out of camera images. This was especially true for sports shooters, and Canon ruled the world of sports for a while with their low noise high ISO sensors.
Meanwhile Canon was pulling stunts like dumbed down Rebels, and Nikon was putting together low end consumer DSLR's with full features (the D70). Canon could do nothing but follow suit. Canon had a FF sensor, and Nikon did not. Canon was at 16mpix, and Nikon was at 12mpix on an APS sized sensor. So Nikon had some catching up to do. However the original FF sensors did have some issues, especially when used with some of the older pristine glass. Nikon is smaller than Canon, and may have been smart to not get into the FF sensor business when Canon did as FF sensors were VERY costly to engineer, and manufacture.
Currently Nikon is producing top level cameras in every regard with FF sensors to boot (pricey). However Canon is doing the same, even if I think Nikon may have taken a bit of a lead when the D200 came out in many areas.
Nikon and Canon have always been neck and neck, and that continues to be true to this day. I've watched both companies evolve over time, and it's actually fun to see them compete. IMO the BEST thing for Nikon is Canon, and visa versa!
Ironically the first 35mm SLR was a Canon/Nikon joint effort!
It's ALL GOOD!
