>> |
Anonymous
>>82742 >They were quicker than Nikon to come out with autofocus SLRs. That'll get sports and nature photographers, but autofocus is really only essential or exceptionally useful for the extreme telephotos. Other professionals- advertising, general wedding/portrait/whatever, photojournalists, etc- have largely gone Canon, too.
>They've been the only game in town with regards to full frame digital SLRs Full frame is tremendously overrated. The only thing it does besides give a little less noise is make it easier to get wide angles on the cheap, and anyone buying a 5D or 1Ds shouldn't be too worried about that.
And if we're talking crop factors, Nikon, Pentax, and others have an advantage overall against Canon here. The 1.5x crop factor yields generally better focal lengths with the old typical focal lengths than the 1.6, or at the very least, closer to other classic focal lengths.
>And when you say the only advantage they have is slightly better sensors... well, if you accept that premise, that's now one more advantage than Nikon has over Canon, and that's a pretty big advantage.
Canon sensors do tend to be less noisy than the competition, but not enough where it would make any difference in a reasonable purchasing decision.
Canons and Nikons and Pentaxes and so on all are close enough technically where one would expect a good variety among professionals. But Canon dominates, and I don't see why. I'd expect a variety- maybe 40% Canon, 40% Nikon, 10% Pentax (only because they don't have a fully "pro model" camera, though the K10D is close) and 10% other assorted brands- 4/3rds systems, Leica DMR, Sigma, etc.
|