File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Hey /p/ in your opinion which camera has the best lenses that come with it, Nikon or Canon?
>> Anonymous
There's no best lenses, you need one suited to your uses and tastes
>> Anonymous
unless you mean 18-55's, Nikon's non VR was better than Canon's non-IS but now, the Nikkor 18-55 VR and Canon EF 18-55 IS are very much comparable
>> Anonymous
50D comes with 18-200 IS

Best kit lens/camera combo ever.
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
>>283008
I lold hard.

Also, zeiss trumps all.
>> Anonymous
>>283002
Sony
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
this thread needs more sage

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution96 dpiVertical Resolution96 dpiImage Created2008:03:31 18:01:13Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width551Image Height467
>> Anonymous
Nikon has better glass than Canon. dpreview has a whole lot of topics about this but don't buy a kit just for the lens. If you want great pictures, robust colors, go with Canon. If you want performance, durability, heavy bodies and have less money, go with Nikon. I've always used Nikon but I love Canon DSLR's.
>> Honest So You Dont Have To Be !9UISPtwBPo
You want good glass, and your only comparing Nikon or Canon??

Pentax is your friend!! they seem intent on shooting themselfs in the foot, but they make the best glass around, hands down
>> Anonymous
>>283088
haha, yeh....good joke faggot
Sony have Zeiss- which wins.
Leica have, well leica- which wins

Nikkor lenses are good, but very expensive. Most of the canon lenses have cheaper versions made by Tamron and sigma which are of equal quality.


Lens wise
Leica>Zeiss> Nikkor> Tamron>Canon>Sigma
>> BurtGummer !!RRMHFHglFsy
Nikon + 18-135 kit = win combo
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
heroes use nikon
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
pedophiles use canon
>> Anonymous
Nikon lenses have a zoom that twists the wrong way.
>> Anonymous
>>283088
Not hands down, but this article gets it pretty close:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-05-02.shtml

>>283093
This post is so wrongheaded. First of all, you don't judge brands, you judge lenses, though pretty good generalizations can be made about the characteristics of the designs each make turns out.
>> sage sage
>>283093
Pentax lenses were and are of consistantly higher quality overall than any other manufacturer.

Tamron over canon? Come on, I've got and love a few of their gems, but a lot of their line, new OR old, are dogs.

Leica, drink moar koolaid
Zeiss, maybe a few decades ago, but Pentax had them over a barrel when they were worth a damn anyway so...

For full disclosure, I've owned or own an F system, M42 system, KA system, and FD system, along with random adaptall and T-mount stuff over the years.
>> Anonymous
If you check all the lens reviews on DPR every Olympus lens PWNS canikon and pentax so shouldnt i jump ship to 4/3rds?
>> Anonymous
>>283235
are you smoking crack? show me these reviews.
>> Anonymous
>>283235
That's because they're comparing 4/3rds and Canon/Nikon's point and shoots. 4/3rds is certainly superior there.
>> Anonymous
of course no one here has really used and tested all of the kit lenses. but from what i have read the pentax kit lens is alot better than the other kits.

of course if that is what you are going to base your decision off of i look forward to your black and white pic of the crowd milling around downtown and the one with your friend and the wow! out of focus background and of course the landscape you shoot at 1pm.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>283254
>>283250
Stop being retarded.
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/
Also this http://www.cameralabs.com/lenses/Latest_DSLR_Lens_reviews.shtml

Though what really surprised me, was this:
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_E-3/outdoor_results.shtml
The Nikkor 17-55 is supposed to be the Holy Grail of standard zooms, isn't it?
>> SAGE
Mamiya
sony second.
>> Anonymous
>>283270The Nikkor 17-55 is supposed to be the Holy Grail of standard zooms, isn't it?

cameralabs isn't exactly reliable, the 12-60 is good but it's not constant 2.8
>> Anonymous
>>283384
And the 17-55 isn't a 5x zoom. The point is, they were both used at f/8, where they should be at maximum sharpness anyway, and the 17-55 looks worse than some cheaper kit lenses. Wtf?
>> Anonymous
first of all, they're 2 different category of lenses

second, cameralabs is ran by an idiot

third, these are fucking JPG samples, different companiees have different approaches to processing. check DPR studio comparisons with RAW, every single test will be, yeahhhh uhhh well they all look pretty much the same

fourth, the small ass 4:3 sensor will have more DOF at comparable apertures than the bigger sensor on a D300

fifth, Olympus sucks shit
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>283270The Nikkor 17-55 is supposed to be the Holy Grail of standard zooms, isn't it?
>> Anonymous
>>283414
>third, these are fucking JPG samples, different companiees have different approaches to processing.
Actually, the E-3 is known to have a strong AA filter which leads to softness, plus quite relaxed image processing, so it's not like one of the pictures is oversharpened and the other isn't.

>the small ass 4:3 sensor will have more DOF at comparable apertures
How the fuck is this relevant to sharpness?
>> Anonymous
>>283428How the fuck is this relevant to sharpness?

Because the E-3 at f/8 inherently has more in focus than a D300 does, just the nature of having a smaller sensor. Try as he might, he physically can't have more in focus with the D300 at f/8 than he could with a E-3.
>> Anonymous
>>283455
He was shooting a distant landscape, where everything should be in focus at f/8 even on a fucking Hasselblad. (Of course, the focusing might be off, but then the whole picture would be slightly out of focus, not just the corners)