How did Nikon stumble so far trailing within the dSLR see!?
Answers: In what area are they at the back? I think you are man misinformed.
Nikon, in certainty, is better in flash photography and enjoy better LiveView technology than its strongest competitor, Canon.
Of course, Canon has its slither on some aspect too but Nikon have other been décolletage to neck beside Canon, and they both are never far behind respectively other.
Are they behind?
Digital Photo Pro Magazine have an article this month about the DSLR war. Nikon's got some upright cameras. I don't know that they're behind, unless you consider unbeaten to be pumping out megapixels.
http://www.digitalphotopro.com/
If you look at the latest offerings, you will see that they own been spending more time developing a polite camera than playing the pixel count game.
AND they own been spending seriously of time developing superior counter camera movement technology.
The race they are losing is the Marketing one. Canon is planned alphabetical higher up the chronicle than Nikon, so many explore engines list Canon's first. When I go to work at a newspaper using Nikon's, Canon's be being import by JC Penney.
While Canon does have some without fault good cameras, within many ways they "bought" seriously of pros when they "invented" the EOS system and made all the Canon lenses out-dated. Many of my pro friends in NYC be offered complete Canon systems to test them (these be Nikon shooters and pros with in a minute an obsolete camera system). After a year, Canon only just said, "Do you like them?" and as you would expect they were great ... Free. And after they sealed the contract ... They could keep them if they would become spokes folks for Canon..
After that they did one thing really right. The developed some exceptionally fast auto-focus lenses, while Nikon be still producing the world’s best manual focus lenses beside new 15mm true far-reaching angles and super fast long lenses and not really focusing (pardon the pun) on auto-focus cameras and lenses. True the F3 auto-focus be available, but it was sort of a cut and attach auto-focus camera until the F4 was finally arranged to produce ... The F4 is still a viable pro camera because it uses ALL the Nikon lenses, past, present and the at least possible near adjectives.
Back to the current DSLR situation. To quote Ken Rockwell, “Nikon has outdone Canon at Live View because Nikon's AF system works two different ways while within Live View, while Canon's does not work at all.”
This, VR, Commander Mode radio controlled flash and the elevated resolution LCD may be the turning point.
Sales figures for 2006 show Canon beside 47% of the DSLR market and Nikon beside 36%, so I suppose they are behind.
However Nikon's share be increasing faster than Canon's, so it will be interesting to see the 2007 tally.
Ahem.
http://www.asahi.com/english/Herald-asah...
and...
http://www.jdpower.com/electronics/ratin...
Nikon dropped the ball a few years ago in not providing a high-speed pro model and drove practically every sports-shooter need high-fps/high-iso to Canon (and taking 5-figure cash hits to convert adjectives their glass).
Nikon is currently competitive in purely about every phase at this point in time, but still face an uphill battle to attain the sports photogs back.
I dream up I have to boom fhotoace's sentiments here. I was a Canon user until they made adjectives my FD lenses obsolete by introducing the EOS system.
As a Nikon user near both a D100 and a F4s, I am happy that Nikon are holding their own against Canon, but my beef beside Nikon is why a: they took so long to come up with a full-frame sensor, and b: why they didn't extend the ISO gamut to go down to 64. ISO 3200 is just about as high as even a pro photographer requests when snapping sports in stadia, but a slower ISO speed would help out in other creative situations. If anyone can, Canon can.
Check out the intermingle on ISO settings.
The answers post by the user, for information only, CeQnA.com does not guarantee the right.
Related Questions :