Quote:
|
Originally Posted by xepherys
actually, Nikon's and Canons are pretty close to par. Many people prefer Canons not for the bodies, but the glass. Canon "L" lenses are often some of the best glass you can get for the money (and they aren't inexpensive). At the pro-am level, the bodies are pretty much the same. At the higher level, Canon does have some higher ground, the 1Ds Mark III is a freakin' fantastic body. The IQ on a lot of Canon lenses is better, in my opinion, as well, even on the lower end of the price range.
Of course, Nikon fans probably have an identical argument for their side, so a grain of salt is needed for this argument.
|
I'm a Nikon person and yes, the glass is our argument too. Even Nikon's point and shoot cameras have high quality glass. Ultimately the two makes aren't that different, they're keeping up with each other too well for one to have an advantage. I will say I've managed to convert more than a few canon users though.
As for the OP, that's a fun lens. I have a Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro that I bought for my Nikon when I couldn't afford a Nikon lens and it gets lots of use too. I'd love to have it be a 1.8 though. I strive for the shallow depth of field look in a lot of my work.