Serious question. Why is do most people prefer Canon for portrait photography over Canon. I got to meet with a few photographers on salary (they all work at Sephora at SF) to collaborate for an editorial shoot and everyone had either a Mark II or III; my first and only DSLR is the D810 and although I never feel gimped when taking studio pictures, I always wondered why 500px and such is mostly Canon.
>>2859810
>Canon for portrait photography over Canon
stupid mistake, "over nikon"
>>2859810
I don't think as many people truly "prefer" one brand over the other. You get people who are incredibly defensive about their kit in order to shake off the feeling of buyer's remorse but most people don't care that much outside of keyboard warriors and brand whores on the internet.
I think Canon gets a lot more exposure and mention and people in general will be attracted to them because of that, and because they haven't explored alternatives like Nikon, Sony or Pentax.
I work as an electronics salesman and when people come in to buy D-SLRs a lot of them go for the D3300 or D5300 over the Canon alternatives. Overall I believe Canon is still the top selling brand but that doesn't mean much. They're all pretty good.
>>2859810
Canon lost a lot of the market share during the Vietnam War to Nikon which is why Nikon is thing. Canon regained a huge amount of that market share back when they released the first competent digital cameras and some seriously nice telephotos. Since it was a hard switch to the EF mount people had to invest into the system and people are reluctant divest to jump ship to another brand. They've also been around forever giving them a strong sense of stability. Sure the Sony whatever is a great camera but it would cost a fortune to switch it. The Nikon 810 is also pretty incredible but again, the cost switch is high. Camera bodies only stay relevant for so long but lenses stick around for quite awhile. Much to contrary of the internet the Canon bodies out there right now are quite good (this is less true for affordable video) and there is faith that Canon (and Nikon) will continue to make great cameras.
TL;DR Canon made the first good and accessible digital cameras and people are reluctant to switch to something else.
>>2859814
That's wrong, though.
>>2859810
My mentor started with Canon because he wanted a full frame camera and got the 5Dc when it was first released. I got a Canon because my mentor had a Canon and said he'd lend me lenses if I wanted. My wife got a Canon because I had a canon and I told her I'd lend her lenses if she wanted.
>>2859810
>One hour Headshot session is typically over 100 pics.
>Four hour Comp Card session is 400-500 pics.
Gear wears out due to lots of wear and tear. Canon is better for warranty repairs than Nikon. Several friends wished they had gone Canon instead of Nikon, but it's too late now since they're already committed and would have to replace all of their gear.
>this is now a "why'd you get a Canon" thread
I got my 550D because two of my mates had them, and I wanted a good camera like theirs.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make SIGMA Camera Model SIGMA DP1 Merrill Camera Software GIMP 2.8.6 Maximum Lens Aperture f/2.8 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 28 mm Focal Length Range 19 Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 180 dpi Vertical Resolution 180 dpi Image Created 2015:07:22 16:35:41 Exposure Time 1/4 sec F-Number f/4.5 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 200 Exposure Bias -1 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Flash No Flash Focal Length 19.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 800 Image Height 800 Rendering Custom Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Unique Image ID 3030333132323837BDCBAF5531443744 Resolution HI Autofocus Mode AF-S Focus Setting AF-S White Balance Auto Exposure Mode A Metering Mode A Exposure 0.3 Contrast 1 Shadow 1 Highlight 1 Saturation 1.1 Sharpness 2.0 Fill Light 1.0 Color Adjustment Infinite
>>2859851
>No it's not.
Yes it is.
>>2859859
>Fuck you and your opinion. Canon launched the 300D and the 5D.
Okay? That's not why they're popular.
Canon is prominent and popular because of two things: They won the autofocus race back in the early 90's, which won over a lot of professionals who were looking to make a big investment required by the switch to autofocus, and because of stroke of genius branding with their white lenses. One begat the other, and so led to their synonymy with "professional camera". That cachet and household name status carried over into the digital era, and here we are.
Canon was the underdog for the bulk of their existence, playing second fiddle to the more established and more esteemed Nikon.
>>2859962
>>this is now a "why'd you get a Canon" thread
When I got back into photography. They were a "popular brand" with "lots of lenses". Pros use canon! My friend used canon!
Then I realised that I was going to be stuck on an ecosystem that just didn't work quite like I wanted it to, so I sold my camera to my friend and switched to mirrorless. I can see why people with more lenses and who shoot portraits/sports are locked in though.
Canon really needs to up their game though, they've not taken mirrorless as seriously as they should have and the dated sensor technology is starting to hold them back. It's now at a point where even my friend (looking to upgrade to full frame) is hesitant to stick with canon. Only the lenses and his locked ecosystem are really keeping him there.
>>2859810
went canon for best AF, overall lenses and advantages of #1 brand (easier to sell to others, easier to buy from others, faster and cheaper to get repairs, more accessory support at all times)
Nikon's one and only edge comes from the body, and specifically only from the sensor and nothing else.
If canon comes out with a sensor just as modern 2, 5, 7 or 10 years down the line, I'll still have all canon's advantages on lenses and accessories and market.
Whereas if you go nikon and your next body isn't superior to the next canon body, you've got zero advantages over canon.
Not hard to see why that'd make canon seem a better long-term system investment if someone's not only focused on the immediate present.
>>2859810
>>2859810
I've owned both and don't think it really matters anymore. There are so many cameras that do the job that it comes down to the glass you like. Canon has better skin color out of the box, but I'm not sure how that matters in our PP heavy world. Both companies will lose to mirrorless in the long run if they aren't careful.
>>2860003
>No it's not.
>Yes it is.
Damn. That's a pretty rock solid argument from both ends.
>>2860003
>stroke of genius branding with their white lenses
On a side note, do you think the white lenses might have something to do with reduced heat absorption of white versus black lens casings, and it's role in thermal expansion on optical elements?
dat ef 85 1.8
>>2860088
Is nice, but it's really nothing special. Other manufacturers also have fast 85mm lenses that are affordable.
I sold my friend my 85mm 1.8 and gave him my EOS 300, he loves it to bits but he also lusts after the 56mm f1.2 XF.
>>2859810
>I got to meet with a few photographers on salary (they all work at Sephora at SF)
photographers working at a makeup store. lol alright
>>2860083
That's what the marketing line is, but how many Nikon shooters do you hear complaining about their hot, loose jiggly lenses? Why are only some of Canon's lenses white? Why isn't the 85 1.2L, with its huge front element, white? Why isn't the camera body white?
The truth is, white or grey or silver does help with thermal expansion, but it REALLY helps the Canon photographers stand out in a crowd, and to make a crowd seem more unified when there's a lot of them.
>>2859815
I like my 5d2 because it was cheap, high MP, solid body and F O O L F R A M E.
But yea as >>2859851 said, I'd do the same with a nikon or whatever. Large frame with good glass is just desirable to me.
as for OP, I'm sure people just pick canon for the price and brand. Cheap and great quality and functionality. I hate the Nikon UI but that's a subjective matter, so I guess those who like Canon UI, would use Canon cameras, and so on. Saying that, If I had to pick over my 5d2/5d3 or a D810/E (whichever one is without the low pass filter) disregarding the price, I'd pick the Nikon any day. So it's more about which one fits my needs and which I can get for the best price.
all brands however have faggots who just brandfag all day;
> muh nikon rainbow sensation of colours
> muh canon natural colours and 5 0 M P
> muh sony, jason lanier said its the bestest
> muh fuji, im different
>>2860107
I'm sure with your limited experience with photography you'd assume your opinion is the correct one, but it lacks a historical basis or any kind of insight. Maybe with time you will come to reconcile your beliefs with reality, but until then I would advise discretion.
>>2860119
> natureguy
> limited experience with photography
man, c'mon
>>2860098
they're salaried photographers that work for the corporate side of the largest makeup retailer in the country
how much do your pictures make again? thought so.
>>2860117
>mfw I own Nikons and Fujifilms digital cameras..
Maybe I like colors
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 244 Image Height 250
>>2859962
>this is now a "why'd you get a Canon" thread
I wanted to upgrade from my Nikon d50 to something a bit more useful that could also duo video. I was torn between the Nikon d7000 and the canon 60d. But finally I preferred the canon ergonomics and it had better video+ magic lantern and I haven't got much Nikon lenses anyway, so the switch was not too costly. After I bought a few lenses, I eventually upgraded to a 6d. I'm honestly jealous of Nikon (well, Sony's but whatever) sensors and sometimes cheaper lenses, but I prefer the Canon's ergonomics and the ef lens lineup so I don't think I'll change anytime soon
>>2859814
None of this is quite true.
Canon never had much in the way of professional marketshare until the late '80s. Nikon swept the professional market in the years before Vietnam, after they released the F and F2, which were the first successful professional SLR systems. Canon took over when electronic cameras with AF hit the scene, because Nikon's early AF cameras and lenses were shit and Canon's were excellent.
Digital was actually what brought Nikon back to relevance, first with the very early Kodak/Nikon DSLRs and then with the D3.
>>2860119
Bro, come on, you don't even have to read a photography history book to know about Nikon and Vietnam. It's a lot of the Vietnam history books. Nikon F (1959) and the Nikonos (1963) were very popular cameras during the war and for good reason. Their popularity with the photojournalist spilled over to the consumer market and the German share of the camera industry started its decline. Hell there's even a single PJ that's credited for getting the Nikon F so quickly adopted in Vietnam, if you really care I can see if I can hunt down the book he's in and get you a name.
The Canon advent with digital is recent enough that unless you're still in high school you should have lived through it to an extent. They made really good digital cameras (both in terms of image quality and function) before anyone else did while making them affordable. The shift to EF was hard for people to swallow but it did make rolling out auto-focus much easier. There was also some issue with rear element distance that it addressed but to be honest I don't know that much about that portion of the switch.
Like I'm not making this shit up, older photographers still talk about the switch canon, and much older photographers still talk about when the Nikon F became a thing.
Oh please stop this dick waving contest, both companies have their own pros and cons.
>>2860151
>Hell there's even a single PJ that's credited for getting the Nikon F so quickly adopted in Vietnam
You mean Nick Ut? The one who took the napalm gril picture with a Nikon F while the Leica guy next to him was dicking around with a take-up spool?
He's using a Canon and a Leica now, but Nikon SLR's were pretty much the best thing ever at the time, though. No question about it.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Leica Camera AG Camera Model M8 Digital Camera Camera Software Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Windows) Maximum Lens Aperture f/1.0 Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2016:06:09 22:06:00 Exposure Time 1/250 sec F-Number f/5.7 Exposure Program Manual ISO Speed Rating 320 Lens Aperture f/5.7 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Light Source Unknown Flash No Flash Function White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard Unique Image ID 00000000000000000000000000003866
>why do portrait phorographers choose canon
Because they render skintones better sooc.
/thread
>>2860184
can't /thread your own comments, newfag. Go back to /b/
>>2859962
It was the only DSLR walmart had when I had been passing by the electronics counter one day, and I had a moderate interest in photography due to being the designated family photographer with shitty use and toss film/digital point and break cameras.
I'm not that invested in it with only 3 moderately priced lenses. If I could do all over with the knowledge I have now, I would go with Nikon because they have 2 spinny setty thingies instead of hold the adjustable setty button and spin the spinny setty/spin the dial placed for mutant hands on Canon.
>>2860088
It's plasticky and full of chromabs, meh minimum focus distance and bokeh is "fair" from a further focusing length. But the AF is great, cool for action on a 7D.
Canon is still plagued by its old sensors but what annoys me the most, is those old lenses design from film era ( the 28, 50 f1.4 & 85mm).
Still waiting for Canon to update them.
>dat EF 85mm ƒ/1.2 L markII
>>2860206
KYS
>>2860015
You fokin wot m8?
Sub 1dx/d5 levels, Nikon has better-
Sensors
Processors
Autofocus
Optical viewfinders
Lcds
A flash system that isn't retarded
In the past couple of years they've even pulled ahead of canon in video quality.
Canons strength has always been their lens catalog being fuller and arguably of better quality than Nikon. They also have better pro service, a wider used market, and at the end of the day a better marketing department than the cringe fest Nikon one.
I'm not sucking Nikons dick, I'm a Fuji fag now but was a cps member for 5 years.
>>2860309
>In the past couple of years they've even pulled ahead of canon in video quality.
Oh wow
Aaaaaaaand Nikon has a carrot skin tone out of the box. For free. Gratis. Even sony managed to get better skin tone from same types of sensors
Canon fanbois sayings that
>Portrait phorographers only choose canon.
Now that's edgy as fuck
>>2860309
clueless
>>2860309
7Dmk2 and 5Dmk3 are really tough to beat, AF wise.
Also- Optical viewfinders? What? At worst they're the same, but in many cases, Comparable canons are on top. (For instance, the 5Dmk3 and the D810)
Better processors? How do you judge that?
>LCDs
really dude? Does anyone even actually use the LCD for anything other than checking critical focus?
>>2860311
Handled a Nikon once and was surprised by the flatter/yellower skin tones that came OOC. You can always change it in post of course, but I typically prefer more separation in my colors. Canon cameras have a generally nice OOC look, although somewhat too contrasty to my taste.
>>2860323
Medium format rocks for portrait photography, Canon and Nikon can both kiss their asses.
>>2860206
If you had got an xxD then you would have had separate knobs.
>>2860367
>Does anyone even actually use the LCD for anything other than checking critical focus?
Yes
>>2859810
They use mostly Phase One in the studio.
>>2860370
>You can always change it in post of course
You can even change it in camera.
>>2860151
Where you are wrong is in thinking Canon was bigger than Nikon before the Vietnam war.
Canon was nothing until the 1980's.
They are the "Pepsi Cola", Nikon is the "Coca Cola".
>>2860566
"Ici c'est Pepsi" :^)
>>2860309
>nikon has better AF than canon's 7d-mkii, 5d-mkiii and 80d with top-of-the-line Dual Pixel CMOS AF
I want some of what you're smoking.
Nikon AF is worse in every accurate test.
