70

I'm considering purchasing a DSLR for the first time here in the next couple of months. The two "big boys" seem to be Canon and Nikon. I've looked at both companies, and I can't really see significant differences between the two.

Are there any?

(Please don't go into a flame war here -- I'm looking for factual differences between the cameras, not "I enjoy X because of Y...")

Also see What do Pentax, Sony, and Olympus DSLRs offer that differs from Canon and Nikon? for another important part of the story.

Community
  • 1
Billy ONeal
  • 3,350
  • 5
  • 29
  • 47

14 Answers14

74

There's very few minor differences between those two.

Nikon has a consistent mount throughout its current generation of amateur and pro DSLR cameras. If a lens mounts on one, it should mount on the other. On some entry-level cameras with older lenses, you may not get autofocus and/or metering — but the lens is still functional. Nikon used to have only autofocus in the body. Some previous generation lenses require a camera with a focus motor in the body to autofocus. Nikon's recent mirrorless CX-mount differs from it's DSLR F-Mount because CX lenses are not intended for use on DSLRs - but official Nikon adapters do exist to mount F lenses on the CX mount.

Canon currently has three mounts: EF, EF-S, and EF-M. An EF-M lens is designed for a mirrorless camera, and won't physically mount to an EF-S or EF camera. An EF-S lens is made for a APS-C sized sensor and physically won't mount to a full frame camera, but can be adapted for use on a mirrorless camera. (Based on Matt's comment below, it may also be possible to mount a EF-S lens on a fullframe camera with some modification to the lenses and a limited zoom range.) EF lenses will work on either APS-C or full frame cameras, and can be adapted for use on a mirrorless camera (with the same adapter as for EF-S lenses). All autofocus Canon lenses have focus motors in the lens.

The off-camera flash system is very different between the two as well.

They each have a few lenses in their arsenal that the other is lacking — extreme macro or adjustable soft focus lenses for example. But those are really niche cases.

Canon is making their own sensors and Nikon has started to use some Sony sensors that are shared among several cameras (Nikon D7000, Pentax K-5, and Sony A580 all use the same sensor - or very close to it). The current generation of Sony sensors in these cameras appear to be superior to the current Canon sensors. Most of the technology advantages between the "big two" tends to switch back and forth as they each introduce new generations of cameras - so a sensor advantage today may not exist tomorrow.

Realistically, either would take good pics.

Don't forget about Pentax and Sony as well — they're competing for market share instead of against their own lines and look to be feature packing even their lower level cameras. Canon and Nikon (especially) leave off obvious (sometimes even basic) software enhancements from their lower lines in order to encourage mid-to-top tier purchase.

dgatwood
  • 2,235
  • 11
  • 15
rfusca
  • 26,496
  • 12
  • 95
  • 142
  • "good pics" <-- Is that pun on purpose? :P – Billy ONeal Jun 05 '11 at 22:40
  • +1 - agree with Billy, nice down the middle of the road answer :) – Barry Semple Jun 05 '11 at 23:47
  • 2
    Just to expand more. The biggest difference is the lens lineup each brand gives you access to. The lens offerings of one brand may simply fit more with your needs. – Itai Jun 06 '11 at 00:15
  • 11
    Also - Canon and Nikon tend to leap-frog each other every few months. It may come down to which camera is best for your needs when you're ready to buy. When you buy, you're impacting your future purchase of lenses which, in turn, encourages you to stay with the brand for years to come due to the investment in glass. Canons tend to be a bit cheaper for the same specs, but I know plenty of Nikon die-hards who claim that Nikon glass is a hair better quality. I ended up going with the Nikon D90 when I switched to DSLR after delightful years of Canon point-and-shoots. I'm happy with my choice. – jaxxon Jun 06 '11 at 06:28
  • 2
    Remember, good glass is expensive. Camera bodies are more subject to technology creep than lenses. Once you pick a brand and start to buy lenses, you will have a substantial investment locking you into that brand when you are ready to upgrade or replace the body you buy today. – RBerteig Jun 06 '11 at 06:59
  • 2
    In the interests of neutrality, it's worth pointing out that EF lens are compatible with old film bodies, and only the top of the range Canons aren't compatible with EF-S lenses – Rowland Shaw Jun 06 '11 at 12:02
  • 3
    It's also worth pointing out that if you pop a bit of plastic out the back of an EF-S lens you can mount it on an EF body, just don't zoom all the way out or you'll get vignetting / hit the lens with the mirror. The EF-s 10-22 works great on my 1DmkIV from 11mm onwards, at 10mm the mirror hit the lens but did no lasting damage. – Matt Grum Jun 06 '11 at 23:52
  • 1
    @Rowland It's not just EF and EF-S, Canon changed their lens mount when they introduced the Eos series of AF SLRs to a format that's incompatible with their MF SLR mount. Nikon's mount hasn't changed, meaning olf MF lenses are compatible with even the latest DSLR (a very few exotics excepted which were designed for specific bodies and niche markets, like the medical Nikkors, which work on only a single body). Might not be significant to most users, I know. – jwenting Jun 07 '11 at 05:32
  • I observed that most of the Canons don't have an AF assist light. They use the inbuilt flash for this purpose. – publicRavi Jun 14 '12 at 15:25
  • Good answer - much better than I could do! Ultimately if you spend £1,000 on a DSLR you'll get £1,000's worth of DSLR. I recall what swung it for me was what the camera felt like in my hands and the off camera flash system but ultimately you do need to get your hands on them. I got my hands on a Fuji mirrorless the other day, and I have to say it felt great to hold. – James Snell Mar 06 '13 at 10:48
  • YES. There are some differences in the sensor technology. Presently, Nikon has the lead in sensitivity. See my "Camera Differences" elsewhere in the post. – Stan Sep 04 '13 at 19:17
  • Also don't forget about Olympus and Panasonic – thomasrutter Jan 06 '16 at 00:59
  • @jwenting On the other hand, Nikon is still using clunky mechanical connections left over from the 1950s between the camera and the vast majority of their lenses. Canon made a clean break in 1987 with the creation of a new all electronic mount that has served them very well. Other systems, such as micro4/3 and most other mirrorless systems, have followed suit. The advantages of all electronic control are clear in terms of consistency from shot to shot an over time (mechanical linkages have to be checked and adjusted from time-to-time). 30 years later Nikon is finally making "E" lenses. – Michael C Oct 10 '17 at 19:37
  • 1
    @jwenting Nikon's mount may not have changed since the 1950s, but try actually focussing an AF-P lens on an old Nikon Body. Even the manual focus is 'focus-by-wire' and can't be operated on most Nikon bodies made since the F-mount was introduced. Old Nikon lenses will work (to various degrees) on new Nikon bodies, but some of Nikon's newest lenses (AF-P and 'E' lenses) won't work on many Nikon Digital SLRs. – Michael C Oct 11 '17 at 20:30
42

As of 2012, the only fundamental difference between all bodies of both brands is the registration distance (between lens mount and sensor). Nikon lenses sit slightly farther from the sensor, which means that you can mount a Nikon lens on a Canon body with a 2.5mm spacer to get the correct distance, but if you try and mount a Canon lens on a Nikon body there is nothing you can do to get it close enough to focus to infinity.

For a long time Canon was the only player offering "full frame" 35mm sensors (if you ignore the Contax N digital flop and 35mm MF backs) starting with the 1Ds in 2002, but in 2008 Nikon joined them with the D3. Sony entered the market the same year with the A900.

Part of this is due to the fact that Canon manufactures their own sensors whereas Nikon buys them in from other suppliers (e.g. Sony). This partially explains their delay in getting a FF offering.

The following are general trends as of 2012 so there will be counter examples and they may have changed since then:

  • Nikon bodies tend to offer more customisation at a comparable level. You often have to get the top of the range Canon to get more than 3 shot exposure bracketing, for example.

  • Likewise Nikon tend to offer better autofocus and build quality in the mid range models. Canon you have to upgrade to get the best.

  • Nikon bodies tend to offer extra features such as an intervalometer built in; you have to buy a wired remote to get this with a Canon body.

  • Historically Canon were much better for noise due to their in-house CMOS sensors, which is presumably why Nikon had to compete on features. However with the latest Sony sensors the ball is in Nikon's court for now.

  • Certain Nikon bodies have the autofocus motor built in and move the lens via a screw drive.

  • Canon don't include a pop-up flash with any of their full frame bodies.

  • Canon bodies tend to be more curved whereas Nikon follow a more angular form-follows-function approach

  • Canon were first to introduce HD video features for DSLRs. Nikon followed but the Canon video implementation was superior to Nikon's. The latest Nikon announcements D4/D800 should redress this however.

To retain perspective, these differences are relatively minor, and both companies produce superb cameras, as do other DSLR manufacturers.

Compared to other brands the most obvious difference is the presence of full frame sensors which is only shared with Sony [currently], and Leica [in a rangefinder form factor].

It's also worth noting that neither have in body stabilisation, whereas other manufacturers do. But that's a whole different question, see: What is the difference between in-lens image stabilizing and sensor-based image stabilizing?

AJ Henderson
  • 34,864
  • 5
  • 54
  • 91
Matt Grum
  • 118,892
  • 5
  • 274
  • 436
  • 18
    An excellently detailed and objective answer, Matt. The best compliment I can pay it is that, having read it I have no idea whether your own preference is for Canon, Nikon or something else. The kind of answer we should all aspire to. :) – Mark Whitaker Feb 11 '12 at 10:00
  • 2
    Good list. I would add that Nikon has cornered the high-sensitivity market because they are the only one who chose to make a full-frame DSLR with a relatively low pixels count (12 MP). Even though astronomical ISO sensitivities 102,400+ are possible with both brands, the larger photosites on the D3S is a seriously important difference for certain types of photography. – Itai Feb 13 '12 at 03:29
  • 1
    Not to mention Canon is cheaper for shooting full frame. – crenate Nov 15 '13 at 14:08
  • As of 2017 all of Canon's current bodies except the entry level Rebel series offer 7 shot bracketing with up to three stops between each shot - Nikon offers up to 9 but limits the interval to 2 stops when more than 5 frames are selected – Michael C Oct 11 '17 at 05:48
  • Re: AF. As of 2017 this is pretty much the opposite of when this was written. Canon's mid-grade AF systems tend to have more cross-type AF points and more precision AF points when used with lenses f/2.8 or wider than Nikon. – Michael C Oct 11 '17 at 05:49
  • There are now a few Canon bodies with built in intervalometers, and many more that have the capability when running the third party Magic Lantern firmware. – Michael C Oct 11 '17 at 05:50
  • All Canon EOS EF lenses have an electronically controlled focus motor in the lens and thus don't need an AF motor in the body. Most newer Nikon lenses also have electronically controlled AF motors in the lens. The USM/SWM type in-lens AF motors have proved to be superior to screw driven AF lenses and Nikon has not introduced a new screw-driven lens in over a decade. Nikon does still sell a few older screw driven designs. – Michael C Oct 11 '17 at 05:52
  • Canon has Dual Pixel CMOS AF for those users who wish to have continuous AF while recording video, Nikon does not. – Michael C Oct 11 '17 at 05:52
  • Nikon is still using mechanical aperture connections left over from the 1950s between the camera and the vast majority of their lenses. Canon made a clean break in 1987 with the creation of a new all electronic mount that has served them very well. Other systems, such as micro4/3 and most other mirrorless systems, have followed suit. The advantages of all electronic control are clear in terms of consistency from shot to shot and over time (mechanical linkages have to be checked and adjusted from time-to-time). 30 years later Nikon is finally making "E" lenses (mainly expensive high end ones). – Michael C Oct 11 '17 at 05:54
26

Another thing to consider is design philosophy. The ergonomics of the two brands (sizing, control layout, body shapes) are quite different. One or the other may work far better for you, making the choice obvious after actually handling a few cameras rather than just looking at pictures and specsheets on a website.

jwenting
  • 4,949
  • 1
  • 18
  • 22
  • I agree. Significant difference will mostly probably be subjectively perceived. – Leonidas Jun 07 '11 at 01:10
  • 1
    Ergonomics also have objective differences - like how well and fast you can finetune your fully manual shot, in a chaotic situation. – Michael Nielsen Dec 08 '12 at 13:23
  • 1
    which is a personal thing, at least in part. If I can't reach the buttons or can't manipulate them properly because the control layout is too cramped or spread out for the size of my hands and fingers, it might be perfect for someone else but for me is useless. – jwenting Jan 07 '13 at 12:22
19

One thing to consider is do any of your friends have DSLRs and what do they have. This is useful for 2 reasons; you can try using their cameras and seeing how you get on with them before you buy, and you can share accessories. I've ended up with a Nikon and through a couple of friends have access to ~7 different lenses and a couple of external flashes, whereas if I'd gone Canon then I wouldn't have that.

I'm not saying this should be the only thing you consider but it is something worth bearing in mind.

Phil
  • 654
  • 7
  • 17
  • 2
    This is true of buying any product. More importantly though, you've not talked about the differences between the actual cameras, which is what I'm specifically asking about. – Billy ONeal Jun 06 '11 at 03:36
  • 3
    +1. Having access to current users will be important when getting started. Being able to occasionally borrow an unusual lens or merely ask questions that can be answered in the jargon used by your camera's maker can be very helpful. All else being equal, this could be the deciding factor. (It was for me, I already had friends and relatives with Nikon, and knew no Canon users well enough to borrow equipment. After much shopping, I had no concrete reason other than that to pick Nikon over Canon.) – RBerteig Jun 06 '11 at 06:56
  • 3
    You said you were trying to decide which make of camera to buy, and as you pointed out and others have confirmed there aren't any major differences between the cameras so it is important to consider other factors that will influence your decision. – Phil Jun 06 '11 at 09:55
  • Ahh, I wished it were so. Most of my friends and acquaintances bought Canon DSLR years ago already, but none of them are as interested in photography as I am. I went with Nikon, because the D90 offered the me my extra perks at an adequate price. The best I'm missing from their setups is a Tamron 18-270. (And the people I met using equipment I'd like to borrow ... live some hundred km off my place.) – Leonidas Jun 07 '11 at 01:06
13

@matt grum covered the technical aspects, but for me the biggest difference is the ergonomics. Canon and Nikon have a very different approach to control layout, and you'll probably prefer one over the other.

Håkon K. Olafsen
  • 3,196
  • 1
  • 22
  • 41
  • 1
    only correct answer. And of course if you like grey/white lenses, Canon has a larger lineup (though a bit of paint can get you the same effect with any brand) :) – jwenting Feb 12 '12 at 08:23
  • 1
    Ergonomics is the big difference for me too, I had assumed this was just down to familiarity. Also Nikon are said, possibly mainly by Nikonistas, to have a much superior and more integrated lighting system in CLS. – epo Feb 12 '12 at 14:12
  • 1
    +1 This is one of the key differences I hear people talking about in general conversation, and often the deciding factor when people chose one brand over the other. – jrista Feb 12 '12 at 18:44
  • 9
    And Amen to that. As a Canon user, everything is in the wrong bloody direction on a Nikon. Everything! Want to zoom the lens? You must turn it the opposite way from your Canon. Focus? Opposite. Light-meter? Opposite. Lens release? Opposite. Aperture and shutter speed? Opposite (as far as I remember). I mean, seriously, they could not have been more contrary if they had tried to on purpose. We can blame the Germans for this one though - Nikon copied Zeiss, Canon copied Leica... – Staale S Feb 12 '12 at 20:18
  • @StaaleS - Wonderful remark, you just made my day with that one. Moreover, it's true. – Rook Dec 20 '13 at 21:57
10

Will hackability be a factor? Canon's CHDK gallery looks intriguing.

lmwangi
  • 109
  • 2
  • 4
    This doesn't apply to DSLRs as specified in the question. – fmark Jun 06 '11 at 08:40
  • 3
    @fmark: While I agree with your sentiment (that CHDK doesn't really apply to DSLRs), it's worth pointing out that there do exist ports of CHDK to some DSLRs; e.g. a port for Canon's 350D apparently provides expanded exposure bracketing, flash compensation, etc. – Conor Boyd Jun 06 '11 at 22:49
  • 7
    For completeness, the Magic Lantern firmware which adds mostly video related features is targetted at Canon DSLRs. – fmark Jun 07 '11 at 04:25
9

Your question is What are the striking differences between Canon and Nikon?. Striking differences? None at all. If there actually were striking differences, it wouldn't be so hard to decide between a Canon and a Nikon in the first place, and that is certainly not the case. You see, when you notice people are arguing about two different positions over and over again without reaching an agreement, it is very likely that both of them are equally probable, and this is one very good example of this. Another one would be, for instance, which brand makes better shoes, Adidas or Nike? There's no point arguing that.

the_midget_17
  • 965
  • 2
  • 12
  • 24
7

Canon DSLRs (and EF mount film bodies) have a shorter registration distance (distance from the film/sensor plane and lens mount) than Nikon. This means you can mount any Nikon F mount lens on a Canon with a simple adaptor. If you mount a Canon lens on a Nikon body it will be too far from the sensor and you wont be able to focus to infinity.

Matt Grum
  • 118,892
  • 5
  • 274
  • 436
6

You are correct in stating that there are no significant differences between the two. But a huge heap of minor differences do add up to two different characters of cameras--either one of which could easily suit your needs. Any statements about how different the two makes are as broad generalizations will typically be wrong--there are going to be exceptions on either side. Which system might be a better fit does come down to individual usage, gear needs, and feel-in-the-hands.

But here goes.

Lenses

When it comes to wide angle shooting, Nikon typically offers more lens choices, particularly for a crop shooter. Canon has no 10.5mm fisheye for crop, nor a cheap fast "normal-on-crop" prime, like the Nikon 35/1.8. And the Nikon full-frame pro-quality 14-24/2.8 was without peer (until Canon introduced the 11-24mm f/4 in 2015). When it comes to supertelephoto (>300mm lenses), Canon offers a few more mid-grade and lower-priced choices. For example, Canon has a 400/5.6, 400/4, and 400/2.8 at $1400, $6500, and $11,500 price points, while Nikon only offers 400/2.8 primes a the $9000, and $12,000 price points (OTOH, Canon's 100-400 zoom and Nikon's 80-400 zoom are both around the same price). Canon has an additional 17mm tilt-shift lens. Canon's recent tilt-shift lenses (The 17mm and 24mm models introduced in 2009 and the 50mm, 90mm and 135mm T/S Macros introduced in 2017) also have more flexibility with regard to the rotation between the tilt and shift movements that can be adjusted to any angle on the fly without disassembling the lens. Nikon's Perspective Control lenses are restricted to 90° rotation steps between the tilt and shift movements.

So, there is a lens give-and-take between the systems, and which one will suit you better depends on which lenses you actually need. If you don't need a 400/4 prime or a 17mm tilt-shift with rotation between the two movements (and few people do), then the absence or presence of one hardly matters. And, of course, there are often 3rd-party lenses to fill the gaps.

Low-end body "crippling"

Nikon's low-end bodies (D3x00 and D5x00 lines), arguably, suffer more from "dumbing down" than Canon's low-end bodies (XXXXD and XXXD lines). And Canon's recently added one additional dRebel line with dual wheel controls and a top LCD. Again, whether or not you need these "gracenote" features will determine whether it matters. Low-end Nikon bodies do not have a DoF preview button, cannot do true mirror lock-up, do not do high-speed sync flash, and may not have autobracketing as a feature. All of these features exist in the lowest-end Canon dSLR bodies, but they are more expensive.

Where there is a larger "missed" feature, however, is that Nikon low-end bodies do not have focus motors in them, and Nikon does not put focus motors in all of its lenses. And you need one focus motor somewhere to perform autofocusing. The practical upshot of this is that if you purchase a D3x00 or D5x00 body, and use an AF (not AF-S) lens on it, that lens will not autofocus. Nikon is the only brand with this specific issue. Most Nikon lenses are now AF-S, so this is far less of an issue than it was, say, five years ago. And, of course, not all subjects require autofocus.

Backwards Compatibility

On the flip side, all the film-era Nikon F-mount lenses can still be used on a Nikon body, while Canon's FD/FL manual focus lenses cannot be used on an EOS mount directly.

As with the lenses, Nikon tends to engineer for backwards compatibility, while Canon tends to go more bleeding edge and makes its older gear non-compatible. Another pithy way it's been put is that Nikons are designed by photographers while Canons are designed by engineers. Which one will be a closer design aesthetic to your personal tastes is up to you. But depending on the age of gear you might have inherited or that you can borrow, this might make a difference.

Left-to-Right vs. Right-to-Left

A minor note: Nikon tends to go widdershins while Canon doesn't. Lenses mount counter-clockwise, and the exposure scale/meter (unless you change a setting in the camera) by default puts -EV on the right, and +EV on the left. Canons, otoh, do the lefty-loosy, righty-tighty thing with the lens mount, and puts -EV on the left and +EV on the right.

Hacking

Canons seem to have a disproportionately larger number of engineers using them. And many of those engineers happen to write firmware in their day jobs. The result is that some very talented people looked at the CHDK, looked at their dSLRS, rolled up their sleeves and went to work. Magic Lantern exists for some Canon dSLR models, and works quite well to add some frankly astounding features that Canon hasn't seen fit to add, such as focus-peaking, a built-in intervalometer, single-shot HDR, auto-ETTR, video HDR, trap focus, etc.

Nikon hacking is undergoing, but has not reached the level of Magic Lantern in terms of code maturity.

Flash Differences

For a while, Nikon's CLS wireless flash system was far more convenient than Canon's, because Nikon built CLS masters into the pop-up flashes of its prosumer camera bodies, and Canon didn't. From 2012 onwards, however, Canon has begun to add this feature into its bodies, and even down into the XXXD dRebel models (600D forward all have this feature). The lowest-end model Nikon has this in is the D90/D7x00 tier.

However, the Nikon mid-grade flash, the SB-700 is arguably a higher-end model than Canon's mid-grade flash, the 430EX III-RT, as it has master capability for wireless control of another flash, and includes SU-4 mode ("dumb" optical slave capability). Neither model, however, has a PC sync port. And the 430EX III-RT has radio control and the additional wireless features of the RT system.

In 2012, Canon added built-in radio control to its line of speedlights with the 600EX-RT (although there are no built-in radio masters in the camera bodies--you need another 600EX-RT or an ST-E3-RT to perform that role) and followed up with the 430EX III-RT. 3rd party manufacturers have, in the time since, created compatible flashes and triggers with the Canon RT system.

Nikon, otoh, is introducing its first radio flash, the SB-5000, in March of 2016.

Michael C
  • 175,039
  • 10
  • 209
  • 561
inkista
  • 52,065
  • 10
  • 88
  • 161
  • At what level would you consider a "lower level" body "dumbed down"? D3XXX level? D5XXXX level? My D7000 certainly does have a DoF preview button... – Billy ONeal Jun 13 '14 at 11:53
  • Yes. D5xxx and D3xxx are the "low-end" (entry-level) bodies I'm talking about vs. the Canon XXXD and XXXXD lines. In other words—the bodies that don't have dual-wheel controls and are typically <US$1000 when introduced as a new model. The D7XXX line is mid-range/prosumer like the Canon XXD line. – inkista Jun 13 '14 at 22:15
  • ...while Canon tends to go more bleeding edge and makes its older gear non-compatible.* Within the EOS system this is only true with regard to some off camera flashes. Every EF lens ever made since the EOS system was introduced in 1987 is fully compatible with every EOS body (film or digital) ever made.
    • – Michael C Oct 10 '17 at 21:40
  • Nikon has also broken that mold with the introduction of AF-P lenses that are only fully compatible with a handful of recent entry level models. – Michael C Oct 10 '17 at 22:43