What's the difference between these and the longer canon or nikon specific option? Is one type more reliable?
1780048
The difference is the price. Anything made by Canon or Nikon is way more pricy. These units are extremly easy to use, you can fire one or two flashes at the same time. I have purchase about 6 of these units for my students and everyone warks right out of the box.
615463
I use a Canon but they make the same lense that is compatible with Nikon too!
608748
I have both for my Nikon D300s. Sigma 17-50 2.8 is a much better choice. Range in slightly narrower but indoor performance, portrait photography, and bikes are better.
365186
nikon makes D40 and D40x, if there is a camera 40d it would be a ladies brand known as canon! just go with the D40, but it only autofocuses with the latest AF-S lenses, and also the the older, professional, AF-I lenses. good luck
1203850
yep. I am going to amend my advice and recommend the Tokina 11-16 2.8. This gets excellent reviews and is faster than the others for low light shooting such as UW. I shot with the 10-24 such subjects as a gilded church. It came out spectacular. All in all, if money is not an issue, it is a tossup between the nikon and tokina. I switched to fx format and now use the nikon 12-24. It's a monster. BTW, another great option for the Nikon DX is the great 18-200 zoom.
874720
There's no comparison. The 16mm with converter is as good a substitute as you will find, but cannot hold a candle to the Rokinon. The latter is better corrected across the frame, better designed (Samyang patent), and very, very sharp. But the 16mm gives you the equivalent of a 24mm on a 35mm format - which may be a more useful combination for some shooters. I have a 16-50 PZ that covers 16mm acceptably.
348784
I too am torn between the Canon SX10 and this Nikon. I was 90% sure I was going to go with the Canon as it gets nothing but stellar reviews, but I tried them out side by side today and I have to say - the Nikon seemed more intuitive to use! My kids started going off the deep end before I could make a final decision, but I'll be watching this post to see how others chime in :)
1455073
I agree with xapshot; No difference in quality or functionality of the two. Only two different marketing areas that Canon feels should kept apart. Concerning warranty I don't know the difference. I find it sensible to agree again with xapshot on that matter as well :)
1063909
The build isn't the toughest. I had to send mine in for repair initially for a build issue. The warranty is great though. I think it lasts for 6 years. However, depending on how much you use it and the kind of wear and tear you expect a more robust build may be a better choice. However, I think canon lenses at least only come with a one year warranty. Nikon may be different.
357725
To my understanding it is usually believed that 2470 is a better version than this one in the same focal length range. But there are other things to consider. How important is it for you to have the extra versatility, that is, the focal length of 70 to 120? How much do you care about the lost of aperture range? (And that depends on what you plan to shoot most often.) How important is the price difference to you? And weight differs, too. Actually, I envy the newest 750 model so much! lol. It certainly deserves good lenses.
311424
I have the Canon 5d Mark ii and works ok... honestly I would recommend a Canon flash.. it will cost more but probably more reliable. if you are just looking for occasional usage it is ok for that.
790657
Mainly price. The Rokinon lenses are very good. I own a 35 and 24 Rokinon as well as some Canons. I think they perform extremely well.
913710
Both Nikon and Canon are great products. I own the Nikon, but I have a Canon 35mm SLR. As far as ease of use, they are very comparable. The booklet that comes with it is really helpful, and you can't really go wrong with either brand in my opinion.
1077062
I don't know all the specifics about Nikon vs Canon, but I would doubt it. Nikon does have a "nifty fifty" for a few more dollars, though. Here is the link: http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_0_12?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords;=nikon+50+mm+1.8&sprefix;=Nikon+50+mm+%2Caps%2C436
357729
To my understanding it is usually believed that 2470 is a better version than this one in the same focal length range.But there are other things to consider. How important is it for you to have the extra versatility, that is, the focal length of 70 to 120? How much do you care about the lost of aperture range? (And that depends on what you plan to shoot most often.) How important is the price difference to you? And weight differs, too.Actually, I envy the newest 750 model so much! lol. It certainly deserves good lenses.
870298
Canon's is a fixed 40mm lens. This is a 14-42mm motorized zoom.And it's not a fixed focus lens, it has a fixed focal length with a constant aperture. Their 40mm is autofocus. There really shouldn't be a battle on which is better. Both serve a purpose. If you're going for one lens to walkaround with, a fixed 40mm is a bit limited.
231215
If they're the same price then get the T5i. It has a couple of new features. The T4i has been discontinued so is no longer subject to Canon's pricing policies.