This isn’t a scientific example by any stretch of the imagination. And comparing one lens from Nikon vs. one lens from Canon isn’t fair especially since we have so many other factors that are different such as sensor size, different sensors, autofocus systems, metering systems. I did edit both photos using Adobe Camera Raw with the same settings. The cameras in question are the Nikon D90 and the Canon 5DII.

Just in handling and auto focus I like the Nikon’s capture of the subjects – I was able to nail the shot in one try. And it took several attempts to get the Canon to duplicate the shot made by the Nikon D90. But here you can see side by side comparisons at about 100%. These were cropped so you can see the difference.

Nikon 105mm VR vs Canon 100mm IS

Nikon 105mm VR vs Canon 100mm IS

If I was to pick a winner I would go with the Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR. A lot of that is just from my gut in my selection. In testing the Canon 100mm f/2.8 IS this week I have been feeling the Nikon just gives me better results. And I think that is one reason I decided to keep photographing with both camera systems. I was really close to selling my Nikon gear to replace it all with Canon. But that 105mm is hard to beat. If you don’t have one you should go out and buy one.

Or get it from amazon.com.

One of my dream lenses has been upgraded to a version 2 – the Nikkor 200-400mm f/4 VRII is brand new and weighs in at about $6999. I am drooling already. Will I ever own this lens? Probably not – I really don’t photograph enough events or sporting events that would use this lens. And this wouldn’t be very good for indoor sporting events because you want to have an f/2.8 to try and freeze the action with a 1/1000 of a second shutter speed.

I can see using a really long lens for models or fashion because you can make the person look thinner with the compression available with really long lenses (one reason you don’t photograph models with a wide angle lenses). And you get the really blurry backgrounds behind the subject.

AF-S Nikkor 200–400mm f/4G ED VR II

So, yeah, the lens isn’t practical but it is really cool. It would be perfect for outdoor sporting events. All you would ever need for outdoor football would be a 70-200mm and the 200-400mm lens. And with improving ISO capabilities on these camera bodies this lens may soon work for indoor sports photography.

And this lens doesn’t have a Canon counterpart. And Nikon is the king of zoom lenses (Canon is the king of prime lenses.)

This is pretty cool – the two top 50mm lenses from Nikon and Canon. You will probably notice the size difference between the two lenses. Canon’s 50mm lens has a über wide aperture of f/1.2 and Nikon is limited to f/1.4.

People will often complain that professional lenses weigh so much – well that is due to physics and if the lens is made out of metal, alloy, or plastic. More and more Nikon lenses are made from plastic – at least on the outside.

Will Nikon ever make an f/1.2 50mm lens? They already do! However, it is manual focus. I have heard from someone who heard from someone who works on Nikon lenses that the Nikon mount cannot support an f/1.2 lens if that lens has a focusing motor onboard. I don’t know if that is true. However, Nikon’s lack of f/1.2 is one reason I am adopting some Canon gear.

Nikon f/1.4 vs. Canon f/1.2

And aperture really is my deciding factor when buying a lens. If I can afford the wider aperture (lower numbers) then I will buy it. Otherwise I will upgrade when I can. The Canon lens is so much larger because the glass has to be so much wider. It is huge! But it helps the camera shoot in the dark and my favorite feature is the control over the depth of field.

Nikon f/1.4 vs. Canon f/1.2

Nikon f/1.4 vs. Canon f/1.2