Nick Carver Photography Blog

Photography Tips, Tutorials, & Videos

CONTACT
 

Featured Testimonial: Online Course

A recent graduate of my Introduction to DSLR Photography Online Course had this to say about the course:

Nick Carver not only has a firm grasp on the subject of photography, he also has an excellent understanding of how people learn. His online courses are designed to insure that all types of learners--visual, kinesthetic,and auditory--walk away with an improved understanding of photography and how to implement what they've learned. Nick isn't my first photography teacher but he is the only one who actually taught me how to take better photos. In his course the lights turned on for me and my pictures will never be the same. Thanks Nick! 

- Shannon P.

Shannon completed this course as part of The Complete Package - which includes all 4 of my online courses with a savings of over 27% - and is now working on the subsequent courses. Learn more about my "Introduction to DSLR Photography" online course here and my discount packages here.

Nikon is Backwards

Nikon is Backwards

If you know me, you know that I really don't care about the Nikon vs. Canon debate. As I've said before, that rivalry is about as useful as the "my dad can beat up your dad" argument. The bottom line is that both manufacturers make fantastic cameras, both have their strengths and, most importantly, it's the photographer, not the camera. A great photographer can get great shots with either system.

BUT...

There is something I want to point out about these 2 systems that no one ever seems to address. It's something so simple and so basic that while everyone is arguing about megapixels, color reproduction and ISO performance, this point just never comes up.

The point I speak of is that Nikon is backwards. That's right! I said it! Nikon is backwards! Despite my Switzerland-like neutrality between the two systems, I can confidently say that Nikon is backwards. And I can prove it.

Let's look at 4 undeniable, undebatable, and - dare I say - astonishing bits of evidence that prove Nikon is backwards. Allow me to remove the shroud from over your eyes...

 

Exhibit A
The light meter/exposure compensation scale

When you look at the exposure compensation scale or the light meter scale (both use the same exact scale) of a Canon camera, you see something like this:

Canon Exposure Compensation Scale

Positive on the right, negative on the left. Makes sense. That's how we were taught in school and that's how pretty much every other meter on the planet is designed - positive to the right, negative to the left. That's how society is set up - to have higher numbers to the right and lower numbers to the left.

When you look at a ruler, the higher numbers are to the right, the lower numbers are to the left. And if a ruler had negative values on it, they would be on the left side of zero. Same deal for a radio dial, a speedometer, and book pages.

But now picture a ruler where zero is off to the right and then as you move left, the numbers progress up 1, 2, 3... Or picture your speedometer with 0 mph on the right and as you accelerate, the dial sweeps to the left. Doesn't feel right, does it?

Well, here's your Nikon scale:

Nikon Exposure Compensation Scale

It's backwards. Plain and simple. It just doesn't jive with how we think of numbers. We think of positive numbers on the right, negative on the left. Nikon decided to throw caution to the wind and flip the positive and negative. I don't know why, but they did.

So, there you go. Nikon's exposure compensation and light meter scale is backwards.

Strike one, Nikon.

 

Exhibit B
The lens mount

What's the old rule for fastening a screw, nut, bottle cap, or jar lid? "Righty-tighty, lefty-loosey." You rotate to the right (clockwise) to secure something tighter, you rotate left (counter-clockwise) to loosen it.

So now instead of a bottle cap or screw, let's attach your lens to your camera. With your Canon lens, you line up the dots and rotate right (clockwise) until the lens clicks into place. Fasten it on just like a jar lid.

Okay, let's do the same thing with your Nikon. Take your lens and line up the white marks, now rotate clockwi-NOT SO FAST, AMIGO!

You're going to have to throw out everything you've ever learned about fastening things to other things because on a Nikon, you rotate the lens counter-clockwise to attach it to your camera. So instead of righty-tighty, lefty-loosey, you'll have to remember "righty-removy-the-lensy, lefty-attachy-the-lensy." Doesn't have quite the same ring to it, though.

So, there you have it. Nikon's lens mount is backwards.

Strike two, Nikon.

 

Exhibit C
The rear lens cap

As a result of the lens mount being backwards for a Nikon, the rear lens cap also fastens on backwards. Rotate right to loosen it and remove it, rotate left to attach and tighten.

But just like the lens attaching the camera in a seemingly backwards way, I'm sure this clockwise to loosen and counter-clockwise to tighten thing only seems backwards to us. Surely only us Americans with our crazy imperial measuring system are on this page. I'm sure this "backwards" tightening/loosing business makes complete sense to the rest of the world.

What's that? It doesn't? It's backwards everywhere?

Damn. Strike three, Nikon.

 

Exhibit D
The zoom ring

Let's look at the zoom ring for a Canon lens:

Canon zoom ring

Ah, yes. Lower focal length numbers on the left, higher focal length numbers on the right - just like inches on a ruler and mph on a speedometer.

Now here's Nikon's zoom ring:

Nikon zoom ring

Hmm...okay. Lower focal length numbers on the right, higher focal length numbers on the left. Backwards from every other scale we're familiar with in the rest of our lives...alright. Makes sense, I guess, when everything else on the camera is already backwards. I mean, if I have to think backwards when attaching the lens and using the light meter, why stop there? Better to go 100% backwards than only partially. Right?

Strike 4, Nikon. You were out one strike ago.

 

Closing Statement

I have no idea why these things are backwards on a Nikon. My guess is that they just had to be different than Canon. Too bad being different makes everything backwards in this case.

So, in summary, this backwards business is the main reason I recommend Canon over Nikon. Now some of you gear heads out there may be thinking "that's ridiculous to recommend Canon over Nikon based solely on these trivial matters. Nikon is clearly better in image quality/ISO performance/auto-focus/blah, blah, blah."

Well let me respond to this imaginary devil's advocate with 2 statements:

First, these "trivial" matters actually play a huge role in the usability of the camera. If you're constantly fighting decades of training on what's considered forwards or backwards, then you're fighting an unnecessary battle. A camera's controls should get out of your way. They should be so easy and intuitive to use that you never have to think about using them - you just use them.

And secondly, Nikon doesn't have better image quality, ISO performance, auto-focus or blah, blah, blah. Canon doesn't either. Sure, you can compare MTF charts and side-by-side sample images. You can do an in-depth analysis of noise performance and color reproduction. But most of that stuff has no practical application in photography. Plus, Nikon and Canon are always out-doing each other. Canon may be the top today, but Nikon will be back on top on a few months. It's a never-ending seesaw of who has the latest technology, best image quality, and better auto-focus system.

So don't worry about Nikon vs Canon. Concentrate on learning how to use your equipment to the very fullest. Concentrate on becoming a better photographer, not a better gear reviewer.

But all that being said...let the angry letters begin!

Recommended Tripods (Part 1: Aluminum)

As a landscape photographer, I love tripods. My tripod is my right-hand-man. Aside from carrying the weight of the camera and stabilizing it for tack-sharp images, a tripod allows me to get real careful with my composition. A hair this way to remove that branch, a nudge down to get the horizon in the right place...a tripod makes it possible.

There are tons of tripods to choose from out there. Even compared to camera bags, I think the world of tripods has more brands, options and variations than anything else in photography. It can be a lot to sift through, so I thought I'd help you out by recommending a few tripods.

I'm only recommending 3 tripods in this post - one around $100, another around $150 and another at $250. I'm sure there are many other great tripods out there at these price points, but the ones I'm recommending here are brands I've used and trust. And it seems there's a big price jump after $250. Once you get above that, you are pretty much buying the tripod legs and head separately, and things can get pricey that way (my tripod, for instance, cost about $1500). All of the tripods here feature a quick release system for rapid connection and removal of your camera, flip-lever locks for quick extension, multi-angle leg positions for uneven terrain, and a rapid center column for easy height adjustments. Also, these tripods are made of aluminum. I'm going to have to devote another post entirely to carbon fiber tripod recommendations, but those put you into a different price range altogether.

Around $100
Slik Pro 340DX Tripod with 3-Way Pan/Tilt Head (buy - $100)

Tripods under $100 are pretty much useless. They are about as stable as a soggy cardboard box. Those Sunpak ones they sell at Best Buy for $30...don't bother. You're better off handholding the camera than using one of those. But if you're willing to fork over $100 for a tripod, this Slik Pro 340DX is a great choice. The maximum height without the center column extended is 45.7" and with the center column extended, it's 57.9". It's pretty lightweight at 3.5 lbs and folds to a mere 19.3", which makes it easy to travel with. It won't handle weight loads over 8.8 lbs, but it's unlikely the average user would hit that limit anyway. This tripod has a 3-way pan/tilt head, which means you have separate knobs to control tilt, roll and panning. This makes them slower to adjust than a ballhead, but at this price point, that's what you get. Overall, this tripod is a really great value for the money.

Around $150
Manfrotto 293 Tripod with 494RC2 Ball Head (buy - $160)

Manfrotto is a very reputable brand that's been around for a long time and makes some of the best tripods on the market. You can't go wrong with them. This Manfrotto 293 tripod with a 494RC2 Ball Head provides a lot of bang for your buck. At 3.97 lbs, it's not as lightweight as the Slik covered previously, but the extra 5" in height make up for it. That's an extra 5" in height without the center column extended (50.6" in all). With the center column extended, it's only a fraction of an inch taller. But what really matters is the maximum height without the center column extended, because the more you extend that center column, the shakier things get. This tripod also folds down small to 20.7" and can handle a load of 8.8 lbs. But the biggest factor that sets this tripod apart from the Slik and makes the extra $60 entirely worth it is that this tripod features a ballhead instead of a pan/tilt head. This means you have a single knob to unlock and lock the tripod head. No more fiddling with 3 separate knobs to position your camera. Just flip the lever, position your camera, and lock it down.

Around $250
Manfrotto 055XB Tripod with 498RC2 Midi Ball Head (buy - $243)

This Manfrotto has many of the same benefits as the previous Manfrotto discussed including a ballhead, but this one is just a beefier, taller version. It's maximum height without the center column extended is 54.1" (70.3" with the column extended) and it can handle a load of 15.4 lbs. It's quite a bit heavier at 6.34 lbs and quite a bit longer when folded down at 28.92". But a nice feature on this tripod is its minimum height of 2.8". That means you can shoot from just a few inches above ground level if your heart desires. The previous Manfrotto and Slik tripods could only get down to 15" and 18" respectively. I wouldn't say that's a major selling point, though, unless you do a lot of macro work, because how often will you actually need to get that low to the ground? But I'd go with this tripod if you want the extra height and the extra stability of a higher maximum load. Just make sure you're willing to carry around 6.34 lbs of aluminum, otherwise you'll never end up using it.