I had the issue here in Europe, it went back & forth to Tamron and it’s now history.

I had promised to come here and post feedback, so…

The answer for resolution is better sensor and lesser lenses give better IQ than better lenses and inferior sensor. But for that difference to show you’d be talking D800 and Nikon lenses versus 6D and Canon lenses. With the D600 as the camera, the advantage, although slight, would be to the Canon camera and lenses. However, the resolution difference is slight enough that for purchasing decisions I’d call it even and look at other things.

Roger

Roger,

I’d like to kindly ask for your views on a decision very similar to the one you’ve made recently. I’d like to decide between the Nikon D600 and the Canon 6D, and two-three lenses (initially) for each.

The question is, what gives one better image quality: a higher quality sensor with great lenses (Nikon D600 + Nikkor 24-70 f2.8 and Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 VR II) or a somewhat lower quality sensor with somewhat better lenses (Canon 6D + Canon 24-70 f2.8 II + Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS II.) In other words, what makes the bigger difference here, the Canon’s better lenses or the Nikon’s better sensor?

The photography I do:
I shoot people / portraits at parties in low light and shoot catwalk fashion shows (also often in poor light, sometimes in good light.) You could call my photography “fashion” and “wedding” photography.

Also, at parties, I often hand my camera to friends to get my own shots. These friends often cannot hold a shot even at 1/30s with IS turned on. I also frequently need to do heavy cropping on these images (the ceiling in particular, while my feet are chopped off…) A higher resolution image to start with helps.

Sensors:
Advantage Nikon here: 24 Mpx v.s 20 Mpx and a Dynamic Range that is 2 EVs broader.

Lenses I’m planning to (initially) buy if I go Canon:
• Canon 24-70 f2.8 II – better than the Nikon equivalent. (Seems significantly better than the Tamron 24-70 f2.8, so I’m not as tempted by the Tamron’s IS and lower price if I go Canon.)
• Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS II – better than the Nikon equivalent. (Seems significantly better than the Tamron 70-200 f2.8, so I’m not as tempted by Tamron’s lower price if I go Canon.)
• Canon 85 f1.2 II – a Nikon equivalent simply doesn’t exist. (I’m debating whether I really need this lens / how practical it actually is. If it cost $400, I would not be debating it, I would just buy it. But at $2,000, I’m debating it, and may go for a cheaper portrait lens eventually. The existence of it as an option is nice.)

Lenses I’m planning to (initially) buy if I go Nikon:
• Nikkor 24-70 f2.8 or Tamron 24-70 f2.8 (Image Stabilized) – there difference in optical quality seems small, and Tamron’s IS would help me (my friends holding my camera while photographing me) in low light at parties.
• Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 VR II or Tamron’s latest 70-200 f2.8 SP Di VC USD – the difference in optical quality seems small, and the Tamron is cheaper, so I’m tempted by the Tamron.
• Nikkor 85 f1.4G or Nikkor 85 f1.8G – both great lenses, but not quite as cool as the Canon 85 f1.2 II

Future proofing / long-term system considerations:
• It seems Canon may be years (?) behind Nikon/Sony in sensor technology in the following two respects:
o DR: the dynamic range of the Nikons is 2 EVs better.
o AA filter: Nikon also seems to be one or two years ahead in terms of eliminating AA filters. (Is this right?)
• The D600 already has AF in Live View while shooting video. The 6D doesn’t have that.
• IS/VR in the 24-70 f2.8: there is a chance that the updated version of the Nikkor 24-70 f2.8 (perhaps coming out later this year, perhaps not coming out for a couple more years) will have IS/VR built in following Tamron’s lead. Canon’s 24-70 f2.8 Mk II just came out last year without IS. That lens will probably not be updated for many years.

Thank you for all your thoughts!

Kristian

On the 50D I’d probably prefer the Tamron. It’s equally sharp with the 24-70 Mk I and IS is useful to have sometimes. The Sigma is not as sharp as the other two.

That being said, on a 50D I’d really prefer the 17-55 f/2.8 IS unless I thought an upgrade to full-frame was in my future, or I just really needed to get to 24mm. I use the wider end a lot, 24 just isn’t that wide on a 50D, but also like the cost savings. That’s just me though.

Roger

Your help with this will be greatly appreciated.