I used Nikon as a film shooter for over 20 years. Then, as I switched to digital I found I just didn't like Nikon's approach to color and exposure. I gave Canon a try and I was hooked. I just feel I have better control over the image with Canon. Plus, I have found lenses at the right price to fit my needs. I don't think either company is much different when it comes to pricing. But a lens such as the 70-200mm F4 L (non-IS) just doesn't exist in the Nikon lineup. Just like many others my gear line up changes from time to time. My current line up is the 7D (with grip), the above mentioned 70-200mm L, 15-85mm and the new 40mm f2.8 STM. I couldn't be happier! I should also mention a few of my last Nikon lenses had front/back focus issues that took several trips to Nikon to fix. So far with Canon, I don't even need to use the micro adjustment feature. All my lenses are spot on right out of the box.
twhite828 wrote:
I did. I had a fairly unique situation - I was moving up to a pro body, so I needed to sell everything anyway (I was on crop). I decided to evaluate the entire system, plus the 1DX vs. D4.
I wanted to stay with Nikon, but rather than just arbitrarily make the call, I put together an Excel spreadsheet. I came up with a set of criteria, and weighted them according to how important they were to me. I then scored each one.
They were: ISO, Ergonomics, Ultrawides, General Purpose Glass, Long Glass, Autofocus, Framerate, Mount, Video, Control Design, and Flash System. I think there were a few more, but they escape me.
Based on the criteria that I came up with, I weighted, and I scored, it turned out the best decision was to switch to Canon.
I didn't like it at first, but I haven't looked back once.
Do Pentax to Canon to Nikon to Sony to Nikon to Olympus to Nikon to Canon to Sony to Canon converts count?
Who's got time to take photographs - it takes forever playing with all this gear!
------
Why did I eventually ( I swear, I'm done...I think) choose Canon? Lenses. Nikon lenses are boring, and Sony doesn't have the lenses I want or even a FF in production for that matter. Plus, Canon's CLP really helped the (final, I promise) transition.
In a perfect world, I would have Canon's lenses, in a Sony body with a Sony sensor and Sony (or Olympus) colors, Nikon noise processing and warranty (except for out-of-region stuff, which would be Canon) and flash system, Olympus image processing for JPEGs, and Olympus MA logic.
While I haven't switched completely yet I have started to invest quite a bit in Canon (I still have my D3 and other Nikon gear).
My primary reason for investing in Canon was in mid 2011 Nikon had no FX sensor bodies that shot 1080p video (which I was looking to add a DSLR to supplement the video camcorder I use on video jobs) and although I didn't own any Canon glass I could use adaptors to use my Nikon lenses on the 5D2. So I picked up a used 5D2 and a new Canon 85 f/1.8 (I wanted at least one Canon lens to shoot with).
I also liked Canon's prime lens options (and the used pricing of them), but Nikon has quickly been making up on that front (brand new 24 f/1.4, 28 f/1.8, 35 f/1.4, 50 f/1.8, 85 f/1.8, and 85 f/1.4 all released in the past few years). Also, it doesn't hurt to have other professional friends who shoot Canon as well (I have quite a few).
About a month ago I moved to the 5D3 (w/ BG-E11 grip) as my primary body because it best fits my needs for both stills and video. For lenses I've also picked up a 35L and a 135L and am considering picking up the 40 2.8 STM as a temporary mid range option until Canon figures out how to make a decent 50mm lens (the 1.8 is a cheap toy, the 1.4 is old and doesn't have real USM, and the L has focus issues which is unacceptable for its price).
There's little to tell between the two tbh. One of my friends was thinking of switching but I suspect I've convinced him otherwise. He can't get the 50mm 1.2 out of his head though :S
I was surprised that the 5d3 seemed better built and tougher than his d4 though... it was certainly weightier.
switched recently form d4 to d1x felt the ergonomics of the canon better suited to the way i hold the camera had been with nikon for about 5 years also found the longer lenses much lighter for canon can actually hand hold the 200 f2 canon but not the nikon as easy.
picture and shooting is much of the same but it feels better in the hand.
Rickuz wrote:
She bought you that gift while you were still a Nikon shooter?
Yes I had Nikon. D800 at the time. But I also had some
Canon gear.... I had 7d at the time. So I was kind of shooting both system. Predominantly Nikon.
I converted when I was just in my high end P&S stage. I had a Nikon P90 which I gifted to my parents and bought a Canon SX30 the next year. After that it has been all Canon
Had a D7000 back then and pre-ordered the D800 before it was released. Once the 5D3s showed up at my work, I played with it for a few minutes before realizing how awesome it was and much of leap it was from the 5DII. I canceled my D800 and picked up a 5d3 and never looked back.
Then the D800s started showing up and after playing with it, I felt happier with my decision; the d800 wasn't as revolutionary as everyone praises it to be.
What an interesting one, I certainly was tempted when my 1D3 couldn't focus - Nikon's D3 pissed all over Canon.
But it wasn't all that good at what I do which is HDR Pano's, it didn't have the wide spread in exposures when bracketing.
I also consult other photographers in multi-imaging, and found the Nikon system so frustrating and slow to work with, when applying it to my applications.
Canon did fix my 1D3, but I cleaned it and scratched the sensor, had it replaced...but I was never happy with that camera, I look at the 1D4 is the upgrade and what the 1D3 should have been.
Never the less, the shear cost is prohibiting, and I too like my 85mm f/1.2 135 f/2, 300 f/2.8LIS and ....etc.. but what do I do like is the Nikon 45 and 85mm tilt shift lenses, I wish Canon would make a new 45 and 90mm TS-E Mk II
Canon seem at the moment to be a little behind, but I guess that really depends at what one is looking at. Sure the D800 has the most pixels, but pixels are not everything at least not the amount.
Hi-ISO Noise! I am sorry, but if you have to shoot at 256000ISO, maybe you should turn on the light - its OK for a happy snapper to shoot like this but not a professional at least that is IMHO.
Exposure - well, that's the holy grail isn't it, but this is where we need to master our craft - again, Happy Snapper!! vs Professional Apprentice vs Master!
Photography is a Craft (Science and Art) but we see to much BS-Artist and that's brand independent.
Here's an interesting and well-thought-out "switch" type review from a pair of successful and experienced professional wedding photographers.
The video is worth watching.
One is a long-time Canon shooter and the other is a long-time Nikon shooter contemplating switching from a D4 to a 1DX. Decision IS made at the end of the video. I won't spoil it for you.
I made the switch in 2006 when I found a D30/nifty50 in a thrift shop for $90...sold all my Fs and most of my lenses to go all the way Canon...and then...
When I found I could use the Nikkors on Canon I rebought most....and added others (before their prices went to the moon...), and now have MF Nikkors from 50mm to 300...
....but did not look back to the 58, 35 or 24 though...the more modern 50mm Nikkors being much better, the 35 not as good as the Canon....and the 24?...
Well, the 24 got replaced 6 years later...just this month with the Olympus 24...here my first shots with it...
...on Canon 30D @ 5.6
I like the IQ, sharpness, contrast and color...and ability to handle backlighting...something the Nikkor could not do...
Only issue I'm going to have is that it focuses in the opposition direction to all my other (Nikkor) lenses...oh well...not an issue with Canon AF lenses, of course...and I find that there's just enough shimmer to the 30D microprism to MF pretty well...
I had been shooting Nikon since 1999 and bought a D1 long before Canon announced the 1D. Their only offering was the D30 and it wasn't anywhere near as solidly built as the Nikon. In 2005 my car was broken into and about 90% of my gear was stolen. Fortunately I had good insurance and had a chance to "start over" and "do it right". Most of my shooting at that time was for Hammy so I decided to make the move to Canon so we could share lenses. I picked up a refurb 1DMkII from Adorama and have been shooting Canon ever since. Lots of things I still love about Nikons but I have so much invested now that I don't see myself moving back.
I use to shot with Olympus, forget that horrible body number already, E something Anyway, it was 2005 and I tried 20D with some low end zoom lens, don't remember focal as well and never comeback to Olympus after. Difference in image quality and overall in everything was huge!!! 9 Canon bodies since, tons of L's etc. Very happy with Canon Nikon? Why would I need something if I am happy with what I have now. They don't have better lenses and that is more important to me than some mpx's or extra body options they might have. Also I never like Nikon shots look in colors unless shots are made by very high level pros.
