I am waiting and see what Canon will offer sooner or later. First, I am really happy that Nikon made the move with announcing the D700. Now good competition is there in this market area which is always good for the customer.
Personally I don't even expect that a possible 5DMkII has better properties as the D700. My theory is that Canon purposely delayed the announcement of a 5DMkII to avoid damaging sale values of existing products like 5D, 40D, or 1D(s)MkIII. A 5DMkII prototype probably already exists but it might have less good specifications as the D700. But hopefully I am wrong and Canon comes up with a positive surprise soon !
There is almost no one for whom a brand switch either way is a truly rational choice if a collection of good lenses already exists. Switchers and Upgraders are almost always driven by motives that any good psychologist, or perhaps any good marketer, would tell you are based in some sort of pathology.
Rarely, some professional photographer will actually require some new advancement or some specific ability presented by another brand, and for them a switch may make economic sense. Rarely.
Most brand switching is accompanied by a very elaborate set of rationalizations. Rationalizations, although the word sounds similar, are not rational. We should all go take some pictures, and stop with the obsessive lust for new stuff.
But then, who would support the families of all those share holders?
l.g.c. wrote:
There is almost no one for whom a brand switch either way is a truly rational choice if a collection of good lenses already exists. Switchers and Upgraders are almost always driven by motives that any good psychologist, or perhaps any good marketer, would tell you are based in some sort of pathology.
Rarely, some professional photographer will actually require some new advancement or some specific ability presented by another brand, and for them a switch may make economic sense. Rarely.
Most brand switching is accompanied by a very elaborate set of rationalizations. Rationalizations, although the word sounds similar, are not rational. We should all go take some pictures, and stop with the obsessive lust for new stuff.
But then, who would support the families of all those share holders? ...Show more →
I have been paid to take half a million pictures since the 5D was introduced. I am very glad I switched as that work would have been less good if I had continued using Nikon's DX cameras. Any professional who works every week can afford to trade in his current gear for another system if he is more comfortable with the new gear, and he should. Worrying about the loss of a few thousand quid is pointless when that amount is covered by a few jobs. If you're a hobbyist - sure, don't switch, but at that level, what does it really matter.
I am considering a switch from 5D to D700. However, I'm not sure the Nikon lenses will suit me as well. With the 5D, I primarily use the EF 50/1.4 for candid people/situational photography. It's on the body 80-90% of the time. I guess on the D700, I'd use the Nikkor 50/1.4; but I'm not convinced that I'll like that lens as much as the Canon. That's the main hesitation causing me to wait to see what Canon offers in the D700 class. Strange that a $300 lens is keeping me from buying a $3K body, but I really enjoy my 50. As for lens investment, I don't have that much sunk into Canon. A cheap 28mm lens, the 50, and a 100-400L that I hardly ever use. Consider how many other cameras I've bought and sold, going from Canon to Nikon would be no big hassle. By comparison, I sold five or six lenses to make the transition from 30D to 5D. That was more of a pain.
Fun thread, so I'm back.
My partial move was economical (and a little lust driven) The Nikon 200 f2 VR was exactly what
the 'monkey needed for a gig. Since it was ~$1800 less than Canon's IS offering (unavailable at the time)
I got a "free" D300 to shoot it with. Ya with me so far Told the Mrs. I'd sell it after the wedding.
Well, after she saw the images of her best friend on her special day the words were something like
"you can't sell THAT lens". The next logical move for BIF was the 300 f2.8 VR w/wo 1.7x
that Canon doesn't have so...the 300 f2.8 IS was turned and a few dead presidents added
and things are getting darker by the minute. Still teach with the 1D's, 1DmkII and 400 f5.6L's
but I'm over that line in the sand methinks. Don't need a shrink, on a recent trip North to
OspreyLand the 1DmkII/40D...D300/D2X came with and all got along famously. Keepers
split right down the middle. It's all good and don't let anyone tell ya different. It's a great
time to be a photographer!
I don't like that focus ring turns on the Nikon 85mm when it auto-focuses, and I think the 50mm uses the same type of focus system. It's annoying since it moves while you're trying to hold the camera. I'd probably choose the Sigma over the Nikon.
brainiac wrote:
I have been paid to take half a million pictures since the 5D was introduced. I am very glad I switched as that work would have been less good if I had continued using Nikon's DX cameras. Any professional who works every week can afford to trade in his current gear for another system if he is more comfortable with the new gear, and he should. Worrying about the loss of a few thousand quid is pointless when that amount is covered by a few jobs. If you're a hobbyist - sure, don't switch, but at that level, what does it really matter....Show more →
This is the whole point. If you really need a system change, the money isn't the main issue. Price out a Phase One back sometime.
Ya everyone go out and buy a 700D. I have a lot of Nikon friends that can`t afford a new one. They can buy yours used cheaper in a few months when Canon comes out with something better and you all switch back......me I am happy to wait and just take pictures with my raggy old hasbeen 5D.
brainiac wrote:
I might go Ben Hur (one foot on each horse). ...
If I tried that, I'd end up like those cartoon skiers who approach a tree and send one ski around each side.
What I might do is get a Coolpix P6000 instead of a G9, if Michael Reichmann's "rumour" description pans out.
I have (a) too much money invested in Canon glass and (b) not nearly enough free time to switch. Yes, I'd like to see the 5D II and I'd like it to be spectacular, but I'll wait for a while and hope...
This morning I think I shall take a watch and see attitude for a while - even if the 5D replacement is only a FF 40D. I'm shooting with a 20D and some nice glass at present and my main interests are people (primarily), nature (Landscape/wildlife/macro) and travel (culture). I can still develop and learn a lot with the 20D but I identified three areas where I am bumping up against blockage to my vision. I want the best AF I can get, significantly improved high ISO performance and a few more MP for group shots and landscapes. The D700 addresses these perfectly at a price point I might be able to consider. But Nikon do not have the glass to match in my primary area (except perhaps that 200 f2 VR). On full frame the Canon 70-200's seem to be better than the Nikon and although the 84 f1.4 looks a nice bit of glass I'd still rather have the 85 f1.2 and 135 f2 L's.
What I worry about (and it may be unfounded) is Canon losing the plot and insisting on keeping its top of the line AF to the (for me currently too) expensive 1 series. They have broken this mould in the past with the EOS 3. Are they willing to do it again? If not will Nikon bring out a 100 f1.2 or f1.4 to match the bokeh and other performance of the L's and re-optimise the 70-200 2.8VR for full frame? If so and they add that D3x everyone is talking about (even if I may not be interested in it) then it seems they will have a mature system to meet the needs and desire of photographers at every level.
Canon actually only needs to introduce the 3D (D700 equivalent) to get there or there abouts (after that I suspect we will quibble about small areas of difference that won't be relevant to over 95% or more of our work/play - Canon will be slightly better here/Nikon slighly better there....)
What concerns me (and again it might be totally unfounded) is that Canon's market philosophy will keep them stuck in that old paradigm (that may just be a figment of my imagination).
Again this is somewhat unfair and probably unfounded but in my low caffeine moments I wonder if it isn't a case of Nikon designing cameras for photographers and Canon designing them for markets
That is now but by the time of the next Canon announcements or my second cup of coffee all may be hunky-dory
Edited by Andy Wilson on Jul 03, 2008 at 11:06 AM GMT
trenchmonkey wrote:
Fun thread, so I'm back.
My partial move was economical (and a little lust driven) The Nikon 200 f2 VR was exactly what
the 'monkey needed for a gig. Since it was ~$1800 less than Canon's IS offering (unavailable at the time)
I got a "free" D300 to shoot it with. Ya with me so far Told the Mrs. I'd sell it after the wedding.
Well, after she saw the images of her best friend on her special day the words were something like
"you can't sell THAT lens". The next logical move for BIF was the 300 f2.8 VR w/wo 1.7x
that Canon doesn't have so...the 300 f2.8 IS was turned and a few dead presidents added
and things are getting darker by the minute. Still teach with the 1D's, 1DmkII and 400 f5.6L's
but I'm over that line in the sand methinks. Don't need a shrink, on a recent trip North to
OspreyLand the 1DmkII/40D...D300/D2X came with and all got along famously. Keepers
split right down the middle. It's all good and don't let anyone tell ya different. It's a great
time to be a photographer! ...Show more →
...what's wrong with owning both? I talked to my local camera dealer this morning about a D700 and some Nikkor lenses.
For me...a D700, Nikkor 85 f/1.4, VR 200 f/2, SB 900, VR 70-200, 24-70 f/2.8 or VR 300 f/2.8 will get along fine with my Canon gear.
I'm running a business, not a popularity contest...and...at this point, the specs on the D700 and the fact that it may ship by the end of July...makes me favor that camera over anything Canon currently offers.
I need to order some new bodies and lenses for the upcoming high school and youth sports seasons and they may be Nikon...unless an updated version of the 5D is announced and ready to be delivered by August 5th, 2008.
...what's wrong with owning both? I talked to my local camera dealer this morning about a D700 and some Nikkor lenses.
For me...a D700, Nikkor 85 f/1.4, VR 200 f/2, SB 900, VR 70-200, 24-70 f/2.8 or VR 300 f/2.8 will get along fine with my Canon gear.
I'm running a business, not a popularity contest...and...at this point, the specs on the D700 and the fact that it may ship by the end of July...makes me favor that camera over anything Canon currently offers.
I need to order some new bodies and lenses for the upcoming high school and youth sports seasons and they may be Nikon...unless an updated version of the 5D is announced and ready to be delivered by August 5th, 2008.
Well Lee, you are obviously a pro and know what you're doing but I'd like to ask -- what would be wrong with just going with a 1DsIII + all the equivalent Canon lenses you specified? In fact, you probably own at least a couple of them already. Would the Canon kit be that big of a compromise against the Nikon kit you referenced, to the point where it becomes the limiting factor in final image quality? ... I'd find that hard to believe.
I am quite happy with my 1D2N, 1D3 and cupboard full of big primes. I have no intention of switching to Nikon, simply put Canon does the job for me (images sold and published) and I am very pleased with my 1D Mark 3.
i have been talking about switching for quite some time now but after seriously thinking about it, i decided that i am actually very happy where i am. the only thing i did do was pick up a old school 5D (yes the one without all those bells) for a killer price (about the price of a new 40D) so i am quite happy
p.s
that still doesn't mean that i don't think that Canon is screwing up...
!
Told the Mrs. I'd sell it after the wedding.
