Mmm... I don't want to start another Canon vs Nikon-debat but I can give you some reasons..
1) they want a camera that takes pictures which are IN FOCUS
2) they want a camera that doesn't make the color red hurting your eyes
3) they want a camera that gives pictures without a 'plastic' finish
4) they want a camera that gives a usable user-interface
5) they want a camera with a logical button-layout
The 14–24/2.8 zoom. I ordered a D3 on the basis of the incredible MTF charts of this lens. I was using a duo of 1DsMk I/5D using Zeiss and Leica lenses manual focus (every length from 14mm to 180mm; what I needed particularly was the wides).
But once Nikon brought that zoom out, I switched, and the low-light benefit was just icing on the cake.
-The Nikon user interface (ergonomics, button layout, etc) was much more natural to me. It made taking photos more fun because I spent less time fumbling with settings.
-The flash system. Not that Canon's was bad, but Nikon's is sooooo much better and flexible.
I miss some of the Canon lenses, and my 20D But, if Canon's interface feels intuitive to you, and flash isn't a big concern, I don't see how switching will benefit you. Like others have mentioned...there's some Nikon lenses that don't have an equal on the Canon side, so that's another consideration.
My advice would be to seriously make a list of what you are not achieving with your Canon rig first and then second approach a local Nikon dealer or NPS directly and ask for some loan kit. It's not cheap to switch so you don't want to be throwing away hard earned $s for nothing. My main motivator to move was a loss of faith in the 1D3 AF for sport, motorsport and aviation. I got some Nikon kit on eval and loved it. Cost me a few (4) thousand quid but it was well worth it.
zamorasurfboards wrote:
Ive been debating on switching to nikon latley. I wanted to hear some reasons why Canon guys switch to Nikon. Specially Sports photogs.
Thanks
I shoot tons of sports and the main reason I switched was the poor AF tracking of the Mark III.
I didn't realize how bad my particular Mark III was until Nikon Professional Services sent me a D3, 24-70 and 70-200 to use on assignments for a couple of weeks.
The better focus and high ISO of the D3/D700 plus the superior image quality of the Nikkor AFS 24-70 f/2.8 made it very dificult to stay completely with Canon.
Also...the SB 900 is a great flash and the exposures....especially in sunlight...are amazing.
I traded in some of my Canon 1 series bodies and a few L lenses on the Nikon gear and am waiting to get a Mark III back from Canon repair to see if I'll keep it or go with another D700 or D3.
zamorasurfboards wrote:
Ive been debating on switching to nikon latley. I wanted to hear some reasons why Canon guys switch to Nikon. Specially Sports photogs.
Thanks
The thought has crossed my mind lately as well. I recently purchased a Nikkor 14-24 2.8 for use on my 5D2 and the IQ on that lens is amazing. If the IQ on the new Nikkor 24-70 is similar, that sure is starting to give some pretty good incentive to switch. However, I don't know how much you already have invested in Canon Gear, but if you are like me I have a small fortune already commited and don't really want to start over again from scratch. So I just had a novel idea. Why not just add a Nikon body to my lineup and shoot both systems? Just pick the best lens based on IQ from either system that fits the need for the particular situation, then shoot with the body to match.
For sports photography, if you've got the money to make the switch, I'd say go for it. The D3, D3x, D700 and D300 (which all share the the AF system) seem to track better in good light than the Canon 1-series. In fact I'd go as far as to say that body wise, Nikon right now pretty much has Canon licked in almost all areas (low light focus is an area where I haven't had the superlative experience of others and where my 1Ds3 is without doubt the preferred tool of choice).
Lenses wise, its a little trickier. With Nikon's recent price hikes (considerably more than Canon has raised prices) and relative unavailability of their super teles it gets more difficult to recommend just jumping in without careful planning. However, if you are cool with the mega $$$ you'll spend (or you don't need the super teles) and/or have a way of getting them, then go for it. If you have a desire for recently designed fast, expensive primes at a variety of focal lengths, then stick with Canon (though if sports is what you shoot, you probably won't care about those primes).
Ivo Heshusius wrote:
Mmm... I don't want to start another Canon vs Nikon-debat but I can give you some reasons..
1) they want a camera that takes pictures which are IN FOCUS
2) they want a camera that doesn't make the color red hurting your eyes
3) they want a camera that gives pictures without a 'plastic' finish
4) they want a camera that gives a usable user-interface
5) they want a camera with a logical button-layout
Please feel free to add other items to this list
That's funny... I got the same experience with Nikon stuff
Have you already made the switch? I notice you have been pretty active on the B&S forum. The 200-400 is a great, versatile lens that I use to shoot surfing and wildlife. You'll need over 10K for the 500 or 600--I'd love to have the 600, but can't justify the purchase.
I've been with Nikon for 30 years. Last week I made my first visit to Nikon Service due to an SB 900 failure. That track record has kept me in their camp. The used 200-400 I bought is worth more today than I paid for it. The big glass holds its value, unfortunately, most people who own them don't sell them.
zamorasurfboards wrote:
Ive been debating on switching to nikon latley. I wanted to hear some reasons why Canon guys switch to Nikon. Specially Sports photogs.
Thanks
1) Bodies- The 1d mark III gives great image quality but can't focus on crap.
D3 is near perfect, even better high ISO quality...
I can also pick up a D700 and D300 and not have vital functions compromised severely unlike Canon, which cripples its lower end bodies. The AF system of the D700 is the same as the D3, and the D300 is not far behind. Excellent weather-sealing on all bodies- these are features that pro photogs need in a backup body.
2) Lenses- 200-400mm - the best lens I have used for sports, period. Excellent not just in image quality, but in flexibility- this has changed the shots I can get, especially when the players move close all of a sudden.
3) Flash system- Nikon CLS is far more superior if you use TTL- the ability to customize all slave flashes from one master is also very convenient.
Cons:
Prohibitively expensive 400/2.8 and 500/4. 70-200 2.8 not that great in the corners on FX wide open... but it's not a huge hindrance given that you generally aren't focusing in the corners when you are shooting wide open.
What will you gain by moving back to Canon? Just curious (and I'm sincere about that). Seems like an expensive thing to do twice in a short period of time.
But, if Canon's interface feels intuitive to you, and flash isn't a big concern, I don't see how switching will benefit you. Like others have mentioned...there's some Nikon lenses that don't have an equal on the Canon side, so that's another consideration.
