guys this was meant to be an analytical discussion of WHY canon chooses to do the things they do, right or wrong. It was not meant to be a troll post or whatever you call it. After re-reading my post i guess it does sound kind like an A hole... and Im sorry about that.

Lets see, the cheapest Canon cameras are more compatible with Nikkor lenses than Nikon's are. I can mount ANY, ANY f-mount (pre-AI, AI, AI'd, AIS,) lens that doesn't require mirror lockup or is a dumb G-lens on any Canon DSLR and it will meter. The G-lens will still mount, it just needs a match stick jammed in the aperture blade or one of those dumb 16:9 adapters. You can only meter manual focus lenses on the most expensive Nikons which is stupid and frankly makes me hate Nikon.

The D700 is certainly a superior camera with superior features. Who cares about EF-S lenses. You can modify them to mount and most people that shoot Canon are smart enough to know that mounting stupid crop sensor lenses on a full-frame body is a giant waste of time. The one exception to this is the NEW 35 DX. If you want to shoot in 5MP crop mode, get a D40.

I think Nikon may have made better 35mm bodies, but from what I've read (I wasn't around to witness it first hand) their horribly slow focusing lenses sent most serious shooters to Canon. The fact that Nikon still doesn't have their act together with a strong lens line-up is sicking. The 14-24 and 24-70 are both amazing. Why does the 70-200 suck so bad at the long end? Why aren't there any decent non-telephoto, fast-focusing AF-S primes? Why did it take years for Nikon to make a weak attempt at matching USM with ATM? I have plenty complaints as you can see about Nikon. I both love and hate Nikon. I shoot Nikon and I don't want to ever hold a Canon again, but I may...

TWoK wrote:
Lets see, the cheapest Canon cameras are more compatible with Nikkor lenses than Nikon's are. I can mount ANY, ANY f-mount (pre-AI, AI, AI'd, AIS,) lens that doesn't require mirror lockup or is a dumb G-lens on any Canon DSLR and it will meter. The G-lens will still mount, it just needs a match stick jammed in the aperture blade or one of those dumb 16:9 adapters. You can only meter manual focus lenses on the most expensive Nikons which is stupid and frankly makes me hate Nikon.

The D700 is certainly a superior camera with superior features. Who cares about EF-S lenses. You can modify them to mount and most people that shoot Canon are smart enough to know that mounting stupid crop sensor lenses on a full-frame body is a giant waste of time. The one exception to this is the NEW 35 DX. If you want to shoot in 5MP crop mode, get a D40.

I think Nikon may have made better 35mm bodies, but from what I've read (I wasn't around to witness it first hand) their horribly slow focusing lenses sent most serious shooters to Canon. The fact that Nikon still doesn't have their act together with a strong lens line-up is sicking. The 14-24 and 24-70 are both amazing. Why does the 70-200 suck so bad at the long end? Why aren't there any decent non-telephoto, fast-focusing AF-S primes? Why did it take years for Nikon to make a weak attempt at matching USM with ATM? I have plenty complaints as you can see about Nikon. I both love and hate Nikon. I shoot Nikon and I don't want to ever hold a Canon again, but I may...

it takes time to create awesome lenses, im sure they are working on it. They know what they need to do to really get back in the game.

The reason people are switching from Canon to Nikon is because of:
A. Terrible Canon QC on lenses and bodies
B. The Mark III fiasco (that still isn't resolved)
C. Nikon fortuitously pulled their heads out of their butts at just the right time and released the D3, D300 and then D700
D. And, of course the 200-400 lens

Justin Huffman wrote:
id like to explore why the canon system is failing
SNIP!
Flame on

Don't you think this kind of provocative exaggeration is rather inviting flames? Certainly there are always people shifting between systems & even if the flow is heading Nikon's way at the moment, it's hardly time to conclude "the canon system is failing". Most people I know - Canon & Nikon shooters alike - will concede that at the moment Nikon has the better bodies but will likewise acknowledge that Canon still has the better glass. Different people place different emphases on different elements of their gear depending on their needs.

Canon isn't failing, Nikon is just now offering more competitive choices. Which is a good thing. There is more than enough room for more than one top tier professional camera maker.

.I used to try and rationalize on the merits of both but it always ended in dribble. There are advantages in both systems its just a matter of when and where you realize the merits of each one!

did you answer your own question?

not this *hit again.

J, I expect better from you than kind of thread. That's all I'll say....

Come on Avi, this wasnt meant to be that kind of thread.... sorry to all if it came across that way. Let me reiterate; what do you folks think is going on over at Canon? as mentioned the the MIII fiasco and canon guys' dissapointment with some of the 5DII features. I myself have always wondered about the 5D, and with the newer 5DII video its even more appealing.

Justin,

IMHO it boils down to the following - if you prefer megapixels and extra features, you're a Canon and 5DII person, if you think 12 is enough and are more concerned with the autofocus and sealing, you're a Nikon and D700 person.

The problem is that a lot of current Canon shooters (including myself) and in the second camp, but too invested in lenses to swap so are getting frustrated (and verbally so) about the lack of Canon response to it.

Chris

brucemuir wrote:
not this *hit again.





+984835048508340858
Sorry OP but this thread is 100% pointless. Canon is not failing in the least. Infact I know more people switching from Nikon to Canon since the 5D Mark II. Canons QC doesnt suck, just more people buy Canon so the numbers look bigger. I used to sell cameras and would see it all the time where someones photography skills are lacking so they blame the gear and return it. Happens all the time. If the gear genuinely is bad, guess what, it happens. Nature of electronics. Happens on every single electronic item you buy.

What I find funny too how people started complaining when Canon issued a voluntary fix to the 1D M3 and 1DsMark III. Funny how noone seemed to notice a problem (especially with the 1Ds Mark III ) but are all of the sudden mad at Canon. hm...

I can tell you one group of photographers who aren't moving from Canon to Nikon, those needing the fastest possible prime standard and wide lenses.

Where are Nikon's modern AF full frame versions of Canon lenses like 50 f1.2, 35 f1.4, and 24mm f1.4?

If you need fast short lenses Nikon can't help anymore. Depressing. I left Nikon after 16 years partly because of this issue.

Chris Beaumont wrote:
Justin,

IMHO it boils down to the following - if you prefer megapixels and extra features, you're a Canon and 5DII person, if you think 12 is enough and are more concerned with the autofocus and sealing, you're a Nikon and D700 person.

The problem is that a lot of current Canon shooters (including myself) and in the second camp, but too invested in lenses to swap so are getting frustrated (and verbally so) about the lack of Canon response to it.

Chris

+1

Although I have to say that I'm concerned with megapixels, extra features, AF & sealing and my 1DsMkIII delivers it all.

Lol this contrasts massively on the amount of pro users who use Canon. In Asia, most amatuers & pros use Canon. Like I said, it's a Canon world out there. I'm still surprised to this date that randomly, some guy wouldn't recognize what Nikon is and if they did, the usual impression is, Nikon is for elitists. It's a Canon world out there.


My Flickr Gallery
My Nikonians gallery
View my DNA

canon delivers on what every tech hungry person seems to be looking for
sleek design and look
it is eye grabbing with the white lenses
tech heavy and cutting edge

what canon doesn't deliver
RELIABILITY and CONSISTANCY

this is coming from a 5 year canon user that went through a 1Ds $7000(DOA out of the box, replaced), 1D2 $4200, 1Ds2 $7400(DIED 1.5 months into ownership took 3 weeks to replace and i was a CPS member), 1D3 $4500(and the saga of issues continues)
it got to the point where went on a job to shoot and wondered what was going to happen and that my BU camera better be ready.

i did find the one canon bodys that delivered for me was the 40D/XTi. to date the most reliable canon products i owned

i think this rather amusing little piece covers the cutting edge part of my statement about canon. it is from the canon forum
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/749082

brucemuir wrote:
not this *hit again.





I agree. This always leads to "my system is better than yours". Use what you like already.

look i got some really good images from my canon cameras in those 5 years. also regretfully i got to know my way to jamesburg blindfolded. i got to go to NZ with my 1D2 instead of my brand new 1Ds2 which was a outstanding $7400 paperweight at jamesburg while i was away. its not a matter of mines better. its a matter of which one to trust.

This is the kind of thread that lessens the quality of this forum.

for me it is a matter of whichever system gives me what i want.

If pentax made a better FF/FX camera tomorrow for a good price, i would switch to Pentax in a heartbeat.

HELLOOOOOOOOO TROLLS!

That's all, continue trolling.

The Canon system is failing?

I switched over a year and a half ago simply because I found Canon equipment too unreliable and I lost faith in it's ability to consistently deliver a sharp image. Half my lenses had to go back - with a camera - for calibration. My MKIII was so inconsistent that I took a dozen photos on Continuous servo just to insure I had a couple in focus. When every time you click the shutter you question if you really got the shot, it's time to change. You have to be able to trust your equipment.

Nikon has been much better, much more consistent. I know that when the camera says something is in focus, it really is.

To the OP - As far as people giving you a hard time about "nikon junk" I hope they are simply kidding and in no way serious. Pending any issues with the camera (like the MKIII focusing), photos from one system or the other look pretty much the same. No brand of camera can make anyone a better photographer. If anyone thinks that's really the case, I have some AIG stock to sell ya @ $50 a share

Don't worry, Canon will come out the the 1DMIV soon enough and the Canon forum will be filled with people switching from Nikon. Me, I plan to stay - I'll take reliable over anything at this point, and Nikon has been far more reliable than Canon.

Steve

Fanboyism at its best ?

I will add my .02 cents.....there I did!