Curator wrote: Paul B wrote:
The NSN person who began the long thread eventually moved to Nikon, as has the chief technical guy over there. Some say their MkIIIs work fine while others report problems. And so it goes.......
Stories like this always seem to end the same; the person with the problem switched to Nikon. I\'ve used the Mark IIn, and while I like the Mark III better, I wouldn\'t have a problem using a Mark IIn if the Mark III didn\'t exist. Why don\'t those with Mark III issues consider the Mark IIn as an alternative to switching to Nikon? I don\'t have a problem with Nikon, but it seems like an expensive alternative...especially for the super telephoto shooters.
You\'re right, it is expensive for the people using big guns and Nikon doesn\'t have an 800/5.6. That\'s probably why more people in this segment haven\'t switched. A lot of people (me included) would prefer to continue using the MkIIn or perhaps try the 50D and even 5DII (although I still don\'t get why people substitute the latter.) But for a professional photog (particularly one who does a lot of BIF) it might be worth going with Nikon, despite the switching costs, if you believe the D3 is truly a better AF system and your livelihood is tied to producing the best pics. It\'s been awhile but I think the person who started the thread just got tired of Canon\'s \"denial\" (as she put it) and needed a body that worked. You can check her website listed on the thread and see what she mostly deals with in subject matter. I think others have had an easier decision to make if they use mainly shorter or medium-sized lenses.
Jun 01, 2009 at 03:12 PM
Previous versions of Paul B's message #7139617 « Galbraith Update: MK III Not Improved »
