Are you a Canon or a Nikon? And why?

[Village Idiot]

I'm not asking people to fight each other on why they like one or another. I just want people's opinions on why they like what they're using. What's wrong with that?

I'm not saying it's Canon VS Nikon. I respect what you use personally and I want to know the good points of what you have and why you chose it.

How about the following posts?

But we all know that black is better than blue, just like Canon is better than Nikon. :lmao:

Canon is so much better.

Canon is so much better.

Justification?

first reason i like nikon its because i had a ****in good deal on a nikon d60 (my first dslr) then i bought some nikon gear, switching to canon never crossed my mind since i had all that stuff..... simple as that, both are capable of produicing quality image.

afterward, i had the chance to play with some canon bodys and they felt a little cheap to me and the nikon was still feeling better in my hands. anyway, buy something you like, something your comfortable working with.

And eventually you'll get some one like a certain camera manufacture fan in here posting a wall of words about how their brand is superior to every other brand and why all the other brands sucks and then it'll just be an all out flame war.

[sarcasm]Not like it's starting to get the already. [/sarcasm]

Like the last poster I quoted basically called Canon's bodies cheap. Do I really want to hear that without telling him why Nikon is so terrible?

And what about the other brands?

 

[Soocom1]

having started with a Minolta, I found Canon and Nikon as part of the "snob" croud.
Then my Minolta grew a set of legs along with $3000 worth of lenses.
So after I got insurance money, I then went and bought a 1Ds, and am now a full Canon guy. As for Nikon... well.. sorta a Chevy Vs. Ford argument.
Oh well.
Justification: It was there, I could afford it, so I got it.

 

[PJL]

I received a Canon film SLR as a Christmas gift several years ago. I never felt the need to change.

 

[wingsabr]

^ (the canon shot of the bug is amazing)

I'm a Nikon because I'm just starting out and my better half had a Nikon and some spare lenses. So I have my own body and get to use her lenses...budget FTW

 

[Alan92RTTT]

I wanted the tilt swivel screen. For me the rest of the specs in the price range I was at were almost identical.

 

[Jayce]

I shoot Canon, for a few reasons. Primarily, they just seem to fit my hand better. I don't know if it's a materials thing or a button layout thing, but I'd imagine it's a mix of both. Another big reason (although it's a little ridiculous) is that I just ended up buying what my favorite photographers were using, and the majority of them shoot Canon. Last big reason is video, where it seems like Canon has a pretty solid edge.

For what it's worth, I'm not opposed to switching, if Nikon released something totally groundbreaking.

 

[Newcastle Shooter]

Im Nikon. I love the products.

Reason - I started out with a Samsung GX10 for landscape stuff and it was a very noisy camera. I started to branch out and needed much higher ISO so after a bit of research found that Nikons D90 pretty much trumped everything in that price bracket and above to. It got great ratings and felt solidly built with all the features I needed.

I used this site to research at what point iso degredation set in on each model

DXO mark

The first 4 DSLRs are all nikon with the D90 at no14.

Im now on a D700 and love it - thats at number 2.

Obviously there is a lot more to it than that and everyones different - but thats what was important to me when i was on a tight budget.

 

[benhasajeep]

For 35mm film and digital I am now 100% Nikon. But for several years I had Nikon and Canon! Had more Nikon gear so decided to just stick with it.

I started out Pentax and Minolta cameras over 25 years ago. I finally decided on Nikon about 15 years ago. I gave Canon a try as they came out with a DSLR that I thought was very good. Unfortuantely I have a taste for the good glass. And keeping up 2 different systems along with other formats its get to be pretty pricey. So since I was already chest deep in Nikon I decided to go with it. I have had good experiences with both.

If you put a camera in my hand I will take it and check it out. Doesn't matter the brand. If I could afford them all, I would actually have them all. Good thing I have not won the lotto. I would be broke in a week and B&H, Adorama, Calumet, Cameta would be the richer. :mrgreen:

 

[cfusionpm]

I shoot Canon because when I was in college a few years back and in a photography class that required I step into DSLR world from P&S, my friend, the professor, and about 3/4 of the class all had Canons. It was a pretty easy decision to pick up a Rebel XTi and grow from there. I have been nothing but pleased with my choice and Canon's cameras/accessories/lenses have served me quite well. The only regret I have is that they don't have a full frame speed camera like the D700. But I'll just enjoy the extra reach of the 7D or 1D, whenever I can afford one of those.

 

[inTempus]

I shoot Canon because of their lenses and I prefer the layout of their bodies. I found Nikon's to be backwards and counter-intuitive. Even their lenses mount backwards. The menuing system of the Canon is more simple and easier to navigate for me.

With that being said, I think Nikon makes a better product over all, but only marginally so. The D3S really is a killer body and Nikon's resistance to endlessly increasing their megapixel count as much as they possibly can really is more to my liking.

If I had it to do over again, given the bodies on the market today, I would likely be shooting a couple of D3S's.

3 years from now, Canon might pull their head out and field a pro body that puts Nikon behind them once again. They did a great job in the consumer space with the 7D which, IMHO trounces the D300S.

There was a time, not too many years ago, when Canon really had no competitor that played at their level. Nikon changed that with the introduction of the D700 and D3... and I think they still have the lead, ever so slightly, in terms of desirable features and image quality. Canon still holds the lead with AF performance it seems, but most people that own the AF kings (D3S and 1D4) don't use them to their potential - I certainly don't. I would likely be just as well served by the D3S as I would be with my 1D4.

 

[Montana]

I shoot Canon because of their lenses and I prefer the layout of their bodies. I found Nikon's to be backwards and counter-intuitive. Even their lenses mount backwards. The menuing system of the Canon is more simple and easier to navigate for me.

With that being said, I think Nikon makes a better product over all, but only marginally so. The D3S really is a killer body and Nikon's resistance to endlessly increasing their megapixel count as much as they possibly can really is more to my liking.

If I had it to do over again, given the bodies on the market today, I would likely be shooting a couple of D3S's.

3 years from now, Canon might pull their head out and field a pro body that puts Nikon behind them once again. They did a great job in the consumer space with the 7D which, IMHO trounces the D300S.

There was a time, not too many years ago, when Canon really had no competitor that played at their level. Nikon changed that with the introduction of the D700 and D3... and I think they still have the lead, ever so slightly, in terms of desirable features and image quality. Canon still holds the lead with AF performance it seems, but most people that own the AF kings (D3S and 1D4) don't use them to their potential - I certainly don't. I would likely be just as well served by the D3S as I would be with my 1D4.

I own both, and don't use either to their full potential. LOL I know which one will be the first to go if I were to lose my job.......

 

[inTempus]

I shoot Canon because of their lenses and I prefer the layout of their bodies. I found Nikon's to be backwards and counter-intuitive. Even their lenses mount backwards. The menuing system of the Canon is more simple and easier to navigate for me.

With that being said, I think Nikon makes a better product over all, but only marginally so. The D3S really is a killer body and Nikon's resistance to endlessly increasing their megapixel count as much as they possibly can really is more to my liking.

If I had it to do over again, given the bodies on the market today, I would likely be shooting a couple of D3S's.

3 years from now, Canon might pull their head out and field a pro body that puts Nikon behind them once again. They did a great job in the consumer space with the 7D which, IMHO trounces the D300S.

There was a time, not too many years ago, when Canon really had no competitor that played at their level. Nikon changed that with the introduction of the D700 and D3... and I think they still have the lead, ever so slightly, in terms of desirable features and image quality. Canon still holds the lead with AF performance it seems, but most people that own the AF kings (D3S and 1D4) don't use them to their potential - I certainly don't. I would likely be just as well served by the D3S as I would be with my 1D4.

I own both, and don't use either to their full potential. LOL I know which one will be the first to go if I were to lose my job.......

Which one? I guessing the D3S. I have a D3S on order from Adorama (I have had it for 3 weeks now.) and I'm thinking of just canceling it.

Tell me, which would you dump and why?

 

[inTempus]

I used this site to research at what point iso degredation set in on each model

DXO mark

I don't think I would buy a camera based strictly on DXO Labs ratings. First, 99% of the people out there that constantly cite them don't even understand their ranking system, what the numbers actually mean or how they're arrived at.

Secondly, there are LOTS of people out there that contest their methodologies and findings, and make very good cases as to why. There are also other testing sites out there that have published contradictory findings in the past such as Clarkvision.

With that being said, the D90 is a great body. I don't know how solidly a plastic body can be built, but of the plastic body cameras on the market it's certainly the #1 IMHO. I've read stories where they've been dropped from several feet and didn't fly apart. That seems to indicate they're pretty rugged although certainly not to the level of a D300 or 7D (or even 50D).

 

[burnws6]

Nikon. Because I'm not a homo.

 

[Derrel]

I shoot both Canon and Nikon bodies and lenses. Each brand has some advantages and disadvantages. I've been shooting d-slr bodies since the Nikon D1, and have owned 10 different models,and have shot two others,and the thing is--EACH company has strengths that the other company lacks. Some of the strengths are not very obvious, and would be missed by newbies who have been shooting only for a year or two, or who are unfamiliar with exactly what products the big two have made over the years.

Nikon has a much wider in-camera TTL flash commander system, and arguably, better, more-consistent TTL flash exposure control, and arguably, Nikon has better light metering due to the 420, and 1,005-area color-aware light metering they have in multiple bodies; Canon has just invented its own color-aware light metering system which is in only their new 7D body.

Canon has made some very good cameras over the years, and for several generations of cameras, Canon had better sensors and better high-ISO performance cameras than Nikon did. One of the nice things about Canon bodies is their long flange to film distance, which allows Canon to use lenses from multiple systems, including the Nikon F mount and the Pentax or M42 thread mount, with adapters---which makes a Canon body an amazingly versatile camera. I've been involved with photography for over 35 years now, and have bought a lens or two each year for quite some time. For me the lenses are a big,big,big deal and I have much more money tied up in lenses than in camera bodies. It's nice to have the ability to use lenses on multiple brands of camera bodies. Today, Canon and Nikon each have good offerings, but they do not compete in the same "spaces", or on the same exact feature sets/capabilities. They kind of co-exist in the marketplace, much like Toyota and Honda, or Burger King and McDonalds.

The one brand I think more people ought to look at is Pentax. Especially if they are looking for a low-cost but still high-featured camera body. Their new K-X model I think shows that they're going to offer better and better cameras as things move onward.