I'm on the fence between Canon and Nikon. Help!

[metroprimes]

Hey! So to get down to brass tacks, here's a quick introduction on where I stand as a photographer/who I am: I'm a photographer of roughly 3 years of experience. Am I good? I couldn't tell you. I just like to take pictures. I haven't messed with any studio lighting equipment, and I really only use Photoshop for selective coloring/basic editing in camera RAW. Anyway, I intend on venturing into the photojournalism career track and I understand that eventually, I'm going to need some reliable gear, which is why I've come to a forum to maybe learn a little more about gear itself and to learn from other people's own experiences.

I present to you my dilemma that's been racking my brains for quite some time: I cannot make a decision on who the most reliable manufacturer is (in terms of producing gear, bodies, better prices, more features). I suppose I should know by now that the most important aspects of photography are most likely the lighting and the lens that you use for the job. I've owned the Canon's 7d and I traded it in for the Nikon's D7000 because it seemed to out-perform the camera in a few ways, and I can see that Canon is raising the prices for their new line of L series lenses with little features to be added. This means that I no longer have use for the Canon lenses I have and I've realized that by buying the more expensive lenses, I'm making a pact with one particular company. This idea scares me mainly because I don't want one particular company to usurp the other, and to be stuck with the cheaper equipment.

I'm terribly sorry for my rambling, but for those still reading, I suppose I'm just asking for a few opinions from both Canon and Nikon users on their opinion on why they chose their particular "investment" and why they're sticking around. I'm having second thoughts with Nikon already, because I know that Canon's 5dmkii and 5dmkiii have a faster shutter for continuous shooting, and as a photojournalist, that would most definitely be very useful. However, with the Nikon, I see that images from a Nikon tend to be crisper and have better color, with more noise reduction.

To the Nikon users, what lenses should I be looking at, and to the Canon users, was I a fool for making the switch? I'm not a gear snob, and I've seen that Tamron, Tokina, and Sigma make excellent-quality lenses as well.

I hope that these questions aren't terribly hard to answer. Anyway, much thanks!

 

[jaomul]

A photojournalist should know!

 

[metroprimes]

Well, I should have checked the forum already for questions like this one. I already know that this is an age-old question, I'm really only fishing for some photographer's opinions is all.

 

[PhotoWrangler]

Well all those thousands and thousands of threads where this question has been asked before, should contain a whole hell of a lotta opinions....

 

[pixmedic]

wheres schwettylens and his triple facepalm pic when you need it. seriously...nikon and canon are basically the SAME. the both make a quality camera, and quality lenses. put some pics of cameras up on your wall, throw a dart, and go buy it. no matter which way you go, it will be fine.

 

[pic_chick]

picking a fight cannon or Nikon is what you are doing LOL. I really don't think is matters so much they are both going to make great gear and that is the truth.

But if I where in your shoes I would rent the bodies and lens you are trying to compare and choose what works for you.

It is super easy and cost are pretty low to rent gear I always rent a lens before I buy it and I will rent bodies to try out a few before I upgrade. You can rent gear from 3 days to months on most sites look in to it.

Gear is always better tested in hand then on paper I say. Plus it is so much more fun.

 

[PhotoWrangler]

Instead of looking at the cameras, you should look at the accessories (i.e. lenses, flashes, etc...) You're buying a SYSTEM, not just a camera.


BUY SONY! SONY ROCKS! YOU'RE NOTHING WITHOUT SONY! SONY BEATS ALL!

 

[jaomul]

Well, I should have checked the forum already for questions like this one. I already know that this is an age-old question, I'm really only fishing for some photographer's opinions is all.

I wasn't trying to be a smart ass. The 7d vs d7000 has been asked and as owners we all say the good points on the cameras we have, or the bad ones. You have had both so are one of the few who could actually give an experienced opinion.

For your job you need speed and possibly a slight "spray pray" on occasion. Nikon d300 is the 7d equivalent here, not really the d7000. The likes of the 1d mark ii/iii/iv are the faster AF and fps on the canon side. The nikon d700 with battery grip or the d3 are the nikon fast boys. You can post which is better quetins and get different answers off users who never really used the other brand. I use Canon stuff, but think nikon have nicer straight out of camera pictures but that could be the grass is always greener kind of thing.