Why did you buy Nikon?

[Mrgiggls]

<straps flame-retardand suit on>

Fuggit I'll say it: When I looked into my first DSLR, I read dozens of articles and reviews. Technically, it seemed the question of "N or C" was more or less a wash, so since this guy Ken Rockwell had used both extensively and praised Nikon for it's superior ergonomics that's who I went with.

If anyone cares to give me an extensive disertation on why Mr. Rockwells opinions should be discarded as dissinformation of the most heinous and vile nature, let me say this. Not interested. I understand that his opninions are just that and take them as such and have never regreted making my camera system decision based on them. Am I a KR fan? No, but I do recognize he knows more about Photography and the engineering behind it than I do.

 

[nmoody]

The D3100 was the best bang for the buck new. I would assume most people pick a brand based on one of two things:

1. It was the best value for them
2. Someone they know uses one

 

[Mach0]

I went from a Fuji bridge to a d40 I got for a good deal. I'm comfortable with Nikon's system and all of my stuff is Nikon. It's all I know and I am fairly satisfied.

 

[murklemark]

Use a Canon at work, thought it was OK, but the D3100 offered a great entry level camera a great price so I look a slight leap of faith.

 

[Mrgiggls]

Use a Canon at work, thought it was OK, but the D3100 offered a great entry level camera a great price so I look a slight leap of faith.

You'll here a lot of folks, including myself, say that there is no bad choice between Nikon and Canon, so please forgive me if I chuckled at the "leap of faith". Right now the D800 has stirred the pot and given Nikon an edge. Just wait, Canon will rebound with it's own champ before long.

Throwing your entire camera rig budget in with Sony...now that would be a leap of faith!! :bigangel:

 

[Aloicious]

I shot Nikon Film bodies back in the day and always liked their build quality, glass quality, and the fact that they never changed the lens mount which gives a wide range of good used glass to use for someone on a budget. when I finally switched to DSLRs a couple years ago, the nikon bodies just felt SO much better in my hands than other brands, and since I already had positive experiences with Nikon, and the fact that their DSLR sensors were top of the line, it was an easy choice to continue with nikon....and since then I've been glad that I did with their leaps and bounds in sensor technology and advancements in quality glass, and all the other reasons people have mentioned.

 

[Mrgiggls]

I shot Nikon Film bodies back in the day and always liked their build quality, glass quality, and the fact that they never changed the lens mount which gives a wide range of good used glass to use for someone on a budget. when I finally switched to DSLRs a couple years ago, the nikon bodies just felt SO much better in my hands than other brands, and since I already had positive experiences with Nikon, and the fact that their DSLR sensors were top of the line, it was an easy choice to continue with nikon....and since then I've been glad that I did with their leaps and bounds in sensor technology and advancements in quality glass, and all the other reasons people have mentioned.

When was this? I may be way wrong here but I always thought (until just recently) that Canon held the best sensors and Nikon got the nod on its glass and ergonomics.

 

[DScience]

<straps flame-retardand suit on>

Fuggit I'll say it: When I looked into my first DSLR, I read dozens of articles and reviews. Technically, it seemed the question of "N or C" was more or less a wash, so since this guy Ken Rockwell had used both extensively and praised Nikon for it's superior ergonomics that's who I went with.

If anyone cares to give me an extensive disertation on why Mr. Rockwells opinions should be discarded as dissinformation of the most heinous and vile nature, let me say this. Not interested. I understand that his opninions are just that and take them as such and have never regreted making my camera system decision based on them. Am I a KR fan? No, but I do recognize he knows more about Photography and the engineering behind it than I do.

Me too!

 

[Nikon_Josh]

As I have said many times before, I was all set to get a Canon when I started looking. Canon were the brand to buy in my opinion, that was until I handled a entry level Canon camera which to be quite honest felt like a complete piece of S***, cheap, flimsy and a dreadful grip. If it wasn't for that small factor, I would be a Canon user right now. The Nikon entry levels just felt better! I haven't lived to regret my choice yet, I considered switching to a 7D on a few occasions when upgrading from my D40 but am incredibly happy I chose the D90 and am now Nikon for life! The camera just gives me what I want and need in a camera, great ergonomics and great images! Thanks Nikon!

 

[Aloicious]

I shot Nikon Film bodies back in the day and always liked their build quality, glass quality, and the fact that they never changed the lens mount which gives a wide range of good used glass to use for someone on a budget. when I finally switched to DSLRs a couple years ago, the nikon bodies just felt SO much better in my hands than other brands, and since I already had positive experiences with Nikon, and the fact that their DSLR sensors were top of the line, it was an easy choice to continue with nikon....and since then I've been glad that I did with their leaps and bounds in sensor technology and advancements in quality glass, and all the other reasons people have mentioned.

When was this? I may be way wrong here but I always thought (until just recently) that Canon held the best sensors and Nikon got the nod on its glass and ergonomics.

depends on in what aspect of sensor performance, and what sensors you are looking at, but I was refering to ISO performance which Nikon has been ahead of the game since ~2007 when the D3 came out, and has consistantly been the leader in that aspect ever since....but even when you look at other areas of sensor performance too, they are still excellent and near the best ones since about the same time period...Canon does have excellent sensors, I never meant that canon's were bad or anything, just that Nikon's were excellent, and held the lead in the ISO performance which is a big factor for me.

BTW, when you look at sensor ratings from places like DxOmark or others for example, canon did have an edge in sensors until around 2007 when the D3 line came out and nikon took a strong lead in ISO performance, and were about equal dynamic range and color depth until 2008 when the D3X came out and the had quite an improvement in color and DR, and they've just been getting better since...but again, it just depends on what sensors are being compared, and canon's sensors are also excellent, and have been doing excellent for a while, but there were more factors than just sensors that pushed me to Nikon over canon.

 

[greybeard]

[FONT=&quot]I chose Nikon because I feel they make the best photo equipment. I also own Sony, Canon, and some early Kodak digital. I think Sony is the cutting edge when it comes to sensor technology but they still have a way to go when it comes to putting it all together. I like Canon and I could have just as easily gone with Canon but, Nikon was the brand that was available when I first bought my N80 35mm and I now use a d5100 and I have no reason to change brands.[/FONT]

 

[zamanakhan]

I got a d5000 as a present, I had canon envy for a while. It seemed all the cool kids had white lenses on their cameras and no flash on their 5d mark whatevers. I also couldn't believe the price comparisons on lenses, How much cheaper canon lenses were. Now I know all the smart ones buy Nikon, and you get what u pay for with lenses, although lately it seems to be a lot of supply and demand as well, even older lenses are going up in price my 80-200 2.8 afs has been seen in keh for 14-1500.

 

[IgsEMT]

When I was coming from med. format into digital, the only thing I knew about Nikon was that their glass was superior to Canon's, this goes back about 10yrs now. So I went w/ Nikon digital and no regrets. Whether Nikon's glass is superior to Canon or not - I don't know; after seeing large prints from both brands, its hard to tell which one was shot. However today, what keeps me w/ Nikon (despite several thousands of dollars of investment of it) is the consistency that they've been keeping with their bodies - I can take d70 to D3s (haven't held d4 or d800 yet) and w/ in few minutes modify menus as well as adjust exposure and get results I need. However, with Canon, b/n 20d, 30d, 40d, 5d, 5dm2 and 1dm2 (the ones I worked with) - they seems all different to me.

Joe

 

[EchoingWhisper]

I shot Nikon Film bodies back in the day and always liked their build quality, glass quality, and the fact that they never changed the lens mount which gives a wide range of good used glass to use for someone on a budget. when I finally switched to DSLRs a couple years ago, the nikon bodies just felt SO much better in my hands than other brands, and since I already had positive experiences with Nikon, and the fact that their DSLR sensors were top of the line, it was an easy choice to continue with nikon....and since then I've been glad that I did with their leaps and bounds in sensor technology and advancements in quality glass, and all the other reasons people have mentioned.

When was this? I may be way wrong here but I always thought (until just recently) that Canon held the best sensors and Nikon got the nod on its glass and ergonomics.

depends on in what aspect of sensor performance, and what sensors you are looking at, but I was refering to ISO performance which Nikon has been ahead of the game since ~2007 when the D3 came out, and has consistantly been the leader in that aspect ever since....but even when you look at other areas of sensor performance too, they are still excellent and near the best ones since about the same time period...Canon does have excellent sensors, I never meant that canon's were bad or anything, just that Nikon's were excellent, and held the lead in the ISO performance which is a big factor for me.

BTW, when you look at sensor ratings from places like DxOmark or others for example, canon did have an edge in sensors until around 2007 when the D3 line came out and nikon took a strong lead in ISO performance, and were about equal dynamic range and color depth until 2008 when the D3X came out and the had quite an improvement in color and DR, and they've just been getting better since...but again, it just depends on what sensors are being compared, and canon's sensors are also excellent, and have been doing excellent for a while, but there were more factors than just sensors that pushed me to Nikon over canon.

To me, until this year only had Canon lost their lead (D3x is a different price point, so a comparison isn't fair). Their 5D2 sensor is as good at D3/D700/D3s but with 10 more megapixels. Canon made a big mistake by keeping the same sensor in 5D3. For APS-C, Nikon took the lead ever since they had the Sony 16MP sensor, Canon knew the lower end of the consumers wouldn't notice the difference, that's why they didn't bother developing newer sensors. I predict Canon will have a newer sensor in 7D2, if they still want to have a pro APS-C camera.

 

[Aloicious]

we weren't comparing prices, just sensor performance. the 5d2 may put out similar level of color/DR quality as the D3/D700/D3s at a higher MP, but the Nikon sensors dominate the ISO performance, especially with the D3s. But to each their own, like I said, it depends on what sensors are being compared and what the end user's needs are as to what could be considered 'Better'...and just to re-iterate, my original statement was simply that one of the reasons I stayed with nikon when I switched to digital was that their sensors were some of the top of the line, I didn't make any specific comparison, or disregard any other brand's sensor quality. I didn't really mean, or expect for it to become a canon vs nikon sensor history debate.