Why Canon?

I'm a 400D user , and very happy with it after my Pentax ist DL experience. I wonder why photograghers (us) choose

Canon brand? What were your reasons?

I've heard and read much about Canon brand in PN society and the other online photo societies. There were man people using Canon equipment and positive feedbacks let me to Canon. I know there are many pro-photographers in PN society, and let's hear from them... MF

No particular reason. It's just alphabetically on top of the camera list so I chose it. I have used many high and low end cameras from different brands and I like them all.

At the time I bought my first dslr digital camera, Canon was way ahead in the noise department, don't know if I would go the same route at the present.

My film lenses fit my dslr. That was enough

At the time I switched to digital from a long discontinued film system, Canon had the best sensor tech. There are many more viable choices now so if I had to start over... who knows. The cameras also fit my hands well and the controls made sense, even if they aren't as fast as a nice old fashioned aperture ring on the lens.

[[My film lenses fit my dslr. That was enough]]

 

Same here.

Canon has the best system of lenses, bodies and accessories for my needs.

I have a Canon DSLR because I have a Canon film SLR, and it can use the same lenses.

 

I have a Canon film SLR because when I wanted one, the SLR that my local second hand camera shop had that I could afford and felt best in my hands was a Canon.

Canon had the First DSLR under $1000 (300D) -- it's why I chose Canon

Image quality, as in SUPERB image quality!

Wanted to get an auto focus film camera lo those many years ago, saw a review of a Sigma 28-200 lens, shots looked very nice, liked the range, and the caption said it was shot with a Canon Rebel G.

 

Figured I'd check one out, liked it alright, and voila, I became a Canoneer.

 

Over the years, no competitor has shown me any compelling reason to change

I've been using Canon FD lenses on FD bodies (F-1N, T90, A-1) over the past few years and have been very happy with both the operability of the system and with the results. And the cost has been pretty good, too. I've amassed a collection of superb pro-level lenses and bodies that would be well out of financial reach for me with current EOS or Nikon gear.

 

Alas, however, the times they are a-changin', and I thought I'd better look ahead to the days when film becomes obsolete or prohibitively expensive. So as a segue into the EOS system, I recently picked up an immaculate EOS-3 body and an EF 50/1.4 lens. My plan is to acquire the successor to the 5D (since I'm used to shooting full frame), provided that it's within my reach.

 

So why EOS, you might ask, especially since my beautiful FD glass isn't compatible with it? The answer is that I've been very happy with the FD system, and figured that the EOS system offers comparable quality, range of lenses, and usability. To quote Bob Dylan again, what's the use of changing horses in midstream, especially if you're happy?

I chose a canon EOS film SLR a very long time ago because I could get one second-hand for a good price. Never saw a reason to change, but stayed with the EOS system because of the investment in lenses and flash

I bought a film rebel and kit lens back in the early or mid 90s. At the time it was lighter and cheaper than the Nikon kit. Weight was important - I used this thing for hiking and travelling. Then I started collecting lenses. When I bought my 300D I saw no reason for switching.

In the 80s I shot Nikon and Contax. When the EOS 1 came out, I switched and never looked back.

 

Look at all of the choices you've got in the EF Lens line-up. This Choice, This Choice or That Choice.

 

Look at what the 10D, 20D, 30D, 40D and what the 50D offer.

 

Probably the most important is the Fit and Finish of the Product. I've had only one lens in my 18 years of Canon

Shooting where a part came loose. It was the AF Switch on the EF 135 SF. But at that time the lens was 15 years old.

And, Canon repaired it for free. I call that a Company that stands behind their products.

Canon and Nikon are probably equal. I prefer Canon's lenses and the way the camera operates. They have a feel that

makes more sense for me.

 

I do prefer Nikons flash, the build of there camera bodies and how Nikon's AWB works but really I could flip a coin and be

happy with either Canon or Nikon.

 

I never tried Sony or others simply because of what I have heard of Canon/Nikon being the best. I guess I am a victim of

advertising to some degree but I never really care for any Sony products but there SLR's maybe just fine.

For me, a personal bias. I learned on an Canon AE-1 Program film camera, and I was (and still am) so delighted by how

perfect that camera is that I figured Canon could have only built upon their strengths to be even stronger in the last couple

decades since.

I shot with the Nikon film system and loved it. After I started to shoot Commercial work, the Nikon's sat and I eventually

sold them. When I went to digital, the Canon reviews were outstanding and I bought the 1D and never regretted it. The full

frame bodies, RAW files and the 85/1.2 leave me with no desire to go back. I do not need high ISO speeds, dedicated flash

with matrix metering or ten frames a second.

The red ring looks much more attractive than the yellow logo.

 

Just kidding, I started without much experience about DSLR and photography and Canon seemed to be easier to

understand when I did my research about the whole system. For example, EF lenses should fit and autofocus with

every EOS camera, EF-S for 1.6 crop and L is the pro line. On the other hands, Nikkor lens line up had both auto

and manual focus, and I just couldn't diffferentiate between AF, AF-S, G, D, and G IF. Of course, with little

experience about cameras, I look at the megapixel count as a benchmark for my purchase and clearly the 8 mpx

Canon Rebel Xt was "superior" than the Nikon D50 and Nikon D70, both at 6.1 mpx (the Xt was actually cheaper

than the D70). So there you go that's how I went with Canon.

Fredo, the friendly Best Buy saleskid told me Canon is the king in the DSLR game.

I wanted a Nikon when I started on film way back in 1980, but I was a poor college student, and the Canon AT-1 was $100 +/- less than the Nikon. Fortunately Algore had not invented the internet, so I didn't have to spend hours reading others' opinions and reviews. I shot a 50 1.4 for years until I got a second lens. Never had a desire to switch to Nikon, didnt buy my first Eos film body until the system had been out a few years. In the beginning the eos lens system choices were limited, not the great selection like we have now. I've stuck with Canon, only "bad" experience was with a new 5d this year, in fact. When I got my first video camera 10 years ago, didn't really look at other brands than Canon, due to my still photography experience.

The 400D was on sale...

I, too, had a good sales pitch on Canon when I moved to digital, and I am happy with the results of the sales pitch. I

spent time reviewing cameras, and found Canon and Nikon overall equal with having a superior point here and there

over the other. My best firend uses NIkon with similar grades and styles of lenses, and we achieve simlar decent

results if we as photographers so what we need to do.

Canon's triple rebates and Dell used to offer some xx% off coupons made it more reasonable for an amateur to own a set of DSLR gears. But Canon never offers triple rebates again and Dell lhas listed Canon’s MSRP when offering xx% coupons since I switched from Nikon (film) to Canon. :-(

 

I'm thinking to move back to Nikon (D700 + 12-24 F2.8 + …) and to keep 5D+100-400mm (which is a great kit).