Changing from Canon to Nikon

[roberto_carli]

Is there anyone who can tell me why is a wrong choice?

 

I get many pictures with D3,above all sport shots.. At present there isn't a Canon camera as well.

I have Canon since 1994

 

Thks for ur opinion.

 

<a href="http://www.robertocarli.com">

[colinsouthern]

Can't think of a single reason - all the best with your D3 :)

[JDMvW]

If that's what you want to do, fine. I personally wouldn't be keen to do it if I had a lot of expensive lenses already.

 

I did make the move from Nikon film to Canon digital, largely because Canon just seems to have led the pack since the introduction of the EOS system. I like the choices that I have in lenses, especially IS lenses, better than what I see on the Nikon side.

 

At any given moment, one or the other manufacturer is going to have the 'latest thing' which lasts at most for a few months. Then it goes back the other way for a few months, and so on, and on, and..

[roberto_carli]

Canon is the first in long lenses ,but dont' think so regard wide lenses.

[johnson_d.]

Surely you are in the best position to determine what's best for yourself. Who are we to argue? Good luck.

[ofey_kalakar]

D3 is an excellent choice. Nikon builds fantastically rugged cameras. After checking out your

styles of shooting, the D3 will definitely fit your style. I say congratulations and go for it.

[pascalharvey.com]

Go for it, you'll do great shot with your D3 and I will continu doing great shot with my EOS 40D... Cameras dont do photos by themselves...

[gdanmitchell]

<p>If you already have a 1-series Canon DSLR (e.g. - 1D or 1Ds) and a bunch of lenses, it is hard to imagine how

you would gain enough by the switch to compensate for the expense and trouble. (By the way, I would say the same

thing, more or less, if you were contemplating a move <i>from Nikon to Canon</i>.)

 

<p>On the other hand, if you <i>don't</i> already have an investment in a pro-level setup like a 1D or 1Ds plus

lenses (in which case "changing from" would not accurately describe what you contemplate doing) then the top

cameras from both brands are excellent and can get the job done - choose one, build a kit around it, learn it well,

and avoid the temptation to switch between them because one or the other is momentarily "ahead" in some way

that may or may not materially affect the quality of your photography.

 

<p>Dan

 

<p>(Who notes that your web site features a section on "landscapes," and wonders how the D3 bests the Canon

offerings for this type of photography?)

[steve torelli]

Here at Photonet we endlessly discuss and debate the relative merits of cameras, lenses etc. and it's both interesting and fun. Often,these differences we discuss are minute ones at best, still it's fun and informative. Nevertheless, it never ceases to amaze me how many people are willing to, or are in the position to swap entire systems every time Canon or Nikon comes out with a new and supposedly superior camera body. I doubt that it's necessary to point out that camera bodies come and go fairly often and the two companies play a constant game of oneupmanship.

 

IMO it's a waste of time and money. But, it is your money and you can spend it any way you like. Unless you're just here seeking validation for what you already probably know is a pointless move, what other answer is there ? Good luck whether you stay or go.

[amorteguy]

My first camera was a Kodak 110 (you could actually count the grain in the photo), then I upgraded to a Russian SLR (couldn't set the shutter speed, it randomly choose one for you because choice was not for the user.) Then I bought a Nikon and owned it for about a month and sold it for a Canon. I haven't regretted the choice all these many years later.

 

However, it really boils down to buying the camera that will work best with your style of photography.

[JDMvW]

I love the description of the Soviet SLR! Mine has a perfectly (?) predictable shutter speed, but rewinding the film after you've shot it is an exercise in frustration, even when you push all the right buttons.

 

Comrade, you _will_ be pleased with your People's camera!

[alan_myers]

If Nikon gives you more of what you need and want, then I'd say go for it.

 

Their line or cameras and lenses have advanced a lot even within the past year. And I'm sure Nikon will continue to be at the top of the camera and lens game for a long time in the future. The competition between Canon and Nikon is producing better and better equipment for users of both systems. Other manufacturers are contributing their share to the growth of the technology, too.

 

There will be significant costs switching systems. This will come from both selling off your used equipment at a loss against your original investment, and in buying the "latest and greatest" at somewhat artificially inflated prices, since most products tend to settle in price some months or even years after their initial introduction. How much depends on market demand. Only you can say if the cost is okay with you.

 

Personally, I'm never too quick to make a change. I always want to give new products a little time to prove themselves, in real world applications. I'm in no way suggesting there are any apparent problems, but *what if* D3 or D300 or VR super tele users suddenly start seeing some issues with their cameras or lenses?

 

This is essentially what happened with the 1D Mark III... Something unforeseen occurred and a lot of early adopters expereienced problems that effected their ability to get the shot. That's a critical issue for anyone who makes their living from behind a camera.

 

I guess I just don't like the idea of being a "beta tester" with brand spanking new products. I'd rather let the dust settle a little, then make an informed decision based upon real world reports and experience.

 

As camera (and lens) systems become more and more complex and technologically advanced, we can expect more and more glitches, as manufacturers rush relatively lightly tested products to the market in the race against their competition. It's a case of the computer industry invading the camera industry, and bringing it's software and hardware business model along with it... Short hardware life cycles, steep drops in prices after the initial introduction frenzy wears off, frequent s'ware glitches that are addressed by patches after the products are out in the marketplace.

 

In the end, only you can decide. Both Canon and Nikon provide top quality systems and each has their own strengths and a few weaknesses.

[roberto_carli]

First of all Thks to everybody who replyt this post.

 

To explain better my actual standing:

 

I am a pro,with many lenses and two top Canon camera body,that means nothing,because

when you talk about Photos you have to make an informed decision based upon real world

reports and experience ,As well as ALAN MYERS suggests; that's true ,in my opinion is the

real matter!

 

So doesn't matter if i am Canonist or Nikonist,the present is Nikon is at least the same lvl

of Canon,but imho,with D3 is now one step forward,regard noise and AF precision and

stability too.

 

I think to get less lenses to contain costs,but for my need ,at present Nikon is better than

Canon.

 

Best regards to everybody.

[Spearhead]

<i>I think to get less lenses to contain costs,but for my need ,at present Nikon is better than Canon.</i><p>So if Canon has some new introductions in nine months, are you going to switch again? I can't really see the point, all ofd these "better" things have a time limit. A year ago, a lot of people thought Nikon would never compete with Canon's new products and sold whole systems. It's good for the camera makers, but it really has zero impact on anyone's photography.

[roberto_carli]

JEFF

 

your answer is not silly ,but you have to consider The last three top sport Cameras Canon

have always problems with AF tracking, and now stop to test cameras for a big brand,you

have to always go to set to CPS center ,i am tired to lose money in that way.

The old 1D worked in excellent way,why Canon have done step behind and Nikon forward?

If i get an out of focusing with 1D i know if my mistake,but now i know if a Canon mistake

and for me it's enough to change;but you are sure to work many years more with nikon

D3,for sure!

[Spearhead]

If all the Canons have such terrible AF problems, why are most of the sports shooters still using them? You'd figure that three generations (five or six years) would cause people to change, but they don't. I shoot with quite a few other sports pros at events and have yet to see more than a few using Nikon. That doesn't mean Canon is better, but you'd figure all those agencies and papers would be buying something other than the Mk3 if Canon had so many problems with the last two generations.

 

Buy what you want, but spending because one brand appears to be better this year means that you will be looking at the same thing next year.

[roberto_carli]

Jeff

 

" why are most of the sports shooters still using them? " .Very simple Jeff,there wasn't a valid alternative; unfortunatly for Canon ,now is came: with D3 sports shooters solve their problems.

I heard AFP,worldwide photo agency,of Italy return to Canon at least 30 camera body, changing in D3 Nikon..... I think this is only the first step ,many other will came,if Canon will not improve AF of recent Cameras.