First time in my life thinking about switch to Nik...

[eric_chiu2]

<p>I want to express my feeling of disappointment for Canon's current DSLR direction. I am a part time wedding and event photographer. I would call myself a semiprofessional. I was a happy Canon user since my high school years from Canon 650, 10s, 1N, 1V, 1D and current 1D IIN that I upgraded 1.5 years ago. And currently I have 17-40mm F4, 24-70mm F2.8, 70-200mm F2.8 IS, 50mm 1.4, 50mm 1.2. You can tell how much I love Canon.<br>

Now I am looking for a upgrade and I found that I am stuck. The worst is that I found that Canon is stuck. Well, at least in a near future. Again, its only my point of view.<br>

My 1D IIN with 8mp, if I got lucky, I can sell it for $1600-$1800. It almost make no sense to me that to spend another $2000 to get a 1Dmk3 with 10mp, and such minor changes e.g live view, 3200ISO (only one stop over mk IIn), dust remove, a little larger LCD... Well, here comes the NEW 5D mkII, yeah! Hey, I am sorry, if you are a 1D user, you will know what I mean, 5D's body and features just not design for professional. For all my events shooting, I rent a 5D for a second body and never fall in love with it. Sorry to say that, 5D II look the same to me as 5D. It is just a Honda Civic with a Accord's engine. I don't mean its bad, but honestly, as a wedding and event photographer, I don’t need 21mp, I don’t need my camera to shoot video. All I need are: good low light performance, quick and accurate focus, easy and flexible exposure control, good weather seal, good solid metal body for real life battles... Nikon D700, for $2400, give me all. Why Nikon!<br>

Well, may be I could wait, but for what? Because of D700, 1D mk3 look meaningless. For $1000 more, you get less pixel, worse ISO performance, worse LCD resolution, non-full frame. Therefore, Canon may force to have 1D mk 4 come out quick, but what could they do? More pixel?, better ISO? faster cont frame rate? and lower the price? Ok, than you may have a $3000 ID mk 4 with similar specs to 5D and a 1.3 crop with faster cont. frame rate. Still, its a more expensive D700 with higher mp but with 1.3x crop. I don’t know if that’s what I want.<br>

On the other hand, Canon could have a 2D or 3D in between 1D mk3 and 5D with full frame and professional body and price it around 5D II's price and lower 5D II's current price. But this will defiantly hurt the feeling of customers who lately bought 5D II or 1Dmk3.<br>

Instead, I want more flexible exposure control, better flash, build in flash transmitter, better manual focus control, which comes with all Nikon. But Canon never listen. They just keep playing around the specs.<br>

As you see that I mean that Canon is kind of stuck in the near future. In a long run, of course they could totally change their marketing direction. But we don't know yet. For the time now, I am seriously thinking switch to Nikon. I will miss my 50mm f1.2...</p>

<p> </p>

[bobatkins]

<p>It's a free country (more or less), so you can switch to Nikon any time you want to.</p>

<p>The only way you'll ever know if it was the right choice is to do it and hope you are right.</p>

<p>

There are thousands of shooters making a living and happy with Canon gear, but you may not be one of them.

<p>

Personally I like to think that I'm responsible for 90% of the quality of my pictures and the gear accounts for the other 10%, but maybe I'm wrong.

[g dan mitchell]

<p>Hey, if you prefer Nikon, go ahead and switch. Both brands produce excellent cameras and camera systems, and outstanding photographers use both systems to produce wonderful photographic work.</p>

<p>To switchers moving in either direction (Canon -> Nikon or Nikon -> Canon), I suspect that your search for photographic nirvana may not be as successful as you hope, but who knows?</p>

<p>Dan</p>

[marco_hidalgo]

<p>There are people using both systems, they take whatever they think is best from each brand.<br>

If I am not wrong, many photographers during the Vietnam war were using the legendary Nikon F camera + Leica M. And I think Steve McCurry also carries a Leica M along his Canon bodies with some white lenses.</p>

[eric_chiu2]

<p>Don't get me wrong, I still love my 1D mkIIn. If I only take vacation pictures and family pictures with it, I will be happy forever. However, as a professional photographer, its a responsbility that to give my clients the best I could. Make sure my equipments up to date is one of it.<br>

With only a part time job as a photographer, I can't afford a 1Ds mkIII. I have to watch the cost of my spending on equipments also. For now and new future, I don't see what in Canon I could goes with. That's why i feel stuck. I love to stay with Canon and that's why I feel little upset.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>I'd have to say that if you can't produce excellent wedding pictures with an EOS 5D, then it's probably not the fault of the equipment. It's not like you're shooting formula one racing in a torrential rainstorm or doing dessert combat photography in Iraq.</p>

[images_in_light_north_west]

<p>There is an awfull lot of people shooting weddings with the 5D series, I have never done so myself but with good fast glass and a 5D I would think a good photographer could make that work pretty well and the new 5D2 will do very well in low (hi iso) light and if you dont need ful-rez you have 2 sRAW options for smaller files, yes it does not have the 1D focus, I think however I would prefer the smaller body to shoot a wedding and I'm 6'-2 195lb's so I'm not small, best of luck.<br>

Ross</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>On the one hand, you say you (1) aren't busy enough to afford a new Mark III 1Ds, then you say that the (2) 5D Mk II is not rugged enough for you. If (1) is true, then (2) is false.<br>

If you think getting completely new lenses and a decent Nikon in the same class as the Mark III is going to cost less than a Mark III, you must have some really cheap sources for the Nikon.</p>

<p>If you just feel like swapping, by all means, do so.</p>

[w_t1]

<p><a href="http://www.largeformatphotography.info/chasing-magic-bullet.html">http://www.largeformatphotography.info/chasing-magic-bullet.html</a></p>

[thomas_hardy1]

<p>Hey contact Arash Hazeghi ( not sure about the spelling) he recently switched. Or maybe he has parallel Nikon / Canon systems. Ask him what his motivation was. Apparently a few of you guys can afford to just switch back and forth (and then back again a year later I suspect).</p>

<p>http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=680881</p>

[eric_chiu2]

<p>I agree with everyone of you. Honesty, I would like to be swapped so that I have reasons to stay with Canon. If I tell you 5D body is as good as 1D, I am lying. I never said 5D don't made good pictures, I said I never really like it compare to my 1D. Because it is not design for pro, but 1D is, its fact.<br>

Again, I am happy and making good pictures with my 1D and 5D now. But for a planning upgrade now and near future, from 1D to 5D, I don't see its a "upgrade". From 1D IIn to 1DIII, not really, I guess I made my point. From 1DIIN to 1DsIII, can't afford.<br>

Smaller body is also one of the reason I am thinking about D700, small but still a professional body. <br>

Well, I am not here to convince anyone to switch gear with me. I just try to state what I see and feel about Canon.</p>

[sattler123]

<p>Just switch - what do you need us to tell you what to do? According to your logic, Canon does not fullfuill the needs of a pro - so switch! Just wondering what all the thousands of pros do with all their Canon gear?!</p>

[saskphotog]

<p>I agree with Juergen. Why do you want my approval?</p>

<p>As for my comment, if you are a pro, you must realize that the real world differences in results between the cameras you discuss are miniscule at best. You must also understand that there are excellent photographers using both brands, which means the photographers are more important than the Canon/Nikon question. </p>

<p>If you understand all that, and persist in thinking the money spent switching will make you a better photographer, then switch.</p>

[dogbert]

<p>I think Eric has a fair point. Canon has been trying to differentiate products within its own lineup to keep the price of it I series cameras as high as possible. The 5D is largely aimed at amatuers, even if there are pros using it - same evaluative metering is the EOS 300/rebel 2000, no weather sealing (even Pentax offers this in their entry level camera the K200D), the AF system is not much different from the old Elans, and worse in low light than some of the early models and the ergonomics are not great. Even the lowly Elan 7 had knobs to adjust metering and drive modes instead of having to do the button press, comand/real dial spin.<br>

Sadly for Canon, the way they have developed their lineup has opened up huge opportunites for Nikon and others and it is showing in Canon's sales. They have gone from being totally dominant in DSLR sales to second place in only a few years.<br>

It seems they are relying on nothing but their sensor technology for the last 5 or so years to get them sales, yet Nikon has now basically matched/surpassed them in this.<br>

While people rave about the 5D mark II, when you think about it all we got after more than 3 years wait was video, a better LCD (something entry level cameras had 18 months ago), more megapixels and maybe a 1 stop improvement in ISO. Sure it will be a big seller for existing Canon fans but I doubt it would swing any new entrants Canon's way when compared to the D700.</p>

<p> </p>

[mike_bisom]

<p>Well, I agree with Eric 100%. Like it or not, Canon reserves it's "best stuff" for the top two bodies. This is simply a fact. The top two have better builds, better AF, better metering. No one is saying that you can't get great results from the rest of the Canon line up but facts are facts. On the other hand, with Nikon from the D300 and up, you pretty much get Nikons "best stuff" in terms of AF and metering and the bodies just continue to get more robust as you go up the line. The D300 is a pretty robust body and it only gets better. I am coming from the other side of the fence (or maybe a different part of the lawn!); we starting shooting digital with Canon 10D and went through the progression up to the 40D. Although I liked the idea of the 5D, I couldn't bring myself to spend the $$$ as I thought it pretty much felt like a xxD with a full frame. Then Canon gives us the 50D and 15MP and it was clear to me that Canon's roadmap meant simply increasing the MP count. Now I process thousands of images from different photographers and I have always personally been partial to the Nikon's- so we switched. I absolutely love the D300. 51-focus points, Nikon's better metering- and I can assure you that our flash exposure is MUCH more consistent with the Nikons, better build and so on. If Canon had had a 1D Mark III closer in price to even the D700 I would have stayed with Canon. But $3,700 for Canon's "Pro" body (facts are facts) or $1400 for a Nikon D300 or $2400 for the D700... In other words, I get where Eric is coming from: Canon doesn't have a reasonably priced pro body. I define Pro body as better build, better AF, and better metering than the less expensive bodies. As to whether switching will make you a better photographer... give me a break. I don't think this is anywhere near what he is saying. But some tools are better made than others. I know nothing about carpentry... but I am pretty sure some saws are better than others. A good craftsman will want the better saw because he knows the value to him. It doesn't change his skill set. If I were a professional golfer, I would want to use the best set of clubs I can. Because I know the value of those clubs to me. Again, my skill is unchanged. Canon reserves their best for their top two bodies. Fact. Whether that's of any importance to you is really up to you. </p>

[christopher hartt dallas]

<p>So look at a good used 1Ds2.<br /> <br /> I still use my 1D2N regularly for weddings and think it's a great camera. Ditto the 1Ds2. I also have 1D3 and 1Ds3 and they're better. But hey, it's subjective.<br /> <br /> Bob A advised that if you can't get 'excellent wedding pictures with the 5D, it's probably not the fault of the equipment'. I would extend that statement to the 1D2N - if it isn't doing what you need it to, it's not the fault of the equipment.</p>

[dogbert]

<p>"Bob A advised that if you can't get 'excellent wedding pictures with the 5D, it's probably not the fault of the equipment'. "<br>

This attitude is silly and misses the point of the the original post. You can get a great picture with Drebel Xs/1000D if you are prepared to work at it. Though for a variety of reasons you won't get a high rate of keepers when event shooting. <br>

Its about reliability, predictability and how easily the camera gets out of your way, when trying to make a photo.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>Please switch and sell all your gear off cheap to us!</p>

<p>Actually I like Nikon and still keep an old FM3A and dozen AIS/AI Nikkors around for old skool kicks. When I did shoot Nikon exclusively I was unfortunate enough to experience a string of QC problems with defective AF, etc., and had to deal with Nikon Service. Hopefully they've improved as they were as terrible as terrible gets. Canon support was head 'n shoulders above them and are far from perfect.</p>

<p>And, incidentally, I know several event and wedding photogs that use the 5D exclusively with amazing results. Every piece of gear has its idiosyncrasies and, with a little practice and study you learn to work with them and crank out great images. Usually the problem is behind the VF. Unfortunately that's the most difficult component to upgrade...</p>

[christopher hartt dallas]

<p>Geoff F - are you suggesting that the 5D, 1D2N and/or 1Ds2 is NOT "reliable, predictable" and whatever the rest of your statement is?<br /> <br /> If your contention is that a weekend wedding shooter isn't psychologically prepared to use pro-level equipment, then I guess I understand your statment. But seriously, if that's not it, your statement seems a little obsequious.</p>

[eric_chiu2]

<p>I am almost crying to see someone understand what I was saying. Again, I have no meaning that all Canon's cameras now have any problem to take great pictures, even Xti. What I want to said is that Canon have to change their marketing direction on their professional line of Cameras or they will loss many customers, like myself. <br>

From very begining of my original post, I just want to express my feeling about Canon. Not to get approval for switch system, not to convence any other to switch system. In fact, I am still using my ID11n for wedding with no complaint (both myself and clients). But in the very near future, I may have to make a decision to switch, for a better tool and reasonable price.</p>

[mbkissel]

<p>You ask this on a Canon forum. That's sort of like two foxes and a chicken discussing what they are going to have for dinner that night. Why not ask your question on the Nikon forum?</p>

<p>Good luck with your decision, whatever that may be.</p>

[dogbert]

<p>Christopher, no I am not saying that. The point is good photos can be taken with anything but then that doesn't mean a photographer should always be happy with whatever it is camera makers dishes out using the old 'its what behind the viewfinder that matters' logic. If that is the case we might as well all be using box brownies. Sure the 5D is a good camera. That doesn't mean we should stop wishing for more and better tools.<br>

The thing that keeps me in Canon is that I am heavily invested in their lenses. But I can see Eric's point that their marketing direction means they are not going to be offering me what I would like in an upgrade anytime soon. <br>

I don't need more than 16 megapixels. I would like affordable weather sealing and in-body IS. Other companies offer this and there is nothing wrong in wanting Canon to offer these things too. That I know they won't give me this soemthing that is tempting me to switch. Of course other systems have their issues too.<br>

Even Bob Atkins once said he was not going to buy another Canon body until they offered in-body IS. Does that mean we should all say " fine but you can make a good picture without it".<br>

PS Canon could learn something from Nikon's 3D colour matrix metering and flash system.</p>

 

[ilkka]

<p>The images from D700 are not going to be any better than from 5D or 5DII. Are you sure you like its design enough to pay several thousand dollars for the switch? D700 is a not a pro body either. D3 is. I agree that Canon is a bit stuck, not really coming out with anything new. But the 5DII is still a big thing. Are you sure you are not an equipment junkie that just needs a new fix? I don't mean to offend, but some people just can't be satisfied with whatever they have, they need something new every year, just for the sake of it being new and different. Nothing wrong with that if you can afford the habit, but it will in no way improve the images.</p>

[christopher hartt dallas]

<p>Geoff, OK, I buy that. Once again though...a good used 1Ds2 would give you a heck of a body (provided you know what to do with it).<br /> <br /> In-body IS isn't that big of an issue for me. Generally, I think Canon's direction has taken a turn for the 'not as desirable' neck of the woods too. If I were starting out right now, I'd opt for a Nikon D3. But as an entrenched Canon user, it's unlikely that I'll jump ship until Canon shows a consistent pattern of questionable decisions. Sure, there has been a blip on the short term radar for Canon...but they aren't history yet and I'm waiting to see what their "Significant" announcements will be for PMA 2009.</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>I have owned a Canon 10D and now own a Nikon D2X and Kodak SLRn. I have held a D200, D300, D70, and all the Rebel cameras. Have you held a D700? Correct me if I am wrong but is it not closer to the feel of a D300 than a D2X or D3? Based on my experience with the D2X and D300, I suspect the difference from the D700 to the 1DIIn is no different than from the 5D to the 1DIIn.</p>

<p>You have to be very careful about jumping from one manufacturer to another since each manufacturer comes out with new models on a very regular basis now and because with respect to Nikon and Canon, so far, they have avoided going head to head against each other. They have tended to introduce cameras that are not as good as the other guy's in one respect but much better in another respect. However, with the vast influx of bodies from each in the past year or so and with Nikon only entering the full frame market in the past year, I think we will see even greater changes coming, as Canon reacts to Nikon, and Nikon reacts to Canon....</p>

<p>As for me, I can go back and forth willy-nilly since I use manual focus Nikon lenses which can be used effectively on either Canon or Nikon bodies! </p>