shaun_bevan

<p>Thanks for all the replies.<br /> <br /> Originally, I set out to build a new Nikon system because I'm not quite satisfied with the D80, it's lacking a few items that has caused some frustration: performance in low lighting, noise in high ISO, no live view, etc. Also, something I didn't mention before, I decided that when I upgrade I would have a camera with access to the HD video features because this is something I want to begin practicing with (that's how I headed for the D300S initially).<br /> <br /> I was prepared to invest around $6000 into a new system, so when I say that money isn't the issue, I meant between the three systems. I could easily go for the Nikon system as well as the Canons. I was ready to go full throttle with my D300S kit, but I made the mistake of checking out Canon prices for kicks. So now I'm stuck with the idea that I could have access to a FF camera (or a Canon equivalent to the D300S) and a set of really nice lenses for a cheaper price, and that's where I'm stuck.<br /> <br /> The real question is why would I choose the D300S over the 5DMKII or even the 7D? This would be a easy decision if they weren't all great cameras, but alas.<br /> <br /> I guess I made the mistake of mentioning sports, because I wouldn't say it's a main focus of mine, but there has been on occasion when I've been asked to shoot a college football game. Mainly, I do a lot of event shooting (indoor/outdoor), portraits, and I work on some personal documentary/essay projects.<br>

<br /> I'm definitely going to have to get out there and get my hands on these systems to make a decision. It seems like it's the only way.</p>

<p>Thanks for your replies.<br>

<br /> To be honest, I'm not exactly partial to Nikon or Canon. The only reason I've begun to consider making the switch is because it appears that I can get a better camera setup for a cheaper price.<br>

<br /> It's also very appealing to think that I can grab a full frame camera with all the fixings for about $5000, whereas if I stick with Nikon, I'll be paying about $1000 more for a similar or lesser setup.<br>

<br /> I'm haunted by the saying "You get what you pay for". So that's why I'm a bit on edge about the differences between the Nikon and Canon lens. Is it really worth the extra $1000?<br>

<br /> I'm not too worried about "starting over" with Canon because I'm sure it'll all fall into place at some point.</p>

<p>I guess what it comes down to is would you choose the 5DMKII set or the D300S set?</p>

<p>On a side note, I'm a freelance pj and need this camera for the typical shoots (events/portraits/sports).</p>

<p>So I was thinking about upgrading my Nikon D80 to a D300S and also pick up a 70-200mm and a 24-70mm. I was planning on selling the D80 and a couple of other lenses I have in order to ease the price of the new equipment, but after doing some number crunching it seems cheaper if I buy the same type of equipment (or better) on the Canon side.<br /> <br /> Here's what I put together (all prices taken off Adorama or B&H for a general idea).<br /> <br /> I figure I can probably sell all my Nikon gear: D80 ($500), 18-200mm ($700), SB-900 ($400), 50mm f/1.8 ($75), 18-55mm ($100), and a 55-200mm ($100) for a total of: $1875 or say $1500 for worst case.<br /> <br /> Now if I were to stay with Nikon, I would keep the 18-200mm, the SB-900 and the 50mm. So that means I would only have $700 to play with.<br /> <br /> <br /> So the following is a price comparison:<br /> <br /> Nikon:<br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/635645-REG/Nikon_25464_D300s_SLR_Digital_Camera.html" target="_blank">D300S</a> : $1700<br /> 70-200mm: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/644741-USA/Nikon_2185_AF_S_Zoom_Nikkor_70_200mm_f_2_8G.html" target="_blank">VR II</a> : $2400 (or <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/274780-GREY/Nikon_2139_AF_S_VR_Zoom_NIKKOR_70_200mm.html" target="_blank">VR I</a> : $2000)<br /> <a href="http://www.adorama.com/NK2470AFSU.html?searchinfo=Nikon+24-70mm" target="_blank">24-70mm f/2.8</a> : $1800<br /> <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/619515-GREY/Nikon_2181_10_24mm_f_3_5_4_5G_ED_AF_S.html" target="_blank">10-24mm f/3.5-4.5</a> : $800<br /> <br /> Total: $6700 - 700 = $6000 (w 70-200m VRII) or $5600 (70-200mm VR I)<br /> <br /> <br /> Canon:<br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/646908-REG/Canon_3814B004_EOS_7D_SLR_Digital.html" target="_blank">7D</a> : $1700<br /> <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/234444-USA/Canon_7042A002_70_200mm_f_2_8L_IS_USM.html" target="_blank">70-200mm</a> : $1900 (or the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/91680-USA/Canon_2569A004_70_200mm_f_2_8L_USM_Autofocus.html" target="_blank">prior model</a> $1300)<br /> <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12142-USA/Canon_2514A002_Normal_EF_50mm_f_1_8.html" target="_blank">50mm</a> 1.8: $100<br /> <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/264304-USA/Canon_8014A002_Zoom_Wide_Angle_Telephoto_EF.html" target="_blank">24-70mm 2.8</a> : $1300<br /> <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/351542-USA/Canon_9518A002_EF_S_10_22mm_f_3_5_4_5_USM.html" target="_blank">10-22mm 3.5-4.5</a> : $800<br /> <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/486706-USA/Canon_1946B002_580EX_II_Flash.html" target="_blank">580EX II</a> Flash: $450<br /> <br /> Total: $6250 - $1500 = $4750<br /> <br /> <br /> So if I made the switch to Canon, I'd save $1250. Which leads me to think I might as well pick up the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/583953-REG/Canon_2764B003_EOS_5D_Mark_II.html" target="_blank">5D MKII</a> for $2700. So $2700 - $1700 (7D) = $1000. Add that to the total for Canon that makes it $5750, which is still cheaper than the Nikon setup!<br /> <br /> I don't know much about Canon gear, but does this sound like a good trade? <br /> <br /> Money isn't really the issue. I'm more worried about the quality of the equipment I'll be buying.</p>

<p>Thanks</p>