# Thinking of switching from Nikon to Canon



## CNCO

Ok Im a Nikon guy, I enjoy their products but their prices are high. I saw on ebay a 400mm f2.8 is 6k. Now Im not ready to buy a lens like that but down the road as I get more clients for sports yes that lens is do-able. I see a lot of guys on tv that use canon so it can't be poor equipment. Im looking to sell everything so I dont get stuck with something and then regret loosing out. 

Any ideas or opinions would help. Basically I'm looking to get rid of everything and get a 7d and a 70-200 f2.8 right away. Eventually I will get the other stuff, 35/50mm and a flash but with spring sports coming up, I need better equipment. I am trying to work for Max Preps and do my own thing on the side.


----------



## Trever1t

uh, why switch from Nikon? Canon prices are lower for comparable quality? I don't think so.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

Reliable sources repeatedly tell us Nikon is superior.


----------



## CNCO

i know, i know its just that the long stuff is so much cheaper. everyone on tv is using canon. someone convince me!


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

If you say "everyone on tv is using canon" one more time, I will call you a troll, and this thread a joke.


The 400mm 2.8L lens is over $7K


----------



## NayLoMo6C

nikon? canon? who cares? it's you that matters

UPDATE: lol i guess this thread no longer needs this advice :scratch:


----------



## CNCO

um yes on tv they are using canon, can't you tell by the grey lens at basketball and the dugouts in baseball. im glad you think this thread is a joke, please leave looser.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

Troll.


----------



## CNCO

i guess what ever that means in piss poor ohio. what a loser state! get a life n a job! wake up to modern day technology then you can coment on my post. until then you are some amateur who knows dick!


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

CNCO said:


> i guess what ever that means in piss poor ohio. what a loser state! get a life n a job! wake up to modern day technology then you can coment on my post. until then you are some amateur who knows dick!


----------



## Derrel

Look into what Sports Illustrated shooters are using TODAY...not five or six years ago--boatloads of SI guys today are shooting Nikon once again. The Nikon D3's incredible High-ISO performance AND full-frame sensor have redefined sports cameras. Many of the low-rent newspaper media one sees on TV are  stuck with pool Canon gear that's several buying cycles old...a top-level big glass Canon or Nikon lens will easily last for 10,15,20 years if used with reasonable care and not involved in a major accident. At the most recent Olympics, Nikon was about 50-50% with Canon among the top-level shooters that get sent to the Olympics. Canon's 1D Mark III autofocus debacle caused thousands of top level shooters to abandon Canon; Nikon's development of the D3, with a bigger sensor, and better High ISO performance than anything Canon has ever had, convinced legions of others to move back to Nikon after the period of Canon dominance that lasted from roughly 2002 to 2007. Nikon's 200-400 f/4 VR zoom was another major draw; the SPorts-Illustrated magazine cover of the New Orleans Saints's Drew Brees holding up the Lombardi Trophy after his team's win in the Super Bowl two years ago was shot with that 200-400mm f/4 lens, a "mere" f/4 zoom, but yet when combined with superb ISO 6,400 and usable 12,500 ISO settings of the D3 or D3s, that one single lens is turning in superior daytime AND nighttime football at NCAA and NFL arenas all across the USA. Look a little closer at what "everyone on TV" is actually using...you're missing the black lenses, which don't stand out very well. If you want cheap lenses, Canon has em. One year warranty and all.


----------



## Overread

Oddly the cheap long telephoto argument for canon isn't really a massivly strong one for their supertelephoto lenses (ie the really expensive ones) but more for their more moderately priced options - the 400mm f5.6 - 300mm f4 - 100-400mm - where they have a wider variety of choice on the market than Nikon do for the similar price range (least as far as I am aware). 

Also canon is restructuring their prices and a fair few of the original super telephotos are being upgraded with new versions which are hitting at a very high initial price point (it will come down, but only in time) and I suspect that long term the economic changes in the world will result in their pro lenses are nikons being on a more even price footing with each other. Further the original version will go out of production so second hand costs and new costs will go up (new costs will rocket up as the stock reduces). 

Overall I get the feeling that you've seen the mighty 70-200mm f2.8 IS L M2 and had your mind wiped out by its quality (its a darn nice lens! ). You need a lot more research (ok anyone making this choice does) to really have concrete advantages that you will get from moving brands from one to the other. That said canon will oneday be offering a nice 200-400mm with built in 1.4TC which nikon does not have  


(oh and only canon offer a 5:1 macro lens - )

Ps canon don't need long warranties because the stuff never breaks! Nikon on the other hand .. well they need that longer support structure - :greenpbl:  :mrgreen:


----------



## CNCO

I saw tonight a 400 f2.8 sold for 6k on eBay. For shooting sports f4 isn't goIng to cut it. The best 400 f2.8 nikon I found was 9k. That's a big difference. My 70-200 nikon is great. I'm going to try a 200-400 rental n go from there if I can't sell everything. I'm a nikon guy but as mic jagger said you can't always get what you want.


----------



## Overread

I can't easily compare US prices  but UK side brand new :
Canon
EF 400mm f2.8L IS USM Lens: £6007.98

Nikon
AF-S 400mm f/2.8G ED VR Lens: £6648.00

However canon are also releasing a M2 of the 400mm which means that lens will very soon be out of production (chances are it already is) which means ever though its a slower item to sell, once the stock is gone its gone. So I fully expect to see its price both new and second hand rise: 
The current price of the M2 of that lens is:
£8607.98
It's due to hit that market in March so that is when I expect to see the market start to slowly react - just like the 70-200mm f2.8 IS L the original lens will boost up in price whilst the new lens will (far slower) reduce in price as it remains on the market longer (many also expect that prices will drop - least UK side - after the Olympics as well).


----------



## pgriz

I'm a Canon user, but if I had to start fresh, I'd take Nikon in a heartbeat.  Two key factors:  hi-iso performance and AF performance.  Many of the pros (and here I mean guys and gals who know their stuff and are published in the high-end mags) are selling their Canon gear and re-equipping with Nikon.  I haven't yet maxed out on my equipment, so for the time being, I'll stay with my investment, but if my pattern of shooting starts requiring fast-moving action under dim conditions, I'd be strongly tempted to switch.  As well, Canon loses in the matchup with flash performance, but here too, my skill level is still low enough that I'm not being seriously compromised.  As for the lenses, I have to believe that the two companies have comparable prices for lenses with the same specs.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

Hindsight being 20/20...if I knew then, what I know now, I would have gone Nikon.
But like pgriz, it all works just fine for me now, and the forseable future.


----------



## usayit

Isn't this like choosing between papermate and bic?  One might be better but the difference is probably nominal with the most important thing being the hand holding the pen.

OP's sig has "Nikon 70-200mm / 2.8 vr".. Can't see the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L being so much different that suddenly he/she's shooting for SI.   Each time you change systems, you usually loose out in $$$.  You better have a good reason... certainly more than "what you've seen on TV"


----------



## Formatted

To be honest CNCO I've looked at all your threads, you say you shoot events for hockey and stuff but I've never seen any of your photos. You shouldn't be looking at a 6k lens when you've got a crappy little body, you should get yourself a 70-200, D300 and some strobes and learn that way. Super Telephotos are a massive challenge, to not only hold and use.


----------



## CNCO

Formatted - check out my work on smug mug. I know the d80 sucks for sports. It's a body I bought when my daughter was born a year ago. I'm lookIng to upgrade to a D700 since I am trying to get in with max preps. It's a cheap body to start but I know I need better equipment to advance. I'm also doing lax in the spring. I have used a D3x mounted with a 600mm lens and a 200-400 on one side with a 70-200 on the other side of my waist. I can use big equipment. I'm just amazed at how many fans and other people said nice work who do you work for? It let's me know that my work is decent to good now imagine what I can do with more advanced gear.


----------



## cnutco

If you bounce to the otherside... I want your SB900.


----------



## Village Idiot

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Troll.



Your so looser.


----------



## Formatted

> I'm just amazed at how many fans and other people said nice work who do you work for? It let's me know that my work is decent to good now imagine what I can do with more advanced gear.



Fans aren't photographers, lots of your photos are under exposed and poorly framed, lose the photos with players with there backs turned.


----------



## gsgary

It does not matter what camera you use, it's behind the camera that matters.I shoot Canon and sports with a 300F2.8L but used to use a 300F4L with no problems, if you are going to switch don't bother with the 7D get a 1Dmk4 
This shot was taken a few years ago when i used my 10D and 50mmF1.4 as backup equivalent to what you have now


----------



## Formatted

> This shot was taken a few years ago when i used my 10D and 50mmF1.4 as backup equivalent to what you have now



I could make a joke about how this shows that Canon hasn't moved on, but I'm not going to!


----------



## gsgary

Formatted said:


> This shot was taken a few years ago when i used my 10D and 50mmF1.4 as backup equivalent to what you have now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could make a joke about how this shows that Canon hasn't moved on, but I'm not going to!
Click to expand...

 
I will have to come down to bath for a shoot out


----------



## Overread

gsgary said:


> Formatted said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This shot was taken a few years ago when i used my 10D and 50mmF1.4 as backup equivalent to what you have now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could make a joke about how this shows that Canon hasn't moved on, but I'm not going to!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I will have to come down to bath for a shoot out
Click to expand...

 
I'll join you - between the 300mm f2.8 and the MPE the nikon gear won't stand a chance


----------



## Formatted

I'm sure my 200-400 will show you the way!


----------



## gsgary

Formatted said:


> I'm sure my 200-400 will show you the way!



Post some shots and i'll post some


----------



## TheGreatGonzo

Oh man, I'm brand new and even I knew this question was frought with danger.  It is like going on a firearms forum and asking about switching from Glock to Sig (or vice versa).  
Gonzo


----------



## CNCO

Formatted don't talk about poor framing when your first shot in your festival folder the guy on the right is cut off. Please leave this thread. Fans may not be photographers but they buy the pics. I'm convinced to stay with nikon due to better iso and better af. As mentioned I bought this d80 as my first Dale and I'd say I have done a good job at using it. If I get this contract for a football team then I am going to get a d700. I have seen some shots with a 200-400 and that will be my next purchase. My 70-200 f2.8 is just fine for now. I'll invest in longer glass later.


----------



## KmH

CNCO said:


> um yes on tv they are using canon, can't you tell by the grey lens at basketball and the dugouts in baseball. im glad you think this thread is a joke, please leave looser.


Actually.
If you look closely.
At a number of events.
You'll see as many.
If not more.
Black, Nikon lenses.


----------



## gsgary

KmH said:


> CNCO said:
> 
> 
> 
> um yes on tv they are using canon, can't you tell by the grey lens at basketball and the dugouts in baseball. im glad you think this thread is a joke, please leave looser.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually.
> If you look closely.
> At a number of events.
> You'll see as many.
> If not more.
> Black, Nikon lenses.
Click to expand...

 
Not at the events i shoot at


----------



## CNCO

I see a lot of grey lens but I do know some guys with Getty n they told me I'm nuts to switch. I know it's more about the photographer but I can always improve as we all can but you can't make a lens focus faster or your camera perform better at high iso. I'd rather spend the money on equipment.


----------



## Formatted

> told me I'm nuts to switch.



I'm confused, why did you make this thread...


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

Formatted, why are you still here? He told you to leave the thread!


----------



## Formatted

> He told you to leave the thread!



Bye!


----------



## gsgary

CNCO said:


> I see a lot of grey lens but I do know some guys with Getty n they told me I'm nuts to switch. I know it's more about the photographer but I can always improve as we all can but you can't make a lens focus faster or your camera perform better at high iso. I'd rather spend the money on equipment.



It won't be long before Canon are infront again on ISO because there is no difference in focus speed between 1D and D3, i shot some horse racing a few years back when the D3 first came out and was using a 1Dmk1 and 1Dmk2 shooting and printing on site for the other guy and he commented on the 1Dmk1 having more shots in focus than his new D3 but it could have been more technique


----------



## benhasajeep

First of all there is no reason that you have to have an AF-S VR lens for your first big lens. I shot sports 20 years ago starting with a Tamron MF 300 f/2.8. And if you go through old newpapers and magazines. You will see many great photo's from MF equipment (from many photogs). Deppending on your position, you may have to focus very very little between shots. I was just starting out 20 years ago and got pictures in every paper (football, basketball, and volleyball seasons). After a while I bought my own AF 300mm f/2.8 Nikon. That was a body driven AF and it worked just fine. Unfortunately it was stolen and I had to replace it with another MF 300 f/2.8 Tokina this time. I have that lens today and still use it. It is a bit more of a challenge focusing with out a split prism in the DSLR's. But I still get loads of keepers with it. I use it with a D300 body so metering and everything else works fine using it. I just tell the body what MF lens is attached. Visiting KEH there are several EX rated AF 300mm f/2.8's on there for less than $2,000. They have a 400mm f/2.8 AF-I lens for 4k I think it was. Don't limit yourself to the newest fanciest equipment out there. I can tell you I will never have to worry about an AF failure on my 300mm f/2.8 at an important event (unless I drink too much  ). And if you do get one of those fancy AF-S lenses. What will you do if the AF motor in the lens quits? Can't quit the job. Have to keep going with the back-up AF-L system (Left Hand focus motor  )

For about 2 years I considered switching to Canon. Only difference is I kept my Nikon gear while picking up some Canon gear. At the time Canon was a bit more advanced in DSLR bodies over Nikon. But Nikon finally got into gear and made a come back. For me I really don't think there is a big quality difference between the two. I will recommend either just the same to anyone who asks. I chose to stay with Nikon just due to all the gear I have. If you include my film gear I have close to 50 pieces of Nikon equipment, probably a bit more.

If you have a set of gear, and your not on a company provided equipment expense account. I don't see a very good reason to jump ship based on cost of equipment.


----------



## CNCO

I agree that there was good equipment years ago. The thing is the technology in the new equipment is to help. It's like saying sure a 70s muscle car is fast but wouldn't you rather a new car with new technology? I'm going to check out keh n go from there, thanks.


----------



## Overread

gsgary said:


> CNCO said:
> 
> 
> 
> I see a lot of grey lens but I do know some guys with Getty n they told me I'm nuts to switch. I know it's more about the photographer but I can always improve as we all can but you can't make a lens focus faster or your camera perform better at high iso. I'd rather spend the money on equipment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It won't be long before Canon are infront again on ISO because there is no difference in focus speed between 1D and D3, i shot some horse racing a few years back when the D3 first came out and was using a 1Dmk1 and 1Dmk2 shooting and printing on site for the other guy and he commented on the 1Dmk1 having more shots in focus than his new D3 but it could have been more technique
Click to expand...

 
Heck after the newest info on the new Pentax with its almost insane dynamic range even they could top the ISO war at one stage. I think that a lot of pros can indeed justify changing setups provided that they can come up with a way to prove that the change over cost will be less than the new profit it will generate. I see changes based on camera bodies as short term and also can't help but feel that a little bit of it is just wanting to own new gear when the photographer has all they need already .


----------



## table1349

If you want to change then change.  If you don't then don't.  It really isn't that big a deal here.   I shoot sports, I shoot Canon.  I didn't bother to change when a lot of people did and it has never been an issue.  Saved the money for other stuff.  The ISO war is a bunch of garbage when it comes down to sports shooting and most shooting for that matter.  If you need a very high ISO then your not shooting sports your shooting biddy-basketball in a grade school gym at midnight in a blackout.  I shoot mostly college Division I, II and NAIA and rarely get above 1600.  I can, will and have put my shots up against the Nikons shooting in the same range and the results are more than even.    

Nikon is a good system.  I know, I shot it for 30 + years with film.  I switched to Canon only when I went digital. I liked the layout of the control in my hand on the Canon bodies better than then Nikon bodies.  Lens quality is comparable.  Some Nikon glass is more expensive, some Canon glass is more expensive.  The only advantage I see to Canon is the amount of available lenses for the beginner.  It's your money, do what you want.  The bottom line is, most of it comes down to the shooter.


----------



## CNCO

I agree


----------



## DVC Mike

Nikon makes some really great gear, and have done so for years'

Cannon has engineered some good gear as well.

Why change from one system to another? In my mind, there are both really close..


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

Duh! Because nice Canon glass will be more visible on TV!


----------



## CNCO

I'm going to stickwithnikon thanks for the help.


----------



## Formatted

There is also the ergonomics issue, could you take just as good pictures with a Canon? Moving takes time to move, I use a Canon 40D since I don't own a Nikon macro lens, from my perspective its not as easy to use as a Nikon, the menus are fiddly.


----------



## CNCO

the whole thing is doing football, hockey, lax, auto racing and motorcycles i do need fast auto focusing. there is no way around it. i need something at high iso for night games and shooting through glass at hockey rinks. there are no cut out holes and the lighting is poor. im not shooting at nhl arenas here. although i was recently at a prep school and their glass was crystal clear, it ought to be if i were sending my kid there for 40k a year.


----------



## Robin Usagani

Can I start a thread about me wanting to switch to Nikon?  Will I get positive responses?


----------



## Formatted

> Can I start a thread about me wanting to switch to Nikon? Will I get positive responses?



You could try...


----------



## CNCO

i highly doubt it, it appears as if even the canon owners regret buying canon. im glad i asked around this is what forums are for!


----------



## Overread

Pffft canon owners outside of Gary and me it seems


----------



## Formatted

> Pffft canon owners outside of Gary and me it seems



From what I understand Canon is great for macro, they have smaller sensors and so higher pixel density results in nicer macro images.


----------



## Overread

Actually don't Nikon have smaller sensors? Canon are 1.6 crop - aren't nikon 1.5crop? I'm pretty sure there is some minor difference in sensor size between the two companies - otherwise if they are both the same its just MP cramming (though my MPE does like my 7D )


----------



## benhasajeep

Overread said:


> Actually don't Nikon have smaller sensors? Canon are 1.6 crop - aren't nikon 1.5crop? I'm pretty sure there is some minor difference in sensor size between the two companies - otherwise if they are both the same its just MP cramming (though my MPE does like my 7D )


 
Your thinking of it backwards.  Canon does have a slightly smaller sensor in APS-C size.  Thats why their crop is 1.6 and Nikon is 1.5.  4/3 is even smaller and thats why they are 2x crop.

Crop factor is good for wildlife buffs.  But the wide guys sure don't care for it.


----------



## Formatted

> Crop factor is good for wildlife buffs.



I seem to do rather well with my D3s! Although I will be buying a crop body, probably the D400 when its out..


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

Oh, I don't regret buying Canon. If I did, I would switch on a dime.
There is a difference between "having known then, what I know now" and still being happy with what I have.
I am saving up for a 1DMarkIV. Is that regret?


----------



## ericANDamanda

I've been with Canon my whole life So I am biased but find Canon to have less noise at higher ISO than Nikon.  However I've owned a 40D in the past and hated it because of noise, color inaccuracy, shutter lockup and many other issues.  All that was fixed when I switched to the 5D Mark II.  I also use the new 60D as a backup camera and find both bodies extremely reliable and satisfactory to my needs.  I will grant that Nikon has the more accurate color capture than Canon.  But that can be fixed if you shoot in RAW. 

Cheers!

Eric & Amanda Photography - International Destination Wedding Photography Team - International Destination Wedding Photographers


----------



## benhasajeep

Formatted said:


> Crop factor is good for wildlife buffs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I seem to do rather well with my D3s! Although I will be buying a crop body, probably the D400 when its out..
Click to expand...

 
I was really happy in my film days to have a 300mm f/2.8.  But after a while, at least with me, I was like I wish this was a 400mm.  Then I did pick up a 500mm.  And of course I was like I wish this was 600mm.  When digital bodies came out.  I was like OH YEA 750mm.  But now I am finding myself wanting 1,000mm.  Same goes with my Jeeps.  I will do a mod.  Then, man I wish I had 20 more horse power.  Well, then I would do some things and get 20 more.  Then little later, man I wish I had 20 more hp.  I don't think it ever ends???  In any of my interests!  I think its a disease?


----------



## gsgary

Overread said:


> Pffft canon owners outside of Gary and me it seems



I won't change, like i said i was getting shots with my old 1Dmk1 that my mate could not get with his D3, the 1Dmk1 was a fantastic camera, mk2 is


----------



## ghache

I wouldnt shoot canon just for the fact that i really dont like the buttons layout, menu layout (i wouldnt be lost if i ever had to shoot a canon though)
I played with a 60D yesterday, I t felt pretty good in my hands,  but the lack of dual wheel control and the placements of buttons is a nono for me. AND the shutter sounded like the camera was a big empty can of pop


----------



## gsgary

CNCO said:


> i highly doubt it, it appears as if even the canon owners regret buying canon. im glad i asked around this is what forums are for!



Not me


----------



## o hey tyler

CNCO said:


> i highly doubt it, it appears as if even the canon owners regret buying canon. im glad i asked around this is what forums are for!


 
I don't regret buying Canon for one second. Especially since I went from a Sony A-200, and the 5DClassic is the best full frame value on the market right now.


----------



## KmH

CNCO said:


> i highly doubt it, it appears as if even the canon owners regret buying canon. im glad i asked around this is what forums are for!


Not making the simple effort to use the shift key to make the ocassional appropriate capital letters, and foregoing proper punctuation, does not make a good impression.


----------



## Samerr9

Hey guys, most of you are talking about technical things and I guess all of you know better than I do as i am really new to all this... 

However, I want to mention something I realised not only in the camera field but in life in general. You always find a brand or a team that all supprters of other brand or teams get really aggressive against it. For example, in soccer you find all supporters against Brazil except Brazil supporters, you rarely find an Argerntina supporter getting agressive against Germany or Italy or vice cersa. Also, in F1 all suppoerters are against Ferrari. Getting back to this discussion, I find Canon supporters more objective when looking at Nikon and Nikoners get really aggressive against Canon. We as Canoners say both are good but Nikoners say Canon is bad. I noticed that Sony and Fuji holders tend to like Nikon but not Canon.. 

It seems for me that I am always sticking with such thing, I have Canon and support Brazil and Ferrari and I am really happy with all of that.

Thanks


----------



## Robin Usagani

so what is so special about this color aware metering?  Now that I understand about on camera metering,  I have no problem with my exposure.  Is this mostly geared toward noobs with matrix and semi auto mode?


----------



## gsgary

Samerr9 said:


> Hey guys, most of you are talking about technical things and I guess all of you know better than I do as i am really new to all this...
> 
> However, I want to mention something I realised not only in the camera field but in life in general. You always find a brand or a team that all supprters of other brand or teams get really aggressive against it. For example, in soccer you find all supporters against Brazil except Brazil supporters, you rarely find an Argerntina supporter getting agressive against Germany or Italy or vice cersa. Also, in F1 all suppoerters are against Ferrari. Getting back to this discussion, I find Canon supporters more objective when looking at Nikon and Nikoners get really aggressive against Canon. We as Canoners say both are good but Nikoners say Canon is bad. I noticed that Sony and Fuji holders tend to like Nikon but not Canon..
> 
> It seems for me that I am always sticking with such thing, I have Canon and support Brazil and Ferrari and I am really happy with all of that.
> 
> Thanks



Well it wouldn't be much good supporting the UAE in the World Cup


----------



## gsgary

Schwettylens said:


> so what is so special about this color aware metering?  Now that I understand about on camera metering,  I have no problem with my exposure.  Is this mostly geared toward noobs with matrix and semi auto mode?



Nikon users need it to get exposure, we don't


----------



## CNCO

KmH said:


> CNCO said:
> 
> 
> 
> i highly doubt it, it appears as if even the canon owners regret buying canon. im glad i asked around this is what forums are for!
> 
> 
> 
> Not making the simple effort to use the shift key to make the ocassional appropriate capital letters, and foregoing proper punctuation, does not make a good impression.
Click to expand...

 

neither does the fact that your ignorant enough to say that on my thread @ss hole


----------



## kundalini

CNCO said:


> um yes on tv they are using canon, can't you tell by the grey lens at basketball and the dugouts in baseball. im glad you think this thread is a joke, please leave looser.





CNCO said:


> i guess what ever that means in piss poor ohio. what a loser state! get a life n a job! wake up to modern day technology then you can coment on my post. until then you are some amateur who knows dick!





CNCO said:


> Formatted don't talk about poor framing when your first shot in your festival folder the guy on the right is cut off. Please leave this thread. Fans may not be photographers but they buy the pics. I'm convinced to stay with nikon due to better iso and better af. As mentioned I bought this d80 as my first Dale and I'd say I have done a good job at using it. If I get this contract for a football team then I am going to get a d700. I have seen some shots with a 200-400 and that will be my next purchase. My 70-200 f2.8 is just fine for now. I'll invest in longer glass later.





CNCO said:


> neither does the fact that your ignorant enough to say that on my thread @ss hole



You've been reported.


----------



## gsgary

How much do  Max Preps pay ? , i looked at their prices and they are about half what we charge when we shoot and print onsite


----------



## ghache

LOL, He thinks that making the grammar police on an internet forum makes a good impression.


----------



## PASM

CNCO said:


> I I do know some guys with Getty n they told me I'm nuts to switch..



I agree with them.


----------



## Samerr9

gsgary said:


> Well it wouldn't be much good supporting the UAE in the World Cup



I don't think UAE qualified lately but if they did I would support them regardless of the results  BTW I am Lebanese living in the UAE..


----------



## o hey tyler

CNCO said:


> *Neither* does the fact that *you're* ignorant enough to say that on *a public forum that I don't own*, ass hole



Fix't


----------



## gsgary

Samerr9 said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well it wouldn't be much good supporting the UAE in the World Cup
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think UAE qualified lately but if they did I would support them regardless of the results  BTW I am Lebanese living in the UAE..
Click to expand...


It's not much good supporting England in the World Cup at the moment


----------



## Formatted

Can we move this to off topic now?


----------



## KmH

CNCO said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CNCO said:
> 
> 
> 
> i highly doubt it, it appears as if even the canon owners regret buying canon. im glad i asked around this is what forums are for!
> 
> 
> 
> Not making the simple effort to use the shift key to make the ocassional appropriate capital letters, and foregoing proper punctuation, does not make a good impression.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> neither does the fact that your ignorant enough to say that on my thread @ss hole
Click to expand...

Thank you. Calling me names proves my point, was uncalled for, and it is not *your* thread. The thread belongs to TPF.


----------



## Dan Barron

Why would you switch from Nikon to Canon and vice vera if you have all the kit for one brand. It is the person that makes the shots, not the equipment.


----------



## Overread

Dan Barron said:


> Why would you switch from Nikon to Canon and vice vera if you have all the kit for one brand. It is the person that makes the shots, not the equipment.


 
only part way - I bet you anything without any equipment at all you'll find it pretty hard to take a photo


----------



## OrionsByte

Overread said:


> Dan Barron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would you switch from Nikon to Canon and vice vera if you have all the kit for one brand. It is the person that makes the shots, not the equipment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> only part way - I bet you anything without any equipment at all you'll find it pretty hard to take a photo
Click to expand...


----------



## GeraShapiro

I used nikon d50 for 3 years until it got stolen from me...it was a great camera...
Now i bought a Canon 50D and its a whole different world...the colors are more sharper and the screen is amazing. 
I also thought that nikon is better but i was completely wrong....go for the canon...


----------



## Formatted

> I also thought that nikon is better but i was completely wrong....go for the canon...



Really pointless comparison.

Your comparing a camera that came out in 2005 (D50) with a camera than came out in 2008 (50D), technology in cameras changes so rapidly that 3 years makes a huge difference. How about you compare the D90 with the 50D and see which comes out on top.


----------



## Stevenl

So no matter what I buy today it will be obsolete in three years in a competitive market?


----------



## MichiganFarts

KmH said:


> Thank you. Calling me names proves my point, was uncalled for, and it is not *your* thread. The thread belongs to TPF.


 
The word "calling" was inappropriately capitalized, and should have a comma preceding it.  "Thank you" is not a sentence.  Anyone want to do me now?  :lmao:


----------



## Stevenl

Asking if anyone wants to "do" you now could have been worded different. "Would anyone care to correct my grammar now?" would be more apprpriate.

Effing grammar Nazis.


----------



## CNCO

I ask a simple question n all I get is 6 pages of internet junk, please keep the discussion related to the topic.


----------



## Formatted

> I ask a simple question



You should have realised when asking as question like this, things get heated.


----------



## benhasajeep

Wow, suprised this was still going.

Stay with Nikon! The economy and slowed production has alot to do with equipment prices right now. SB-600's street prices are up almost $60 (at least 30%) even though another model has come out. And with stuff in short supply the prices are not going to go down anytime soon. ANY manufacturer!


----------



## Mike_E

Nah, switch.


----------



## benhasajeep

Mike_E said:


> Nah, switch.



If you do switch, I think you should switch back! layball:


----------



## KmH

Stevenl said:


> So no matter what I buy today it will be obsolete in three years in a competitive market?


No. It won't be obsolete, but in 3 years the technology being offered will have advanced.


----------



## KmH

CNCO said:


> I ask a simple question n all I get is 6 pages of internet junk, please keep the discussion related to the topic.


 
It's a public forum and a thread can develope in any number of unforseen directions.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

CNCO said:


> I ask a simple question n all I get is 6 pages of internet junk, please keep the discussion related to the topic.


Control freak.


----------



## benhasajeep

Bitter Jeweler said:


> CNCO said:
> 
> 
> 
> I ask a simple question n all I get is 6 pages of internet junk, please keep the discussion related to the topic.
> 
> 
> 
> Control freak.
Click to expand...


It that a dial or button.  Or a combination of a button and dial????


----------



## Overread

benhasajeep said:


> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CNCO said:
> 
> 
> 
> I ask a simple question n all I get is 6 pages of internet junk, please keep the discussion related to the topic.
> 
> 
> 
> Control freak.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It that a dial or button.  Or a combination of a button and dial????
Click to expand...

 
I've a CA mode on my 7D but no CF mode  

but then again I use CF cards so maybe control freak there?


----------



## benhasajeep

Overread said:


> benhasajeep said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bitter Jeweler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Control freak.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It that a dial or button. Or a combination of a button and dial????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've a CA mode on my 7D but no CF mode
> 
> but then again I use CF cards so maybe control freak there?
Click to expand...


Can I assign a button for it?? :scratch:


----------



## Joves

KmH said:


> Stevenl said:
> 
> 
> 
> So no matter what I buy today it will be obsolete in three years in a competitive market?
> 
> 
> 
> No. It won't be obsolete, but in 3 years the technology being offered will have advanced.
Click to expand...

 
Exactly! Accoding to Moores Law it also becomes less expensive as well. Now the manufacturers will indeed try to convince you it is obsolete so you purchase the latest, and greatest.



MichiganFarts said:


> Anyone want to do me now? :lmao:


 
I dont know are you an M or F? Will I need beer bottle goggles?


----------



## imagemaker46

I've been using Canon for most of my 35 years shooting sports and have gone though all the generations of cameras and lenses, I stopped at the 1D mkll.  In two weeks I have 30k worth on Nikon gear arriving on a trial from Nikon, I have no doubts that I will be switching this year and not because I believe that Nikon is superior, I think they are both close to being equal although they both have the good and bad.  Why the switch, I'm sick of being treated like crap as a professional in the eyes of Canon.  Nikon came to me with the offer of the gear, I feel like they have more respect for professionals now.  Canon dropped me from their CPS after being a member since 1980, seems that having three 1D bodies, 70-200 2.8, 300 2.8, 400 2.8,  that are older than 2 years doesn't qualify anymore. If I need Canon gear I have to rent it, Nikon pro service is free, Canon charges $250, Nikon loans gear no charge. As a professional I appreciate what I have been offered.


----------



## o hey tyler

CNCO said:


> I ask a simple question n all I get is 6 pages of internet junk, please keep the discussion related to the topic.


 
Probably because you acted like a douche bag and insulted members that were trying to help you. Why should we care? You feel like you own your thread. Guess what, it's the internet. People are going to post in your thread. Deal with it.


----------



## mengo55

I started out with Nikon as a youngster when it was the thing in film, with great lens, then went to Canon for its marketing and they finally met nikon on lens quality. I stayed with them 35 yrs until I converted to digital. Some major points are, Canon has abandoned local pro photo shops, dealers are having tremendous problems dealing with them, Canon is into mass marketing walmart, best buy etc. Their long fast pro lens are seen all the time on the football field side line, they do have that market. That's why they appear to be on tv so much. Their marketing also is obvious on tv shows where actors who know nothing about photography are using them. If you are planning on a career of sports photography and are planning on spending thounsands for a couple of lens, go with Canon, by all means.  I did a lot of reserch before putting the bucks out for a DSLR and it was hard for me to let go of tradition, but bang for buck Nikon won hands down! Now that I'm back and used to new bells and whistels in differant places, I love it! Be careful and compare apples to apples, Canon marketing is very crafty. Also I've found that because of popularity Canon lens hold value better, funny since they have always been viewed second to Nikon lens. I find used Nikon lens and accs cheaper. Don't know where you're headed in the craft, but I have to say Nikon for now is the way to go. Check out the D7000, with a grip/spare battery adapter, it's a jewel. Good Luck!


----------



## imagemaker46

What Canon did years ago was the smart move, changing the colour of their lenses to white, they stand out. They have walked away from treating the professional market as a professional market.  Charging professionals that are spending tens of thousands on Canon gear to be part of their pro membership is a joke.  They are pushing the amateur market. As far as shooting sports goes, people see the white lenses on tv, they don't see Nikon, and Nikon has caught up with Canon in camera quality and more sports shooters and agencies are starting to switch. Canon will always be strong, but Nikon is on a huge push back to the pros.


----------



## Formatted

> They have walked away from treating the professional market as a professional market.



Actually they walked away with the pro market because there auto-focus was significantly better than Nikons, not because of the colour of the lenses.


----------



## imagemaker46

What I always find amusing is the number of "photographers" that rave on about being sports photographers. They talk about what sports they shoot, how good they are, and then talk about the longest lens they own is a 70-200mm, if you're shooting sports and that's all the glass you have you're an amateur playing in the professional world. I like hearing about the Sports Illustrated guys, and how the Getty( photo leeches) guys are using this or that, I see Canon on tv so they must be better, you see Canon on tv because of the white lenses. Doesn't mean that SI is using all Canon.  Some of the old school guys at SI are still trying to figure out how the gear works, that's why they have grunts with them, back in the film days, some didn't even load their own cameras, or carry their their own gear, or set up the remotes, and they didn't pay for their own gear.  I have a lot of respect for some of the SI guys, great shooters and nice guys to work with, but there are a lot that are complete jerks, the ones that start the conversation off with "I'm with SI" 

Sorry got a little off topic.


----------



## imagemaker46

Formatted you didn't realy read what I wrote, Canon created a visual market with the white lenses. Canon does have great autofocus, Nikon does as well.  Caon pushed ot the MKlll before it was ready and had focusing problems, they came very close to losing a bigger chunk of the pro market after that one. I know some pros that dropped Canon because of the MKlll.  It was the windows vista of the camera world.


----------



## Formatted

> Canon does have great autofocus, Nikon does as well.



I'm not talking about now, I'm talking about in 1995 when everyone dropped Nikon and moved to Canon. They are only just starting to come back.


----------



## imagemaker46

Ah ok, gotcha.


----------



## gsgary

Formatted said:


> Canon does have great autofocus, Nikon does as well.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not talking about now, I'm talking about in 1995 when everyone dropped Nikon and moved to Canon. They are only just starting to come back.
Click to expand...


That's when the fantastic 1Dmk1 came out still use mine for events where we print on site, small very sharp files straight out of the camera
What am i thinking of 2004 when i got mine


----------



## imagemaker46

I believe that the 1D was released in 2001, I bought mine in december 2001 for $9000.


----------



## gsgary

imagemaker46 said:


> I believe that the 1D was released in 2001, I bought mine in december 2001 for $9000.


 
I waited it cost £4000 mine has not had a new shutter still going strong and focus is fast and spot on probably the best camera i have had


----------



## imagemaker46

I've still got two 1D  bodies, basically lens holders now, they have had probably close to 500,000 frames though both of them, and are very tired cameras. I use a mkll as a main body, until the Nikon gear arrives in a couple of weeks.


----------



## gsgary

Me too my main cameras are 1DmkII's and 5D, i think it will be very hard to get hold of Nikons and Canon for a while after what has happened


----------



## Formatted

> i think it will be very hard to get hold of Nikons and Canon for a while after what has happened



I don't and I will tell you why, for at-least Nikon.

Nikon's main cameras built in Japan are the D3, D300 and D700. All of which are actually getting on a far old bit. Nikon has been producing these cameras for a good 3 years now and I guarantee with the exception of the D3s, where in some parts of the world its still a struggle to get a hold of one. That the D700 and the D300 are no longer being produced, but instead there replacements are being or beginning to be made. So I can see the release of Nikon's new cameras being pushed back a good few months. 

Nikon UK has a surplus of D700 and D300s, as they've been running rebates till about a month a go...


----------



## gsgary

Formatted said:


> i think it will be very hard to get hold of Nikons and Canon for a while after what has happened
> 
> 
> 
> I don't and I will tell you why, for at-least Nikon.
> 
> Nikon's main cameras built in Japan are the D3, D300 and D700. All of which are actually getting on a far old bit. Nikon has been producing these cameras for a good 3 years now and I guarantee with the exception of the D3s, where in some parts of the world its still a struggle to get a hold of one. That the D700 and the D300 are no longer being produced, but instead there replacements are being or beginning to be made. So I can see the release of Nikon's new cameras being pushed back a good few months.
> 
> Nikon UK has a surplus of D700 and D300s, as they've been running rebates till about a month a go...
Click to expand...

 

After what has happened in Japan i think there is more important things to worry about than getting a new camera released
http://nikonrumors.com/2011/03/13/n...possible-to-resume-operations-in-14-days.aspx


----------



## benhasajeep

gsgary said:


> Formatted said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i think it will be very hard to get hold of Nikons and Canon for a while after what has happened
> 
> 
> 
> I don't and I will tell you why, for at-least Nikon.
> 
> Nikon's main cameras built in Japan are the D3, D300 and D700. All of which are actually getting on a far old bit. Nikon has been producing these cameras for a good 3 years now and I guarantee with the exception of the D3s, where in some parts of the world its still a struggle to get a hold of one. That the D700 and the D300 are no longer being produced, but instead there replacements are being or beginning to be made. So I can see the release of Nikon's new cameras being pushed back a good few months.
> 
> Nikon UK has a surplus of D700 and D300s, as they've been running rebates till about a month a go...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> After what has happened in Japan i think there is more important things to worry about than getting a new camera released
> Nikon plants in Sendai "virtually impossible to resume operations in 14 days" | Nikon Rumors
Click to expand...

 
For employees I believe this is a true statement.  For the corporation this is not a true statement.  Disaster or not, Nikon needs to keep a good face to the public.  This is for no other reason than stock prices and market share.  Nikon will not want to appear, to not be able to supply their customers or potential customers with their product.  Just like the car companies going through bankruptcy.  They kept putting on a good face and telling you what was comming next.  What good was comming.  Nikon will be doing the same thing.  The need too!  While at the same time keeping quiet about repairs to the factory, or employees hardships, etc.


----------



## JohnMF

I recently sold my canon 40D and lenses and bought a Nikon D700. Took me about 15 minutes to get to grips with the set-up and functions, then I was good to go.

The real issue here is whether you should sell you Windows PC and get a mac.


----------



## Joves

benhasajeep said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Formatted said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't and I will tell you why, for at-least Nikon.
> 
> Nikon's main cameras built in Japan are the D3, D300 and D700. All of which are actually getting on a far old bit. Nikon has been producing these cameras for a good 3 years now and I guarantee with the exception of the D3s, where in some parts of the world its still a struggle to get a hold of one. That the D700 and the D300 are no longer being produced, but instead there replacements are being or beginning to be made. So I can see the release of Nikon's new cameras being pushed back a good few months.
> 
> Nikon UK has a surplus of D700 and D300s, as they've been running rebates till about a month a go...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After what has happened in Japan i think there is more important things to worry about than getting a new camera released
> Nikon plants in Sendai "virtually impossible to resume operations in 14 days" | Nikon Rumors
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For employees I believe this is a true statement. For the corporation this is not a true statement. Disaster or not, Nikon needs to keep a good face to the public. This is for no other reason than stock prices and market share. Nikon will not want to appear, to not be able to supply their customers or potential customers with their product. Just like the car companies going through bankruptcy. They kept putting on a good face and telling you what was comming next. What good was comming. Nikon will be doing the same thing. The need too! While at the same time keeping quiet about repairs to the factory, or employees hardships, etc.
Click to expand...

 
Well in reality they will be lucky if the local infrastructure is up in a month. I think they will be down atleat 2 months if not more while the rebuilding begins. Their only real option would be to shift production somewhere else, which could happen if the can atleast get the tooling out, but that is still a 2 month or better ordeal. Suppling product or in this case new product can be put back for the reasons of the disaster but, suppling replacement parts is another matter because it is one of the things that go towards reliability. I think they may lose many new users but, not on the lower end since those models will be unaffected.


----------



## benhasajeep

I was reading several blogs from people visiting the Sendai Nikon plant.  The cameras are hand assembled by a single person.  Takes 80 minutes on average per body.  With that known, I say Nikon would not move any production of the current models.  Unless the factory is not useable.  Which from reports is not the case.  In Nikons case the people are very important to operations!  There would be a long learning curve to train new assembly people.

It looks worse and worse for the whole region though.  Apparently Sony and Panasonic also had large facilities in Sendai.  I really feel for the people of Japan.  I looked at my companies schedule thinking we be doing some of the charters sending crews and supplies over there.  But I didn't see any.


----------



## Overread

JohnMF said:


> I recently sold my canon 40D and lenses and bought a Nikon D700. Took me about 15 minutes to get to grips with the set-up and functions, then I was good to go..


 
That's it I'm calling Tony!


----------



## JohnMF

Overread said:


> JohnMF said:
> 
> 
> 
> I recently sold my canon 40D and lenses and bought a Nikon D700. Took me about 15 minutes to get to grips with the set-up and functions, then I was good to go..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's it I'm calling Tony!
Click to expand...

 
I still have my Canon G9, does that get me off the hook?


----------



## chuasam

CNCO said:


> i know, i know its just that the long stuff is so much cheaper. everyone on tv is using canon. someone convince me!


Yes, Nikon is Junk. What Nikon stuff are you thinking of selling? I'm sure some of us Nikon users can take it off your hands.


----------



## mjhoward

What is with digging up all the year old posts?!?


----------



## pgriz

The newly joined discover the search function...


----------



## Dao

But he replied to a banned person.


----------

