# Opinion of Nikon in general



## mikoh4792 (Feb 18, 2014)

Has Nikon been losing a lot of customers due to the d600 issue? Do you guys feel as though Nikon has treated their customers unfairly/dishonestly with that problem?(releasing the d610 right after and not providing refunds/trade ins...etc).

I'm thinking of going over to canon soley because of customer service. If I'm going to stick to a certain company because of the lenses I will invest in, I need to be sure I can trust them to treat me fairly and honestly.


----------



## molested_cow (Feb 18, 2014)

You can trust me, with your money!

I've been shooting with a D700 since 2011, never had to service it, lens too.
I've been shooting with a F501 and then a F4s for more than 10 years. Well, never went back to Nikon for repairs. Any decent camera repair shop can do the job.
So what's your concern again?


----------



## mikoh4792 (Feb 18, 2014)

molested_cow said:


> You can trust me, with your money!
> 
> I've been shooting with a D700 since 2011, never had to service it, lens too.
> I've been shooting with a F501 and then a F4s for more than 10 years. Well, never went back to Nikon for repairs. Any decent camera repair shop can do the job.
> So what's your concern again?



You have not answered the question. Read again, you'll see my concern.


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 18, 2014)

mikoh4792 said:


> Has Nikon been losing a lot of customers due to the d600 issue? Do you guys feel as though Nikon has treated their customers unfairly/dishonestly with that problem?(releasing the d610 right after and not providing refunds/trade ins...etc).
> 
> I'm thinking of going over to canon soley because of customer service. If I'm going to stick to a certain company because of the lenses I will invest in, I need to be sure I can trust them to treat me fairly and honestly.



Practically none, considering very few actually had the extremely overhyped oil/dust issue and the ones that did Nikon fixed for free, so other than on the interwebs it was pretty much a non issue.


----------



## mikoh4792 (Feb 18, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> mikoh4792 said:
> 
> 
> > Has Nikon been losing a lot of customers due to the d600 issue? Do you guys feel as though Nikon has treated their customers unfairly/dishonestly with that problem?(releasing the d610 right after and not providing refunds/trade ins...etc).
> ...



I see, so it was more of a rare issue that was being exaggerated.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 18, 2014)

You should read Thom Hogan's February 2014 article entitled, "Can You Trust The Camera Makers?", located here: Can You Trust the Camera Makers? | byThom | Thom Hogan

It should be required reading for all BSO's, BCO's, and BNO's (butt-hurt Sony owners, butt-hurt Canon owners, and butt-hurt Nikon owners).


----------



## SCraig (Feb 18, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> Practically none, considering very few actually had the extremely overhyped oil/dust issue and the ones that did Nikon fixed for free, so other than on the interwebs it was pretty much a non issue.


Yes, I trust Nikon.  Yes, I think they treated their customers fairly.

I agree with Robbins.  The vocal minority shouted louder than the satisfied minority.  How many D600's have been sold?  How many had the oil problem?  We'll never know the answer to either however I'd be willing to be my bottom dollar that the former VASTLY outnumbered the latter.

Anything made on a production line is subject to occasional problems.  That's why they have a warranty period.  As far as I know Nikon fixed every one that was returned to them.  What else would you have them do?


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 18, 2014)

mikoh4792 said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > mikoh4792 said:
> ...



Yup, pretty much.  There were a few cameras that had the issue, and the owner could take it to any authorized Nikon repair center and get it fixed for free.  It was talked about a lot more often than it actually happened, and there were quite a few non-Nikon owners who would often posts stuff all over claiming to had a D600 with the problem because for some odd reason some folks seem to think if they use one brand of camera everyone else should use it too and as a result they tend to overhype any problem with any camera brand that isn't their own.  But the actual number of cameras that were brought in for repair were minuscule compared to the number of D600's that were manufactured.

All in All Nikon has an excellent track record of building a high quality product, and particularly if you purchase new or refurbished with a warranty they have an excellent reputation for addressing any warranty issues you might experience.  I own a D5200 myself, and before that a D5100.  Never had a single problem with either, both were very well constructed and I have no complaints about either.  Odds are good you'll probably end up replacing the camera long before you experience any issues with it, most people do because the technology advances so fast.  

Just take a look at Ebay and see how many D40's, D50's, D90's are out there for sale - all still in working condition even though they are very old cameras.


----------



## goodguy (Feb 18, 2014)

Chris from The Camera Store is a Canadian guy who reviews cameras on youtube, he also sells cameras for his living.
He addressed this issue with the D600 and he pretty much said this is way over hyped.
I am sure there was some issue with the oil/dust but it was really not as bad as you might think.






Did I lost my faith in Nikon ?
Not at all, I bought a Nikon D7000 which was a lemon with a well known problem of Back Focusing, if I would have lost faith with Nikon I would probably be the owner of a Pentax or Sony today but I am not I own a D7100 and I love it and love Nikon.
My next camera will probably be Nikon as well.


----------



## mikoh4792 (Feb 18, 2014)

Thanks for all the replies, appreciate it. I'll look into that reading Derrel


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 18, 2014)

mikoh4792 said:


> Thanks for all the replies, appreciate it. I'll look into that reading Derrel



No worries, happy to help.  I went Nikon myself for the image quality and low light performance, never regretted my decision.


----------



## pondball (Feb 18, 2014)

A few years back my old cool pix 5700 suddenly went south... All that I saw after taking a shot was grey crap in the viewfinder... It was at least two years beyond warranty so I searched around to see what the problem might be and found out that there had been a problem with the sensors in that camera... Not having a camera shop within 30 Km's I enquired directly from nikon if I could send it back to their repair shop for evaluation to see if it could be fixed or if I should start looking for a new camera. Deep down I was hoping it was beyond repair so that I could justify moving up to a dslr... 

THe short of is that two weeks later I received a parcel back from nikon with my fully functional cool pix 5700... They had done whatever was necessary (something about the sensor) as well as given it a thorough cleaning and it has been working perfectly well ever since. This, again, was years past its warranty. Customer service... Can't think it could be any better than that... There was no charge for the repair, nor for the shipping! 

On that day nikon won themselves a loyal customer. In the past month I have since kitted out with a barely used D700 and set of lens (sorry, glass... I'm learning). Rightly or wrongly I spent little time looking at other manufacturers offerings, rather spent my time evaluating many different models of nikon and having been enjoying my new baby ever since.


----------



## KmH (Feb 18, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> Practically none, considering very few actually had the extremely overhyped oil/dust issue and the ones that did Nikon fixed for free, so other than on the interwebs it was pretty much a non issue.


Yep. Blown way out of proportion.
Most of those reporting oil spots problems had no technical understanding and  actually had dust on their image sensor.

A member recently reported being 'irritated' because one of 2 of his lenses had spots he couldn't get rid of.
That too was a case of lacking technical knowledge and the issues was he had dust on his image sensor.

Imagine how many D600s Nikon USA Service had to deal with that has no oil spots because people just assumed *ANY* spot absolutely had to be oil.
Imagine how many new D600s got returned based on the-sky-is-falling, the-sky-is-falling, the-sky-is-falling wails from less than fully informed online information.


----------



## tirediron (Feb 18, 2014)

~$15K in Nikon gear, been digital since the D1/D100 came out.  In all that time I've had ONE occasion to use Nikon's service; my 24-70 focusing helicoil packed it in.  I shipped it off (under warranty) and received a BRAND NEW replacement lens in <3 weeks.  I received two telephone calls during that time advising me of the status of the repair, and a follow-up e-mail.  NO complaints with Nikon WHATSOEVER!


----------



## PaulWog (Feb 19, 2014)

I bought the D5200 knowing about the issues with the D600.

Here was my thought-process: I really wanted the D600, but read about the issues. Instead of judging the company, I judged the product model. I would've gone with the Canon 6D (I actually wish I did -- company has nothing to do with it), but I went with the D5200 and I've had no issues.

From someone who wanted the D600, I would've bought the D610 if it was out at the time I was buying. I felt the Canon 6D didn't represent enough value for the money (I think I was specifically looking at the AF system, but I was totally new to photography at the time).

Anyways... long story short... the D600 issue did cause me to think hard for a bit about Nikon... but in the end, it's just one problem. I stop believing in a company once I'm personally treated poorly, or once they start making repeat mistakes (ex. if their D610 started to have issues, or if they released a D620 with issues... and just kept cutting corners over and over).


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 19, 2014)

I bought a d600 refurbished a few months ago.  I was worried about the issues I've read and was contemplating saving up more for a d610.  But from what I've read the oil issue was related to an early production run.  And Nikon fixed or replaced all the d600s that were sent to them.  So they stand behind their product.  But, as a consumer I also don't want to lose my newly purchased camera for xx weeks.  So that was part of my decision.  

I also own a d7000 and have not had a problem at all with it since buying it new.


----------



## bigal1000 (Feb 19, 2014)

Maybe you should buy a Canon if you think their customer service is better than Nikon's I own several Canons they are no better or worse than Nikon and I've heard horror stories about Canon do you really need us to tell you what to do ? Not trying to be a wiseguy but I like to do a lot of research make up my own mind when I buy something .......I think Nikon was fair with people with the early 600's they fixed or repaired them. Off topic a bit but how many recalls has Toyota had did everyone with a recall notice get a brand new car !


----------



## TheLost (Feb 19, 2014)

mikoh4792 said:


> I'm thinking of going over to canon soley because of customer service. If I'm going to stick to a certain company because of the lenses I will invest in, I need to be sure I can trust them to treat me fairly and honestly.



HAHAHahahaha..  I've dealt with Canon on a few issues before.  Good luck to you!

You'll probably have better luck with Fuji if you want a company to kiss-your-butt-for-business since they are (relatively) smaller and are trying to grow their user base.


----------



## vipgraphx (Feb 19, 2014)

I have been shooting nikon for years now and always stood behind the brand. The only reason I have been looking into another brand this time around is because the current nikon line up is a bit off from what I want right now.  The d600/610 does not have everything I need out of a camera and the d800 is overkill for my needs. I really wish there was something I between like all the features in the d800 but 24MP.  

I know this May sound crazy but I bought. D610 and noticed oil or dust problems right away. For a brand new camera it was way to much to ignore and it was only getting worse fast. 

Does it steer me away, not really but what does steer me away is that I have found myself not really having a nikon camera that fits fits my needs. I really like the d700 it was everything I needed hopefully there will be a d700 replacement soon. 

Other wise canon or sony this time around for me.


----------



## yioties (Feb 19, 2014)

How many people bought the D600 knowing that there MIGHT be a oil issue on the sensor? I had an issue when I bought my D5100 and sent it to Nikon and got a new camera and lens in 3 weeks! I've had a great experience with Nikon so far.


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 19, 2014)

vipgraphx said:


> I have been shooting nikon for years now and always stood behind the brand. The only reason I have been looking into another brand this time around is because the current nikon line up is a bit off from what I want right now.  The d600/610 does not have everything I need out of a camera and the d800 is overkill for my needs. I really wish there was something I between like all the features in the d800 but 24MP.
> 
> I know this May sound crazy but I bought. D610 and noticed oil or dust problems right away. For a brand new camera it was way to much to ignore and it was only getting worse fast.
> 
> ...



I was also holding out for a 700 replacement .. 24mp and video.  I used a 700  before and loved it. I love the dual back focus buttons and build and quick WB/ISO buttons on top. But ..... no 700 replacement in sight so I got the 600. The 800 36mp i thought was overkill for my needs and too pricey.


----------



## kathyt (Feb 19, 2014)

Never heard of it. I would stick to a well known brand like Canon.


----------



## MGRPhoto (Feb 19, 2014)

Funny thing is looking through the Buy/Sell/Marketplace section of various photography forums you see people make such a big deal about imported vs US because apparently Authorized Nikon Repair locations won't touch them. I've been sending imported gear to Nikon shops for years and they've always treated that gear the same as my US gear. I've always had good experience with them.


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 19, 2014)

kathyt said:


> Never heard of it. I would stick to a well known brand like Canon.


I also use a Canon every day.

I print to it, use it to copy papers and fax with it.

works pretty good too.


----------



## KmH (Feb 19, 2014)

MGRPhoto said:


> Funny thing is looking through the Buy/Sell/Marketplace section of various photography forums you see people make such a big deal about imported vs US because apparently Authorized Nikon Repair locations won't touch them. I've been sending imported gear to Nikon shops for years and they've always treated that gear the same as my US gear. I've always had good experience with them.


Nikon USA Service - East & West - are the only 2 Nikon Corporation repair facilities in the USA.
Nikon USA Service will not work on non-US serial numbered Nikon gear.

There are other independent, but Nikon authorized repair shops.
Nikon does not sell Nikon parts to shops not authorized by Nikon.
The authorized independent shops are allowed to work on non-US serial numbered Nikon gear, but you are dealing with the independent shop and not Nikon.


----------



## ratssass (Feb 19, 2014)

"It's not a camera..It' a _*NIKON*_"


----------



## TheLost (Feb 19, 2014)

MGRPhoto said:


> Funny thing is looking through the Buy/Sell/Marketplace section of various photography forums you see people make such a big deal about imported vs US because apparently Authorized Nikon Repair locations won't touch them. I've been sending imported gear to Nikon shops for years and they've always treated that gear the same as my US gear. I've always had good experience with them.



I bought a 'grey' market Nikon 28-300mm G from B&H back in 2003..  I tried to send it to Nikon in 2007 and they wouldn't touch it.  

I cant really blame Nikon because i knew about the 'grey' market issue before i bought the lens and i saved about $100 vs. the U.S version...  I ended up sending it to a 3rd party repair shop (Nikon Authorized) and they did a great job on the repair for probably less then Nikon would have charged me.

Point is...  Nikon USA won't touch import/grey market products.


----------



## MGRPhoto (Feb 19, 2014)

KmH said:


> MGRPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Funny thing is looking through the Buy/Sell/Marketplace section of various photography forums you see people make such a big deal about imported vs US because apparently Authorized Nikon Repair locations won't touch them. I've been sending imported gear to Nikon shops for years and they've always treated that gear the same as my US gear. I've always had good experience with them.
> ...





TheLost said:


> MGRPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Funny thing is looking through the Buy/Sell/Marketplace section of various photography forums you see people make such a big deal about imported vs US because apparently Authorized Nikon Repair locations won't touch them. I've been sending imported gear to Nikon shops for years and they've always treated that gear the same as my US gear. I've always had good experience with them.
> ...




Well they've never had an issue working on the grey market/imported lenses I've sent them. I should clarify, I've always used the repair form on Nikon's site and sent them to their facilities.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 19, 2014)

kathyt said:


> Never heard of it. I would stick to a well known brand like Canon.


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 19, 2014)

Derrel said:


> kathyt said:
> 
> 
> > Never heard of it. I would stick to a well known brand like Canon.
> ...



See, there you go again.  I was going to tell kathyt if she keeps it up, she is going to get a cartoon.


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 19, 2014)

Heck, after seeing Matthew's eagle shots, I darn near got poopie pants and ordered a D7100 :mrgreen:

Dude, it would not take much to figure out that in Nikon or Canon you are dealing with pretty much the top two dawgz - for somewhat normal people.  (had to throw that in for the Leica folks).


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 19, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> Heck, after seeing Matthew's eagle shots, I darn near got poopie pants and ordered a D7100 :mrgreen:
> 
> Dude, it would not take much to figure out that in Nikon or Canon you are dealing with pretty much the top two dawgz - for somewhat normal people. (had to throw that in for the Leica folks).



Ok, wait.. is the poopie pants thing required for D7100 shooting?  Because if so I might just stick with my D5200.. lol


----------



## slow231 (Feb 19, 2014)

yioties said:


> How many people bought the D600 knowing that there MIGHT be a oil issue on the sensor? I had an issue when I bought my D5100 and sent it to Nikon and got a new camera and lens in 3 weeks! I've had a great experience with Nikon so far.



I did, and mine does have the oil issue.  mine was also a factory refurb too (ie checked out by nikon).  It's annoying, it gets dirty VERY fast, and is very annoying to clean (usually taking multiple wet swabs).  That said I love the camera.  It's an awesome mix of IQ, low light, and light weight (yes this is a plus for someone who actually uses their camera professionally... but that's another rant).  I just have to clean it WAY more often than i'd like, and it takes a lot longer than i'd like.

the oil doesn't annoy me nearly much as all of the people WITHOUT D600's who like to chime in about the problem being hyped. this thread is a perfect example, look at all of those who felt the need to say something about the problem being hype... how many own d600's?  I actually have a dog in this fight, and i don't complain about the problem nearly as much as these guys b*tch about it not being a problem.

not saying that they can't potentially have decent 2nd hand info or research... but none have actual experience either positively or negatively in relation to the problem.  in the end they're just parroting what they've heard... aka hype.  not surprisingly it's the same people who like to give lens reviews/advice about lenses they've never used.

IMO it's wrong to say "it's just dust", it's not. or that "it clears up after xxx shots", because it's still pretty strong after dozens of 1000's of shots, perhaps it got better, but certainly not gone. and i have no idea where people are getting their #'s concerning "few isolated incidents".  It certainly affected a good chunk of the early products which was clearly evident by the first initial lensrental report that started the whole issue.  a lot of what's being said is from people who have absolutely no clue or experience with what they're talking about.  funny how they're the ones complaining about hype.

back to the OP no i haven't lost faith.  a company like this isn't going to recall all their cameras for something that's really not catastrophic.  Like i said I have one with the dust issue. and I knew this when i still had a chance to return it.  I didn't, and still wouldn't today.  Nikon makes great cameras, imo better than the other options out there dust/oil or not.


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 19, 2014)

fyi, my d600 refurb from a few months ago has been clean so far.  but i haven't put thousands and thousands of shots on it yet


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 19, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > Heck, after seeing Matthew's eagle shots, I darn near got poopie pants and ordered a D7100 :mrgreen:
> ...



Well you know for wildlife photography, you have to blend in with the elements.  Poopie pants attract vultures really well.  Don't knock it til you smell it...errrr try it.


----------



## CaptainNapalm (Feb 19, 2014)

My personal experience with Nikon has been outstanding from the customer service standpoint.  I dropped off my camera to have it repaired under warranty for a faulty shutter mechanism at a service centre.  The repairs are advertised to take 4-6 weeks.  I got my camera back within 2 weeks with shutter mechanism replaced. Not only that, they had replaced the full camera grip and top frame which was dented from damage I inflicted by dropping the camera from 2 meters high on concrete my own fault which they didn't have to do. They also cleaned my sensor and camera on the outside and have me a free Nikon shirt and camera cleaning kit when I picked up the camera. Total cost to me for all this = zero. I'll be sticking with Nikon.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 19, 2014)

Lemme see...FM, FM-2, FE, FE-2, F3HP, F2A, F2 ASB, N90s, F FTN, D1, D1h, D70,D2x, D3x... so I have owned 14 Nikon bodies. Only issues were the D1 developed a diaphragm actuator problem, and had to be sent to Nikon, Torrance, Calif. repair facility. The FE was a bit dodgy too, so I sold it on to the next fellow (I was owner #2 on the FE, owner #2 on the D1 as well). Over 50 Nikkor lenses, made from the early 1960's to as recently as 2012, only had ONE lens repair, that of a 1970-era 35mm f/1.4 whose diaphragm crapped out in 1985. Only one really chitty lens, a 35-135 Zoom-Nikkor (I was owner #4 of that utter POS optics).

Overall, a good record. TWO items sent in for repair since 1982.


----------



## yioties (Feb 19, 2014)

Nikon in Mississauga gives great service


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 19, 2014)

slow231 said:


> yioties said:
> 
> 
> > How many people bought the D600 knowing that there MIGHT be a oil issue on the sensor? I had an issue when I bought my D5100 and sent it to Nikon and got a new camera and lens in 3 weeks! I've had a great experience with Nikon so far.
> ...



Ok, well if you bought refurb with a warranty why not send it back in to get the problem addressed?  Have you actually done anything proactive about the situation or informed anyone where you purchased the camera or anyone at Nikon that your having an issue?  Because of the folks that I talked to who had the problem, everyone that did say once they actually contacted someone at Nikon or the authorized dealer they bought it from the issue was addressed and fixed.

As for the numbers, Nikon never really officially released any numbers on it but they do release their sales numbers, and had the problem been anywhere near as bad as the interwebs made it out to be you would expect to see a pretty noticeable downward spike there at some stage, and there isn't one.    While you might have some anecdotal evidence, well I'm sorry to say that really doesn't make you any more of an expert on the topic than anyone else, nor does it make anyone else less qualified to speak on the subject than you are, I'm sorry but that's just a non sequiter.

You'll also note that the OP's question isn't so much specifically about the D600 but about Nikon as a company and how well they stand behind their products.  In my experience and in the experience of many others, they seem to stand behind their products fairly well.


----------



## grafxman (Feb 19, 2014)

As a Canon guy I'm not going to diss Nikon however there is one thing about Nikon stuff that has long puzzled me. For some reason there always seems to be more used Nikon gear for sale than Canon gear. I first noticed this when I was looking for a used Sigma lens a few years ago. Everywhere I went, fredmiranda, KEH, bhphoto, craigslist, ebay, etc. it seemed there were always Nikons available but no Canons. Anyway, before I wrote this I just did a little survey of used gear. At KEH I found 47 Canon bodies and 59 Nikon bodies. There were 83 Canon lenses and 121 Nikon lenses of all types. At bhphoto there were 57 used Canon cameras and 64 used Nikon cameras. Here on the TPF there are 2 Canon items for sale and 14 Nikon items.

I don't know what this means. Maybe Nikon sells a lot more cameras than Canon. Maybe Nikon owners are more dissatisfied with their gear than Canon owners. Or, it could mean something else. In any event, Nikon lovers have a much wider selection of used stuff to choose from. I just think it's a bit odd. Then too, some folks think I'm a bit odd.


----------



## mikoh4792 (Feb 19, 2014)

bigal1000 said:


> Maybe you should buy a Canon if you think their customer service is better than Nikon's I own several Canons they are no better or worse than Nikon and I've heard horror stories about Canon do you really need us to tell you what to do ? Not trying to be a wiseguy but I like to do a lot of research make up my own mind when I buy something



I just came here to get people's opinion, I don't see the problem. I am getting people's opinion, and then making up my own mind.... I usually like to see what other people think when I am new to a certain hobby.


----------



## grafxman (Feb 19, 2014)

slow231 said:


> yioties said:
> 
> 
> > How many people bought the D600 knowing that there MIGHT be a oil issue on the sensor? I had an issue when I bought my D5100 and sent it to Nikon and got a new camera and lens in 3 weeks! I've had a great experience with Nikon so far.
> ...



I've got nearly 19,000 photos and videos on flickr and nearly all of them were shot with Canons (50D, 7D, 6D) and I have never, ever had to clean a single camera. Many of my shots are outdoors in windy, dusty, moist, high humidity areas too. I have camera cleaning gear and I have had to get stuff off of lenses. Frankly speaking, if had a camera that I had to frequently wet swab clean I wouldn't even sell it. I would toss it in the garbage can after I blasted it with my 12 gauge so nobody else would get stuck with it then buy a different brand. But that's just me I guess. I have a low tolerance for things that cause me aggravation.


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 19, 2014)

grafxman said:


> As a Canon guy I'm not going to diss Nikon however there is one thing about Nikon stuff that has long puzzled me. For some reason there always seems to be more used Nikon gear for sale than Canon gear. I first noticed this when I was looking for a used Sigma lens a few years ago. Everywhere I went, fredmiranda, KEH, bhphoto, craigslist, ebay, etc. it seemed there were always Nikons available but no Canons. Anyway, before I wrote this I just did a little survey of used gear. At KEH I found 47 Canon bodies and 59 Nikon bodies. There were 83 Canon lenses and 121 Nikon lenses of all types. At bhphoto there were 57 used Canon cameras and 64 used Nikon cameras. Here on the TPF there are 2 Canon items for sale and 14 Nikon items.
> 
> I don't know what this means. Maybe Nikon sells a lot more cameras than Canon. Maybe Nikon owners are more dissatisfied with their gear than Canon owners. Or, it could mean something else. In any event, Nikon lovers have a much wider selection of used stuff to choose from. I just think it's a bit odd. Then too, some folks think I'm a bit odd.



Or it could be that more Nikon owners start with the entry level and then upgrade equipment whereas more canon owners stick with the entry level gear for longer - indicating that maybe Nikon has an edge in the "intermediate/hobbiest" end of the market but Canon has the edge in the "beginner" level.  

Or It might also be dependent on your local area to a certain extent, I know in my local area the exact opposite is true.  You can't swing a dead cat without hitting a craigslist listing for canon gear, but I can count on one hand the number of listings for used Nikon gear.

Or it could have something to do with the winter solstice.  Maybe it's a druid thing?  Who knows about these things.. lol


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 19, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> Well you know for wildlife photography, you have to blend in with the elements.  Poopie pants attract vultures really well.  Don't knock it til you smell it...errrr try it.



you know CostalConn wears a Fish suit to get his shots.

I tried wearing a fish suit recently.  And I got FABULOUS Closeup Shots with my 10mm as the Eagle was carrying me away


----------



## runnah (Feb 19, 2014)

Nikons are for technicians and Canons are for artists.


----------



## yioties (Feb 19, 2014)

Give an artist a camera and 9 out of 10 times his images will be crap but a technician will read the manual and his image will rock!


----------



## runnah (Feb 19, 2014)

yioties said:


> Give an artist a camera and 9 out of 10 times his images will be crap but a technician will read the manual and his image will rock!



That could not possibly be further from the truth.


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 19, 2014)

Guess I would have to look it up, but if it was not much of an issue or over hyped...then why would they make the D610 replacement so soon after?  

Either way,  I would not see a reason to lose faith on a proven company because one product had issues.


----------



## runnah (Feb 19, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> Guess I would have to look it up, but if it was not much of an issue or over hyped...then why would they make the D610 replacement so soon after?  Either way,  I would not see a reason to lose faith on a proven company because one product had issues.



Ford pinto.


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 19, 2014)

grafxman said:


> As a Canon guy I'm not going to diss Nikon however there is one thing about Nikon stuff that has long puzzled me. For some reason there always seems to be more used Nikon gear for sale than Canon gear. I first noticed this when I was looking for a used Sigma lens a few years ago. Everywhere I went, fredmiranda, KEH, bhphoto, craigslist, ebay, etc. it seemed there were always Nikons available but no Canons. Anyway, before I wrote this I just did a little survey of used gear. At KEH I found 47 Canon bodies and 59 Nikon bodies. There were 83 Canon lenses and 121 Nikon lenses of all types. At bhphoto there were 57 used Canon cameras and 64 used Nikon cameras. Here on the TPF there are 2 Canon items for sale and 14 Nikon items.
> 
> I don't know what this means. Maybe Nikon sells a lot more cameras than Canon. Maybe Nikon owners are more dissatisfied with their gear than Canon owners. Or, it could mean something else. In any event, Nikon lovers have a much wider selection of used stuff to choose from. I just think it's a bit odd. Then too, some folks think I'm a bit odd.



Yes, you are certainly odd.  I've never been accused of being even - so there you go.


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 19, 2014)

runnah said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > Guess I would have to look it up, but if it was not much of an issue or over hyped...then why would they make the D610 replacement so soon after? Either way, I would not see a reason to lose faith on a proven company because one product had issues.
> ...


   Ooopsie    Kris Cross that out


----------



## grafxman (Feb 19, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> grafxman said:
> 
> 
> > As a Canon guy I'm not going to diss Nikon however there is one thing about Nikon stuff that has long puzzled me. For some reason there always seems to be more used Nikon gear for sale than Canon gear. I first noticed this when I was looking for a used Sigma lens a few years ago. Everywhere I went, fredmiranda, KEH, bhphoto, craigslist, ebay, etc. it seemed there were always Nikons available but no Canons. Anyway, before I wrote this I just did a little survey of used gear. At KEH I found 47 Canon bodies and 59 Nikon bodies. There were 83 Canon lenses and 121 Nikon lenses of all types. At bhphoto there were 57 used Canon cameras and 64 used Nikon cameras. Here on the TPF there are 2 Canon items for sale and 14 Nikon items.
> ...



Then you must be uneven.


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 19, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > JacaRanda said:
> ...



Hey now.. I happen to own a 72 ford pinto.  Believe me, never had any worry that the gas tank would go up in a rear end collision.  They have to catch me first to hit me from behind, and not a lot of stuff on the road is capable of that particular feat.. lol


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 19, 2014)

grafxman said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > grafxman said:
> ...


  And unbalanced too.  I could not catch a break.


----------



## Annaa (Feb 19, 2014)

I've had three Nikon DSLRs so far - D50 (purchased in 2006), D200 (2008) and now a D600 (2013). All three cameras have worked perfectly for as long as I've had them. I still use both my D50 and D200 from time to time - no issues.

I've also had absolutely no problems with spots/dust/oil/whatever on my D600. It's a fantastic camera. I do think this whole thing is totally over hyped. From what I've heard, Nikon will fix any camera with this problem for free, or give you a brand new one (recently I've heard of people getting a brand new D610 instead of the D600, too). What more can they do? That's what I would expect from them, and that's what they're doing. Enough for me.

I bought the D600 even though people were already complaining about it when I made the purchase, because I liked it and because it felt right. I'm very glad I did - it's been an amazing companion over the last 6 months and every single time I use it I'm blown away all over again by the image quality it produces. If anything, I feel sad that such a great camera gets lost in all the negativity about this issue. The media/internet is definitely making it look way worse than it is. Most of the people ranting and complaining about this are people who has never used or owned a D600, and definitely not encountered said issue.


----------



## Annaa (Feb 19, 2014)

grafxman said:


> As a Canon guy I'm not going to diss Nikon however there is one thing about Nikon stuff that has long puzzled me. For some reason there always seems to be more used Nikon gear for sale than Canon gear. I first noticed this when I was looking for a used Sigma lens a few years ago. Everywhere I went, fredmiranda, KEH, bhphoto, craigslist, ebay, etc. it seemed there were always Nikons available but no Canons. Anyway, before I wrote this I just did a little survey of used gear. At KEH I found 47 Canon bodies and 59 Nikon bodies. There were 83 Canon lenses and 121 Nikon lenses of all types. At bhphoto there were 57 used Canon cameras and 64 used Nikon cameras. Here on the TPF there are 2 Canon items for sale and 14 Nikon items.
> 
> I don't know what this means. Maybe Nikon sells a lot more cameras than Canon. Maybe Nikon owners are more dissatisfied with their gear than Canon owners. Or, it could mean something else. In any event, Nikon lovers have a much wider selection of used stuff to choose from. I just think it's a bit odd. Then too, some folks think I'm a bit odd.




... Or maybe Nikon users are so satisfied with their gear that they can't resist but to buy new stuff all the time - and to fit it all in their collection/afford it, they're forced to sell their old stuff.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 19, 2014)

Canon makes a damned fine photocopier!!!! And some freaking awesome calculators!


----------



## grafxman (Feb 19, 2014)

Annaa said:


> grafxman said:
> 
> 
> > As a Canon guy I'm not going to diss Nikon however there is one thing about Nikon stuff that has long puzzled me. For some reason there always seems to be more used Nikon gear for sale than Canon gear. I first noticed this when I was looking for a used Sigma lens a few years ago. Everywhere I went, fredmiranda, KEH, bhphoto, craigslist, ebay, etc. it seemed there were always Nikons available but no Canons. Anyway, before I wrote this I just did a little survey of used gear. At KEH I found 47 Canon bodies and 59 Nikon bodies. There were 83 Canon lenses and 121 Nikon lenses of all types. At bhphoto there were 57 used Canon cameras and 64 used Nikon cameras. Here on the TPF there are 2 Canon items for sale and 14 Nikon items.
> ...



Perhaps. As for me, I only buy a new camera when the new one offers a significant advantage over the one I'm currently using. I bought the 7D because the 50D couldn't shoot video and the 7D could. I bought the 6D because it is substantially better in low light than the 7D. I only buy a new lens when it fills a specific need that I've identified. It seems unusual, to me at least, and irrational to do otherwise. Not to mention financially unwise.


----------



## runnah (Feb 19, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Canon makes a damned fine photocopier!!!! And some freaking awesome calculators!  <img src="http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=67111"/>



Nikon makes some sweet glasses!

http://nikon-lenswear.com

Probably because they know their demo is the nerdy glasses wearing types.


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 19, 2014)

Well I buy because I love working overtime.  So Hmmmffff...


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 19, 2014)

grafxman said:


> Annaa said:
> 
> 
> > grafxman said:
> ...



Ok, well I'm pretty much the same way - I had a d5100, I ended up getting a D5200.  Takes better pictures, higher MP sensor lets me crop more which is great for the sort of photography I do, shoots a little faster which is also good for the types of pictures I take, all in all a very good upgrade.  Even better when you consider I didn't actually spend any money on it.  I was actually looking at upgrading to the 7100, just sort of fell into the d5200 by accident.  

But the "upgrade for advantage" thing isn't specific to people who buy one brand of camera or another, so I guess I'm a little lost when it comes to this response.  A lot of folks will start with an entry level camera like the 3200, use it for a while, realize they want some more advanced features and upgrade.  Happens all the time.  I'm sure it happens on the Canon side of the fence too.  The point of my posting is that truthfully we have no idea why sometimes you'll see more used canon gear for sale than nikon or vice versa.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 19, 2014)

grafxman said:
			
		

> Perhaps. As for me, I only buy a new camera when the new one offers a significant advantage over the one I'm currently using. I bought the 7D because the 50D couldn't shoot video and the 7D could. I bought the 6D because it is substantially better in low light than the 7D. I only buy a new lens when it fills a specific need that I've identified. It seems unusual, to me at least, and irrational to do otherwise. Not to mention financially unwise.



Well, there you go...Canon did not update its APS-C sensor cameras since the 7D came out in 2009...they're still using the same, tired, outdated sensor in basically all of their APS-C line. THey added approximately 2 million focus-detect pixels in the 70D, but the entire Digital Rebel and XXD line has used the same .50 micron sensor tech and the same sensor that was current back in early 2008, when they were designing the 7D. SInce then it's been basically a flat performance line for model after model after model after model after model after model in Canon's crop-body cameras...so Canoin users have had no real reason to upgrade or buy new cameras for the past half of a decade.

The only area Canon has made any improvement in has been in their full-frame models. Canon still clings to its home-brewed sensor technology though, while Sony and Toshiba have pulled far ahead, and spent billions of Yen to upgrade their sensor fabrication plants and technology. 

And you wonder why Canon users are not "upgrading"? There has been NO REAL UPGRADE path for the majority, the APS-C sensor crowd, since 2009...same old chit, only with a new model number on it,iteration after iteration after iteration... the only Canon users who have been able to benefit have been those who have the money to go full-frame...


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 19, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> grafxman said:
> 
> 
> > Annaa said:
> ...


----------



## grafxman (Feb 19, 2014)

Derrel said:


> grafxman said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'll give you credit for knowing something I don't. However several months ago I posted a link to a videomaker article about Canon's extremely sensitive new sensor. The article link is dead now but google's cache still has it. Here's an excerpt:

Back in March Canon announced that they had developed a high sensitivity 35mm full-frame CMOS sensor built for one purpose, shooting video. The sensor features pixels measuring 19 microns square in size. While this may not sound very large, its actually more than 7.5-times the surface area of the pixels on the CMOS sensor youll find in the top-of-the-line EOS-1D X and other digital SLR cameras. In addition, the sensor's pixels and readout circuitry employ new technologies that reduce noise, which tends to increase as pixel size increases. Utilizing these technologies, the sensor makes it possible to shoot clearly visible video in dimly lit environments with as little as 0.03 lux of illumination (about the brightness of a crescent moon). This initial announcement was accompanied by some pretty impressive comparison tests. - 

Here's a link to the google cache:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Canon's Ridiculously Sensitive CMOS Sensor | Videomaker.com

A video camera with this sensor was used to record color video of fireflies at 30 frames in .01 lux of light. So Canon hasn't been goofing off. They just haven't got the technology down to the user yet.


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 19, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > grafxman said:
> ...


----------



## Derrel (Feb 19, 2014)

Yes, I recall seeing that ultra-large pixel video sensor Canon had developed. Of course, it's gone exactly nowhere, and done nothing for anybody, but it did make the web for a week or two before fading away to nothingness.

The way I see it, a camera maker can make and sell its customers the best cameras it possibly can by procuring the BEST-possible sensors available, like Nikon and Pentax are doing, or a camera maker can use outdated technology in an effort to keep keep profits high for itself, and force its users to settle for second-rate performance. That's what Canon has been doing since 2009 with its entire APS-C lineup. They are still in the "Pentium 4" frame of mind, meaning "Good enough for our users." Profits over performance. "Good enough".


----------



## grafxman (Feb 19, 2014)

Derrel said:


> Yes, I recall seeing that ultra-large pixel video sensor Canon had developed. Of course, it's gone exactly nowhere, and done nothing for anybody, but it did make the web for a week or two before fading away to nothingness.
> 
> The way I see it, a camera maker can make and sell its customers the best cameras it possibly can by procuring the BEST-possible sensors available, like Nikon and Pentax are doing, or a camera maker can use outdated technology in an effort to keep keep profits high for itself, and force its users to settle for second-rate performance. That's what Canon has been doing since 2009 with its entire APS-C lineup. They are still in the "Pentium 4" frame of mind, meaning "Good enough for our users." Profits over performance. "Good enough".



Derrel, I seriously doubt that anyone using a 70D or 7D feel as if they're using a second rate camera. In fact they seem to like them well enough to hold on to them instead of constantly selling them and trading them around like I've already shown that many Nikon users are doing a lot of with their gear. Also, I'm absolutely certain that neither you or probably anyone else here has a clue as to what Canon's "frame of mind" is or Nikon's either for that matter. Since you think Pentax sensors are the best available why don't you use a Pentax instead of a Nikon? It would give you opportunity to sell and trade that Nikon gear some more.


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 19, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > robbins.photo said:
> ...


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 19, 2014)

grafxman said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I recall seeing that ultra-large pixel video sensor Canon had developed. Of course, it's gone exactly nowhere, and done nothing for anybody, but it did make the web for a week or two before fading away to nothingness.
> ...



Ok, well as a general rule I tend to avoid this topic of conversation, however did you happen to notice that the two cameras you mentioned?  First, the 70d - lets see, it's the newest release in the APS-C sensor line up for Canon and costs over $1000.  The 7D?  Also well over $1000.  Even though both of these cameras cost over twice what my Nikon D5200 costs, neither can match it for either low light performance or image quality.  

As Derrel mentioned, all of the other cameras Canon makes that are in the less than $1000 use essentially the same sensor.  So if you own say an older T2I you might as well hang onto it until you can afford a 70d or a 7d or some other $1000 plus camera because your not going to see any difference between the images you take with a T2I and the images you take with a 50d, or a 60d, etc.

So rather than shoveling snark about how you anecdotally claim that Nikon users are selling off their equipment in droves maybe you should stop and consider the fact that when I owned the 16 mp D5100 I had several options I could upgrade to that cost less than $1000 and would actually improve my image quality significantly.  If I owned a T2I I've got the 7D, the 70D or I really need to pull out my wallet and go full frame.

So, that having been said, I really do understand why some folks like Canon and stick with it, and there are other reasons why one might go from a T2I to a 50d or 60d.  But image quality and lowlight peformance will stay pretty much the same, which frankly doesn't really appeal to me personally.  There are some features that Canon offers that might really suit someones needs well.  But they really don't suit my needs as well as Nikon, so I went Nikon. 

So maybe you can just like and enjoy your Canon, you can let me enjoy my Nikon, and we can just give this whole thing a rest.


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 19, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > JacaRanda said:
> ...


----------



## Derrel (Feb 19, 2014)

grafxman said:
			
		

> Derrel, I seriously doubt that anyone using a 70D or 7D feel as if they're using a second rate camera. In fact they seem to like them well enough to hold on to them instead of constantly selling them and trading them around like I've already shown that many Nikon users are doing a lot of with their gear. Also, I'm absolutely certain that neither you or probably anyone else here has a clue as to what Canon's "frame of mind" is or Nikon's either for that matter. Since you think Pentax sensors are the best available why don't you use a Pentax instead of a Nikon? It would give you opportunity to sell and trade that Nikon gear some more.



Oh, sorry, my bad...I should have said, "Ninety-fifth rated" for the 70D, 



and "One hundred and thirteenth-rated," for the Canon 7D. My bad, my bad. I meant second rate in a kind sort of way, though.
 

You "do know" that Pentax cameras are made using the same sensors that Nikon is "also buying" from Sony, right?? And that Canon's highest-rated camera is 25th in sensor performance? 

Canon's frame of mind is clearly that of a company that's lagging behind behind a whole slug of Nikon, Sony, and Pentax cameras, all of which user newer, better, higher-perfoming sensors made on newer, better, more-advanced sensor manufacturing machinery. 

Canon has photocopiers and calculators and flatbed scanners to make, office machines to produce, and despite millions of dollars in R&D in the imaging division spent for the last five years, they've been unable to see their way clear to migrate their sensor fabrication to the modern-era with the .19 micron process that Sony and Toshiba have invested in. Canon uses OLD technology to make its sensors. Period. Outdated, old-fashioned, already-payed for machinery that they have willingly *not updated*. This is why the BEST that Canon can do is its 1Dx, which scores a DxO mark sensor performance rating of 82 points, which places their BEST camera at 25th place, tied with the Nikon D3300, which also scores 82.


----------



## grafxman (Feb 19, 2014)

I think there's quite a bit more to a camera than just it's sensor. I'm happy with my Canons. I know you'll stay happy with your Nikons. But know this Derrel, if I thought that Nikons were significantly better than Canons I would go to Nikons. I would have Sigma convert my lenses to Nikon. But I just don't see it. I've seen posts here about people dumping their Nikons for Canons. I seen posts here about people having to wet swab their Nikons frequently to avoid oil collecting dirt. Like I said, there's a lot more to a camera than just it's sensor.


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 19, 2014)

grafxman said:


> I think there's quite a bit more to a camera than just it's sensor. I'm happy with my Canons. I know you'll stay happy with your Nikons. But know this Derrel, if I thought that Nikons were significantly better than Canons I would go to Nikons. I would have Sigma convert my lenses to Nikon. But I just don't see it. I've seen posts here about people dumping their Nikons for Canons. I seen posts here about people having to wet swab their Nikons frequently to avoid oil collecting dirt. Like I said, there's a lot more to a camera than just it's sensor.



Sadly then I think it's safe to say you only see what you wish to see.  I've seen plenty of posts by Canon users selling there gear.  Maybe they are switching brands, maybe they are just upgrading to newer equipment, etc.  I've also seen plenty of posts by canon folks who need to clean their sensor, or are having some sort of issue.  So what. Doesn't mean that Canon builds a bad or unreliable camera.  For me to try and state such would be intellectual dishonesty of the highest order.

But hey, don't take my word for it.  If your premise is since you see a lot of Nikon gear for sale Nikon's must be junk, just head over to ebay and type in the word Canon.  Once you do I fully expect you to place your Canon camera up for sale immediately, I mean obviously if there is that much Canon gear for sale it must be crap right? Or maybe at least be honest enough to admit that your premise is frankly ridiculous.

You know, I have no problem with people who buy and shoot canon.  I also have no problem with people who prefer Pentax, or Sony.  Each brand has it's own particular set of advantages and combination of feature sets that make them attractive to various people for various reasons.  But what I do take issue with is people who for some strange reason seem to think they need to justify their preference by denigrating someone elses preference, particularly using such a ridiculous and unsupportable premise.


----------



## grafxman (Feb 19, 2014)

I've been making observations, not denigrating anything. It wasn't me who initially posted about having to frequently wet swab a Nikon. I deliberately didn't search ebay because I know many posts there are from Hong Kong and various other places. That's why I looked at TPF, KEH, and BHPhoto. If you had looked where I did you would discover that my count was accurate. Not once did I ever say anywhere that Nikon gear is junk. In fact my OBSERVATION is that Derrel has been trying to persuade me that APSC Canons are all junk because of their sensors. I have no need whatsoever to justify my choice of camera manufacturer anymore than anybody else does. I have no premise about anything. I observe and try to see what's what then make my decisions. I don't have a bad opinion of Nikons. I'm sure they're fine cameras. Furthermore, as I said previously, if I thought Nikons were significantly better than Canons I would switch. But I don't think that so I won't switch. If you think I'm some sort of starry eyed Canon lover then you should take a look at my lens collection.


----------



## robbins.photo (Feb 19, 2014)

grafxman said:


> I've been making observations, not denigrating anything. It wasn't me who initially posted about having to frequently wet swab a Nikon. I deliberately didn't search ebay because I know many posts there are from Hong Kong and various other places. That's why I looked at TPF, KEH, and BHPhoto. If you had looked where I did you would discover that my count was accurate. Not once did I ever say anywhere that Nikon gear is junk. In fact my OBSERVATION is that Derrel has been trying to persuade me that APSC Canons are all junk because of their sensors. I have no need whatsoever to justify my choice of camera manufacturer anymore than anybody else does. I have no premise about anything. I observe and try to see what's what then make my decisions. I don't have a bad opinion of Nikons. I'm sure they're fine cameras. Furthermore, as I said previously, if I thought Nikons were significantly better than Canons I would switch. But I don't think that so I won't switch. If you think I'm some sort of starry eyed Canon lover then you should take a look at my lens collection.



The number of used Nikons for sale on 3 websites when compared to the number of Canon's is totally meaningless.  You choose to believe that people are selling their Nikon gear because they are abandoning Nikon for other brands.  That's what you choose to see.  Not what is actually there or supported by actual fact.  You choose to see the posts about people who need to clean their sensor when the camera is a Nikon.  You apparently choose to ignore any problem whatsoever reported by any Canon user.  This makes your observations, quite frankly, worthless.  Because you only choose to observe that which you wish to see.

As such whether you choose to acknowledge that fact that you are way out in left field here or not is also meaningless.  I have no idea if you are a starry eyed canon lover or not, and frankly it hardly matters.  It is obvious that you have some form of agenda, otherwise you wouldn't continue to cling to such a ridiculous premise when it is so demonstrably false.  One thing that is certain, one cannot reason with unreasonable people. As such we're pretty much done here.


----------



## runnah (Feb 19, 2014)

This is all just purchase justification. 

"Well I spend a ****load of money on a camera so I am going to defend it to the death and make anyone who bought something different feel like they have to defend their purchase so we all end up in one perpetual angry circle jerk!"


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 19, 2014)

Ron Howard vs Ashton Kutcher or Walden vs Opie?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## runnah (Feb 19, 2014)

JacaRanda said:


> Ron Howard vs Ashton Kutcher or Walden vs Opie?  Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



Walden? Opie?


----------



## JacaRanda (Feb 19, 2014)

runnah said:


> JacaRanda said:
> 
> 
> > Ron Howard vs Ashton Kutcher or Walden vs Opie?  Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
> ...



Their tv characters.  Opie goes wayyyyyy back.  Keep in mind I am a very immature 51 year old.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## bigal1000 (Feb 20, 2014)

yioties said:


> Give an artist a camera and 9 out of 10 times his images will be crap but a technician will read the manual and his image will rock!



Are you the artist or the tech ???????????


----------



## bigal1000 (Feb 20, 2014)

mikoh4792 said:


> Has Nikon been losing a lot of customers due to the d600 issue? Do you guys feel as though Nikon has treated their customers unfairly/dishonestly with that problem?(releasing the d610 right after and not providing refunds/trade ins...etc).
> 
> I'm thinking of going over to canon soley because of customer service. If I'm going to stick to a certain company because of the lenses I will invest in, I need to be sure I can trust them to treat me fairly and honestly.



Please enjoy your new Canon camera............


----------



## kathyt (Feb 20, 2014)

I heard that Canon users are smokin' hot and are good in the sack! Just sayin'!


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 20, 2014)

kathyt said:


> I heard that Canon users are smokin' hot and are good in the sack! Just sayin'!


that's why I've owned an AE-1 for decades


----------



## oldhippy (Feb 20, 2014)

Around here, anything smokin hot, and in a sack. Well that's a prank the kids play on the neighbors.


----------



## bribrius (Feb 20, 2014)

from my limited knowledge. I like the ergonomics of most canons better they feel better to me holding them. The layouts I find more user friendly from the ones I have shot with (not many and I don't own a canon so..) I think Nikon has the edge in photo, canon in video. I think Nikon and the wifi adaptor is both stupid and archaic and canon totally leads in common sense. Nikon seems to put everything into sensors and mps.  I think canon is more fun to shoot. Nikon has the upperhand with better and higher mp and photo quality in most cases. canon might have the upperhand in people actually enjoying to use and liking their cameras.  what Nikon seems really good at is making lenses and putting good sensors in cameras. Canon seems really good at making cameras people actually like.


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 20, 2014)

pondball said:


> THe short of is that two weeks later I received a parcel back from nikon with my fully functional cool pix 5700... They had done whatever was necessary (something about the sensor) as well as given it a thorough cleaning and it has been working perfectly well ever since.



I have had 2 interactions with Nikon service and even beyond the repair (which I paid for) I received the camera back in such a pristine, clean condition that it was like having a new one.


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 20, 2014)

kathyt said:


> I heard that Canon users are smokin' hot and are good in the sack! Just sayin'!



Well, if I can judge from my one interaction with you, yes they are - and thank you.


----------



## ratssass (Feb 20, 2014)

*I LIKE TURTLES!*


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 20, 2014)

ratssass said:


> *I LIKE TURTLES!*


*
I LIKE BACON !*


----------



## Braineack (Feb 20, 2014)

kathyt said:


> I heard that Canon users are smokin' hot and are good in the sack! Just sayin'!



let's prove the theory.


----------



## kathyt (Feb 20, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> kathyt said:
> 
> 
> > I heard that Canon users are smokin' hot and are good in the sack! Just sayin'!
> ...


That was one magical interaction might I say!


----------



## runnah (Feb 20, 2014)

Braineack said:


> let's prove the theory.



Well I am happily married and straight but if in the name science I'll give it a go.


----------



## Braineack (Feb 20, 2014)

runnah said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > let's prove the theory.
> ...




it is science afterall.


----------



## The_Traveler (Feb 20, 2014)

kathyt said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > kathyt said:
> ...



I hope sincerely that I didn't spoil you for other men.
But, if that proves to be true, _c'est dommage_.


----------



## astroNikon (Feb 20, 2014)

I thought we were talking about bacon

oh wait, you are ...


----------

