When the time came to switch to an autofocus SLR (late nineties), I took a survey of the glass available for Canon and Nikon. Canon seemed to have the edge in optics at the high end of their offerings, and the EOS mount was proving a successful transition from the old FD mount. Additionally, Canon tended to have better value for the money at the high end of their optics; comparable Nikkor glass often costed a bit more. So, I elected to go with Canon. I was shooting on film (I picked up an EOS-3), and the optics mattered a lot more than the body to me.
I accumulated a bit of glass, though all that now remains from the original camera gear is the 50/1.4. So, when the time came to switch to digital bodies, it was tempting to go with Canon, but not a deal-breaker if I had to re-buy lenses. At the time, sensors in affordable Nikon cameras were universally junk. Canon was coming into its stride with their CMOS crop sensors, so I picked up a 20D. I invested in additional glass over time, and I reached the point where it would become expensive to swap to Nikon (granted, resale value on most of my glass is very high, and it’s easy to get nearly what I paid for it back). I bought a 40D. I bought more glass. I bought a 5DII, I bought more glass. I sold a lot of old non-L glass. And here I am.
I like the feel and ergonomics of the “professional” Nikon bodies (D700, D3), but I dislike the handling of their “less professional” models. There are a few pieces of Nikkor glass that don’t have comparable Canon examples (the 200-400 and, far more importantly, the 14-24), but for the most part I think Canon still has the edge in sensor output and optics. Bear in mind that my preferred type of lens is a large aperture prime, and not a zoom. Canon on-camera software is junk, their autofocus is a mess in all but the very top tier of cameras, and the metering and flash control isn’t on par with Nikon, but when it comes to the actual bits that make the image (the glass and the sensor), it’s still the choice for me.
Just curious…what made you go Canon instead of Nikon?
— Anon 30 November 2009 #
When the time came to switch to an autofocus SLR (late nineties), I took a survey of the glass available for Canon and Nikon. Canon seemed to have the edge in optics at the high end of their offerings, and the EOS mount was proving a successful transition from the old FD mount. Additionally, Canon tended to have better value for the money at the high end of their optics; comparable Nikkor glass often costed a bit more. So, I elected to go with Canon. I was shooting on film (I picked up an EOS-3), and the optics mattered a lot more than the body to me.
I accumulated a bit of glass, though all that now remains from the original camera gear is the 50/1.4. So, when the time came to switch to digital bodies, it was tempting to go with Canon, but not a deal-breaker if I had to re-buy lenses. At the time, sensors in affordable Nikon cameras were universally junk. Canon was coming into its stride with their CMOS crop sensors, so I picked up a 20D. I invested in additional glass over time, and I reached the point where it would become expensive to swap to Nikon (granted, resale value on most of my glass is very high, and it’s easy to get nearly what I paid for it back). I bought a 40D. I bought more glass. I bought a 5DII, I bought more glass. I sold a lot of old non-L glass. And here I am.
I like the feel and ergonomics of the “professional” Nikon bodies (D700, D3), but I dislike the handling of their “less professional” models. There are a few pieces of Nikkor glass that don’t have comparable Canon examples (the 200-400 and, far more importantly, the 14-24), but for the most part I think Canon still has the edge in sensor output and optics. Bear in mind that my preferred type of lens is a large aperture prime, and not a zoom. Canon on-camera software is junk, their autofocus is a mess in all but the very top tier of cameras, and the metering and flash control isn’t on par with Nikon, but when it comes to the actual bits that make the image (the glass and the sensor), it’s still the choice for me.
— Aaron N. Tubbs 1 December 2009 #