# The (un)official I'm switching to Nikon thread



## unfocused (Feb 29, 2012)

I figured I'd save everybody some time and valuable internet space by going ahead and opening up this thread.

Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.

By opening this thread now, it will also allow persons to begin the whining before the Mark III is officially announced.

On Saturday, this can be followed by the "Should I buy the Mark III or Wait for the Mark IV?" thread.


----------



## briansquibb (Feb 29, 2012)

unfocused said:


> I figured I'd save everybody some time and valuable internet space by going ahead and opening up this thread.
> 
> Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.
> 
> ...



8) 8) 8)


----------



## ThePhotographer (Feb 29, 2012)

I want to switch from Nikon, because i do not like the D800
My question: Is this the right thread for me?


----------



## poias (Feb 29, 2012)

We have already pre-ordered 2 D4s and 2 D800 and 1 D800E for our 3Q assignments. And have decided to keep the *L*enses for 1 year to see if Canon comes with something competitive.


----------



## jrista (Feb 29, 2012)

poias said:


> We have already pre-ordered 2 D4s and 2 D800 and 1 D800E for our 3Q assignments. And have decided to keep the *L*enses for 1 year to see if Canon comes with something competitive.



It truly blows my mind that people make the "jumping ship" decision BEFORE CANON RELEASE _ANY_ *OFFICIAL SPECS*!! _WOW PEOPLE!!_ 

Do we ever live in _hyperreactionary_ times...driven by RUMORS no less!! :


----------



## photophreek (Feb 29, 2012)

So I'll start the thread by saying...... BaBye!! 

Now, after you've bought all your Nikon gears and, surprise, surprise, it's not what you thought it was and Canon doesn't look half bad, then you can state your "I'm switching to - Sony....no - Panasonic...... no - well, how about Olympus or....damn it, I'll see if Canon will have me back.


----------



## frolic (Feb 29, 2012)

ThePhotographer said:


> I want to switch from Nikon, because i do not like the D800
> My question: Is this the right thread for me?



I'm with you. I have a D4 on order to replace my dying D700, but only because it's closer to what I need than the D800. I jumped ship from Canon after being traumatized by the 1DMrk3's crappy AF.... if Canon's figured out how to make the 5DIII focus like a Nikon, I'm coming back.

Guess this kind of whining is one thing Nikon + Canon camps have in common, huh?


----------



## frolic (Feb 29, 2012)

photophreek said:


> So I'll start the thread by saying...... BaBye!!
> 
> Now, after you've bought all your Nikon gears and, surprise, surprise, it's not what you thought it was and Canon doesn't look half bad, then you can state your "I'm switching to - Sony....no - Panasonic...... no - well, how about Olympus or....damn it, I'll see if Canon will have me back.



Uhm, not true. I bought Nikon for better AF and it delivered. Now to get that AF again in a new body, I have to buy way more camera than I can handle (physically - I shoot one handed 99% of the time and the full-sized body of the D4 makes that tough). If the 5D3 can deliver what Nikon does in the AF department, I'll come back to Canon. 

It's a camera. You buy the one that fits your needs the best. I'm not going to let brand loyalty get in the way of logic.


----------



## D_Rochat (Feb 29, 2012)

Always the case....


----------



## sjprg (Feb 29, 2012)

The reason the grass is always greener on the other is one side gets more BS the the other at different times.


----------



## SomeGuyInNewJersey (Feb 29, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> Always the case....



Ah the old traditional saying...

"The saturation slider is always further to the right on the layer in the file"


----------



## EYEONE (Feb 29, 2012)

jrista said:


> poias said:
> 
> 
> > We have already pre-ordered 2 D4s and 2 D800 and 1 D800E for our 3Q assignments. And have decided to keep the *L*enses for 1 year to see if Canon comes with something competitive.
> ...



True. And that they will jump ship to a camera with almost identical specs to what Canon has announced (1Dx vs D4).


----------



## ajfa (Feb 29, 2012)

My only complaint is that $3500 seems like too much money for this camera (body only), given Nikon's pricing. 
If Canon were asking $2700 I'd preorder it ASAP, but that extra $800 makes me want to wait until the reviews come out. I'll hang onto my 7D until I decide whether to sell my EF lenses and jump ship to Nikon.


----------



## Bruce Photography (Feb 29, 2012)

I'm staying a Canon shooter but I've decided to hedge my bets. Canon last summer announced the new 500 and 600 and still can't seem to deliver them. Even the new 300 and 400 are just now coming commonly available. For a tripod ring for my 70-300 I had to wait over 1 year. I'm hoping Nikon will be better about delivering but I'm not counting on it. I'm a landscape guy and I'm planning on buying just the D800e. I plan to test it against my 5Dmk2 or whatever Canon is delivering at whatever time Nikon actually delivers the D800e. I'll use my friends Nikon lenses and share with them my Raw NEF files. If I like what I see, I'll order the 14-24 and conduct further tests against the Canon 14mm, the 16-35mm and the 17 and 24 tse lenses. I love the Canon tse lenses but I really don't like the blue fringing I'm seeing on the 14mm and I'm not happy with the 16-35 but the tse's have spoiled me. 

I've never owned a Nikon but lately I've had the pleasure of helping a friend with his auto-focus problems with his Nikon 7000. Mostly they are operator errors but I need real time and experience with a Nikon before I firm up my evaluations. I plan to keep the Nikon if I like it as well as my Canon gear. I'm tired of speculating on which is best without fully testing both myself. I'll know then which is best for me. If Nikon doesn't cut the mustard, only then will it get sent back. 

Even after the announcement on Friday, I'll wait and see as to when they will be stocked in New York. Good luck everyone!


----------



## Shnookums (Feb 29, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> Always the case....



D800 / 5D3 ?


----------



## JR (Feb 29, 2012)

@unfocused: very interesting thread idea buddy! Personally I will wait until I see some real test comparison before I start complaining! I am really anxious on the ISO performance for both the new 5DmkIII and the 1DX. I am a bit turned off by how much the 1DX official weight came in, but if the ISO performance is there, I will just eat more protein


----------



## Nikon (Feb 29, 2012)

You are way ahead of your time  I am waiting until I see the announcement and specs of the new 5D. If it has built on the 5D MK2 and added improvements such a more focus points and such the 5DM2 is missing, I am willing to pay $3500 for it. If Canon delays the MK3 I am not sure what I will do, but I have been checking out the D800. I might ditch my L lenses and all other EF lenses and jump ship. But I would rather stay with Canon if the new 5D is out soon.



unfocused said:


> I figured I'd save everybody some time and valuable internet space by going ahead and opening up this thread.
> 
> Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.
> 
> ...


----------



## sublime LightWorks (Feb 29, 2012)

unfocused said:


> On Saturday, this can be followed by the "Should I buy the Mark III or Wait for the Mark IV?" thread.



Plus the "WTF is up with all these video improvements Canon added, but we still don't have a mirror lockup button????" thread.


And the "I'm pissed!!! Only 60 of the 61 AF points are CROSS TYPES!!!!!" thread.


----------



## TexPhoto (Feb 29, 2012)

I am opening a home for unwanted Cannon bodies lenses and flashes. Please send them postage paid to my house where they will treated with dignity. L lenses and recent FF bodies (completely useless because of the D800) will be given a special shelf.


----------



## Otter (Feb 29, 2012)

Personally, I will stay with Canon. If the MKIII doesn't meet expectations and comes up short against Nikon's offerings, it just means Nikon has won the battle, not the war. It's always back and forth and it's an expensive past time selling all your depreciated glass and equiptment to switch when in 2-3 years, you may be on your way back. 
I think it's sad how people think equiptment make them a good photographer. It helps, in some cases, from a technical standpoint ie. more megapixels but I would say the vast majority of people on this forum are not professional photographers, who think that switching companies and getting the newest tech or upgrading with the current company they shoot with will make them vastly better photographers. I love tech just as much as the next person, but work more on your craft and become a better photographer and what you can do with your skills and talent not what the camera can do for you.
So all of you are switching...buh bye, have fun... In a couple of years, you'll be possibly switching again...


----------



## Axilrod (Feb 29, 2012)

Otter said:


> Personally, I will stay with Canon. If the MKIII doesn't meet expectations and comes up short against Nikon's offerings, it just means Nikon has won the battle, not the war. It's always back and forth and it's an expensive past time selling all your depreciated glass and equiptment to switch when in 2-3 years, you may be on your way back.
> I think it's sad how people think equiptment make them a good photographer. It helps, in some cases, from a technical standpoint ie. more megapixels but I would say the vast majority of people on this forum are not professional photographers, who think that switching companies and getting the newest tech or upgrading with the current company they shoot with will make them vastly better photographers. I love tech just as much as the next person, but work more on your craft and become a better photographer and what you can do with your skills and talent not what the camera can do for you.
> So all of you are switching...buh bye, have fun... In a couple of years, you'll be possibly switching again...



I agree completely, we are long past the point that a body upgrade is going to make a substantial improvement to the quality of your images. It would be too much of a pain to switch to Nikon, plus everything is "backwards" from the way you twist on the lens to the focus ring, to the dials. Honestly if the 5DIII didn't have improved video I probably wouldn't get it, but considering it's the 2nd generation of something great I'm sure it'll suit my needs. 

If people want a positive response to their declaration of switching to Nikon they should go to Nikon Rumors.


----------



## takoman46 (Feb 29, 2012)

You guys are crazy lol. How can you simply jump ship on a whim just because nikon seems to have put out a camera that might be more suited to your current "wants" when you already have an entire arsenal of L lenses which you will sell and probably lose out lots of money on. Then go and spend even more money buying your Nikon and all the Nikon lenses. Then when you're all happy with your Nikon setup, Canon goes and releases something that appeals to you more than your Nikon setup. Will you proceed to sell off all your Nikon gear and take another big hit to jump ship back to canon? This is crazy talk haha! I'm sure that if you stay with Canon although you believe Nikon is now better, you will still be able to produce spectacular photos that meet your high standards. If you really believe that you can't achieve that and feel like jumping ship to Nikon is necessary then that's pretty laughable. I'm probably gonna get flamed for this post... but whatever. I felt it had to be said


----------



## takoman46 (Feb 29, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> Otter said:
> 
> 
> > Personally, I will stay with Canon. If the MKIII doesn't meet expectations and comes up short against Nikon's offerings, it just means Nikon has won the battle, not the war. It's always back and forth and it's an expensive past time selling all your depreciated glass and equiptment to switch when in 2-3 years, you may be on your way back.
> ...



Otter and Axilrod +1


----------



## Merlin_AZ (Feb 29, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> Always the case....


LOL!!!


----------



## cfargo (Feb 29, 2012)

Nikon USA provides terrible support and has bad ratings with the BBB unlike Canon. I'm going to stand behind a company that stands behind me, Canon.


----------



## stabmasterasron (Feb 29, 2012)

I am switching to a D700. (just kidding, though I have considered it). :-\


----------



## STPhotos (Feb 29, 2012)

I'm really looking forward to what Canon has in store with the 5DIII and anything else up its sleeve, but all these haters and complainers keep me thinking... No matter what's coming, what's already been announced y'all are still gonna hate and complain. I stand by those who have said that the majority of people who are looking at the 5D update are enthusiasts and not pros. It's all these gear heads who think that the latest and greatest will make them better photographers. Go jump to Nikon. Who cares. Cameras are just tools anyway. Sure the new tech is great and exciting, but I really don't have the time and energy to keep complaining of what I have or don't have and jumping ship. 

Remember when film was all we had? The care it took in composing each shot, getting the right exposure, making contact prints and refining the prints in the lab? There was more of an art to the entire process. Some people just don't realize how much we've got today in this digital world of RAW files. It's less about the creativity and more about the equipment. Now, it's all just homogenous bulls**t it seems. All these whiners with the same complaints taking the same cliche photos. Call me jaded. Whatever. 

All I'm saying is that I can pick up any guitar and still sound like myself when playing it. 
It's not all about what you have but how you use what you DO have.


----------



## poias (Feb 29, 2012)

jrista said:


> poias said:
> 
> 
> > We have already pre-ordered 2 D4s and 2 D800 and 1 D800E for our 3Q assignments. And have decided to keep the *L*enses for 1 year to see if Canon comes with something competitive.
> ...



Canon's is being eaten alive by Nikon and Sony in sensor technology. Lack of DR at low ISO, noisy high ISO, retreat on MPx, crippling of AF, jackup of $, reliance on a brandname rather than value, etc. all contribute to our switching. Again, we can AFFORD to because our bodies need replacement and Lenses sell well anyway.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Feb 29, 2012)

poias said:


> Canon's is being eaten alive by Nikon and Sony in sensor technology.



so what nikon developed sensor your are speaking about?


----------



## takoman46 (Feb 29, 2012)

@ poias:

I wouldn't go as far as saying that Canon is being "eaten alive" by Nikon and Sony. IMO the 1Dx actually refutes most of your claims. Additionally, the sample images presented by Canon and Nikon for their respective 1Dx and D4 make me think that the Canon 1Dx is actually better than the Nikon D4.


----------



## poias (Feb 29, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> poias said:
> 
> 
> > Canon's is being eaten alive by Nikon and Sony in sensor technology.
> ...



This might give a hint on where we're headed:


----------



## Canon-F1 (Feb 29, 2012)

poias said:


> This might give a hint on where we're headed:



again:

so what nikon *developed* sensor your are speaking about


----------



## jalbfb (Feb 29, 2012)

Merlin_AZ said:


> D_Rochat said:
> 
> 
> > Always the case....
> ...



+1 Well played


----------



## poias (Feb 29, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> again:
> 
> so what nikon *developed* sensor your are speaking about



Why are you fixated on the word "developed"? The fact that the sensor Nikon has inside it eats Canon alive is what concerning.


----------



## takoman46 (Feb 29, 2012)

poias said:


> Canon-F1 said:
> 
> 
> > poias said:
> ...



Ok we're looking at crop sensors here... The FF sensors in the flagships are where the the tech battle is happening. So maybe Canon is holding back their APS-C sensor tech back a little... so what? You can put the blame on Canon's marketing department for that. They choosing to de-tune their crop bodies to a level that is below Nikon's strategy. It doesn't conclusively prove that Nikon is smashing Canon in sensor tech.


----------



## poias (Feb 29, 2012)

takoman46 said:


> So maybe Canon is holding back their APS-C sensor tech back a little... so what? You can put the blame on Canon's marketing department for that. They choosing to de-tune their crop bodies to a level that is below Nikon's strategy. It doesn't conclusively prove that Nikon is smashing Canon in sensor tech.



So, you're saying that Canon may have an awesome sensor tech that they aren't releasing due to marketing... okay, may be, but how does that BENEFIT us? The fact that the released sensor from Nikon smashes Canon.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Feb 29, 2012)

Like I said before, Canon doesn't care if you go to Nikon. Mostly because for each one of you here wanting to switch over, there is one on the other side wanting to switch to Canon due to the D800 not being what they wanted and the 5D3 sounding more to their liking.


----------



## D_Rochat (Feb 29, 2012)

poias said:


> takoman46 said:
> 
> 
> > So maybe Canon is holding back their APS-C sensor tech back a little... so what? You can put the blame on Canon's marketing department for that. They choosing to de-tune their crop bodies to a level that is below Nikon's strategy. It doesn't conclusively prove that Nikon is smashing Canon in sensor tech.
> ...



Do you know something about the new sensor that the rest of us don't? Lets get the new sensors in our hands before we star talking about which company is smashing the other. Talking about old tech is pointless with the new stuff around the corner.


----------



## poias (Feb 29, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> poias said:
> 
> 
> > takoman46 said:
> ...



Perhaps I am not as optimistic as you in hoping Canon would have better sensor now when they have flat-lined since 2003. I hope they improve, though.


----------



## erwinrm (Feb 29, 2012)

unfocused said:


> I figured I'd save everybody some time and valuable internet space by going ahead and opening up this thread.
> 
> Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.



I'm actually thinking of going bi  That D800 is very tempting!!! But, because of this crappy economy, I'll probably just pick up the 5D mkII once it drops to about $1900.


----------



## takoman46 (Feb 29, 2012)

poias said:


> takoman46 said:
> 
> 
> > So maybe Canon is holding back their APS-C sensor tech back a little... so what? You can put the blame on Canon's marketing department for that. They choosing to de-tune their crop bodies to a level that is below Nikon's strategy. It doesn't conclusively prove that Nikon is smashing Canon in sensor tech.
> ...



I'm saying that the comparison chart you posted only shows that the sensor tech that has been passed down to APS-C sensors is lacking from Canon. This does not benefit crop body users at all, and that sucks. But you're just looking at the APS-C level and and making a generalization about who is ahead of who in terms of sensor development. What I'm getting at is that both Nikon and Canon put their "best" foot forward with their full frame flagship bodies. So by comparing their sensor tech at the flagship level; you will gain a better understanding of where each company stands in terms of sensor technology.


----------



## sublime LightWorks (Feb 29, 2012)

cfargo said:


> Nikon USA provides terrible support and has bad ratings with the BBB unlike Canon.



And they eat children!!! 

Not only that, but they're Democrats too!! Or Republicans.....I forget who's the bad guys these days.

;D


----------



## Grum (Feb 29, 2012)

poias said:


> takoman46 said:
> 
> 
> > So maybe Canon is holding back their APS-C sensor tech back a little... so what? You can put the blame on Canon's marketing department for that. They choosing to de-tune their crop bodies to a level that is below Nikon's strategy. It doesn't conclusively prove that Nikon is smashing Canon in sensor tech.
> ...



Wow look a graph! You can show that to people to make excuses for why your pictures suck. No-one could possibly take decent pictures with a Canon given how they're being 'smashed' by Nikon could they. Get a grip. 

(and oh look it comes from dxomark, the measurebators paradise)

Honestly, this site really attracts some losers (and I'm really not a Canon fanboy btw).


----------



## wickidwombat (Feb 29, 2012)

unfocused said:


> I figured I'd save everybody some time and valuable internet space by going ahead and opening up this thread.
> 
> Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.
> 
> ...


Hahaa great thread! and brave man I had to give you an applaud for this, i nearly started a thread like this yesterday but was scared of being smited into oblivion....


----------



## sarangiman (Feb 29, 2012)

Here I'll add some fuel to the fire 

Nikon lenses have a 5 year warranty vs. Canon's 1 year warranty. $200 to fix your misalignment/decentering problem on Canon lenses, in my experience.

Nikon pro lenses all have 9-blade apertures. 18 point sunstars FTW! Smooth circular OOF highlights, as opposed to octagons above f/1.8 on, say, the 85mm prime.

77mm filter threads on most of their pro lenses... as opposed to 67mm, 72mm, 77mm, 82mm filter threads across Canon's top lenses.

All that being said, I'm still trying to stick with Canon, as I'm looking forward to cross-type AF points being spread out across the frame (Nikon doesn't have this)... and I still haven't seen a scientific/rigorous study that shows that Nikon's AF is any better than top-of-the-line (1-series) Canon AF. In fact I'd be very curious to see how Canon's 'high-precision' [f/2.8] sensors stack up against Nikon's sensors (Nikon doesn't differentiate higher vs. lower precision AF points).

As has been said before -- they're just tools. Whichever gets the job done best.


----------



## Grum (Feb 29, 2012)

There are certainly some advantages to Nikon and before the D800 came out I was quite tempted to switch. But for what I mostly shoot (weddings), the D800 has gone in the wrong direction (though I'm sure it would be perfectly capable). 

I just think people writing off a camera before it comes out, based on rumoured specs, is beyond ridiculous.


----------



## briansquibb (Feb 29, 2012)

Do I use this thread to say I'm switching to the Nokia 41mp phone??


----------



## Ryusui (Feb 29, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> Here I'll add some fuel to the fire
> 
> Nikon lenses have a 5 year warranty vs. Canon's 1 year warranty. $200 to fix your misalignment/decentering problem on Canon lenses, in my experience.


Well Nikon needs to offer a 5 year warranty on their products. Have you ever sent in anything to Nikon service? It damn near takes about 5 times longer to get an item back from them than it does Canon. On average, Canon repairs/warranty items have a 2-3 week turnaround time - and this is from when UPS takes it out of our hands to when they bring it back. Nikon however, usually takes 6-8 weeks, and it's not unusual for something to be gone for 3 or 4 months.


----------



## psolberg (Feb 29, 2012)

> so what nikon *developed* sensor your are speaking about



fyi nikon develops sensors and they share manufacturing with sony to share some costs. Nikon throws their own IP and know how to produce the IQ people have come to expect from them. They have said it repeatedly in every interview. the myth they use pre-fabbed sony sensors doesn't hold to reality. just look at the D3x vs A900. similar? yes. same? no. The D3x had easily the upperhand in IQ and it was all in nikon's design even if sony made the thing.

and besides, who cares who makes the thing. everybody just cares about the results it produces! 



Bruce Photography said:


> ... I'm a landscape guy and I'm planning on buying just the D800e. I plan to test it against my 5Dmk2 or whatever Canon is delivering at whatever time Nikon actually delivers the D800e. I'll use my friends Nikon lenses and share with them my Raw NEF files. If I like what I see, I'll order the 14-24 and conduct further tests against the Canon 14mm, the 16-35mm and the 17 and 24 tse lenses.



Nikon wides are top notch.

the 14-24 nikon is a beast. it destroys anything canon has at the wide end and it's a zoom!
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/canon14l2_nikon1424/nikon1424_canon14l2_a.html

canon 16-35 gets equaly eaten alive
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/nikon1424_17mm/nikon1424_17mm1.html
although If I were to switch I'd go for their 16-35 f/4 with image stabilization.

their 24 1.4 prime is another stellar performer better than the canon equivalent IMHO. It is even better than even their own 14-24. Their 24mm T/S is also supposed to be a hidden jem.

If I shot wide, I'd let nothing hold me back from the N.


----------



## sarangiman (Mar 1, 2012)

> their 24 1.4 prime is another stellar performer better than the canon equivalent IMHO.



Yes, it has much less vignetting on a full frame than the Canon 24/1.4 II. Something like 1.5-2 stops less vignetting... so... not insignificant.

See here:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?FLI=0&API=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&Lens=480&Camera=453&LensComp=690


----------



## hoousi (Mar 1, 2012)

Crazy! ;D
I switched to canon but only because I knew from Nikonrumors that the D800 will be a mp-monster, the 5dii had an awesome price tag and a nice resolution and none of my lenses were FF so that's it. At heart I am a nikonian but I much prefer the canon lens line-up concerning affordable lenses FF and aps-c. I am now lucky enough to afford the expensive stuff so I'd be a happy Nikon camper, too but go look for F/4 zooms, a decent newish 17-55 (IS...), oh and did I forget the lack of AF-S in the last years (finally they are catching up) which ditched you if you were below D7000/D90 level? The only friendly outreach was the 35 F/1.8 2-3 years ago, oh my, thank you very much (I could go on like this, that was often the tone on the Nikon forums, canon grass just so much greener)

I now am a happy Canon camper, my pics please my eyes (though others may bleed, sorry) in spite of the maybe pharaonian/roman whatever tech in the sensor. And if ever I feel a need I get a Nikon with the lens needed/suitable and hope that I can work myself around two camera systems in parallel. But I'll never part from the 85Lii


----------



## sarangiman (Mar 1, 2012)

> But I'll never part from the 85Lii



Funny. Different strokes for different folks, as the 85/1.4 Nikon is another reason I'd consider a switch... The ergonomics of the 85/1.2, which I own, are silly. If you take the lens off extended, you can't un-extend it, since it needs to power the motor to retract. Watch out for that rear glass element that sticks all the way out; you don't want to scratch it/hit it as you're mounting it to your body. 

Furthermore, the CA on the sides is bad enough to make even in-focus objects on the sides appear soft. Then the 8-blade aperture means that out of focus highlights are no longer a pleasing circle at apertures smaller than f/1.6 (yes-- they're only really circular at f/1.2-f/1.4). Canon knows 9-blades is the way to go -- something they updated in their new 24-70 zoom. It gives you more circular OOF highlights AND 18 point sunstars... seems win-win to me. Yet all their professional primes only have 8-blades.

At f/1.2 though, it does let in a LOT of light. For any given f-stop, it actually appears to let in 1/3 stop more light than any equivalent aperture on the Sigma 85/1.4. Also has shallower DOF for any given f-stop than the Sigma, hinting at the possibility that it actually just opens up wider at any given f-stop in comparison to the Sigma. These are really its only redeeming factors, IMHO. But it is in sore need of an update.


----------



## distant.star (Mar 1, 2012)

Hey, everybody!!

I hear Nikon is buying used Canon lenses at 50 cents on the dollar. At least we can get something for them before they lose all their value!


----------



## sarangiman (Mar 1, 2012)

Oops, haha, I guess I forgot there for a moment I was on CANONrumors 

Regardless of the shortcomings of either system, I'm really looking forward to the next two days! An AF system that can actually focus properly outside of the center point & integrated radio wireless in a flash would be spectacular (I've experienced all the horrors of E-TTL Pocket Wizards with Canon flashes...).


----------



## V8Beast (Mar 1, 2012)

How about the (un)official "I've been following all the 5DIII rumors for years, pretending like I was going to buy one, but never really had the money to buy one, and just enjoyed talking trash online, so I'll stick with my Rebel," thread?


----------



## Circles (Mar 1, 2012)

distant.star said:


> Hey, everybody!!
> 
> I hear Nikon is buying used Canon lenses at 50 cents on the dollar. At least we can get something for them before they lose all their value!



???


----------



## smirkypants (Mar 1, 2012)

unfocused said:


> Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.


This is just insulting. I choose a camera and lens based upon what best serves my photographic needs and my budget constraints. When the last generation of cameras came out, it was a close call, but I went with Canon.

I have very specific needs met perfectly by the 1Dx + 200-400/f4 1.4. Unfortunately, that combination looks like it's going to cost me... I can't believe I'm saying this, $18,000 after getting a couple of the accessories. Eighteen large! 

My needs are also perfectly met by a refurbished 200-400/f4 + D4 +1.4 TC. This combination is $5000 less. That's a lot of money. I can buy a lot of things with $5000, like 80% of a backup D4, or a D800 and a 70-200/2.8 VR II lens. See where I'm going with this?

Add to this that I have an extremely important event to cover in April and another in May. Do I know that the Canon 200-400/f4 will be in my hands by then? Or even the 1DX? No. But I already have the Nikon lens and the D4 is still on track for mid March delivery.

I am going to keep all of my Canon gear just in case the Nikon system doesn't work out. I will lose $0 on the refurbished lens and maybe $1000 tops on the D4. If it doesn't work out, it was cheaper than renting the combination for the summer.

But please don't snottily tell me that I'm being frivolous or crybaby because this has been a very hard decision. People have needs and certain cameras and lenses fulfill those needs better than others. It's as simple as that.


----------



## dedrick427 (Mar 1, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.
> ...



Why is it that everytime I've asked (not on here) about advice on what 'the best' camera/lens is for a given situation I always ALWAYS get the "The camera doesn't matter, a good photographer can take great pictures with any camera... blah blah blah... it's more about to locations and blah blah brag..." But then when we are excited about a new camera it's always "RABBLEABBLERABBLEPOPUPFLASHGIGAPIXELSANDFAIRIES!!!! I can't do my job with this!!!! It's Crap!!! RABBLERABBLERABBLEFILMCAMERAPROFESSIONALSBUNRTHEMALIVE!!!!"


----------



## wickidwombat (Mar 1, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.
> ...



sure you dont want to sell me your 1D4?


----------



## hoousi (Mar 1, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> > But I'll never part from the 85Lii
> 
> 
> 
> ...




As often with a special lens with extreme aperture there are shortcomings, rather big ones in consideration of the price tag, but wow, until now many of the shots and that aperture are worth every penny, it makes the Nikon cream machine look like an ice crusher (wide open) (tongue in cheek). I actually only took one single photo above 1.4, for more DOF I think the 70-200 is the way to go indeed. Sometimes a certain love cannot be explained....


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Mar 1, 2012)

D_Rochat said:


> Always the case....



The situation along the Egypt-Israel border is similar, as can be seen in satellite photos.

The reason is that Bedouin on the Egyptian side of the border are allowed to let their goats to graze freely, while Bedouin on the Israeli side of the border are not. That makes the land on the Israeli side of the border greener.


----------



## biggles_no1 (Mar 1, 2012)

It seems that, for the guy on the left, the grass really is greener on the other side.


----------



## Maui5150 (Mar 1, 2012)

To insure the grass is green on both sides of the fence.... you have to pee on both sides...


----------



## smirkypants (Mar 1, 2012)

dedrick427 said:


> Why is it that everytime I've asked (not on here) about advice on what 'the best' camera/lens is for a given situation I always ALWAYS get the "The camera doesn't matter, a good photographer can take great pictures with any camera... blah blah blah... it's more about to locations and blah blah brag..." But then when we are excited about a new camera it's always "RABBLEABBLERABBLEPOPUPFLASHGIGAPIXELSANDFAIRIES!!!! I can't do my job with this!!!! It's Crap!!! RABBLERABBLERABBLEFILMCAMERAPROFESSIONALSBUNRTHEMALIVE!!!!"


It depends upon the kinds of photos you want to take. If you want to take street photos on a sunny day, an iPhone camera is great. If you're taking photos of fast-moving horses that range from 25 to 300 yards away in good and bad weather, you needs fast glass, flexible focal length, good dynamic range for both intense sun and shaded areas, good ISO performance for hitting quadruple digit shutter speeds on drizzly days, high FPS, weather sealing, durability... 

Can you do that with a Rebel and a 75-300?


----------



## traveller (Mar 1, 2012)

Maui5150 said:


> To insure the grass is green on both sides of the fence.... you have to pee on both sides...



Just be careful if they're separated by an electric fence! ;D


----------



## Rockets95 (Mar 1, 2012)

ThePhotographer said:


> I want to switch from Nikon, because i do not like the D800
> My question: Is this the right thread for me?



Let's establish the protocol - That would be the Nikon rumors website!


----------



## Joellll (Mar 1, 2012)

smirkypants said:


> dedrick427 said:
> 
> 
> > Why is it that everytime I've asked (not on here) about advice on what 'the best' camera/lens is for a given situation I always ALWAYS get the "The camera doesn't matter, a good photographer can take great pictures with any camera... blah blah blah... it's more about to locations and blah blah brag..." But then when we are excited about a new camera it's always "RABBLEABBLERABBLEPOPUPFLASHGIGAPIXELSANDFAIRIES!!!! I can't do my job with this!!!! It's Crap!!! RABBLERABBLERABBLEFILMCAMERAPROFESSIONALSBUNRTHEMALIVE!!!!"
> ...


As a proud user of a 500D and a 70-200 F4L IS, I am sorry to say that it is not possible to nail the perfect shot.

Which is why I'm waiting for 5D3. I don't think 5D2's AF is going to help.


----------



## TheBodyRubber (Mar 1, 2012)

sublime LightWorks said:


> cfargo said:
> 
> 
> > Nikon USA provides terrible support and has bad ratings with the BBB unlike Canon.
> ...



I think the correct quote should be... Not only that, but they are politicians too...!!! ;D


----------



## gecko (Mar 1, 2012)

Seems there is no dedicated 'direct print' button.

I'll be jumping ship to Nikon immediately.


----------



## psolberg (Mar 1, 2012)

hoousi said:


> sarangiman said:
> 
> 
> > > But I'll never part from the 85Lii
> ...



I don't think there is that much a difference visually speaking specially with the new 85 1.4 nikon which pixel peepers like Lloyd Chambers hail as the greatest 85mm made (over the canon version). IMO, you have to be looking to notice bokeh differences and that to me is the sign that 1.2 vs 1.4 is a pixel peeper debate. I'd pick the 1.2 over the 1.4 because that's what canon gives me, but I'd much rather have the better lens that only shoots at f/1.4 than the a lens that shoots at f/1.2 but it is not better below that to justfy the size/cost. As the OP said, CA at 1.2 is a huge issue. I'd stop down to 1.4 or 1.8 to try and avoid it. but that's my 2cents. I'm obviously not a person that sweats a third of a stop. 

I agree that as far as shallow DOF and bokeh goes, 70-200 is much pleasing because of the compression at the long end.


----------



## sarangiman (Mar 1, 2012)

> I actually only took one single photo above 1.4, for more DOF I think the 70-200 is the way to go indeed. Sometimes a certain love cannot be explained....



Sometimes I like to go smaller than f/1.4 just to ensure I nail focus on off-center compositions, b/c the 5D Mark II AF severely underperforms. And in those cases, I'm stuck with non-circular OOF highlights.



> As the OP said, CA at 1.2 is a huge issue. I'd stop down to 1.4 or 1.8 to try and avoid it. but that's my 2cents.



Actually, I've found CA to persist & soften a subject on the side of the frame so much that I have to go to f/2 to equivalent sharpness compared to the Sigma 85/1.4 at f/1.4 (which, to be fair, is more like f/1.6 on the Canon lens).


----------



## briansquibb (Mar 1, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> > I actually only took one single photo above 1.4, for more DOF I think the 70-200 is the way to go indeed. Sometimes a certain love cannot be explained....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Breaking news - 5DII AF forces tog to move to Nikon...


----------



## sarangiman (Mar 1, 2012)

> Breaking news - 5DII AF forces tog to move to Nikon...



Not really... I could've just as well upgraded to a 1D series Canon body. But chose to wait for the revamp of the lines first. Which is why today is so exciting


----------



## jrista (Mar 2, 2012)

Tuggen said:


> D800 has more or less it all that I wanted for a 5D2 replacement. Will I switch? I don't think so. Its to expensive to switch system and in next generation it maybe Canon who has the most interesting Camera.
> Also we havent seen the performance of 5D3 yet. Maybe it will beat our expectations?
> 
> Probably I stay with 5D2 untill Canon releases a medium resolution FF hopefully >50MP.



Why would you call >50mp "medium resolution"?? That would be the highest resolution ever seen in a DSLR. That would pretty much qualify hands down as high resolution FF in my book...


----------



## ScottyP (Mar 2, 2012)

jrista said:


> Tuggen said:
> 
> 
> > D800 has more or less it all that I wanted for a 5D2 replacement. Will I switch? I don't think so. Its to expensive to switch system and in next generation it maybe Canon who has the most interesting Camera.
> ...



Cool. Maybe he's logging in _*from the future*_, and it's hard to avoid slipping with a few telltale historical anachronisms.


----------



## ScottyP (Mar 2, 2012)

unfocused said:


> I figured I'd save everybody some time and valuable internet space by going ahead and opening up this thread.
> 
> Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.
> 
> ...



Well they did completely ignore my suggestion that it include a cup holder.


----------



## SeanL (Mar 2, 2012)

If the 5D3 ends up having a 36MP sensor then there will be far too much noise for a FF sensor, but if it's announced that it has a 22MP sensor then the D800 is the way to go because it will offer higher resolution.

There, good thing I preordered my camera..

Wait a minute...


----------



## takoman46 (Mar 2, 2012)

SeanL said:


> If the 5D3 ends up having a 36MP sensor then there will be far too much noise for a FF sensor, but if it's announced that it has a 22MP sensor then the D800 is the way to go because it will offer higher resolution.
> 
> There, good thing I preordered my camera..
> 
> Wait a minute...



I don't understand your point about 36mp being to noisy for a FF sensor. Isn't the D800 FF too?


----------



## EchoLocation (Mar 2, 2012)

I am not a professional and have been wanting to upgrade from a 5DC to a 5DIII for a couple of years now. The 5DII never interested me too much because of the poor AF and it's specialization being weddings/portrait work(where I want a better camera for travel/all around.) I travel a lot and would like something semi quick, with great low light capabilities and not too expensive. 2000 dollars is a lot of money for me, but I finally decided i'd upgrade to the 5DIII if it was around 2500 dollars. Today, I am really disappointed as 3500 dollars is just wayyy too much to feel comfortable spending on a "hobby," especially when I've been wanting the 24-70 2.8 and the price has just nearly doubled. Unfortunately now, for my needs/wants, I think the D700 is the best choice for an upgrade. I can save some money on the body to put towards glass and I know the AF and low light is top notch.
Canon attracted a lot of buyers by having reasonably priced bodies and glass(compared to Nikon,) but that now seems to be changing. I just don't see how the 5DIII is worth 15% more than the D800. I don't care, and in fact, don't want 36mp, but to me, these cameras seem rather equal in different ways and i'm just not understanding the 500 dollar premium by Canon. 
I know the 5DIII will be a huge seller and wildly popular, but from my perspective the 5DIII sounds like it fixed the shortcomings of the 5DII, and didn't wildly exceed the previous camera. I don't see why there should be a 700-1000 dollar price increase on this camera.
I think a lot of people who aren't pros will have to think really really hard before spending over 3000 dollars on a camera. I think Canon really missed the boat by not offering this camera at a price closer to the 2500 dollar range. While the extra money is not huge for people making money off this camera, I think that extra money on the price will prohibit a huge number of people from mindlessly clicking "buy" and upgrading(which I would have done at $2500)


----------



## BornNearDaBayou (Mar 2, 2012)

EchoLocation said:


> I am not a professional and have been wanting to upgrade from a 5DC to a 5DIII for a couple of years now. The 5DII never interested me too much because of the poor AF and it's specialization being weddings/portrait work(where I want a better camera for travel/all around.) I travel a lot and would like something semi quick, with great low light capabilities and not too expensive. 2000 dollars is a lot of money for me, but I finally decided i'd upgrade to the 5DIII if it was around 2500 dollars. Today, I am really disappointed as 3500 dollars is just wayyy too much to feel comfortable spending on a "hobby," especially when I've been wanting the 24-70 2.8 and the price has just nearly doubled. Unfortunately now, for my needs/wants, I think the D700 is the best choice for an upgrade. I can save some money on the body to put towards glass and I know the AF and low light is top notch.
> Canon attracted a lot of buyers by having reasonably priced bodies and glass(compared to Nikon,) but that now seems to be changing. I just don't see how the 5DIII is worth 15% more than the D800. I don't care, and in fact, don't want 36mp, but to me, these cameras seem rather equal in different ways and i'm just not understanding the 500 dollar premium by Canon.
> I know the 5DIII will be a huge seller and wildly popular, but from my perspective the 5DIII sounds like it fixed the shortcomings of the 5DII, and didn't wildly exceed the previous camera. I don't see why there should be a 700-1000 dollar price increase on this camera.
> I think a lot of people who aren't pros will have to think really really hard before spending over 3000 dollars on a camera. I think Canon really missed the boat by not offering this camera at a price closer to the 2500 dollar range. While the extra money is not huge for people making money off this camera, I think that extra money on the price will prohibit a huge number of people from mindlessly clicking "buy" and upgrading(which I would have done at $2500)



It's simple: Canon knows a lot of loyal customers invested in their bodies and glass AROUND THE FREAKING PLANET would not jump ship because of an inferior camera. There, I said it. They figure, hey, "these guys wanted 1d AF, half of 1D speed, AND good noise performance under $6,000. Okay, we'll make it. But you will pay almost exactly greater than 1/2 for it, because our flagship is $6,800 right now." It's called good old Japanese greed. The same principle applies to Nikon's flagship 3DX of yesteryear for an astonishing $8,000. 

Good old Japanese greed. You gotta love it. For examples, see Toyota Sequioua (spelling??), Honda Passport, or Nissan Armada. Then try to relate it to your next camera purchase. Grossly overpriced. And grossly profit machines. The 1DX....is.....somewhat understandable.....with its new AF and metering......and lower MP......

The 5d3......not so much. i hope its a 26-28MP surprise. They can have $4,000 of my dollars if its 28MP and delivers astonishing ISO performance. I'll even send them sushi and saki so they can smack their ridiculously greedy lips after pigging out on their gawdy sales prices. Good Old Japanese greed. You gotta love it!!


----------



## ssrdd (Mar 2, 2012)

jrista said:


> poias said:
> 
> 
> > We have already pre-ordered 2 D4s and 2 D800 and 1 D800E for our 3Q assignments. And have decided to keep the *L*enses for 1 year to see if Canon comes with something competitive.
> ...



well they did now. and it suck.


----------



## ssrdd (Mar 2, 2012)

unfocused said:


> I figured I'd save everybody some time and valuable internet space by going ahead and opening up this thread.
> 
> Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.
> 
> ...



i think canon rumors guys will delete post soon.


----------



## Angryoak (Mar 2, 2012)

unfocused said:


> I figured I'd save everybody some time and valuable internet space by going ahead and opening up this thread.
> 
> Beginning tomorrow night all those who are disappointed because Canon did not create a 5DIII to their personal specifications and offer it at $1,500 can lodge their complaints here, on one handy thread, instead of having to start their own personal complaint thread.
> 
> ...



Wow, forgive me but if I were you, I wouldn't visit rumour sites anymore. You're like someone who moves in next to an airport, and then complains about the noise :/


----------



## RedEye (Mar 2, 2012)

I just checked out the sample photos... they are quite good guys ... YEAH!


----------



## D_Rochat (Mar 2, 2012)

BornNearDaBayou said:


> EchoLocation said:
> 
> 
> > I am not a professional and have been wanting to upgrade from a 5DC to a 5DIII for a couple of years now. The 5DII never interested me too much because of the poor AF and it's specialization being weddings/portrait work(where I want a better camera for travel/all around.) I travel a lot and would like something semi quick, with great low light capabilities and not too expensive. 2000 dollars is a lot of money for me, but I finally decided i'd upgrade to the 5DIII if it was around 2500 dollars. Today, I am really disappointed as 3500 dollars is just wayyy too much to feel comfortable spending on a "hobby," especially when I've been wanting the 24-70 2.8 and the price has just nearly doubled. Unfortunately now, for my needs/wants, I think the D700 is the best choice for an upgrade. I can save some money on the body to put towards glass and I know the AF and low light is top notch.
> ...



How many posts are you going to make about how you wanted the best of everything for $3000? Go buy a Nikon if all you care about is megapixels. Really. Go. Please.


----------



## SiliconVoid (Mar 2, 2012)

EchoLocation said:


> Canon attracted a lot of buyers by having reasonably priced bodies and glass(compared to Nikon,) but that now seems to be changing.
> 
> I know the 5DIII will be a huge seller and wildly popular, but from my perspective the 5DIII sounds like it fixed the shortcomings of the 5DII, and didn't wildly exceed the previous camera. I don't see why there should be a 700-1000 dollar price increase on this camera.



As with any product, the early adopters will pay a premium to get what ever it is before everyone else. As someone who says they own a 5D I would think you have been around the industry long enough to know one of the common differences between Nikon and Canon in their pricing is that Canon will lower its price through the lifespan of the product - typically within the first year. The D800 will be around $3000 until the day they announce its successor.

Canon continues to have a more diverse range of lenses for a more diverse range of financial needs, far greater than Nikon unless you are interested in old manual focus glass.

As for the usage of the camera... you should rent a 5DmkII and test it for yourself. There is NOTHING keeping the mkII from satisfying every photographic need you have - and it does video too.. 

Your last point of attempting to validate the price in the context of the mkIII failing to represent the same level of upgrade the D800 provided over the D700 - no offense but that is idiotic. The D700 is a great photography camera (I have one) but that is all it did. Therefore if the D800 offered nothing more than video over the D700 it would have been a groundbreaking upgrade for Nikon.
On the other hand: The 5DmkII offers a level of performance in its tier that no camera by any other manufacturer offered... That creates higher product demand, which creates higher margin. Based on your 'all round' needs what more did you want them to upgrade that the mkIII didn't upgrade?? (Please don't say mp, that just indicates your 'needs' are determined by other peoples opinions. The image quality of the 5dmkII is superb and the 5DmkIII should be even better.) I mean something that you feel you have to now change brands/systems because of...


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Mar 2, 2012)

EchoLocation said:


> I am not a professional and have been wanting to upgrade from a 5DC to a 5DIII for a couple of years now. The 5DII never interested me too much because of the poor AF and it's specialization being weddings/portrait work(where I want a better camera for travel/all around.) I travel a lot and would like something semi quick, with great low light capabilities and not too expensive. 2000 dollars is a lot of money for me, but I finally decided i'd upgrade to the 5DIII if it was around 2500 dollars. Today, I am really disappointed as 3500 dollars is just wayyy too much to feel comfortable spending on a "hobby," especially when I've been wanting the 24-70 2.8 and the price has just nearly doubled. Unfortunately now, for my needs/wants, I think the D700 is the best choice for an upgrade. I can save some money on the body to put towards glass and I know the AF and low light is top notch.
> Canon attracted a lot of buyers by having reasonably priced bodies and glass(compared to Nikon,) but that now seems to be changing. I just don't see how the 5DIII is worth 15% more than the D800. I don't care, and in fact, don't want 36mp, but to me, these cameras seem rather equal in different ways and i'm just not understanding the 500 dollar premium by Canon.
> I know the 5DIII will be a huge seller and wildly popular, but from my perspective the 5DIII sounds like it fixed the shortcomings of the 5DII, and didn't wildly exceed the previous camera. I don't see why there should be a 700-1000 dollar price increase on this camera.
> I think a lot of people who aren't pros will have to think really really hard before spending over 3000 dollars on a camera. I think Canon really missed the boat by not offering this camera at a price closer to the 2500 dollar range. While the extra money is not huge for people making money off this camera, I think that extra money on the price will prohibit a huge number of people from mindlessly clicking "buy" and upgrading(which I would have done at $2500)



You know what? Anyone who spends large amounts of money on any equipment must think long and hard on it before buying, unless your extremely rich of course. Pros' will think long and hard too, especially because there are pros across all income spectrum's. The established pros, with lots of business and enough in saved earning for equipment will think about it just as much as an emerging pro with limited budget. About the only difference between pros and no pros is the questions we ask as we decide. For me its a measure of need vs ROI (return on investment) vs available funds vs yes, wants! Currently I create and sell art, as well as shooting events, portraits and weddings. I love the creation side of art, but its not as financial profitable as portraits, weddings and events. So to me, the best purchase for the ROI would be the mkiii. Hell, it may even be better for me to grab a mkii when the price drops, because even the mkii would be a step up in low light and image IQ. Of course, the artist in me would love to have those MP's, but there's so many other associated costs to the art side of photography that going for MP would not be the most profitable. That may change in the future, sand when that point comes, MP's would shift from a want to a need.

For you, its all about the wants! And what are you willing to spend on your wants? you start out by saying $2000 is a lot to you for this, then bump it up to being willing to spend $2500. why not consider something on the 7D level? I have been working solely on a 7D now for over a year and a half. It's a great camera... and it can put out pro level results if you use it right.


----------



## crackjack (Mar 2, 2012)

I definitely go to Nikon...
d800 is not a substitute of d700, d700 is still produced and updated yet to come
sorry canon, hope i ever come back


----------



## idimoe (Mar 2, 2012)

I'm waiting to pick up my first DSLR. Apparently there will be a refresh of entry-mid level DSLR's from both Nikon and Canon this year (still waiting guys..) Anywho, since I have no $ invested in a system, my $ and loyalty will go to the superior, comparable product.


----------



## crackjack (Mar 2, 2012)

I definitely go to Nikon...
d800 is not a substitute of d700, d700 is still produced and updated yet to come
sorry canon, hope i ever come back


----------



## D_Rochat (Mar 2, 2012)

idimoe said:


> I'm waiting to pick up my first DSLR. Apparently there will be a refresh of entry-mid level DSLR's from both Nikon and Canon this year (still waiting guys..) Anywho, since I have no $ invested in a system, my $ and loyalty will go to the superior, comparable product.



Get what just feels right for you. The Canon/Nikon competition will go on forever and some years Canon will be best, some years Nikon will be. And of course, it's all subjective to your needs. I don't believe in being "loyal" to a brand like they're family because they're out to make money. You'll likely be happy either way. Don't let these people sulking about mp sway your decision either. I think 99% of these people have been listening to Best Buy employees far too much.


----------



## gagewashere (Mar 2, 2012)

I don't have any money invested in anything yet either. I do a lot of video work though--
Particularly for the video 5DMKIII or the D800? [no lenses no nada, just a bunch of gear at this point without a camera. ] 

thanks!


----------



## SiliconVoid (Mar 2, 2012)

crackjack said:


> I definitely go to Nikon...
> d800 is not a substitute of d700, d700 is still produced and updated yet to come
> sorry canon, hope i ever come back



LOL.. Nikon said that the D800 was not a 'direct' replacement for the D700. In business terms that means it could be if there is enough success with the D800. Nikon knows there will be a lot of friction from owners of the D700 to wait ~3yrs and then have some superpixel diffracting monster rolled out. They have admitted that the D800 does not provide the same flexibility of use as the D700, so far as to publish a camera specific users guide on how to reduce/avoid motion blur due to the new sensor.

So if the D700 fits all your needs, then it is confusing why you would have been waiting or considering the 5DmkII or its replacement in the first place. With Canon you could have picked up a 5D for cheaper than the D700 and been out enjoying the art this whole time.

Both the 5DmkII and D700 will drop in price to approximately the same level, so its not a money issue, just sounds like you feel the need to work your way up to more mp.


----------



## crackjack (Mar 2, 2012)

SiliconVoid said:


> LOL.. Nikon said that the D800 was not a 'direct' replacement for the D700. In business terms that means it could be if there is enough success with the D800. Nikon knows there will be a lot of friction from owners of the D700 to wait ~3yrs and then have some superpixel diffracting monster rolled out. They have admitted that the D800 does not provide the same flexibility of use as the D700, so far as to publish a camera specific users guide on how to reduce/avoid motion blur due to the new sensor.
> 
> So if the D700 fits all your needs, then it is confusing why you would have been waiting or considering the 5DmkII or its replacement in the first place. With Canon you could have picked up a 5D for cheaper than the D700 and been out enjoying the art this whole time.
> 
> Both the 5DmkII and D700 will drop in price to approximately the same level, so its not a money issue, just sounds like you feel the need to work your way up to more mp.



i own 5DmkII right now, and gonna change it to d4, and d700s* or any low noise camera came next
i'm not a fashion photographer i dont need 36mp ...


----------



## DavidGMiles (Mar 2, 2012)

The only thing that'll stop me jumping to Nikon is a decent price on the 200 - 400 L Lens - that is what I really want - and I could sell all my kit, replace it with Nikon equivalents, add £2k and have the Nikon 200 - 400 which some swear buy - if the Canon equivalent is silly money, which I fear it will be, then I will almost certainly switch


----------



## noodles (Mar 2, 2012)

I can't make a decision while I did not see the review comparison between for example 5D MK3 and the D800.
I would wait to see the quality of the photos and compare before making a decision


----------



## smirkypants (Mar 6, 2012)

DavidGMiles said:


> The only thing that'll stop me jumping to Nikon is a decent price on the 200 - 400 L Lens - that is what I really want - and I could sell all my kit, replace it with Nikon equivalents, add £2k and have the Nikon 200 - 400 which some swear buy - if the Canon equivalent is silly money, which I fear it will be, then I will almost certainly switch


This is exactly what I did. I set it up on the nikon price watch site that when a refurbished 200-400 became available, it would shoot me an email. I got the email, thought about it for about a minute. Thought about the canon lens costing $11,000, thought about the refurbished 200-400 costing $6300, whipped out the plastic and bought it. The difference in price almost buys a D4.

Sorry, Canon prices have just gotten out of control.


----------

