# Experiences Switching From Nikon



## Sameer Thawani (Sep 25, 2013)

I wanted to ask if any Canon users here have switched from Nikon and if so what are their experiences? Specifically can you please comment on: 

- What Nikon bodies, lenses, flashes you were using and what you are using now 
- Experiences surrounding gear quality 
- Other experiences in general. 
- How long have you used Canon for and would you do it again?

Specifically if anybody has any experience going from Nikon D300s to Canon 7d &/or Nikon 17-55/24-70 to Canon versions of these lenses, please do chime in. I am considering a switch (I slightly prefer Canon ergonomics and also believe that Canon 7D image quality is superior to Nikon D300s). You would think it would be easy to find opinions of those who have switched on the internet, but apparently not. 

Thanks - and do note that isn't meant to inflame a Canon vs Nikon thing in any way.


----------



## duydaniel (Sep 25, 2013)

I don't think you are allowed to mention the N company here.

Anyway, back in 2012 I wanted to get a D800 but it was out of stock forever.
So I ended up with a 5D3 24-105

Regret? I don't know. Maybe one day I will get a Nikon when I have extra cash.
I think they are very close. Nikon may be slightly better for landscape lover like me

but at the end of the day, your glass is more important. 
Both AK and M16 can kill, just matter of preference


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 25, 2013)

I bought a D800 when they first came out. I also bought a used 24-70 f/2.8G, a used 80-200mm f/2.8D, a 200-400mm f/4 on Craigslist, and already had a 50mm 1.4D lens along with several other lesser lenses.

The D800 was a very nice camera below IS0 800. At ISO 100, the DR was exceptional, and in difficult lighting made a big difference. Its a great camera at base ISO.

However, I am mostly a low light photographer, and the camera did not perform nearly so well as my Canon 5D MK III when I got to ISO 12800 and higher. The DR was slightly less, and the metering system was consistently fooled into over exposing by unpredictable amounts.

Add to that the horrible CA's of the 24-70G, and Nikons poor customer service record.

After about 30 days, I sold it while they were still scarce and made $400 on the deal. I sold the lenses for a profit as well, so it was a profitable camera to get rid of.

Its kinda strange, because the person I bought the lenses from has a brother who is a noted pro photographer (It was his 200-400mm lens I bought) later bought a D800. About 6 months ago, she listed it for sale on Craigslist and finally sold it for under $2000. No one wants them very badly now.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Sep 25, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> I don't think you are allowed to mention the N company here.
> 
> Anyway, back in 2012 I wanted to get a D800 but it was out of stock forever.
> So I ended up with a 5D3 24-105
> ...


I'm not the only one that compares cameras and guns.  I consider myself a sniper rifle. I'll keep an eye on the display and the finger on the trigger, waiting for the right moment to make one or two photos. There are the machine-gun shooters, making 10 photos always equal to anything, even a cake standing on the table. ??? Never had Nikon, but using friends always found strange ergonomics, and controls makes no sense. However, current Nikon cameras can make great pictures too.


----------



## SDPhotography (Sep 25, 2013)

Here is an interesting article from the publishers of Oopoomoo.com (Darwin Wiggett and Samantha Chrysanthou) discussing this very topic. One is a Canon shooter, the other a Nikon shooter. It is a little dated equipment wise, but interesting none the less.

http://www.oopoomoo.com/2012/03/personal-style-is-your-camera-determining-yours/

Cheers

SD


----------



## PavelR (Sep 25, 2013)

I switched about two years ago from Nikon d2x/d200 to Canon 1d4/1ds3.
Reasons:
* no new professional crop body and no more than 12mpx
* no 300/4 with VR
* no fast AF of 135, 80-400
* no 400/5.6
* no good 17-55/2.8 VR
* FL about 138mm on 70-200/2.8 II on MFD
* not many local second hand offers
A lot of things changed - 70-200/4, 14-24, 24/1.4, 35/1.4, ...
I'm still not used to Canon camera handling - I'm missing lot of controls, information in the viewfinder and LCD [selected mode, selected AF point, numeric exposure compensation, card free space] + 5th. battery on a flash, consistent flash exposure.
Canon lenses except 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and 14-24 are on par with Nikkors; second hand offers are much wider and prices are better...
It looks like I stay on Canon world for some time...


----------



## Skulker (Sep 25, 2013)

I'm a Canon man and very happy with my 1Dx and 5D3. Having said that I considered swapping to Nikon when I had a 7D and was buying my 300 f2.8. Because of the quality of the D3 images I was seeing, and the 200-400. I never changed, got the 300, then the 1Dx then the 5D3. 

Comparing results from the D4 with the 1Dx I think I made the right choice. There not a difference worth changing for now as far as I can see. 

So I would say don't swap in a hurry. Its photographers who take pictures not cameras. ;D


----------



## Patrick (Sep 25, 2013)

Skulker said: "Its photographers who take pictures not cameras.




"

Indeed. All too easy to forget that!


----------



## Viggo (Sep 25, 2013)

Patrick said:


> Skulker said: "Its photographers who take pictures not cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Although that is a very common phrase I disagree. If that was true we all would be shooting compacts because they would be good enough if we just practiced enough. 

It's no guarantee to get great pictures with great gear, it is very easy to shoot [email protected] pictures with great gear, but there are great limits to lesser gear that isn't possible to overcome.


----------



## Ewinter (Sep 25, 2013)

Viggo said:


> Patrick said:
> 
> 
> > Skulker said: "Its photographers who take pictures not cameras.
> ...



Amen. And I think there are shots I can take with the 1DX that just aren't possible with the 5dIII. 
I give some people either camera and have to tell them where the shutter button is.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 26, 2013)

Patrick said:


> Skulker said: "Its photographers who take pictures not cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I wonder how many threads/posts there on this site that deal with equipment and agonzing comparisions between gear as compared to the number of threads about technique? ;D

"It's the photographer not the camera" is something we tell non-photographers. When photographers get together, it's all about the gear baby! LoL

To the question of switching sides...

I am in the process of seriously considering jumping ship. I don't have a significant investment in cameras or lenses so there are no significant legacy costs involved. This is an advantage to me as I can look at the multiple choices with a pretty open mind.

What I truly don't understand is how photographers who DO have a significant investment in glass (and let's be honest, it does not take much to make our investment significant!!!) to consider dumping everything and switching sides. Yikes.

That is one of the reasons I have been taking a few months to make my decision. To me, what ever ship I jump on to and once I make my investment in good glass, that's the system I will stick with.

Do other photographers who do have significant kit jump ship often? Right now canikon may have the "best" but in a few years nicanon will come out with something "better" only to be followed by canikon..... One could spend a lot of money jumping and rejumping ship when ever something "best" comes along. I can't imagine that is cost effective.

I guess my rambling point is that just because canikon comes out with something "better" does not make my nicanon "bad". The bottom line is: Is my camera good enough for my purposes?

But then it is all about the gear and not the photographer. LoL


----------



## Sameer Thawani (Sep 26, 2013)

I appreciate the replies on this thread, please keep them coming. It's helpful to know what experiences have felt like. 

As for the notion "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" - I don't see how it's relevant here. I am not considering switching to Canon because it will make me a better photographer - as I stated in my original post I prefer Canon ergonomics.


----------



## Random Orbits (Sep 26, 2013)

AcutancePhotography said:


> I am in the process of seriously considering jumping ship. I don't have a significant investment in cameras or lenses so there are no significant legacy costs involved. This is an advantage to me as I can look at the multiple choices with a pretty open mind.
> 
> What I truly don't understand is how photographers who DO have a significant investment in glass (and let's be honest, it does not take much to make our investment significant!!!) to consider dumping everything and switching sides. Yikes.
> 
> ...



Those that have the means use both systems and maintain both systems.


----------



## RGF (Sep 26, 2013)

I switched from Nikon to Canon around 2000 (after 25 years with Nikon) - from F5 to EOS3 and 1V. Won't comment on that switch - but to this day I still instinctually turn my focus the Nikon direction.

About 9 months ago I investigating returning to Nikon and decided to stick with Canon. The reasons are another story


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 26, 2013)

Funnily enough I was a Nikon shooter for 25 years too. I used the D200 and D300 in digital small format but began using Canon in 2006 due to the introduction of the 'affordable' 5D. At that time Nikon were on record as stating they would never produce a 35mm size digital. 

Straight away I liked the 'honesty' of the Canon. Difficult to describe really. Contols are positive and well placed. Menus are good and intuitive. Reliability 100%. On the later Nikons the control wheels were sloppy and the rubber, which would peel away from the body, fouled the front command wheel. Really didn't like the translucent LCD screen ( which Canon now use on the 5D and 7D). Manual focus on the better Nikkor lenses was nothing like the Canon L, on the cheaper lenses it was hopeless - no damping at all. No lens such as the 24-105 at the time. I could go on and on. 

I always felt the 'IQ' from the D200 and D300 was good, the original 5D required more care IMO, specifically harsh, abrupt contrast it you weren't careful. Resolution was much better on the Canon as you'd expect from FF. 

I've never owned a 7D so can't give an opinion on how they really compare. Interesting that Nikon never actually attempted to match the 7D though. 

Regarding 'would I change back?', put it this way. When I see a 5D Mkiii and a D800 side by side I just laugh ;D


----------



## sdsr (Sep 26, 2013)

Patrick said:


> Skulker said: "Its photographers who take pictures not cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Photographers can't take pictures without cameras and lenses.


----------



## sdsr (Sep 26, 2013)

My serious interest in photography began with my dissatifaction with my first dslr, an entry level Nikon (D3100). The problem wasn't that I didn't like the photos I could take with it but that I hated the ergonomics of the thing, and when the autofocus stopped working completely while I was on vacation in Paris I stopped trusting it and started investigating alternatives. For various reasons I ended up with a Pentax K-5, but after a while I decided I wanted to try FF and, as there's no such thing in Pentax-land, rented a 5DII (lingering anti-Nikon bias led me there rather than to a D700) and a couple of lenses and immediately jumped ship again - it was obvious that the picture quality was better, and the mechanical/focusing superiority of the Canon lenses, however well-built Pentax lenses can be, was shocking. Each time I jumped I sold all the old equipment; "lost" money on the bodies, as I had bought them new, but probably broke even overall on the lenses - those who worry about the cost of jumping ship probably shouldn't. To the extent I "lost" money I didn't - it was worth it for the use I had of the cameras and for the learning experience.

Since then I've wondered about Nikon FF and, out of sheer curiosity, rented D800e and D600 (+ a few lenses, of course) on the off-chance it seemed like an agreeable idea to add some Nikon equipment to my Canon gear, only to end up spending more on Canon. I disliked the ergonomics of their FF bodies as much as their intro bodies, and didn't think the lenses I tried were quite as good mechanically. I don't think there was any significant difference in the resulting images (leaving aside the superior resolution of the 800e and the better dynamic range of both, neither of which would be of much use to me most of the time), but I just don't much like taking photos with Nikon equipment: the mechanical act of taking photos just seems so much more pleasant with Canon (and Pentax). There are hardly any Nikon FF lenses for which I have lens envy, whereas I would have considerable lens envy if I switched to Nikon. So instead of adding Nikon, I've taken a rather different route and added smaller stuff - Olympus and Panasonic M43 (I prefer their ergonomics to Nikon's too...).

I can't answer your precise questions re APS-C equipment comparisons, but you might find it useful to try the lens comparisons at the digital picture, where you will be able to compare equivalent Canon and Nikon lenses, at least in terms of sharpness.


----------



## Apop (Sep 26, 2013)

Sameer Thawani said:


> I wanted to ask if any Canon users here have switched from Nikon and if so what are their experiences? Specifically can you please comment on:
> 
> - What Nikon bodies, lenses, flashes you were using and what you are using now
> - Experiences surrounding gear quality
> ...




Switched in January this year or so,

Used 200-400 vr2, 70-200vr2, 14-24 on a d800, before that a d7000
Gear quality was great, Only disliked the 200-400 a bit, for filter holder and focus ring ''sturdiness''(felt a bit hollow/cheap and got grinding dust/sand noises quite fast.
One other small thins was that i had to clean my sensor fairly often due to some Oil residue? , absolutely not a deal breaker, but it is something I had to remember.

Other than that no other complaints, the gear was great, but I liked the feel of canon , lenses , suits me better for wildlife atm with also increased fps-buffer compared to the nikon model I had.

now canon 1d4, 300 2.8, 70-200,


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 26, 2013)

When I first started looking at DSLR's my impression of Nikon was that the user interface was designed by programmers, not photographers. I found the Canon user interface to be better, but at that time I thought that the Olympus user interface was the best for introductory cameras. I still think so, but now I would have to add that I like the Canon user interface on the 60D or 5D2 even more...

I still have not gotten the opportunity to play with the Canon touchscreen interface so I have no opinions as to how good or bad it is.... but I am certainly curious.....


----------



## Skulker (Sep 28, 2013)

sdsr said:


> Patrick said:
> 
> 
> > Skulker said: "Its photographers who take pictures not cameras.
> ...



Photographers can take photographs with cameras and lenses.

My point is that it is the artistic input that turns the photograph into a picture. And artists can defiantly make pictures without cameras. I was trying to make the point that the photographer is a very important part of the system.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 28, 2013)

Skulker said:


> sdsr said:
> 
> 
> > Patrick said:
> ...


That's true, but read the title of the topic again. He is asking for experiences from those who have switched.


----------



## Skulker (Sep 28, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Skulker said:
> 
> 
> > sdsr said:
> ...



By all means feel free to read the rest of the post that was only partly quoted. You will then see why it is relevant. :


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 28, 2013)

Skulker said:


> By all means feel free to read the rest of the post that was only partly quoted. You will then see why it is relevant. :


Here, you read the OP, I'll copy it for you!

"


Sameer Thawani said:


> I wanted to ask if any Canon users here have switched from Nikon and if so what are their experiences? Specifically can you please comment on:
> 
> - What Nikon bodies, lenses, flashes you were using and what you are using now
> - Experiences surrounding gear quality
> ...


----------



## verysimplejason (Sep 29, 2013)

I have used D90 and D5000 several times. My friend lend them to me sometime ago. He's using Canon for our work and Nikon for personal use. 

I love Nikon cameras for landscape. I just like the colors and the IQ. They're a lot better than Canon for landscapes at least for my taste. I just don't like them for portraits. I have to PP a lot to get my preferred skin tone. All in all, I'll use it only in favor of Canon if I'm more into landscape and macro. Unfortunately, I shoot a lot more portraits so I'm still using Canon up to now.


----------



## Skulker (Sep 29, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Here, you read the OP, I'll copy it for you!



MSP it appears that you wish to start picking a verbal dispute. I have no wish to get involved in diverting this thread away from the topic of the OP who was interested in experience of switching from Nikon to Canon. 

I thought the OP might be interested in my reasons for deciding not to switch having been in much the same position as he is now.

I apologize to him that my post enabled someone to get started on one of these unnecessary, unwarranted and distracting directions. I shall not respond further to this distraction.


----------



## Sameer Thawani (Oct 1, 2013)

> I apologize to him that my post enabled someone to get started on one of these unnecessary, unwarranted and distracting directions. I shall not respond further to this distraction.



Skulker, it's ok. I appreciate the apology but no need to apologize. Don't take this stuff personally. It's all good.


----------



## Sameer Thawani (Oct 1, 2013)

sdsr said:


> There are hardly any Nikon FF lenses for which I have lens envy, whereas I would have considerable lens envy if I switched to Nikon.
> I can't answer your precise questions re APS-C equipment comparisons, but you might find it useful to try the lens comparisons at the digital picture, where you will be able to compare equivalent Canon and Nikon lenses, at least in terms of sharpness.



SDSR, you know your post completely echoes my exact sentiments pertaining to Nikon ergonomics. It's funny, my first DSLR was a D3100 too, and I feel the same way about the controls. In any case, I wanted to ask about the Canon lens envy you are talking about. I have often heard this about Canon lenses, but don't know any specifics. What lenses does Canon posess in its arsenal that Nikon doesn't? All the major lenses (f/2.8 zooms, 1.4's primes) that I know of seem to have their equivalents. Thanks.


----------



## Rui Brito (Oct 1, 2013)

MP-E 65? EF 85 1.2L? Not an expert on Nikon Lenses, but at least those two comes to mind.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 1, 2013)

Rui Brito said:


> MP-E 65? EF 85 1.2L? Not an expert on Nikon Lenses, but at least those two comes to mind.



TS-E 17, the TS-E 24 is markedly better than the PC-E 24. The 50mm f1.0 and 50 f1.2 both with AF have no Nikon equivalent. Until the recent Nikon 80-400 the Canon 100-400 won a lot of people over, but even now the Nikon lens is much more expensive than the Canon.

Nikon had a distinct advantage with flashes until the 600 EX-RT came out, now the Canon system offers more.


----------

