DSLRUsers.com

Hey all,

I am currently selling all my Nikon gear and defected to the west! Err moving to Canon

All my mates including my father are fairly peeved at me since they are all Nikon users but that's another story.

What I ask is what is the transition like? I have never handled a Canon properly, once held a mates 40D + 70-200mm f2.8 IS which left a little smirk on my face

More specifically I shall be moving from a Nikon D90 to a Canon 50D (assuming I sell my Nikon gear first!)

Any tips/info will certainly be appreciated.

Hi Patrick
I defected to the east (Canon to Nikon!) and for me it was easy, it was like getting a new car... all the controls were still there, but in different places - just a matter of getting used to where everything was. Why are you switching? I defected as my boyfriend had Nikon gear and we can share lenses... and now I am a total convert, love my Nikon gear

PatrickN wrote:All my mates including my father are fairly peeved at me since they are all Nikon users but that's another story.

And it's also not that important.

I have never handled a Canon properly, once held a mates 40D + 70-200mm f2.8 IS which left a little smirk on my face

But that is very important. That you take some time to handle a Canon properly.

But you should do a number of things: the 50D is the Canon you should handle. Have a good play with it, but not just with the glass that you dream of, but with the glass that you will be using.

And also take some more time to play with the Nikon equivalents. This time with the glass that you dream of, to put Nikon on a more equal footing with the 40D/70-200 combo. The Nikon equivalent (D300/70-200) is a very formidable camera, and handles very nicely.

Canon's ergonomics are very different from Nikon's, and how the camera feels in your hands should be the determining factor, not the views of your family, nor the views of your friends.

Let's also ask a couple more questions ... the D90 is a fairly new camera ... is this your first DSLR? What is your photographic experience? In total?

What elements of the D90 are you dissatisfied with? Why are you thinking of changing? What do you think that moving to the 50D will bring to your photography? Forget the 70-200 for the moment; that is not a relevant issue in this discussion.

I think that moving to the 50D from a D90 is a big mistake: you are gaining very little, if anything at all. Were you going to the 5DII, I might offer words of support, but not to the 50D. You'd be just wasting your time IMHO.

I wouldn't bother moving from a D90 to a 50D. I am a Canon man but there's something about the ergonomics of the Nikon bodies. As Gary has suggested, there's not much reason to sidestep over to the dark (Nikon) side when comparing these two cameras.

However, if you have access to some nice Canon glass, then I can see your reasoning. That is precisely why I switched sides a few years ago. Now I have a (small) stable of L lens and I'm very happy with the gear I have. Remember, camera bodies come and go quickly, but good lens will stay up to date for many years. Maybe you could acquire/beg/borrow etc a nice Nikon 70-200 F2.8 VR to add to your D90.

Yesterday I saw a 2nd hand D70 for sale at my local camera store. It brought back fond memories of that incredible camera, still good even today.

Anyway, all the best in your decision making.

Ozi.

with Gary.

This is a significant move. This would depend a bit on the lenses that you currently own. Would your commercial interests be affected? You wouldn't want to do an assignment with a 'foreign' camera.

I am assuming you want a similar camera to the D90 therefore considering the 50D?

Sorry, but I am with the other people with this one, why a 50D? and it seems like you may have access to nikon glass through your family and friends...This is a logical argument, but there may be other factors at play, only you know these at the moment.

As for a transition between brands, the word of warning is that everything is reversed (lens zoom and focus in the opposite direction, the light meter is the other way around, the shutter and aperture controls turn the opposite way to the light meter - i am sure this can be fixed though). I regularly play with a variety of brands: Nikon/Fuji that I own, Canon, Olympus, Pentax and Sony, as I work at a camera store and will get loan cameras occasionally and find that although they all work in a similar manner in principle there are a few small differences that must be remembered.

I would say that you will be able to adapt to Canon after a period of transition, how long that will take depends on the person. For myself, it usually takes 5-10mins before I am shooting comfortably (well as comfortably as I will be without long term use of the camera) with another brand.

Do go out there and play with comparable setups (the D90 tends to sit in between the 450D and 50D - but closer to the 50D IMHO, and the D300 sits above the 50D so this may be a challenge).

Having used the 40D and the D80/D90 I can say that there are some niceties in the Canon, but the benefit of moving to the Canon is not high enough for me to consider it as a worthwhile move, unless the ergonomics are better for you. Personally I find that the ergonomics of the Nikons better for me, and Sony easier to use than Canon (it is closer to the Nikon setup). But then again this is a personal thing, I am used to Nikon and anything else is different. PS surenj has made some good points about doing an assn with an unfamiliar camera and what you already own.

i suspect this is a "grass is greener" move possibly from reading too many internet forums and being unhappy with the results you've currently getting. saying that you've never handled a canon properly would be the first case of alarm for me. if you've never held it properly and all your friends shot nikon then why are you switching ? i could understand going from a d90 to a MkII but to a 50d ? what on earth for ? lol

the canon and nikon product are so fantastic at the moment you could shoot with either and get great results so to switch without even knowing what a canon feels like to shoot with is irregular to say the least.

anywhooo...to answer your question, the transition is not difficult at all. the technique aspects of photography don't change according to the system you shoot. and contrary to popular belief, shooting one system or the other does not improve your photography skills. its all about what system fits YOU the best and you enjoy shooting with. that is all it is. so if you have a hankering for a 50d then dont let any fear of "transition" stop you cos in your case, there is none.

My main reason is the D90 body is too small, even with the grip. I can't hold it properly.

Second issue is fps, 4.5fps doesn't cut it anymore. The only thing I will be missing is CLS but I don't really care about that, pocket wizards ahoy!

Glass will include, 24-70 L, 70-200 2.8 IS, and I haven't decided on a longer zoom at this stage or a wide angle.

This time all the glass I buy shall be at the very max f2.8. And as for a 5D MKII that is coming too, just later maybe around September.

So yea, when I mucked around with the 40D It didn't really feel to alien to be honest but I loved how big the body was!

Regards.

Which really begs the question... Why not a D300?

Is physically larger, and has a great feel with the very solid grip.
Runs at 6fps, 8fps with the grip.
Has the menus and little ergonomic things that you presumably are already used to
Has CLS and better weather sealing than the 50D.

It's more expensive, but also more capable.

Good luck to you, both are great cameras... I am just not sure that your two issues REQUIRE a change of brands.

I've made a transition from Nikon to Canon and back again.

What is the purpose of the switch? You've mentioned that the D90 is too small and the fps too low. Have you tried out the D300? It's significantly larger than the D90 and similar in size to the 50D.

Other questions you might want to consider are, what type of images do you generally shoot? what environment do you regularly shoot in?

For me, I moved from Nikon to Canon as I needed the low noise at high ISO at the time, so I moved across. I had the 24-70 and 70-200 IS 2.8 L lenses and a 50 1.4. Loved the kit and it suited me fine...for what I shoot and where I shoot. I like to shoot available light (even at night).

Why did I move back? I constantly hated the way the 5D felt in my hands as well as the reduced number of AF points. Nikon had finally caught up on the ISO game and the timing was right for me to switch back. My current lens line up basically consists of 2.8 and 1.4 glass...yup even at ISO6400 I'll still gladly shoot at f1.4

It's up to your choice, but IMHO the reasons presented aren't enough to justify a huge switchover unless you can get the new gear ultra cheap.

Nikon have excellent 2.8 lenses which are AF-S.
Nikon have cameras which feel great, are robust and the fps will exceed what most people need.

If you're not after HD video, then look at getting the D700.

Switch if you absolutely can't find everything that you need that Nikon have. Each system has its pros and cons.

Hope that helps.

PatrickN wrote:My main reason is the D90 body is too small, even with the grip. I can't hold it properly.

Second issue is fps, 4.5fps doesn't cut it anymore. The only thing I will be missing is CLS but I don't really care about that, pocket wizards ahoy!

As above, why not the D300 or the D700??

Glass will include, 24-70 L, 70-200 2.8 IS, and I haven't decided on a longer zoom at this stage or a wide angle.

This time all the glass I buy shall be at the very max f2.8. And as for a 5D MKII that is coming too, just later maybe around September.

Nice choice on glass (very pricy) if you need longer zoom then the 100-400L or even a good teleconverter and for the wide, either the 17-40 f/4L or the 16-35 f/2.8L. If you really must get the 5DII then I would drop a lens from your start up kit and grab the body first.

The Nikon equivalent kit (14-24mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8VR) is optically superior in the opinion on many people especially the first two lenses. The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 IS is better over the full frame though. Have you considered getting the Nikon glass and then grabbing the D700+MB-D10 later on?

Now I am really confused It's either D700 or 50D + 5D MK II, actually does any shop in Australia sell the Nikkor 70-200 VR in white?

Rooz wrote:i suspect this is a "grass is greener" move

Chris,

This is pretty much in line with my thoughts as well. Rather than changing camera brands, I think that learning how to best use what he already has would be a far more productive route for the OP to travel. And that's especially so given the newness of the camera model he currently has.

I suspect there's some frustration behind this post, and without addressing the proper feeding and care of the D90 in his hands, that frustration will continue to manifest itself regardless of whether he's sailing on the good ship Nikon, HMS Canon, Sloop John Sony, or whatever.

PatrickN wrote:Now I am really confused It's either D700 or 50D + 5D MK II, actually does any shop in Australia sell the Nikkor 70-200 VR in white?

D300 and D700 + 2x MB-D10 would be the closest to 50D and 5DII + grips, and you retain CLS. If you want the white 70-200VR then I would be checking with your local cameras stores (preferably one that has a decent pro range) and they should be able to get one in via Nikon Australia.

The advantage of staying with Nikon is the shorter adaptation period and CLS (some guys on the forum hate it, but I love it). Can I ask, why white?

aim54x wrote:Can I ask, why white?

I think it looks better the way Canon way.

PatrickN wrote:does any shop in Australia sell the Nikkor 70-200 VR in white?

The RRP for this lens (it's actually grey, not white) is Au$3199. That's from the new Nikon price list, effective June 1, 2009. I suspect that the 70-200 f/2.8 IS RRP will be even greater. Street prices for both will be somewhat less, and grey importing is always an option, that is again starting to become viable.

Why is the colour of the lens important? How does that affect your use of it?

As I stated earlier, the move from a D90 to a 50D doesn't seem, to me, a worthwhile objective. If your issue is that the D90 is too small, look at the D300 and D700, as others have suggested.

I do, with respect, think you need to revisit your motivations.

Why shouldn't I? I prefer it grey because black looks horrible and I end up spending half my time cleaning it and removing all the specks! Now if only the body came in white too

That's another thing I am starting to dislike about Nikon, all these damn price hikes, you mention the lens reaching $3k I can buy the canon equivalent for under $2200 new with change for maybe another lens.

PatrickN wrote:

aim54x wrote:Can I ask, why white?

I think it looks better the way Canon way.

Not really a statement that will win you much respect.
Surely the important things include: quality, ease of use, weight/size, and price. But "it looks better" is rarely more important than any of those to a photographer.


Everyone seems to be assuming that Patrick's facing a huge switchover. All we know so far is that he has a D90 and at least one lens (including a slightly damaged 70-300 VR). Possibly not a huge investment so if he's going to switch, now could be the time to do it.

Given what I can glean from Patrick's website, I'm guessing any of these bodies (including the 50D) would be suitable. The 50D's a nice camera. I keep eyeing it off compared to my 40D mainly due to its larger buffer, but might hold off until the next model (the 40D's currently backup to my 5DmkII as well as my "long lens" body).

PatrickN wrote:Why shouldn't I? I prefer it grey because black looks horrible and I end up spending half my time cleaning it and removing all the specks!

Nobody's saying that you shouldn't get white. We're just curious as to why.

To me, the colour of my gear is totally irrelevant. What is relevant to me is that it feels good in my hand, that it's solid, serviceable, and reliable.

That's another thing I am starting to dislike about Nikon, all these damn price hikes, you mention the lens reaching $3k I can buy the canon equivalent for under $2200 new with change for maybe another lens.

Actually, both Nikon and Canon have both increased their prices within the last month, and both did so at the beginning of the year as well. As a general guide, Nikon glass is usually a tad cheaper than the nearest Canon equivalent.

The price I quoted for the Nikkor 70-200 was the new RRP. You are trying to compare that with a street price, probably grey. The Nikon 70-200 can be had ex-HKS for Au$2220. Where's the problem?

And why are you getting so angry and defensive? We are only trying to help you to make the best possible decision,
with as much input as possible; input that you originally asked for.

Bah I guess I'll stick with Nikon for now.

I'm sorry too all that feel their Camera is just a "tool" it isn't... It is your pride and joy, your best friend and mate. You should have pride in it. "you shouldn't worry about colour" is just silly to me. I never said I am choosing aesthetics over form and function, it's the final decision. I have to work with this equipment and if Grey is more pleasing to my idea I shall very well choose it!

Thank you to all who have helped, you have made me see Nikon isn't all that bad. (apart from pricing)

PatrickN wrote:My main reason is the D90 body is too small, even with the grip. I can't hold it properly.

Second issue is fps, 4.5fps doesn't cut it anymore. The only thing I will be missing is CLS but I don't really care about that, pocket wizards ahoy!

Glass will include, 24-70 L, 70-200 2.8 IS, and I haven't decided on a longer zoom at this stage or a wide angle.

This time all the glass I buy shall be at the very max f2.8. And as for a 5D MKII that is coming too, just later maybe around September.

So yea, when I mucked around with the 40D It didn't really feel to alien to be honest but I loved how big the body was!

Regards.

Pat, that makes alot more sense like you say about the body size and feel. if you're not happy with the way a body feels then its important to take that into consideration. 4.5fps doesn't cut it anymore ? how so ? what all of a sudden happened hat that frame rate is too slow ? and why do you want a 50d and a MkII ? do you understand the differences in the cameras etc ?

if i may offer some advice ? i think you're rushing things a heck of alot here. from your OP i kinda got the impression that you are quite new to dslr ? if so, take some time to take a breath, figure out what you want, what you need, what suits you and what doesnt. to be dropping over 10k on a camera system when you are quite new is really a massive investment beofre you even learn and appreciate the craft.

i have spent the best part of the last 3 months shooting with a MkII and was a hairs breath away from switching based on canons superb lens lineup. so i'm not bagging the canon product or trying to convince you to stay with nikon, i could care less. all i'm saying is relax, take your time, understand what you want and need BEFORE you buy.

then again, money may be no object to you in which case, disregard everything i have just said ! lol

Thanks for that, no no I am not new to DSLR! apart from photography my other hobby is pure camera equipment. I knew every bit of equipment out there. Just puts a smile on my face.

If I could I would have both Nikon and Canon, there are certain bits of equipment I just love, and the sound the 50D emits from both motors is just super fine! Though one day I will have both systems running together (just another one of my evil plans)

I might be a collector I don't know, I seem to show the average traits of a collector getting attached to certain items and waiting to collect them.

PatrickN wrote:the sound the 50D emits from both motors is just super fine!

then switch. you don't have much invested in nikon and imho, the stuff you shoot with has to make you smile. i think where we were all coming from is that if you suspect changing brands will somehow improve you're results then you are sadly mistaken. if its just cos canon makes you smile more, (for whatever reason - superficial or not), then i say go with what makes you feel good.

I suggest PatrickN move to Leica instead. I will be, well adding to it rather than switching.

No point switching really, just buy the Canon body, mount adapters and use Nikon lenses on the Canon instead. I do, it's pretty good IF you need (or WANT) the resolution of the 5d2.

PatrickN wrote:If I could I would have both Nikon and Canon,

I do; I generally choose to use the Nikon in favour of the Canon because the ergonomics suit me better, I find the lenses sharper, the cameras more responsive, and more solidly built.

the sound the 50D emits from both motors is just super fine!

Which both motors?

And again, I'm curious: how does the sound of the camera help you to make better images?

Personally, I'd prefer to shut the fake motor sounds off altogether, so that when I need to use my camera in areas where silence is demanded, it can be achieved.

gstark wrote:

PatrickN wrote:If I could I would have both Nikon and Canon,

I do; I generally choose to use the Nikon in favour of the Canon because the ergonomics suit me better, I find the lenses sharper, the cameras more responsive, and more solidly built.

the sound the 50D emits from both motors is just super fine!

Which both motors?

And again, I'm curious: how does the sound of the camera help you to make better images?

Personally, I'd prefer to shut the fake motor sounds off altogether, so that when I need to use my camera in areas where silence is demanded, it can be achieved.

I've used both systems extensively and I choose to go Canon, I find that Canon ergomics (1Dmkiii) feels natural. The Canon thumb wheel makes changing either aperture or shutter a lot easier and faster. None of the Nikons have the thumb wheel! The button within the thumb wheel can be assigned a custom function, I use mine to display the last image! Very fast and again ergonomic!

There will always be debates between Nikon and Canon. I must admit that I am very impressed with Nikon's DX range of lens, and very impressed especially their 85mm F1.4 and 105mm VR Macro. 2 lens that Canon has no match for (ATM)...

I have a friend that is a Nikon user that would go Canon if he bought the 5D MKII body. Nikon at the moment doesnt have anything like it that can match it in terms of features. On the other hand, I am thinking of buying a D700 or D3X just so I can use the 85mm F1.4 and 105mm VR lens for portraiture..... Go figure! hehe

tntman wrote: I have a friend that is a Nikon user that would go Canon if he bought the 5D MKII body. Nikon at the moment doesnt have anything like it that can match it in terms of features.

i found the opposite. i would happily switch to canon if they made a body i liked. the 35/1.4L, 70-200/4L IS left me drooling but the body was a nightmare in my hands. features are a mixed bag and it depends which features you like cos the d700 and mkII are vastly different tools i found from my experience. i certainly found the MkII severely lacking in the features that I prefer but i imagine resolution fiends would find the same issue with the d700.

I went to ted and handheld a 5dmkII, it felt so cheap, very plastic.
My old trusty D300 on the other hand feel so good on my hand.

It doesn't matter which camera you have, the important thing is to enjoy what you do

PatrickN wrote:Now if only the body came in white too

Have you considered the Pentax White camera
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0812/08121603pentaxk2000white.asp
At least one of the users here has one.

gstark wrote:Why is the colour of the lens important? How does that affect your use of it?

One reason is when stalking wildlife. A black lens/body is much less likely to startle your object. I personally can't think of a good reason for a white camera/lens. Maybe if I wanted to shoot polar bears in their natural environment...

PatrickN wrote:I might be a collector I don't know,

It sounds as though you are. Most of the people here will make their choices based on how the camera will assist the final image. You seem to be much more attuned to the object itself. No harm in that, but this may be the wrong place to ask your questions.

One reason is when stalking wildlife. A black lens/body is much less likely to startle your object. I personally can't think of a good reason for a white camera/lens. Maybe if I wanted to shoot polar bears in their natural environment...

Erm...try taking photos of people using a white lens. You stand out quite quickly White just screams out, look at me! look at me! but don't look at me as I want to capture you in a candid manner...

Erm...try taking photos of people using a white lens.

Some of the people I know can get VERY wild. especially after they discover I've been taking photos of them on the sly.

I don't think there is enough difference in quality between the two brands to justify a switch, however the way the camera feels in your hand and the way the buttons function can make a huge difference.
It has been mentioned that you should take the time to learn how to use your equipment, while this is true, some things tend to be easier to learn then others (at least with me). In the old film days I had a Minolta 7xi which was very space age in the way it used the controls, usually needed to press a function button plus another to change anything. I still took some good photos with it but it was fairly alien to me. When I bought the Minolta 600si classic with all individual control buttons, ie 1 button, 1 purpose, I was happy as Larry again.
I'm also a collector, but I don't sell one camera to buy another when it comes to collecting. I usually buy one for whatever nostalgic reason, clean it up and stick it on a the shelf next to the others and never actually use it. That's just me, each to their own.

Well I guess most of you guys where right, I did a job yesterday and I had a great time using my D90 really can't say I had any problems. I dunno maybe it was in my head.

At this stage I think I will cruise with Nikon and see what the D300s turns out like, and the D700x although if they just wack the new D3X sensor into then it will be a studio camera really so I might end up just going with the D700 in the end.

I really enjoy using CLS too so I'd rather not give that up either.

Oh and I have completely rulled out the 5DMKII for the simple reason that it isn't weather proofed, had some close calls and some deep soaks with my D90 so I would like to try and avoid the risk factor.

Regards everyone. Two new toys today!!, I managed to find two ex demo SB800s for a very good price!

Patrick,

I'm pleased to hear that the day went well.

I don't think that there was problem so much in your head, but you were (understandably) impressed by the 70-200 lens, and that perhaps confused you a little. Couple that with the better handling that you perceived due to the larger bodied camera, and there you have a "problem".

The reality is that the 70-200 glass - either brand - is amongst the best that you can find, and that a larger bodied camera can and will feel better in the hands of some operators. There's nothing at all wrong with those perceptions.

The issue is that when it comes to upgrading your own gear, understand the reasons and motivations behind your decision making processes, and then go ahead and make the decisions, but do so for the right reasons.

Me? Thus far - Canon -> Nikon and thinking about going back -> Canon

I know this thread has seen its day - but the level of difference you'd feel is minimal - if any - in your final images. I have shot Canon for 20 years - and due to a number of circumstances, I recently switched.. $40k worth of kit. Not something I'd suggest for anyone to undertake - whether it be $1500 or $40k - its a matter of the fact, that for many - this isn't something that is required. I switched due to the Canon bodies I was looking at would actually inhibit my ability to get certain shots, with the 1D & 1Ds Mk III focal issues. Apart from that - the switch TO Nikon would have been ludicrous, and not offered any benefit.

The "conversion of cost" either way for ANY other reason is prohibitively expensive; and doesn't normally mean you can get better pics. Yes before the D3/D700 came along - (to a lesser extent the D300) the noise difference was marked so a conversion to Canon would at times mean you could get a shot in low light conditions that you would be hard presses to get with the "same" lens in a Nikon. On the flipside BUT there are plenty of photographers who worked with the D100/D200/D2x etc and got amazing images in less than ideal lighting.

Nikon has stepped up with the D3/D700 and the glass. The glass is amazing - with the 24-70mm being my favorite lens, and SUPER sharp. The 14-24mm is great. With the current line-up - inclusive of the 70-200mm there is no reason you need to switch TO Canon. I'd hazard a guess that the D700x will have bot 24mp and 1080p video - if that's important to you. It will then blow the 5D2 out of the water, as the pro level focus of the D3/D3x/D700/D300 is nothing short of magic. Shoot these puppies using AF-ON in continuous mode and it is a magical experience as they lock in amazingly low lighting conditions.

Its about the you as the photographer and how you see. IF the switch will make you see differently - even if its your own self-perception that then change your confidence or change how you see - then it may well be worth it.

The D700 is really an amazing camera - with the fuller pro-body experience. I find changing shutter speed and aperture in manual mode faster than on my previous Canon gear with the command dials being in the exact position they need to be.

I know you've mentioned you are decided to stick with Nikon - so its moot in a way - but if you grab a D300 and/or D700 they are FAR more solid and pro than the Canon equivalent.

Yes - and now I face the facts that as my main assistant doesn't like the D700 - and I shoot with a bunch of other Canon shooters as second shooters and assistants - I may need to switch at least SOME if not ALL of my gear back....

Sigh..

Nathan Rodger wrote:Yes - and now I face the facts that as my main assistant doesn't like the D700 - and I shoot with a bunch of other Canon shooters as second shooters and assistants - I may need to switch at least SOME if not ALL of my gear back....

Sigh..

I find this a bit odd, as the main photographer, I would have thought that the onus was on the second shooters to follow in the footsteps of the man in charge, not the other way around.

Nathan Rodger wrote:Yes - and now I face the facts that as my main assistant doesn't like the D700 - and I shoot with a bunch of other Canon shooters as second shooters and assistants - I may need to switch at least SOME if not ALL of my gear back....

Sigh..

I'll happily come to back you up as a second shooter if you ever need. We live pretty close together and...I shoot Nikon!!

tonykieuphotography wrote:I went to ted and handheld a 5dmkII, it felt so cheap, very plastic.
My old trusty D300 on the other hand feel so good on my hand.

It doesn't matter which camera you have, the important thing is to enjoy what you do

How does a 5D MKII feel cheap and plastic??? The Canon is a well built camera, if not better than the D300 in certain areas...

tntman wrote:

tonykieuphotography wrote:I went to ted and handheld a 5dmkII, it felt so cheap, very plastic.
My old trusty D300 on the other hand feel so good on my hand.

It doesn't matter which camera you have, the important thing is to enjoy what you do

How does a 5D MKII feel cheap and plastic??? The Canon is a well built camera, if not better than the D300 in certain areas...

I dont quite understand how the 5D II feels cheap or plastic, I have handled a few and they have always felt very solid with no traces of plastic unlike the Sony A700 (although the A900 does feel very solid). BUT I do have to agree that my trusty D300 and S5 Pro feel better in MY hands, something about Canons make them feel foreign in my hands. It really must be a familiarity thing.

I am not sure if either the D300 or the 5D II are any better built than each other, although I have been lead to believe that the D300 has better weather sealing....but that is what I have heard..does it matter?

I think from a D300 class up till D3X, the build quality is 2nd to none. Same with Canon's 50D to the 1DS MKIII... the 1D MKIII I have is built like a tank (weighs like one too)... To me, Canon has always been more natural to use than Nikon. I think it must be how we get "used" to a certain system.

Certainly there are quite a few die hard Nikon fans and there are also the Canon fans. I must admit, I am wanting to buy a D700 just so I can use a 105mm Macro VR lens on it... Canon does not make a 100mm IS Macro lens at all!

I love the D90 - it's a really cool camera and very easy to carry around. I bought a 24-70mm after hearing so many great things about this lens because I shoot mainly family photos indoors. I played with this lens @ teds and the sharpness and AF speed was just terrific, so I bought it there and then. After shooting heaps with this 1kg beast attached, I felt that the D90 body was not the best balance and sometimes felt rather uncomfortable when holding for long periods. I decided to get a D700, and it was a perfect match for this lens. Other things that really stood out for me with the D700 is the larger viewfinder, better button layout, impressive battery grip (DB-D10), larger top LCD and higher ISO performance.

I decided to keep my D90 because my wife wants to learn how to use it - which is perfect because it has an Auto mode . I still like to pick up the D90 and take with me when venturing outdoors (using 18-200 DX lens). The D90 produces amazing quality pics - it's just a little awkward to use with heavy lenses or when changing settings alot.

My advice is to buy the best featured equipment to suit YOUR individual needs, and listen to what others saying (if they are making sense ). Use your own mind and heart to really discern what you feel you really need. When I was comparing my first DSLR purchase, I really liked Canon, Nikon and Olympus, but at the end of the day, all these cameras take great photos - For me, Nikon had felt better to hold and shoot, plus the LCD looked clearer and the menus looked much friendlier.

The most important thing for me is that I am getting good use of my equipment and the results I expect - which makes for many happy returns from my investment.

MatthewRoberts wrote:My advice is to buy the best featured equipment to suit YOUR individual needs, and listen to what others saying (if they are making sense ). Use your own mind and heart to really discern what you feel you really need. When I was comparing my first DSLR purchase, I really liked Canon, Nikon and Olympus, but at the end of the day, all these cameras take great photos - For me, Nikon had felt better to hold and shoot, plus the LCD looked clearer and the menus looked much friendlier.

The most important thing for me is that I am getting good use of my equipment and the results I expect - which makes for many happy returns from my investment.

Good call there Matthew, when I initially got my gear I was also hesitant about what to get because I didn't want to miss out on "The Best". You're spot on when you say you've got to choose what is right for you. Once I understood that, it made all my decisions alot easier and I got to enjoying taking photos with the equipment I have. It's sorta put me "at peace" so to speak with my equipment choice.

Alot of good points were raised in this thread, I really liked how they were all really helpful

Patrick if you do decide to get the D700 (or wait for the rumoured D700x) let me know, I might just get one too!

Is there a D700 group buy going on? If there is, I'll be interested!

tntman wrote:Is there a D700 group buy going on? If there is, I'll be interested!

Haha I don't think there is on at the moment but it would be funny to see a Nikon group buy in the Canon Corral!

gummi wrote:

tntman wrote:Is there a D700 group buy going on? If there is, I'll be interested!

Haha I don't think there is on at the moment but it would be funny to see a Nikon group buy in the Canon Corral!

I wonder if we can force the price down if we buy a whole box of them???

aim54x wrote:

I wonder if we can force the price down if we buy a whole box of them???

How many are in a box? Haha we could always ask Poon to bring a box for us rite? Oh wait he probably wouldn't be able to get it past customs, saying he's got 20(im guessing) or so D700's as gifts is a little hard to justify! Oh well, it's fun to speculate on anyway

Hahaha.. That is funny Gummi...

Look, D700 or 5DMKII, both are wonderful tools... just the choice of lens is enough to sway me over to Nikon!

phillipb wrote:

Nathan Rodger wrote:Yes - and now I face the facts that as my main assistant doesn't like the D700 - and I shoot with a bunch of other Canon shooters as second shooters and assistants - I may need to switch at least SOME if not ALL of my gear back....

Sigh..

I find this a bit odd, as the main photographer, I would have thought that the onus was on the second shooters to follow in the footsteps of the man in charge, not the other way around.

Sorry - this is OT.... But in reply...

My main second is my wife... so doing the logic on that - its more feasible switching back than sleeping on the couch...

Seriously though, I draw on a pool of a lot of seconds, and most shoot Canon. So it depends on WHO you have as your second. I don't want my second's shooting ANY system that prevents them from capturing the important moments due to an unfamiliar interface. It is important that they are comfortable with the gear. Most of my 2nd's are pro-shooters themselves (ie with their own biz etc etc) and they hardly ever shoot Nikon. Most if not all of my trusted shooters are Canon shooters; and as such - I may need to transition some gear back... or all - as I'm not sure I can be bothered having two systems.... Eeek my 200f2 VR I've sadly not used on a job, nor any more than 100 test frames at my home studio. The Canon 200mm F2 price here in Australia is FAR more expensive than in the US so I might not get to swap that lens across.. We'll see...

Well I suppose an update is in order.

I'm going to keep this short and simple

I got the 50D and I love IT I can now hold it in my hand for 8hrs + straight and I don't get numb fingers like I did with my D90, everything else to me seems light years better so far have had it 1 week and I love it!

I have had 4 shoots with it in subiaco already with my Canon buddies and it was great, one of my mates lenses is broken so it's with Canon and I let him use my lens while I had the 70-200mm on from another mate felt good to finally be able to help haha.

So all good and I love it!

Oh and dont even get me started on the software! so nice I don't have to waste any money on software, it was all in the box nicely packed!

Now I just need to convert my father to Canon and we will all be a nice and happy bunch!