Predominantly Canon users?

[Roy_Nikon]

Hi. First post here.
Despite the name, I don't think the choice between Canon and Nikon is very significant however I happen to be a Nikon user (D200, D700 the Big Three 2.8s etc) and came across this board when looking for opinions on the Sigma 150-500. The majority of the threads on these forums seem to be Canon oriented though, to a degree that is greater than I'd expect. Interesting. I wonder why?
Roy

[Jim Ford]

I guess it's because that Canon is the Microsoft Windows of cameras, Nikon being the Mac!

Jim

[Roy_Nikon]

Originally Posted by Jim Ford

I guess it's because that Canon is the Microsoft Windows of cameras, Nikon being the Mac!

Jim

Hi Jim
ho ho!
It never occured to me that this might be the case, although on price alone it's true as Nikon is definitely a bit more expensive than Canon in general, which is in synch with your comment. As a Mac "early adopter" in 1986, or 7, I used to love the damned things, despite paying about £2K for my Mac SE - 1Mb RAM, 20 MB h/d; the dog's at the time - however by the mid 90's I was thoroughly sick of watching crashing applications take the o/s down and moved over to Win NT4. Been on PCs ever since. I can't quite believe that people these days are prepared to pay about double for the same performance wrapped up in a Mac. The applications look exactly the same on either platform. Beats me, but people seem to like them.
For me Nikon build quality and ergonomics are preferable to Canon at equivalent (approx) price points. But in the end it's what comes out of the camera that counts. The "fanboy" stuff is nuts.
Roy

[Jim Ford]

I think that most people that start looking to buy a camera are familiar with the name Canon, but are also vaguely aware of another make - possibly called Nikon!

Jim

[Ukwildlifeo]

Of course there are at least 3 other good manufacturers (Olympus, pentax and sony) that are as good, at least at the entry and semi pro level, and in some cases better value for money

I reckon the canon dominance may relate to the good (and as far as I can see deserved) rep of the 100-400mm lens for wildlife to some extent.

[zan]

I bought my first DSLR about 3-4 months after the 400d had been released (which I then bought), and at the time it was well ahead of the Nikon competition. I think that's possibly shifted back now, with nikon having the upper hand with many of their bodies, but once you've bought into a system you're unlikely to change, so it's Canon for me

[ron1863]

I bought into Sony but only because I was an old Minolta users and could utilise my old lenses. I think you will find that there are Olympus, Sony, Pentax etc. users here but the majority are Canon owners. I don't think there is much difference between Canon and Nikon, but Nikon are a bit more expensive and Canon have a greater choice of lenses.

[Lancashire Lad]

I'll step up for the Nikon user

I was a lifelong Canon man, with a bagful of A1's, motordrives, and more FD lenses than I could comfortably carry, but It was a real kick in the teeth when Canon changed the lens mount on all of the new bodies, such that the FD range became effectively redundant overnight.

So, when the time came to delve into the DSLR realm, I opted for Nikon, who seem to have had some thought for their long time customers, as many of their older lenses function perfectly well on their new DSLR bodies.

At the end of the day, there is nothing to choose between what comes out of the camera's of all of the main manufacturers, and as zan has said, once you are into a system, you are likely to stay with that manufacturer.

Canon however, might do well to take note of their past indiscretion - I know several other ex-Canon users who all changed brands as a result of the demise of the FD lens mount.

Regards
Mike.

[Jim Ford]

OK, as everyone else is nailing their colours to the mast:

I chose Olympus because the body has built in image stabilisation, a swivelling live-view screen and a truly effective dust reduction system. Because the lenses I chose are all weather protected, as is the body, I can use it in all weathers. I can also comfortably carry lenses to cover the 35mm FF equivalent range of 14mm to 560mm (3 lenses plus tele-converter) - all designed especially for digital use and all of exceptional quality.

I only wish I could afford the £5000+ for the Zuiko 300mm f2.8!

Jim

[NicolaB]

Nikon user here!

I went for my first Nikon, a D60, after trying out both that camera and a Canon 400D in a shop. I just preferred the general "feel" of the Nikon, it felt more solid and I preferred the control set up. I've pretty much stuck with the brand now on the basis of that decision, and to save buying a whole new set of lenses.

I've got a D300 now after feeling in need of an upgrade from the AF system on the D60 and it's ropey performance at high ISO settings, and it's quite honestly the best thing that's happened to me!

To be honest I think all of the big brands are more or less on an equal field, with some better in certain aspects but falling short in others. It's just a matter of personal preference and the type of photography that you do.