Until I can look through a Nikon viewfinder and change ISO settings with my right index while also adjusting any other setting I need, I'm sticking with Canon.
Haven't you heard? With a Nikon camera, you don't need to change ISO – just set ISO 100 and you're done. In post you can push it to ISO 3200, with a SoNikon sensor that's easy-peasy and the IQ is still better than Canon. Or so I've read somewhere or other...
You make fun of it...but it's possible. Because there is practically no read noise, digitally lifting ISO 100 to ISO 1600 or 3200 is effectively the same thing as actually using those ISOs (with the added benefit of having massively more dynamic range).
Jon, I hope you are wrong. Serious, whats left when you have eliminated the science and have dug deeply into the art of photography....Composition?! Not really a concern on these massive megapixel cameras....
As Ron Popeil stated - Set It and Forget It -
Sorry, not sure I understand... You hope I'm wrong about what?
Composition is obviously important. Getting good focus is obviously important. Getting the right frame is obviously important. I'm not saying they are not, no one who appreciates more DR is.
But here is my stance on the issue. When you nail all of those other factors. And, it's more than possible to nail every one with any pro- or semipro-grade DSLR from Canon or Nikon (and some even from Sony, and probably Pentax as well). We already have cameras with phenomenal AF systems, with very high frame rates (although the best frame rates do tend to cost), and composition is a simple matter of preference...reframe to taste. When you get all that right, what's left? Sensor IQ.
I already have awesome AF. I already have a great frame rate (7D) and a good frame rate (5D III, the 1D X is out of my acceptable range of cost). I already know how to get good composition. When it comes to landscapes, a lot of it is simply a waiting game...waiting for the right light, the right weather, and being at the right place in time to get the shot. When all that comes together...the only thing I don't have, is the best sensor IQ money can buy.
It's not a complicated equation.
I used to say that technology is killing XX .... in this case photography. I am wrong about that, technology is taking photography in another direction, IMHO the wrong direction. When technology levels the playing field for all afforadably, when all I have to do is turn that dial to the green P, not worry about the photo because post processing will take care of any issues, photography is dead. Composition, lighting, position, weather are just reduced to chance moments that anyone carrying an IPhone has an equal probability of capturing that moment....Probably a higher probability ...
The younger generation are not looking for technology advances in a DLSR camera, what they do expect is that the technology advances are crammed into their IPhone 6.
A camera is slowly becoming nothing more than a vehicle to take a selfie and quickly post it online for every to "LIKE".
Must tell you that I think just the opposite. Art can, and is created by an iPhone and such. Normal (selfie) sort of pictures can be created by top end cameras. It all depends upon the user.
Advancement in technology is a great thing to happen in life including photography. Lots of different kinds of pictures can be taken now with advancement in technology. And remember that not all photographers are artists. They take pictures to capture the moment.