Considering switching to Nikon

[etg9]

I have a Canon 5D MKIII and a Nikon D800e.

IMO the AF on Canon 5D MKIII excels over the Nikon D800.

The Dynamic Range on the D800e is unreal and in my opinion better than the Canon 5D MKIII.

And the detail on a 36MP image is also something to marvel at.

But at the end of the day 36MP does not look that great if you miss half the shots due to a poor AF system. And you really cant beat Canon L glass. With the D800 you need the best of the best glass to maximize the resolution potential.

I only use the D800e for product photography and Landscape shots. For everything else i prefer the Canon 5D MKIII.

So it really depends on what you shoot. But for an all around camera - you cant beat the Canon.

I agree with this a ton, I have a 5dIII and have used the D800 plenty to know that the Canon is a much better camera to have in my bag everyday for what I shoot. If I'm in a dimly lit bar or a really quick out of bag to street photo the Nikon doesn't do it for me. If I captured landscapes I would be tempted by the D800 but I'm not sure a 24" or 30" print would be all that much different out of either camera.

As for the should I switch, try both, shoot with what matches the way your brain works. I like the canon way of doing things, maybe you're a Nikon or Sony.

[neuroanatomist]

...maybe you're a Nikon or Sony.

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I tried a Nikon, and invested about 10 K in a D800 and top lenses.  The D800 is great at low ISO, but you have to be extremely careful with it.  I think its a great landscape body.  Lenses that match the body really don't exist, as I painfully found out, and there is nothing close to the quality of the 24-105mmL, the 135mmL, or the 100-400mmL that are some of my most used lenses.
I sold it all, and bought a new Canon body along with a  new16-35mm L  The only images I really liked from the D800 were the low ISO images, 400 or lower.  The DR of the D800 at ISO 100 was amazing, so for bright light landscape use, it is fantastic.

[bornshooter]

go to nikon and pm with the details of the gear you are selling :-) i promise when you buy nikon your photography will be so much better lol

[PackLight]

I would like to have a serious discussion.  I am not going switch in haste, I am justing thinking about this issues.  So please, no flames, etc.  Well thought out comments are welcomed.

Comparing Nikon and Canon bodies here are my thoughts

5D M3 no match
D800 no match, when/if Canon comes out with a high MP body, it is likely to be expensive.

Canon 1.3 crop in a 1 series body is great, Nikon's FX/DX lacks this feature.  The 1.3 crop makes my 500 a bit longer

Not sure how I would compare the 1D X versus D4 (correct body?), but not terribly important since the 1D X is out of my price range.

Canon vs Nikon lenses

Nikon wins in wide angle.
Canon and NIkon both have great mid range lenses (24-70, 70-200).  Canon's 24-105 is probably better than Nikons 24-120.

On the long end, similar quality though with the new super telephotos Canon may have an edge in optical quality and definitely on weight.  But at what cost?

Nikon has 200-400, Canon has an interested lens in development, not out yet, costs $3000 (?) than Nikon's.

Speciality lenses - Tilt shift I think Canon wins at least for wide angles.  Macro - both are great.

Conclusions

Canon - more expensive, lighter weight Super telephotos, weak in the wide angles expect for Tilt Shift
Nikon - less expense, stronger in wide angles,

Anything else?

It is true Nikon has some strong wide angle lenses available.

Of course they are all made be Zeiss.

[TriGGy]

I'm already comfortable with the Canon system, and while I would like to learn how to operate Nikon cameras, getting rid of all my Canon stuff just because I perceive Nikon as having better MP's, etc, is counter intuitive. Same as for people who want to switch to Canon. Know your weapon :-)

[AdamJ]

Don't forget this...



...and of course this.



 

[bbasiaga]

If DR is your primary concern, go Nikon.  If you are going to stay with Canon and get a 5DIII, I doubt you'll find a more versatile body in existance.  I can't really say my composition, creativity, etc are better with the MKIII (just like they wouldn't be better if I got a D800), but I can say that there are a whole bunch of shots I couldn't get on my older bodies that I can get on the new one because of its low light ability, and that between the focus system and higher frame rate than older FF bodies, this one camera easily does the job of my two older ones (5d and 40D). 

Spec sheets are deceiving.  Its easy to make the grass look greener on paper.  My guess is a lot of people who switch systems either way will find, after all their horse trading, that the end result isn't that much different.  There are a few people who do so with good reason and really take advantage of the true differences in the system (like maybe tilt-shift availability, supertelephoto availablity for canon, or the few people who really NEED the extra DR of Nikon).  And there are a few people who will do so and pull up every shadow 4 stops just because they can, and be happy.  The rest...will be just where they were when they started.

-Brian

[sdsr]

Since you don't say why you're thinking of switching, don't describe the Canon equipment you own, don't say whether you've considered and ruled out an upgrade within Canon, and don't say what you can afford, I don't think it's possible to answer your question.  I would suggest, though, that if you're really serious about switching, you should rent for a week the Nikon body you're considering, along with one or more of Nikon's better lenses in the range(s) you use the most and see if you prefer the experience and results.  If you're also considering upgrading within Canon, do the same thing in addition to renting Nikon equipment and compare the Nikon vs Canon you own vs Canon upgrade.  Depending on what you shoot and how, the differences could range from non-existent through trivial to important, and not necessarily in the ways you hope or expect.

[V8Beast]

At the risk of repeating what has already been said a gazillion times, both systems are highly capable if used for the purpose of creating art. If you want to use your gear as tools to create art, there's no point in switching systems.

However, as bizarre as it seems to me, some people genuinely enjoy testing the technical limitations of their hardware for the sole purpose of testing the technical limitations of their hardware. Intentionally underexposing an image to see how much shadow detail a sensor captures, or blowing up an image 100% that will never be printed at 100%, just to see how much detail the sensor captures, seems to be the rage these days. It's taken me a long time to accept this, but some people enjoy this aspect of photography more than they enjoy creating beautiful images with their gear. And you know what? There's nothing wrong with that. It's none of my business how people choose to spend their money, even if what they do with their expensive camera gear seems silly to me. If you're one of those guys, by all means switch to Nikon and be done with it. The D800 trumps anything Canon offers in terms of DR and resolution - and even their crop bodies have extremely capable sensors - so if that's what's important to you, Nikon is the way to go.

[And-Rew]

I would like to have a serious discussion.  I am not going switch in haste, I am justing thinking about this issues.  So please, no flames, etc.  Well thought out comments are welcomed.

Anything else?

Yes, what actually is the purpose of the thread?

• We know nothing about what you photograph
  
• We know nothing about your future intentions with photography
  
  • We know nothing about what kit you already have
    
  • We know nothing about you photographic abilities or knowledge

So - from the title, you talk about switching to Nikon and want an informed discussion - but you give us only the usual facts presented in any of these types of discussions.

You can not have an informed discussion without a decent premise - and so far, you have not given us one.

[ishdakuteb]

canon, nikon or any other dslr cameras all outcome good images with post process... if you cannot have a good image, do not complain about your camera.  for example:  yervant zanazanian is still using his canon 20d for his wedding photography and it is still perfect after post process.  so, get to know your camera and get around with it... and keep in mind that everything has its own limitations, no exception rule imo....

however, congrat. on your new camera

note:  this comments come from a dslr newbie...

[picturesbyme]

Don't forget this...

 

Haha...
That's just a built in TS feature/effect and the LCD clearly shows that Nikon's field is greener

Of course Canon has it's problems too, however this reminds me... This thread became pretty one sided too...
Interesting, because the One who wanted to start  (a never heard before) conversation about switching to Nikon haven't said a word yet.. (although was probably reading based on the activity log...)

I switched a couple times before and I can confidently say there is no perfect system. One might suit a person better but the "other" brand eventually leapfrog over yours and then suddenly everything gets greener over there... Like the others said, go rent first.

[friedmud]

Just bought a D600 today (with just the 50mm f/1.8G so far).  Sold my 7D and 70-200 f/4L IS to pay for it.

As some of you know I recently rented it and just LOVED the IQ at low ISO.

My hobby is Landscapes... so it is just a perfect fit for me.

I've started with the 50mm because I haven't decided on my workhorse lens yet.  I'm leaning toward the 24-70 f/2.8G.  I liked it when I rented it.

I took thousands upon thousands of great photos with Canon gear... but ultimately the low ISO IQ of the D600 and the ability to go full-frame for a reasonable price (the 6D is a non-starter... too many missing features) brought me over.

My advice: If you're unhappy with IQ on the Canon side... do the switch.  I can't think of any other reason to really switch.  If the IQ is fine for you on Canon and you have something invested, I would just stay there... you'll really get great photos out of either system if your technique is good.

[tnargs]

yes, where is RGF? So much for starting a thread with the words "I want a serious discussion". 

As for friedmud, congratulations on your purchase mate, I hope you have great pleasure in this great hobby with your new kit. 

However, looking at your reasons, you had better be prepared to switch straight back to Canon again the day their products match your needs better -- which could get expensive. And you have just walked away from the best lens kit in the land -- which can easily affect one's photo IQ.

My advice: if you are unhappy with IQ on the Canon side... try Sony! At least they make their own senors, so their product is fully integrated like Canon. And they have a range of AF Zeiss lenses to appreciate. But be prepared for your hobby investment to start spiralling.

Canon is still the best long term investment in terms of total system value and results, looking beyond the short-term leap-frogging of individual camera releases.