Why canon?

[Neeneko]

Ok, perhaps a fringe case... but that's a really good reason if applicable.

Yep, I fully admit I am a fringe case ^_^

Magic Lantern provides trap focus (and a bunch more cool features).

Sadly all of my bodies are too old to run Magic Lantern, but I am looking forward to trying it out once I upgrade.

[JR]

Ok, perhaps a fringe case... but that's a really good reason if applicable.

Magic Lantern provides trap focus (and a bunch more cool features).

Is this feature actually available for the 5D mkII?  I thought the focus stuff was for older camera last time I checked on the magic lantern website...or maybe it was the big sign that this firmware can damage my camera permanently that got to me!

[bvukich]

Ok, perhaps a fringe case... but that's a really good reason if applicable.

Magic Lantern provides trap focus (and a bunch more cool features).

Is this feature actually available for the 5D mkII?  I thought the focus stuff was for older camera last time I checked on the magic lantern website...or maybe it was the big sign that this firmware can damage my camera permanently that got to me!

Not 100% sure, but I don't think so.  I know it's in the Unified firmware though, so once the 5DII is officially on the Unified then for sure yes.

[Cetalis]

I needed to get a film SLR for a photo class but knew that i'd go digital eventually, and picked canon because the EF mount meant i wouldn't accidentally get a camera/lens without autofocus or autoexposure, or have to worry about compatibility.

I later toyed with an old nikon and pentax k-r, and I can't say that I liked the rear dials or ergonomics.

[Mark1]

For me the decision as to why I stay with Canon is down to the lenses. I look at the Nikon lens range and they just don't have the variety of choices in the various price brackets. The killer for me is that there is no direct competitor for the Canon 24-105 F4L IS. That lens alone keeps me in the Canon camp as Nikon's 24-120 is a stinker apparently! 

[Kernuak]

I used to shoot with film in my teens with a Zenith 11, but my career took me away from photography. When I decided to "return" back in 2007, I did some research about using my old M42 lenses, which I still had (along with my Zenith). I found out that adaptors could be found for both Canon and Nikon, but they wouldn't focus to infinity on Nikon bodies, which sort of pushed me towards Canon. I then tried out a few bodies, preferring the feel of the D80 over the 400D (I also liked the feel of the 40D, but that was significantly more expensive at the time). The D80 was more expensive than the 400D (it was after all a different target market) and the D40 was lower resolution. After weighing up the options, I decided to save some money and use my old lenses with the 400D. It turned out, I didn't like the results, as even the kit lens and the Tamron I got at the same time had much better image quality and soon got the 100-400. The rest is history. Having tried to use Nikons a couple of times since, I think the menus and general ergonomics on Canon suits me better (although using full manual is a pain on xxD cameras), my only complaint is having to go delving for mirror lockup, instead of an easy to reach button. I could program one of the custom settings, but they have their own disadvantages too.

[willrobb]

a friend told me to buy a Canon F1 and play with it when i wasn't flying in the Vietnam war to keep from going nuts.  through the years i have had Nikons and Hasselblads (even digital) and keep returning to Canon.

Great camera, bet you got some amazing photos in Vietnam.

[archangelrichard]

Like some here I started out in the 60's; with a Petri 7S (remember those?) then a true SLR - a Mamiya 1000 DTL. Have had several cameras between there and Digital, (35mm and 6 X 7) first digital was an upmarket Sharp. then a pocket olympus but when I wanted a real DSLR I looked at Pentax, Sony, Nikon and Canon - for the money the Canon 450D has better resolution, the Sony would have been my choice were it not for the small place they have in the market / aftermarket

I am not a fan boy, people have reasons for preferring one to another although most often you get the "my father / friends had an oldsmobile so I bought one ... " kind of lack-of-logic; I just went for price / performance and a healthy aftermarket was very important to me (for those who do not understand this look on eBay for Canon accessories, then all other brands combined! There are things you can get for a canon you can't get for other brands)

[pwp]

Why Canon? For me it was the quality of professional service and support.

It was in sheer frustration with Nikon's service and support that I ditched my Nikon F4 film cameras and switched to Canon EOS 1n. Canon CPS was a revelation.

The switch to Canon was further validated in the early digital days with clearly better cameras. The D30 of 2000 and the D60 of 2002 were revolutionary. The original 1Ds announced in late 2002 and subsequent 1-Series incarnations have mostly been clear winners for me.

OMG the 1Ds was almost a decade ago! http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1ds/

Switching platforms today would be business suicide with a deep financial committment to Canon glass. But if I was starting out today, my research could possibly push me towards Nikon. Like Canon they're making brilliant cameras. And we all benefit from the hot competition!

But hey, in spite of the lack of stellar wide zooms, (Nikon 14-24 anyone?) I love my Canons and the brilliant support from CPS.

Paul Wright

[Bruce Photography]

After using 4x5 and twin lens reflex cameras in the sixties I went with Pentax.  I went into computer programming for many years and mostly did video until I picked up a Sony point and shoot.  Finally the Canon 10D came out with a reasonable price tag and good quality.  At that time Nikon didn't make their own sensors, but Canon did.  Having been in research I believe that whoever owns their own technology is the long run winner in technology and price.  From what I can see that still holds today.  In fact I'm wondering why Canon isn't introducing technology faster -- are they waiting for Nikon to catch up?  I think even they were surprized how fast people took to the 21mp, full frame 5dmk2 with video.  Why Nikon didn't add sensor cleaning to the D3X and it didn't have higher and better ISO handling is what kept that camera from being better accepted than it has been.  Canon needs something with higher megs for me to invest in a new body.   I'm a landscape guy.  Interesting thread....

[akiskev]

Although I supported McLaren, I think that this Williams somehow affected my choice on selecting a camera brand.
Oh, and the great Canon ergonomics ;-)

[lonelywhitelights]

Ergonomics and ease of use! mainly on the higher end models as I can't say I'm a fan of the small plasticy models below the 7D which seem to be made for tiny elves but I have big hands so there's that to consider

also, a friend of mine is a big Nikon user and I just didn't like the experience of shooting with his D700 but that's more down to the fact that I hadn't ever used a Nikon DSLR before and it was all new and scary =D

I won't talk about IQ because that's a tough thing to talk about, every manufacturer makes really great cameras these days that you're going to get good results if you know what you're doing.

And as a personally opinion, Canon are much better looking than any other camera

[Patrickfoto]

Having used Pentax and Olympus 35mm film cameras as well as Bronica MF  in the 80's I tried out both the Nikon and Canon top of the range models when I was upgrading in the late 80's and fell in love with the Canon T-90!  It was far ahead of it's time and led me to but an EOS 1 on launch...but the T-90 is still, to this day, the best camera body I've used.

[neuroanatomist]

So, Canon cameras are a vice like beer and cigarettes?   

[bvukich]

So, Canon cameras are a vice like beer and cigarettes?   

An addiction for sure.