April 20, 2014, 03:28:01 AM

Author Topic: Why canon?  (Read 20769 times)

00Q

  • Guest
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #15 on: January 19, 2012, 07:27:43 AM »
For me its pure accident. When I was looking into my firsr DSLR, I was open to both. My friend who told me about the camera had a canon. So was another friend. So I bought into a canon. Equally, had they been using a nikon, I'd be with nikon.

I must admit, at the time I genuinely thought canon was better, from the reputation. But now Im realising nikon prob makes better cameras.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why canon?
« Reply #15 on: January 19, 2012, 07:27:43 AM »

moreorless

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 566
    • View Profile
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #16 on: January 19, 2012, 07:43:42 AM »
If it was just down to the body I'd probabley have gone with a Pentax K-5 but the lens support just wasnt there, no weather sealed UWA and no long range standard zoom.

Besided to get the lightest high megapixel body I could and Canon offered a few more megapixels and slightly cheaper lenses than Nikon.

Viggo

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1695
    • View Profile
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #17 on: January 19, 2012, 07:55:43 AM »
I wanted the cheapest and smallest, so when the 350d came out, that was the answer. Simple as that, but I kept using Canon because I liked it better and still do. The ease of use is what's important to me. I need to find the settings I need, fast, and at that Canon is simply the best.
1dx, 17-40 L, 24-70 L II, 85 L II, 200 f2.0 L

Picsfor

  • Guest
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #18 on: January 19, 2012, 07:56:20 AM »
My first camera was a Praktica, which had quite a hefty state of the art (at the time) 28-200 zoom lens attached, which got damaged at work.

The insurance money allowed me to get a used Canon AE1P with the same lens (which was cheaper for Canon models!) an i never looked back.

Soon after i came by a squeeky A1 body to use as a second body - then saved up and bought a mint A1 body with power grip (equivalent to modern battery grip except it allowed me to shoot at 5ps with film). Finally, i changed my AE1P to another A1 so i had symmetry across the range.

I just loved the A1, and the 5D2 was the first digital to match my love of a camera, the 30d and 40D were good introductions to digital, but didn't set my photographic fire alike like the 5D2 or A1 did.

And that is pretty much how i look at cameras now - the 1D series have never really done it for me, until the 1DX - but who knows what the future will bring.

I've looked at Nikon a few times, but never quite found anything that really 'grabs me' like my 5D2. I might moan a lot about the AF, but i do not think it is too much to ask that Canon make all 9 points good quality AF points, given how much further down the line they are with AF technology - and that's what frustrates me with it.

kubelik

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 796
    • View Profile
    • a teatray in the sky
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #19 on: January 19, 2012, 07:59:16 AM »
when I first got back in to digital photography I was looking for affordable consumer DSLR's.  I noticed that a lot of Nikon bodies and lenses had asterixes next to them saying such-and-such would not autofocus with this lens because it lacked the motor driver.  that just struck me as something incredibly lousy, to have cameras and lenses in this day and age that you had to sort through the specs of before you could tell if it was going to AF or not.  and thus ... Canon.

less importantly, but something I noticed later, is that Nikons are stupendously ugly.  if there are any other design professionals who would like to debate that one, well ... let me know.

JR

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1244
    • View Profile
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #20 on: January 19, 2012, 08:05:37 AM »
About 15 years ago I was shooting Nikon (with film of course) but then sold all my equipment.  About 18 months ago when I started photography again I was starting from a clean slate and originally bought the Nikon D7000!  For some reason I did not like the feel and the IQ of it so I decided to trade it in quickly and instead go with Canon.

Originally the lens selection of Canon and the IQ of the 5D mk II sold me to the brand.  Today with several L lens under the pocket, I often look at Nikon and ask myself: do they have the same lens selection as Canon and do they have a oke for like equivalent for each L lens I own?  While Nikon makes great lens too, I could not live without my 50 1.2, 85 1.2 and the 135 for which I think NIkon has inferior product in that focal lenght.

Of course 18 months later I now also want a kick-ass AF system and better low light performance, but this is why I crave the 1DX!

1DX, 24mm f1.4L II, 35mm f1.4L, 50mm f1.2L, 85mm f1.2L II, 135mm f2L, 24-70mm f2.8L II, 70-200mm f2.8L IS II :  D800, D4, and a whole bunch of Nikon lenses

Neeneko

  • Guest
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #21 on: January 19, 2012, 08:52:27 AM »
For me it was because I got a bunch of hand-me-down lenses to get me started.

To be honest, I kinda regret going with Canon, but at this point replacing all my lenses with Nikon equivalents would be costly. 

Canon cameras lack a lot of capabilities that I would really like to have.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why canon?
« Reply #21 on: January 19, 2012, 08:52:27 AM »

gbchriste

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 166
    • View Profile
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #22 on: January 19, 2012, 09:19:47 AM »
I first took up photography circa 1980 with an AE1 and later upgraded to an A1, augmented with a Mamiya C330 twin lens reflex.  Mostly did B&W outdoor scenic and landscape work and my real passion was working in the darkroom graciously provide free of charge by the United States Air Force as part of the on-base recreation facilities.  When the Air Force started closing down these darkrooms due to cost to equip and manage them, especially the disposal and handling of chemicals, the cameras went in to the closet and only came out very rarely for birthday parties and such.  After awhile, they quite coming out at all and hadn't seen the light of day in well over 20 years.

When I had my first grandchild on the way, I decided to jump back in to photography and since I still had a bag full of Canon gear and lots of fond memories, that's where I started looking.  After handling a number of bodies, the 40D just seemed to fit my hand right and I liked the controls, so that's where I started.  I've since stepped up to the 5DMkII with a 70-200 2.8L as my main lens (mainly shooting natural environment/light portraits now).

I'm crazy in love with the IQ and color rendering I get but like a lot of other people, I do so wish Canon would step up with a better AF system.  I participate in a highly regarded portrait photography forum that is populated with a lot of pros that shoot astoundingly good stuff and there's a hardly a week goes by when one of them doesn't announce they are switching to Nikon because they are tired of battling the 5DMkII AF weaknesses.  I'm not there yet but I do often wonder if the grass might be greener on the other side.

alipaulphotography

  • Guest
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #23 on: January 19, 2012, 09:28:43 AM »
450D going for a ridiculous price on ebay.

Lenses seemed to be slightly cheaper than the nikon equivalent.

Favourite camera is probably my Olympus OM-2 though.

7enderbender

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 632
    • View Profile
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #24 on: January 19, 2012, 09:40:51 AM »
For me it also was based on what was available. My dad had (still has) a Canon A1 so that's what I started using first before I got my own AE1-P. It always did what I needed it to do and has been around the world with me a few times and been refurbished twice. I still use that one.

One of my best friends also happened to be a Canon shooter so we were always able to share gear. I never made the switch to the EOS system during the film days though. Just wasn't a big fan. I came close once to buying a used Nikon F5 once but then didn't though I really liked the feel of that one. Also, Leica R bodies made it on the short list a few times. Same with Contax. Olympus was nice as well and I actually just loaded my MjuII with a roll of film. But I always stuck to the Canon FD system (plus the occasional Canon digital P&S). Unfortunately, with digital there is no good way of using those lenses still. The aforementioned buddy bought a Samsung NX10 and still uses FD lenses with that one. It's a bit iffy though.

So when digital became more or less unavoidable I had to decide where to go since I needed to start from scratch. With unlimited funds I would have opted for the Leica M9. In the real world it became a decision between Nikon and Canon (and Sony for a very brief moment). In the end I chose what I was most familiar with. Both have their pros and cons. And Canon red just looks better than Nikon mustard yellow...
5DII - 50L - 135L - 200 2.8L - 24-105 - 580EXII - 430EXII - FD 500/8 - AE1-p - bag full of FD lenses

EYEONE

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 623
    • View Profile
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #25 on: January 19, 2012, 09:41:23 AM »
My story is the same as some others. I wanted to get into photography and two of my close friends shot Canon. So I just bought the same camera as them. I probably should have researched Nikon a little more than I did. I knew that I should get Nikon or Canon but I really didn't know anything else about it.

But looking back and knowing what I know now I don't regret the Canon purchase. Nikon makes some great cameras and you can't fault anyone for choosing them. But I do feel that Canon's EOS system is a lot more unified than Nikon. Nikon has more backward compatibility which is great but it comes at the cost of a unified system. I'm sure Canon made a lot of photographers mad back in the 80s by switching to the EF mount but in the long run it was the right decision. And now Nikon has cameras with AF motors and some without AF motors and a bunch of lenses with aperture rings that don't actually need them on and on. It just seems patched together.

When I think about buying that first camera and how I had no idea what made a lens good, what an f-stop was, what ISO meant or USM, or IS.  I learned so much so fast. I ate it up, I just loved photography and cameras. And still do of course.
Canon 5D Mark III w/BG-E11, Canon 7D w/BG-E7: EF 24-70mm f.2.8L, EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS II, EF 40mm f2.8 Pancake STM, Speedlite 430EXII + 430EXI, Canon EOS 3

7enderbender

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 632
    • View Profile
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #26 on: January 19, 2012, 09:46:46 AM »
I recently sold off all my nikon stuffs and ready to jump to canon because of the varities of lens available from Canon and also it's seem more affortable and more highly rated as compared to nikon. The way I see it, if i continue with nikon i couldnt afford those "N" lens as they are way over my budget. Whereas with canon, i could start of easier with the 24-105L f4, the 17-40L f4 and maybe the 135L f2 in near term.

My situation is kinda epic as my friends pointed out, i was so sure i'm going for the 5Dmk2 and at the same time a used 24-105L mint condition happen to passby and i got it without a body in hand. This all happen in Dec, and by Jan i'm ready to get my 5Dmk2.........but to my bad luck, my iMac logicboard decided to quit and can consider my iMac is total. The replacement of the logicboard is as close as a new iMac. Therefore i have no choice but to forego the 5D 1st and get my computer sorted out. Where as the same time i am also like some, having the dilemma whether i should wait for the mk3.  ::)

Oh come on. If you can make the switch from Nikon to Canon you can also go from MAC to PC. It's really the same bang-for-the-buck issue only more so ;-)

5DII - 50L - 135L - 200 2.8L - 24-105 - 580EXII - 430EXII - FD 500/8 - AE1-p - bag full of FD lenses

Eisbaer

  • PowerShot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #27 on: January 19, 2012, 09:46:54 AM »
When I was young everybody around me had Canon. So, I started with a T70 than T90 than 40D and never I was disappointed.

When I went digital I considered to switch to Nikon for a short time. But Canon felt at home.

Best regards
Eisbaer

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why canon?
« Reply #27 on: January 19, 2012, 09:46:54 AM »

Ellen Schmidtee

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 441
    • View Profile
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #28 on: January 19, 2012, 09:57:09 AM »
First reason is, that after a short talk with a couple of photographers, I was convinced I should buy one of the big brands. Around here, it's Nikon & Canon - I don't even remember when I've last seen a DSLR of a different brand.

Another reason I bought Canon was similar to kubelik's ...

when I first got back in to digital photography I was looking for affordable consumer DSLR's.  I noticed that a lot of Nikon bodies and lenses had asterixes next to them saying such-and-such would not autofocus with this lens because it lacked the motor driver.

I've found it confusing. Wikipedia's description of Canon & Nikon lenses & posts to a local photography equipment forums strengthened my impression that it's easy to select a Canon lens, and confusing to select a Nikon lens.

Another is posts I've read that Nikon's FX line is missing a few lenses, like a 70-200mm f/4. In retrospective, I would much rather have a 14-24mm over a 70-200mm f/4.

Finally, there were a few people who owned Canon and could let me work a bit with their equipment. E.g. two co workers have Canon equipment, and we exchange impressions of equipment and let each other shoot with each other's lenses. There wasn't and isn't anyone who would let me do the same with Nikon equipment.

awinphoto

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1943
    • View Profile
    • AW Photography
Re: Why canon?
« Reply #29 on: January 19, 2012, 10:08:40 AM »
For me as a kid my parents (not photographers nor even really enthusiasts, they could have a roll of film last a year or two in camera) had a canon semi manual camera...  I learned both cameras in high school photo and college, but when nikon first came out with the nikon d1x (their only digital camera at the time) and canon had their D30's and D60's, I liked the feel of the Canon, the system was more intuitive, I could pick it up and not have to change a ton of settings to get what I wanted... It was more user friendly.  I found the nikon interface, like photoshop, had like 3 different buttons/menus to do the exact same thing and the D1x had 100's of options and such... was just too much for me to pick up and start shooting...  I never really got comfortable with it.  When the 10D came out I took the plunge and been using Canon ever since.  I'm sure Nikon has refined it's camera/menu system, but it's a tad too late. 
Canon 5d III, Canon 24-105L, Canon 17-40L, Canon 70-200 F4L, Canon 100L 2.8, 430EX 2's and a lot of bumps along the road to get to where I am.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Why canon?
« Reply #29 on: January 19, 2012, 10:08:40 AM »