"I'm selling my Mark II and buying a Nikon D800 for $2999"
Out of curiosity I was wondering what sort of lens these 20 respondents had. You are moving to another ecosystem to save on the Nikon camera body. You will take a haircut on your lenses along with the MKII. And will have to spend more money new Nikon lenses and a new computer. Obviously this decision is not because the MKIII is 500 dollars more expensive. Am I missing somethings here?
70-200 2.8 IS II
Yep. I just want to be happy with my system and camera. I just want to be sure that if i am be loyal to one brand it will not disappoint me in future. Nikon never did. I really like their system. Once upon a time I just needed more mpix and iso 100 when d700 was hot in the market, so I decided to switch to Canon and THIS was mistake for me, a serious one. I even stopped taking photos due to 5d2, which i really don't like. And now, canon made a good (standard) AF system and probably nothing more important, selling camera for 3500$? Joke? Campetition has probably better AF, better build quality, more MP (not soooo important for me but...), far better ergonomics, is more customizable, has great flash system, better and more precise exposure mattering has better in-camera mechanics, can take more photos (200K), so far can register more DR, has much higher "real" x-sync, has no banding and visible noise @iso100, me NEFs are better for PP (maybe i am just used to nefs but i dont think this is the reason), is cheaper, more reliable. Hmm am I missing something? I just find Nikon more customer orientated and Canon leaded by accountants and financial managers (how to earn money, giving them almost same thing but let push them to pay more and more). Nikon invents, Canon follows. It's strange that u have to pay for 1series to achieve focus properly. I had a perfect and reliable AF in D300. Why I had to wait for years to have 3500$ good AF (probably). I wait for reviews for final decison bur so far I cant convince myself to stay with Canon.