Have you considered joining the dark side?...

[smirkypants]

I've already switched... partially. I'm shooting a D800 and a 200-400/f4 and getting the kinds of results that I have only dreamed of in the past. I use the 5D3 + 70-200/2.8 II for events but I can't tell you how amazing the shots are with the Nikon combo.

[dr croubie]

Depends what Dark Side you're talking about, does film count?

I've already got a lot of Pentacon Six mount lenses used via adapter on my 7D, so instead of going for a 5D3 or D8000, I'm contemplating a $500 Hartblei 1006 M and a few 645 backs, for the other $3000 I can buy a *lot* of rolls of Velvia and maybe a nice film-scanner to boot...

[mws]

Nope. Both Canon and Nikon and can take great pictures, Nikon might get better results under lab conditions, but in my case, (and probably a lot of other peoples) the quality is ultimatley limited by the user. While I'm not the worlds worst photographer, I'm also not the next Ansel Adams. I probably wouldn't notice a difference if my end results with either one.

Many years ago when I bought my first film SLR (Elan IIe) Iwent to the store, tried both the Canon and the Nikon, and like the wau the Canon felt in my hands, the button placement etc, and have beeb with Canon ever since.

Its no different then Ford vs. Chevy. Some people will only drive one or the other untill the day they die, while others just need a truck and will drive what ever they happen to like better when they buy one. 

[Chewy734]

Hell no.  Both camera systems produce amazing shots.  It's more about the photographer than the camera...  in fact, I have yet to learn everything about the 5D2 body, let alone the more complicated 5D3.  I've been with Canon since the AE-1, and invested a lot in Canon glass since then.  It makes no sense for me to switch to Nikon.

[CanineCandidsByL]

IMO, anyone who hasn't considered it isn't serious about their hardware.  In fact, I'd point out that there aren't just two sides. I consider the smaller brands too.

But, not only do I have a glass investment with Canon, I also have a personal familarity with it, not that it woudln't translate into a reasonable familiarity with any brand, but I have never picked up a Canon SLR and felt out of place. Sure, some buttons are missing, there might be a new button here and there, and certain placement varies a little, but when I pick up a friend's Nikon (yes, I'm friends with Nikon owners), there is a different philosophy in place which is reflected in the buttons/switches, their functions, and their layouts. Its not amazingly different, but its different enough.  There are times I like the Nikon philosophy better, but not usually.

I think if I had started with Nikon, I'd prefer it, just as I prefer Canon since I started with them. There is the old saying about "the grass is always greener".  Sometimes the grass is actually greener, but that usually means more maneur.  People starting off have a great chance to invest in the manufacture that best fits their hands and their minds.  I wish all experienced people would push newbies into trying both/all cameras equally and getting them a great fit, instead of pushing them into their own choice.

[JR]

Yes i did think about it, however in the end i could not part with the L lens i love so much and the ergonomic of the Canon bodies.  More importantly, while some of the new Nikon bodies look appealing in terms of specs, i dont beleive i would see any difference in the final product for the use i have.  So i would be spending a lot of money to be left likely disaapointed.  Not because Nikon is not good, but because the difference do not justify a change.  If i was starting from scratch, might be different.

[psolberg]

I'm considering it seriously. Glass is not an issue and I know I can sell it easily. Plus Nikon has released a ton of much needed primes to the point where switching is painless for me. I'll probably go for two D800 bodies. 14-24, 70-200 Vr2, 16-35 vr, and 24, 35, 85 fast primes, 24 t/s, and 24-120. Going from the 5Dmk2 to the D800 is going to be exiting. I'll stay with my current setup for now side the demand for the D800 is breaking records and people's patience.. If I could get one now, I'd sell all my canon gear tomorrow.

[EYEONE]

It's always an idea I keep in my mind. And indeed there are a number of things I like better about Nikon's designs. Certainly not the ergonomics but I do like all the physical switches and dials Nikons have rather than Canon's which seem to be mostly software driven. And of course you gotta love the low light abilities of the D3s. But Canon also has many advantages over Nikon.

But at the end of the day if I thought any of these things would make me a better photographer I'd switch. We all worry too much about the gear. As much as I loooove gear it's just not about the gear. I always wonder sometimes if people really think switching to Nikon or Canon will magically make their photography better. I often think about how much I completely suck compared to famous photographers from 30-40 years ago who didn't have 1/100 of the technology that I have in my bag. We are very spoiled.

[jamesdylangoldstein]

I would definitely switch but I love my Mark II and am short on money.  The Mark II is an amazing camera (the Mark III is too, but more expensive than the newer, better tech) and I'm really happy with it.  I don't shoot professionally, just for fun and to showcase what we do at my work.  The D800 is great for a variety of reasons.

1) It's cheaper than the Mark III.
2) They offer a sharper AA-less model.  Moire can now be fixed easily in Lightroom 4.
3) The resolution allows you to bring a great lens that is still affordable to a professional game and get great shots.  I have to crop my 70-200 a lot (50-75%) to get OK shots at a Yankees game on my Mark II.  Having the extra resolution would make my shots much shaper.  It's like being able to afford a 400mm f/2.8 (and they don't let lenses bigger than a 70-200 into the games).  You can't get closer without a press pass or $1,000 seats.
4) The dynamic range allows you to fix a lot of shots in Lightroom.  I love to bring out detail hidden in highlights and shadows.
5) I have done a few really large 36in prints for my work.  Being able to get higher DPI would be great.  I would like to go even bigger.
6) It will force Canon to lower the Mark III price and rush out a comparably priced 3D.  Since I don't have the money to switch now, I might have the option of the 3D when I do in the future.
7) It seems that the RGB metering does a better job pairing with the smart newer AF systems.
Nikon's UW lenses are much sharper than Canon's.

If I had the money I'd buy a D800e, 70-200 f/2.8, 14-24mm, 50 f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, and 105mm Macro.

[Caps18]

But at the end of the day if I thought any of these things would make me a better photographer I'd switch. We all worry too much about the gear. As much as I loooove gear it's just not about the gear. I always wonder sometimes if people really think switching to Nikon or Canon will magically make their photography better. I often think about how much I completely suck compared to famous photographers from 30-40 years ago who didn't have 1/100 of the technology that I have in my bag. We are very spoiled.

That is it.

Yeah, the new cameras make taking better pictures easier, but you still have to be in the right place at the right time.  Plus, have an eye for composition and light.

But, Canon needs to come up with a landscape camera...  If you were just starting out, it would be hard to convince someone to pick Canon if money wasn't a problem.  The 5Dm2 is still a great deal.

[jalbfb]

Never considered it.  I have a lot invested in Canon gear and still prefer the Canon menu system and Canon lenses. The Force is with me.

[AmbientLight]

Actually I have never considered switching to Nikon, although some of my friends are Nikonians. I rather wait for Canon's 200-400mm instead of adding a second system with different menus and controls only to use one lens (although that is one tempting lens). Regarding the D800 and it's extra MPs I simply don't need that for what I do.

[AvTvM]

I have considered many times.

Last time I was just about to pull the trigger, was when I upgraded from Rebel to 40D. If Nikon would have had a 17-55 with IS, equivalent or better than the Canon 17-55 IS, I would have switched.

When the 7D came out, I preordered .. first time in my life and have not regretted it. While my itch for FFis still very mild right now, I will eventually get a FF body. For that I find very little fail with the 5D 3. It has enough resoultion and speed for my phtographic interests. Overall, it is just about everything the 5D 2 should have been from the start. It is just the pricing which is really off. I could afford it, but refuse to give Canon more money than a better offer from Nikon would cost. As I am in no hurry, I will wait and see how long it takes until the 5D III costs less than the D800 (the day will come, maybe sooner than expected).

As an amateur, who does not shoot on a daily basis, I do not want gear from 2 brands in parallel. I am glad if I master one brand and its intricacies! I want an APS-C and a FF body from the same maker, one user interface, one set of lenses and flashes. I was looking forward to radio controlled ETTL and Canon has delivered and pulled ahead of Nikon on that one. Again, introductory price is ridiculous, but I'll also wait on this one.

In terms of lenses Canon has got everything I want, except a f/2.8 UW-zoom [eg. 14-24] matching Nikon. 

[tron]

I use Canon since 1988. My first Canon camera was an EOS620. I have bought many lenses (and less cameras) since then. I am used to this system and I like it although I admit it is not perfect. Although an amateur interested mostly in landscapes I still do not care about D800 and do not need the extra mpixels.

My 5DII is more than enough and I prefer to get lenses when I can spend some money. I am only impressed by Canon L glass some of which I have and some of which I do not (cannot afford).

[smirkypants]

Brand loyalty is silly. "I love my Chevy and will never own a Ford" is for simpletons. If you have a need and rely upon your gear, you buy the best gear for the job. Period. As of right now, Nikon is giving me better gear for what I need to do at a better price. In the last generation I chose Canon because Nikon just couldn't compete for what I wanted. Now the roles are reversed. The 200-400mm/f4 is the absolute best lens that I am physically capable of hand-holding for extended periods of time and the D800 gives me a HUGE reach advantage over anything that Canon offers.

I really do hope Canon is running scared. I really wanted to stay with Canon. I don't even know how to pronounce "Nikon" and those bastards violate the sacred "lefty loosy, righty tighty" rule. But hey. Canon needs to get their asses in gear, make better products and, for the love of God, stop trying to milk us for every dollar we have!