Have you considered joining the dark side?...

[akiskev]

When I first got my 5D2 I was so excited to finally play with what everyone was raving about.
:-\ I was not impressed from the first shot.

Raw noise levels were worse than my 40D and I had visible banding right smack in the MIDtones at low ISO!

QFT. not.

 

[Aglet]

Agreed. Honestly, you can't go wrong with any of the top brands of DSLR's. They all have the capacity to make magnificent images. It's nice when the tools have all the bells and whistles... but specs don't take great images...

some more than others
specs define the limits of what you can do with the captured image and some of us can tell you, after shooting other systems, Canon's images are a bit more limiting in post. We're not talkin' snapshots here. And you can't always control the light.

 

[hhelmbold]

As mentioned before it has crossed my mind and it is not because I think the dark side is better, but I think Canon is losing the plot in terms of getting their products out to the clients.

But to change the topic a BIT... Would you advise someone else to rather join the dark side looking at the entry level DSLR cameras and current availability?

 

[Aglet]

But to change the topic a BIT... Would you advise someone else to rather join the dark side looking at the entry level DSLR cameras and current availability?

I used to recommend Canon entry level DSLRs without hesitation for newbies.
Now I have to temper that with, "What kind of shooting will you be doing?" Because the D5100 and now the D3200 can fit slightly more advanced novices who intend to do some post-processing and will have some appreciation for the cleaner raw files from the sonikon bodies.

Canon's Rebels are, of course, still a good choice too. but anyone aspiring to grow beyond this as a first camera has a bit more to think about now. it's good to have options, confusing tho it can be.

 

[hhelmbold]

I used to recommend Canon entry level DSLRs without hesitation for newbies.
Now I have to temper that with, "What kind of shooting will you be doing?" Because the D5100 and now the D3200 can fit slightly more advanced novices who intend to do some post-processing and will have some appreciation for the cleaner raw files from the sonikon bodies.

Canon's Rebels are, of course, still a good choice too. but anyone aspiring to grow beyond this as a first camera has a bit more to think about now. it's good to have options, confusing tho it can be.

This is exactly my feeling and deliberately just threw out the question without my opinion to see if others are feeling the same I think Canon has quite a gap to fill in some areas

 

[Rienzphotoz]

What worries me more about Canon currently is their apparent shift to charging more for equipment,

I shifted from the dark side in 2009 ... but I still had my Nikon D80 and a 4 lenses till last month.
What people don't realize is that Nikkor glass costs a lot more than the equivalent Canon glass e.g. Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8 = $1886 vs Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8 = $1400.
Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS costs $1060 vs Nikon's 17-55 f/2.8 (NO VR/IS) costs $1400
So whatever one thinks they saved / lost in buying camera or lenses will soon realize that "Dark side" or the "Light side" they both work out the same (in terms of price). I've always liked Nikon & Canon cameras and lenses ... if I had enough money I would buy D800e (plus some good FX glass) and still use my 5D MK III as well as the D800e.