Why did you choose Canon?

[bratkinson]

Having moved to a 35mm Minolta viewfinder camera while I was in the US Air Force in 1970, by 1976, I desparately needed to stop taking pictures with the lens cap on! So, I went to the local camera store in Milwaukee that I had moved to 1 year earlier and asked what to do. He showed me a just on the market Canon AE-1, with a 50mm flat-fiield macro lens on it. He didn't have to 'sell' me much at all. It was mine a few minutes later!

I went out and ran 2-3 rolls of slides through it, and when I got them back, randomly, some frames were not exposed! And I did all my shooting in about 2 hrs and never put the lens cap on during that period! So, he sent the camera to Canon and they fixed it. Off to my favorite rail yard to take more pictures...same results! Back to the store again! He offered me a full-value store credit on a then 'older model' Canon EF, which I instantly bought. It was the predecessor of the AE-1 and had much the same electronics in a metal body with metal shutter, rather than cloth like the AE-1. The pictures came out great! Within a year, I got 'bit good' by the photography bug and ended up with a 2nd EF and 4-5 more lenses. I think I ran at least 1000 rolls of film through each of those cameras. Then I got married, and that was the end of my photography in 1988.

12 years and an ex-wife later, I wanted to sell some stuff on ebay, so I bought a Canon (what else?) point and shoot G-3. In addition to ebay stuff, I started taking pictures at church as well, and moved up to a G-5 a couple years later. When I wore that one out (oddball exposures, etc), I figured it was time to move to the SLR mode again...so I bought a used 30D and a couple of kit lenses, Canon 18-135 and 55-250. 6 months later, I wanted sharper pictures and the ability to do more no-flash indoor work. So it was time for a 60D and some L glass. This past Thanksgiving, the 60D was replaced with a 5D3 for the drop dead focusing and incredible ISO capabilities. My no flash work is a breeze with an 80-90% keeper rate these days!

Needless to say, I'm very brand-loyal when I find good products. I know I'll be a Canon shooter 'til I die. Ditto for Chrysler products...I've bought nothing but Chrysler products since 1972. Goodyear tires, the same.

 

[Brock]

I started researching DSLRs when I was going to buy one as a gift for my aging parents.

It had to have excellent autofocus because their eyes were getting bad & they had to be able to depend on the camera choosing subjects wisely & focusing accurately.

The Canons had the autofocus motors built into the lenses & had more accurate autofocus, whereas half if not more of the Nikons didn't.

I also looked at examples of the pictures out of the Canons & Nikons; & found the more neutral & natural colors of the Canon more realistic than the more saturated & exaggerated colors of the Nikon (even though the Nikons appeared to have higher dynamic range).

Because of the same reasons I bought one for myself.

If I were in the same position now as I was then, now; it would be a harder decision. Nikons seem to have more AF points in my price range (though Canons are more evenly spread out & I still think the Canons have slightly more stringent tolerances for AF accuracy).

Nikons have also been advancing sensor technology faster than Canon, but I still prefer Canon's more realistic / natural colors to Nikons over-saturated colors.

I'm in the market for a couple new DSLRs atm, my 50D could use an upgrade. I've been eying the D5200 & am curious about the D7000 successor, but I'm holding out hope that Canon can wow me with the 70D.

 

[viggen61]

Years ago, I was into Minolta SLRs.No particular reason, other than that's what my Father had, so that's what I bought.

Back in 2001, I took a trip to Europe and brought both my Minolta and an Olympus P&S Digital. While I liked the fact that there weren't any continual costs with the Olympus, it just couldn't do the things I'd become accustomed to doing with the SLR.

By 2007, I only brought a digital P&S with me on my next trip. This was largely ok, as it was a 5MP camera, and a lot of the photos I took were not worthy of spending money on film for!

By 2010, though, I wanted to get back into photography and persue it as a serious hobby. I looked a little at the superzooms, and other all-in-one digital cameras, but the lure of the SLR was too strong.

As for how I got into Canon, well, I wasn't invested in any current lens system, so I could look at them all. But I wanted to buy into a system that did it all. And that all but completely rules out everyone but Canon and Nikon. I went to a few stores to "test drive" the various models available from both. The bigger Canon (50D at the time) came out on top. The smaller Rebels didn't interest me, and that's purely on ergonomics. The Nikons, for whatever reason, didn't feel as solidly built as the Canons, and the Canon's controls, particularly the main dial and rear dial felt a lot sturdier than the same on the Nikons.

At that point, I was all set to buy the 50D, but the 60D was right around the corner, and I wanted to try that. But I made the wonderful mistake of asking to see a 7D at a shop, and the rest is history. I walked out with it that day, and have been a happy DSLR owner ever since.

 

[insanitybeard]

My Dad started me out with a fixed focus Fuji compact when I was about 13, though a little while after that he 'lent' me his Pentax MX with a 50mm standard lens. This gave me many good years of use (It was fully mechanical, the battery only powered the meter), and as my Dad had an ME-Super, I had access to all his K series lenses too. I used it for the last time in 2009 when he got me a Lumix TZ3 as a birthday present, which proved to be a nice little compact which took up very little space when hiking and going places, however, after a while I missed the functionality and control which you have with an SLR (plus my dad had finally replaced his old Pentax with a modern Pentax digital SLR)- eg, interchangeable lenses, filters, bulb, optical viewfinder etc so got saving. My partner had bought an EOS400D and I had always associated Canon (helped no doubt by the rows of Pros at sports events with big whites) as the manufacturer of choice for the professionals so decided to go for a Canon. I was going to get a 500D at the time but after pondering and reading about the various models it seemed that the 50D would be a better bet- more solid build (important to me), bigger- I find the controls cramped on the smaller bodies- and generally a more 'pro spec' body with less auto modes and more customisation. I decided on the 50D. Then the 7D came out..... it had rave reviews, and coupled with the option of video missing from the 50D, better AF, bigger viewfinder etc I was sold. I just had to save a bit longer!

 

[steliosk]

Never liked that contrasted fake colour?
Never liked those warm-yellowish skintones?

well , then change to a similar profile in the Nikon as in your Canon if you think the results are to yellow.
I have change my Canons profiles, I do not like a red/ magenta cast in the skin tones .

Why bother? Canon's faithful profile gives me the richest skintones i've worked with.

 

[bluenoser1993]

EF 70 - 200 2.8 IS II!!!!! I read a review on this lens and knew it was the system I needed to go with. Found a great deal on a used 7D with a 24 - 105 and picked up the 70 - 200 within a month. Extremely happy, and after a year of getting familiar with DSLR I'm quite happy with my results. Now I just need to wait a couple years for the 5D3 to become yesterday's news and make the change...

 

[CanNotYet]

For me, it was largely my wife's fault. When we met, she had a konica P&S for film. I accidentally put it in the washing machine (long story), and it was no more. Next up, she got a IXUS APS and liked it. Then she got a EOS 500N from her father, which we used for a loong time.

When digital turned up, we started from scratch, as we wanted first a P&S. We looked at all the brands, but my wife had two criterias: IQ, and skintones. She disregarded all other brands after looking at pics, and we became the owners of an A80, which we loved. Adored the vari-angle screen.

A year later, it falls out of our car, and we get an A95 on the insurance (same, but better than A80).

Three years later, we get married. (yes, she is my wife now, but we were together for many years before it happened). So, what to give my wife as a "morning gift"? (old tradition in my country).

The 40D had just come out, but I got a sweet deal on the 30D, and funds wer limited, so I went for it (thinking I can use the old sigma lenses for the 500N for it). The 70-300 worked, but the 28-80 did not, so I sold that package off to a relative, and bought the Tamron 17-50 non-VC.

And now? Several lenses later and flash etc.? I will not switch brands unless Canon goes bankrupt or starts using baby hearts to power their cameras (or something similarly unprobable royal screw-up).

So, pros:

Ergonomics. Nikons feel weird.
Total package. Room to grow that only Nikon can compete with.
Colors and skintones. (yes I know you can change it, but I don't know how, and with Canon, I don't need to...)
Lenses. Both Third-Party and the lovely USM ones
Build quality. (thats the reason I chose a 30D over a Rebel, it has been banged up many times, and still works as new, over 120.000 actuations later)

Cons:
Well...price? (but you DO get what you pay for, both in houses and lenses)

DR does not affect me that much, as I am not remotely pushing the boundaries there. I want fast autofocus and good Hi-Iso performance.

 

[UrbanImages]

My father taught me how to use his AE-1 when I was around 12. (35 now) When the Rebel G came out I bought one along with some third party lenses. I later upgraded to a 7E and in 2005 bought my 1st digital DSLR, the 300D and I was hooked. Having shot film for so long I was resistant at first, but after shooting with it for the first time I was hooked. From then on I got serious and moved on to a 40D and started upgrading my lenses and bodies to the collection I have now. I have tried friends' Nikons and I don't like the way they feel nor do I find them user friendly. Ironically enough my business partner shoots Nikon and she picked up my 5DII and 7D yesterday and she found them to feel better in her hands than her D3. She also acknowledges that Canon has superior glass so the die hard Nikon girl is exploring a switch. ;D At least we would no longer be a divided studio...

 

[drolo61]

Started out in the mid seventies with a Fujica SLR, Dad worked for Kodak, so there was always plenty of Kodachrome in the house. Upgraded myself to Nikon FA, added a FM2 and a couple of lenses. Forgot about photography for some time. Found some "fun money" and added a Leica M6 plus glass to the line-up. Bought first digital (Olympus P&S with great 1,8, lens, forgot the model) around 1999 for the need of a (fast) digital "low cost" workflow for product pics. IQ sucked in those days and for private stuff I a took a quick ebay tour through medium format (RZ67, Hassi C500 and Mamiya 6x6, still my Rollei 6008i). Upgraded digitally 2001 on KonicaMinolta (5MP over the Olymus 3MP), got rid of it after a week for extreme low light noise. Swapped to first version rebel, felt cheap and plastic, so the 10D was my first "keeper" in digital world. Waiting for FF the 5D changed my photograpy as I have not touched much of the film gear since. Have no need for video, so just upgraded last year to 5DIII and completely happy with it. While owning my Nikon film gear I was so much of a "fan boy", that picking up the Rebel almost felt like treason. Was very tempted to go back while waiting for the 5DIII, but for ergonomics and lenses happy to have waited. Nonetheless Canon has to regain speed in developing cutting edge technology - still wait for the long announced firmware update to fix the AF point illumination.

 

[sharka23]

TS-e 17mm !

 

[msowsun]

Brand Loyalty ..... In the late 1966 I was 10 years old and started taking photos with my Dad's Kodak Bownie.

He eventually bought me a used Canon Canonet QL19 (35mm film rangefinder) in 1971 and I have been shooting with only Canon ever since.

 

[7enderbender]

a) It started with my dad's Canon A-1, so I also bought into the FD system. A good friend and neighbor had an A-1 as well, so we shared a lot of lenses and gizmos at the time.

b) I don't like the color of mustard and zoom lenses that turn the wrong way.

c) I couldn't afford the Leica system.

d) Canon lenses for me are the better bang for the buck. For about equal quality Nikon lenses are always a bit more expensive. And there are a bunch of lenses I was interested in that Nikon simply doesn't have an equivalent for.

 

[JPAZ]

After moving from 35mm Rebel to Olympus digital P&S, got a Canon G6 (still have it). When moving to digital SLR, the Canon XTi felt beter in may hands than the Nikon d80. Nuff said.

 

[K-amps]

Not sure how I got into Canon... but what keeps me is the 70-200 F/2.8 mk. ii

 

[pdirestajr]

EOS Rebel G. Andre Agassi.

 

[Area256]

I've owned a number of Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Minolta, and Canon digital cameras over the last 12 or so years. My first Canon was the G7 that I used for travel, and I really enjoyed it. My DSLR at the time an Olympus E520 (or something like it), and it had awful noise. So I went looking for a new DSLR brand. Initially my plan was to get a Nikon D7000, since it seemed to have good noise performance, however then I discovered it had a half-backed LiveView system. So I picked up a Canon 60D, and loved the controls and LiveView functionality - and just about everything else about it. I've been shooting Canon almost exclusively ever since - with the 6D being my latest toy.

 

[Axilrod]

I had various Canon MiniDV cameras over the years and found them to be quality products. Also, my neighbor and close friend that was a photog both shot Canon, so it seemed like the obvious choice for me.

 

[Sporgon]

Full frame in 2005

Been in photography since 1978, used Nikon 35mm and Pentax 6x7 exclusively, then Nikon digital to 2005. Nikon had publicly stated they'd never produce a FF chip (!)

However since using Canon really like the ergonomics of the cameras and the quality of manual focus on the L lenses, although I am attempting now to make more use of AF. Also I believe that in the "prosumer" category the Canons are inherently better made.

In the helicon days of film I really didn't like Canon, apart from the wonderful F-1.

 

[leftnose]

I've been involved with photography since I was very young. My father was a student of Walker Evans and did some nice work on his own. The first real camera I used was his old Leica M2 with a 35mm Summarit. After that, he let me use his Nikon F3 with a 35/2 AIS lens. When it came time that I was old enough to have my own "real" camera (about 1996--I had had many P&Ss up to this point--who else remembers Disc film?), couldn't justify the additional price of an N90s over an EOS A2 so I went with Canon. At that time, Canon was the clear leader in AF performance and that was more important to me than the advantage Nikon held with better TTL flash performance. The first lens I bought for that A2 other than the 28-105 kit lens was the 35/2 (see a pattern here?). I still own both and use the 35/2 today but I've pretty much retired the 28-105 though it still works fine.

Not too long after I bought that A2, the digital revolution started. But I decided to wait it out a bit, inhaling more fixer fumes in the darkroom until things settled a bit, especially since I knew I wanted a full frame sensor, being a fan of the wider end of the focal length range, not to mention better DR, DoF considerations, and low light performance. I was getting results in the darkroom which were very pleasing to me and I didn't want to take a step back with my equipment.

So, several years go past and the 5D Mark II is released. Between that and the D700, it was pretty much a no brainer for me, especially considering the EF glass I already owned and the fact that I could pick up the 5D2 in the store and do everything, the controls were so similar to my A2.

So, my journey with Canon started with cost/feature considerations and then I kept with it due to features/specifications/ergos.

 

[digital paradise]

20D was the cream of the crop for crop sensors at the time. Nikon was using CCD. I have never liked Nikon colours out of the box and I prefer Canon ergonomics. More glass was available and was less expensive compared to a Nikon equivalent.