Canon or Nikon DSLR

[micso]

I have Canon gear and am thinking of changing to Nikon as I have heard good things about the Nikons.

I am going to wait until there are some reviews on the 7d before I decide, but your first one is really a tough decision.

Mick

[Silvia]

The easiest thing is to walk into a good camera store and then just try them out and see what feels best for you. I went into a store pretty much sure I'd buy a Sony and came out pretty much decided it'd be a Pentax. A few test reviews later I bought my Pentax K10D and I'm still very, very happy with it. In the end it's not about brand, but about what feels rights to you. As far as I know there's no really crappy DSLR so it's pretty much up to preference. Just expect to order your lenses and equipment online if you don't go for one of the big two i.e. Canon or Nikon. I my case it didn't matter though as it's usually cheaper to buy online anyway.

Sil

[JohnDoyle2]

You will certainly get your camera much cheaper in America! Customs in Dublin Airport have never stopped me in regards to the cameras that I carry over my shoulder on entry, unlike Heathrow. However, warranty could be an issue in Ireland, but not a problem for you if you travel to America frequently.

[druss_the_axeman]

Originally Posted by thewal

My budget is around €6/700.

Another question. What are your thoughts about buying a camera abroad?? For instance, if I went over to America and knew what camera I was going for, is it a good or bad idea to buy there. If I had a problem with the camera at home in Ireland, what kind of come back would I have. I know that 99.9% of the time, I wouldn't have a problem.

Strange I get to answer two questions in two minutes with the same info:

As I understand it one of the greatest advantages Nikon has over Canon is that their warranties are valid worldwide. Whilst Canon only allow you to have warranty repair in the country where you bought the camera (tight wads that they are).

So if you buy Nikon and you go on holiday and have a problem you can have the camera repaired there and then under warranty, you can also, as you said buy abroad because it's so much cheaper, greedy old Canon don't let you do that.

Having said all of that i've got Canon, and thus far, touch wood, haven't need a warranty repair anyway so it may not be that big an issue.

D

[flake]

Would that all that were true.

Canon & Nikon are virtually the same here so far as I know. Camera bodies are warranties in an economic area i.e. Europe North America, Far East etc. but lenses and accessories carry a world wide warrantly regardless of where they were bought.

So with both systems you have to take a risk but seeing as prices can be as much as 50% less in the States if it did go wrong then you could always pop back & buy another ! Also don't forget that your credit card gives some kind of warranty too in some cases.

[nikonian]

Originally Posted by bsmith

The advice given in stages 1 and 2 are great, and both are very important as a camera must feel good to you. I would also say think about the type of photography you enjoy is it macro or landscape or sport etc etc and look at the lenses available that you may have to add to your kit bag, look at cost, quality and availability. I had to wait a few months to get a lens I wanted because they were so scarce.

(3) then buy a Nikon

The debate is endless and in the end its down to you

Bob

I am taking no chance about which is superior, I usually buy one of each make. The last purchase was two 50mm F1.4.

[flake]

I have Canon gear and am thinking of changing to Nikon as I have heard good things about the Nikons.

Seems a very strange way to base a change of systems on, exactly what have you heard? Remember that reviewers can be as partisan as anyone, more so if there's advertising involved. There is a lot of support for Nikon from the days of film when they were undoubtably top of the pile, however in the days of digital they're still trailing behind both Canon and Sony (cue outrage).

With the D3 Nikon caught a lucky break, the headlong rush to more pixels was brought up short by the use of Nikons first sensor, a Full Frame (also Nikons first) with only 12 MP it performed well in terms of noise and thank's to the focus issues of the 1D MkIII there was a switch to Nikon. But was it because Nikon were unable to produce a highly developed sensor, because it seems unlikely that this was by design.

Canon believe that their main long term competitor is going to be Sony, who are rumoured to be about to launch a 35MP sensor (here) There is no guarantee that Sony will continue to supply Nikon with the high end sensors in the future if and when they become established in the pro end business.

Camera technology is very much swings and roundabouts at ths time - when people start 'saying good things about Sony' will you then want to switch to them? and then maybe back to Canon again?

All of the digital cameras on the market are very capable, unless you're having real problems, or there's a lens you want thich isn't available then it's probably best to stick with the system you have, especially if you're comitted to it.

[tjw_78]

Unless you're taking commercial pictures to order I really don't think it matters a jot. Its all swings and roundabouts, and you won't know whats best for you until you've tried it. I reckon if I were buying my first DSLR I'd see what I could get 2nd hand and then go play. If you like what you have then upgrade after a while. If you don't, buy another 2nd camera of the other type (Nikon or Canon)

[Mickster]

Originally Posted by flake

Canon believe that their main long term competitor is going to be Sony, who are rumoured to be about to launch a 35MP sensor (here)

Holy moly! Is this over the top or would that be like Bill Gates' prediction?: "640K [RAM] ought to be enough for anybody"...LOL!

I think I would prefer a higher sustained frame-rate rather than such a high pixel res.

Mickster

[OldBoy]

Originally Posted by flake

I

There is a lot of support for Nikon from the days of film when they were undoubtably top of the pile, however in the days of digital they're still trailing behind both Canon and Sony (cue outrage).

With the D3 Nikon caught a lucky break, the headlong rush to more pixels was brought up short by the use of Nikons first sensor, a Full Frame (also Nikons first) with only 12 MP it performed well in terms of noise and thank's to the focus issues of the 1D MkIII there was a switch to Nikon. But was it because Nikon were unable to produce a highly developed sensor, because it seems unlikely that this was by design.

You come out with some rubbish flake. Sony make chips but don't design them! They are based on Kodak research who design them and then licence the design to Sony. To say the D3 was a lucky break is utter rubbish, and could be regarded as very brave by Nikon as mags always push for more pixels per chip/sensor. A few weeks after the D3's release a firmware update was provided which included the reference to the D3x, so it appears Nikon already had the sensor for it.

As to the question posed by the original poster, I would stick with Canon if you are use to the system and have a lot of lenses.