I have decided that I dislike Nikon SLR cameras

[robfilms]

i was a long-time pentax fan but fell under the nikon/canon sway.

i never was enthralled by the nikon/canon camera bodies.

(in fact, i could not stand each's menu structure.)

the nikon/canon lenses were very good.

i have recently sold all of my older gear and invested in...

...panasonic's m4/3 mirrorless offerings!

in part because of the excellent 4k video footage.

i also really like the smaller lenses made possible by the m4/3 mount.

image quality totally works for me.

be well.

rob

[vision63]

I was wondering why you switched platforms. You need to use what works best for you. You're not going to live forever.

[AllGold]

pRICE cUBE wrote:
I still feel shaky about Canon AF, the 1D III and 5D2 haunt me. I know Canon has made advancements but they really blew it by denying there was an issue for so long.

Yeah, you're a victim of really bad timing. Canon has never been that bad before or since.

[mrbigstuff]

I liked using a D50 more than my Lumix GH1 for ergos, but sold the Nikon after realizing that I could basically swap one body for the other (in terms of price) and that I could use my Nikon glass with the Lumix and get it to meter but that same lens would not meter on the Nikon...~!!

[pRICE cUBE]

AllGold wrote:
[quote=pRICE cUBE]
I still feel shaky about Canon AF, the 1D III and 5D2 haunt me. I know Canon has made advancements but they really blew it by denying there was an issue for so long.

Yeah, you're a victim of really bad timing. Canon has never been that bad before or since.
I understand that but at the time I started my freelance endeavor and I needed something I could count on. The D3 was not only more accurate than the 1D3, it was full frame. The 1D4 was a slap in the face as they raised the price and it was still an APS-H sized chip. It made more sense for me to use Nikon.

To the D3's credit, the image quality holds up pretty well for an old imaging chip.

I have been back and forth from Nikon and Canon so many times. I can recall at least 5 times. I just don't want to switch up my muscle memory one more time.

[AllGold]

pRICE cUBE wrote:
The D3 was not only more accurate than the 1D3, it was full frame. The 1D4 was a slap in the face as they raised the price and it was still an APS-H sized chip. It made more sense for me to use Nikon.

You mean you didn't want to pay $8K for a 1Ds Mark III instead? :devil:

[pRICE cUBE]

AllGold wrote:
[quote=pRICE cUBE]
The D3 was not only more accurate than the 1D3, it was full frame. The 1D4 was a slap in the face as they raised the price and it was still an APS-H sized chip. It made more sense for me to use Nikon.

You mean you didn't want to pay $8K for a 1Ds Mark III instead? :devil:
Between the $8k price tag and 5 fps, it was an easier switch. I already owned 1 D3 so I could use it with a former employers leftover Nikon telephoto lenses after they switched to Canon. For $5500, Nikon offered a full frame 12mp D3 and it just made sense at the time. I thought I could learn to love Nikon but I just don't.

[AllGold]

I was really pissed at Canon because of their prices. I said at the time I would not buy a 1DIII, 1DsIII, 1DIV, or X at Canon's price even if I'd won the lottery.

However, I will pay a decent used price and bought a 1DsIII a year or so ago for under $900. Nice camera. Used prices for the 1D X have to fall a ways more before I'll bite (and the 1D X Mark II is out of the question).

I know Nikon prices are just as bad but my days of paying $5500 for a camera are over. That's what I paid for two of the original 1D bodies when they first came out but that was way, way back when computers were way more expensive than they are now. Pro digital cameras have not dropped in price (to approach film camera prices) the way computer components have.

[pRICE cUBE]

AllGold wrote:
I was really pissed at Canon because of their prices. I said at the time I would not buy a 1DIII, 1DsIII, 1DIV, or X at Canon's price even if I'd won the lottery.

However, I will pay a decent used price and bought a 1DsIII a year or so ago for under $900. Nice camera. Used prices for the 1D X have to fall a ways more before I'll bite (and the 1D X Mark II is out of the question).

I know Nikon prices are just as bad but my days of paying $5500 for a camera are over. That's what I paid for two of the original 1D bodies when they first came out but that was way, way back when computers were way more expensive than they are now. Pro digital cameras have not dropped in price (to approach film camera prices) the way computer components have.

I had hopes that when Sony bought Minolta they would really give Canon and Nikon a run for their money in the pro division but they haven't done squat and have higher prices for everything.

[M A V I C]

I've only owned Nikon bodies, but when I've used Canons the placement of the rear command dial just seemed wrong. Nikon has it much closer to where my thumb is. It's like using your pinky for the control key vs thumb for the command key.