Canon or Nikon (and why)
Poll: Canon or Nikon (and why)
Total Members Polled: 111
Discussion
I'm a complete impulse buyer and wanted a "better" camera for a trip to NY back in Jan 08. I'd only ever used a point and shoot which I think it came from Tesco. I wandered into Jessops, had a look around and played with a D40. It was only because it was out from a previous demo and the salesperson hadnt put it away.
I didnt really look at anything else, didnt know what I was looking for in terms of features, didnt know there was a D40X, or a D80 or even what aperture was, liked it and bought it then just picked everything up as I went along.
I did try a mates 450D once I had mine, and at the time it made no difference to me which was which, other than mine was black and his silver.
Once I'd bought lenses it didnt make sense to change to another vendor, then I upgraded the body, broke that, upgraded again, bought a few more (too many) lenses and that kind of brings us up to date
I didnt really look at anything else, didnt know what I was looking for in terms of features, didnt know there was a D40X, or a D80 or even what aperture was, liked it and bought it then just picked everything up as I went along.
I did try a mates 450D once I had mine, and at the time it made no difference to me which was which, other than mine was black and his silver.
Once I'd bought lenses it didnt make sense to change to another vendor, then I upgraded the body, broke that, upgraded again, bought a few more (too many) lenses and that kind of brings us up to date
i only chose Nikon (D40) because it was so cheap,i fancied upgrading from my kodak z740 which i used for years and thought its picture quality and response was great,but the Nikon is in a different league,amazing camera for £240.but Canon cameras are amazing also,price and ease of use for me.
Edited by valve bounce66 on Sunday 3rd May 21:44
Switched in 1997 because Canon's (then) new mount meant I couldn't use older lenses on a newer body.
Completely daft reason to stick with Nikon though: although I have one lens based fairly and squarely on a 1969 design, I have no lenses over about ten years old now anyway! Mostly, the Nikons seem ergonomically easier to get on with now.
Completely daft reason to stick with Nikon though: although I have one lens based fairly and squarely on a 1969 design, I have no lenses over about ten years old now anyway! Mostly, the Nikons seem ergonomically easier to get on with now.
Bought Canon 30 years ago as the AE1 was the camera to get at the time. Never did go to the AF system (lack of spare money and commitment at the time) but did add an A1 (pre-owned) and latterly a Canon "New F1" from eBay, along with an old mount non-AF 600mm lens. the 600 came with an FD to EOS adapter so I bought a 400D just to see how well it worked. Works quite well. 400D now nearly 2 years old and I have added a 70-300 DO lens and discovered AF. (Actually I discovered AF last year when I used the kit lens for the first time for more than just testing.)
It may be time for a body update soon but for various reasons I need to keep things small and as light as possible so perhaps a 500D if the prices start to become sensible.
So I'm a typical 'catch them at the start and hook them on the lenses' user although to be realistic the investment is small enough (and ancient enough) that any major upgrade cost would make brand commitment irrelevent since lenses would need to be on the list anyway.
It may be time for a body update soon but for various reasons I need to keep things small and as light as possible so perhaps a 500D if the prices start to become sensible.
So I'm a typical 'catch them at the start and hook them on the lenses' user although to be realistic the investment is small enough (and ancient enough) that any major upgrade cost would make brand commitment irrelevent since lenses would need to be on the list anyway.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff