On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 13:49:54 -0500, Stephen Bishop wrote:

On Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:41:13 -0800, John Navas
wrote:

On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 21:39:39 -0800, SMS
wrote in :

Nikon's low-end lenses are pretty bad in terms of chromatic aberration
and focusing, similar to what Canon used to bundle with their very low
end film Rebel SLRs, and which I don't think are even available any
more. Many of the Canon mid-range lenses have L quality optics, but lack
the professional build quality of the L lenses. For mid-range lenses,
the Canon lenses tend to have faster and more accurate AF, though of
course part of the AF accuracy and speed depends on the body.

It was interesting to watch the Canon-Nikon wars back when the EOS
system was introduced. You had a lot of pros switching to Canon because
of the in-lens focusing motors. Nikon copied that innovation, then Canon
came out with their L lenses and the fluorite element lenses that
Nikon tried to counter with their low-dispersion element lenses, but
never managed to get up to the quality of the Canon lenses. Most of the
remaining Nikon professionals made the switch when Nikon insisted that
there was no need for full frame digital and said that they had no plans
for full frame bodies.

Has any pro ever switched to Nikon from Canon? I'm sure it's happened
but you never hear about it. It's always stuff like 'I switched to Canon
because I wanted a high-resolution full frame body,' or 'I needed to
switch to Canon because I'm doing sports photography and Nikon lacks the
lenses I need."

Utter nonsense.

For once I can say I agree with John. Although I wouldn't consider
it to be utter nonsense, but the above isn't completely factual. When
the D3 and D700 came out, lots of pros switched back to Nikon.

It's true that Nikon dragged their feet for too many years over things
like full frame and other innovations; but now that they've woken up
they are once again the game to beat.



How can you say that? Canon has a 21mp full frame (Canon 5DMkii) for
about $2,700 and Nikon does not have anything to compete in that price
range. The more MP the larger you can print.

I have heard rumors about a D700X for over $4,000 expected price but that
will not compete either.



This is just one data point, but I've heard similar comments: About
a year ago, I personally asked one pro why he chose his D2 over the
Canon 1D. His answer, without hesitating, was, "I want a camera that
I know will still work if I drop it."