I have defected to Nikon

tsk1979 · April 19, 2011

For 5 years 350D was my trusted companion.
For last one year I shot with the Tamron 10-24.

But now, it was time to upgrade body, and move away from Ultrawide to a walkabout.

So in comes the Nikon D7000 and a 50mm 1.8
16-85 and 70-300 VR is on the way, will have it by end of month.

So I am a canon defector

ImageX Photography · April 19, 2011

tsk1979 wrote: »

For 5 years 350D was my trusted companion.
For last one year I shot with the Tamron 10-24.

But now, it was time to upgrade body, and move away from Ultrawide to a walkabout.

So in comes the Nikon D7000 and a 50mm 1.8
16-85 and 70-300 VR is on the way, will have it by end of month.

So I am a canon defector

Welcome to higher image quality.

tsk1979 · April 19, 2011

Thanks Image... Since my previous cam was a 350D I guess any upgrade would have been a higher image quality.
That said, I am looking forward to cleaner star trails!

ziggy53 · April 19, 2011

The Nikon D700 is a wonderful camera. Yes, it will be a major upgrade over the Canon 350D/XT.

tsk1979 · April 19, 2011

Thanks Ziggy. I actually moved to the D7000 not D700

Now awaiting my 16-85 and 70-300 VR!

ziggy53 · April 19, 2011

tsk1979 wrote: »

Thanks Ziggy. I actually moved to the D7000 not D700
Now awaiting my 16-85 and 70-300 VR!

Ah, the simple extra "0". Still quite an upgrade and the Nikon D7000 (along with the Pentax K-5 and Sony a-55) has a very nice random sensor noise signature.

chrisjohnson · April 19, 2011

ziggy53 wrote: »

Ah, the simple extra "0". Still quite an upgrade and the Nikon D7000 (along with the Pentax K-5 and Sony a-55) has a very nice random sensor noise signature.

The 7000 is a nice camera. Still I wonder why you did not upgrade to 60D or even 7D. You could have kept your favorite wide lens AND bought something else to walk around with?

ThatCanonGuy · April 19, 2011

Quite an upgrade, congratulations! Personally, the only thing that makes me think about switching is the sensor crop mode and DX compatibility on FF bodies. But I'm staying with Canon, even if Nikon makes a 70-200 f4 (which they should do; they have an incomplete f4 lineup).

JimKarczewski · April 19, 2011

I see a lot of pros flip everytime something new comes out. It's amusing to see people dump all this money to swap out their lenses to get the other mfg, then do it again when the next big thing comes 2 years later. Must be nice (for the pros with all the fast glass) to have money to blow.. Personally, yeah there are things that are nice on Nikon, but I also can say the same with Canon.

borrowlenses.com · April 19, 2011

Welcome to the dark side. We are sure you're going to love that D7000!

ThatCanonGuy · April 19, 2011

JimKarczewski wrote: »

I see a lot of pros flip everytime something new comes out. It's amusing to see people dump all this money to swap out their lenses to get the other mfg, then do it again when the next big thing comes 2 years later. Must be nice (for the pros with all the fast glass) to have money to blow.. Personally, yeah there are things that are nice on Nikon, but I also can say the same with Canon.

Exactly. Everyone was "should I switch to Canon" when the D2X was delayed, and the Canon guys switched to Nikon when the D3 came out. It just doesn't make sense. Their current camera has been good enough, it was probably top-of-the-line a few years ago, and whatever brand they shoot will come out with something better soon! Impatience is all it is, I guess. And wanting the best as soon as it's available, at the cost of avoiding the hassle and waiting for something better from their current brand.

rwells · April 19, 2011

JimKarczewski wrote: »

I see a lot of pros flip everytime something new comes out. It's amusing to see people dump all this money to swap out their lenses to get the other mfg, then do it again when the next big thing comes 2 years later. Must be nice (for the pros with all the fast glass) to have money to blow.. Personally, yeah there are things that are nice on Nikon, but I also can say the same with Canon.

Everybody has a reason for either sticking with a brand, or switching. They probably have a reason that's good enough for them... and since they are the ones paying for it all, is all that matters.

As to pros switching: Cameras, lenses, etc are just tools. If better tools are available, then it might (with their particular needs), be prudent to swap.

Example:
Canon has in recent years decided to split their bodies down different paths. Do you want a good/great portrait/landscape camera with not so fantastic AF, or do you want a great sports camera?

Do you want 21+Mb files or 12Mb?

Do you want great focusing in real low light, or real iffy low light focusing?

It all boils down to what you need, and IMHO, what you WANT!

I've been shooting professional level Canon gear for 35 years now, but the direction Nikon has taken the last 4 years (and evidently moving forward) fit's my needs/wants better. Will I change over? Who knows...

One things for sure, if I do change from one manufacture to another, that's my choice and I won't really care who thinks what about it.

NeilL · April 19, 2011

customisability-modularity and smart(er) lenses are in the immediate future of high end gear, as is an assault on traditional MF territory

talk of choice and the freedom thereof (in the medium future) is empty unless backed up by the required dollars. I will always be restricted (by my available dollars) to the kind of gear Nikon now offers, and which will continue to be offered as the comparatively el cheapo consumer grade kit, of a do-everything in a single body dslr. where can that configuration go? not much further

unless you can pay the man for the upcoming pro gear, choice will mean no choice. we have about as much choice now, at the dollar level of Nikon, as we are likely ever to have. indeed the no-choice will get cheaper and cheaper. the danger is that the photographer's self-image will consequently get cheaper and cheaper (and being comfortable with their self-image is typically and obviously more important and influential to pros than their photographic images)! people will always throw money after status! better tools, of course, and good therapy

Neil

tsk1979 · April 20, 2011

goldenballs wrote: »

The 7000 is a nice camera. Still I wonder why you did not upgrade to 60D or even 7D. You could have kept your favorite wide lens AND bought something else to walk around with?

JimKarczewski wrote: »

I see a lot of pros flip everytime something new comes out. It's amusing to see people dump all this money to swap out their lenses to get the other mfg, then do it again when the next big thing comes 2 years later. Must be nice (for the pros with all the fast glass) to have money to blow.. Personally, yeah there are things that are nice on Nikon, but I also can say the same with Canon.

goldenballs and JimKarczewski I did not have any glass issues.
1. 18-55 non IS - Horrible lens. Besides in India nobody will buy a used 350D body only. I will have to give the 18-55
2. Tamron 10-24 - I planned to sell it even before I decided to upgrade my 350D. I do not have the luxury to justify 10-24 when I have a 16-85 or 15-85 from canon. I shoot mostly mountains, I realized I was missing a lot of narrow landscape shots. If I do get an ultrawide, it will be Sigma 8-16, in conjunction with my 16-85, but that will be much later.
3. 50mm 1.8 - Excellent resale. So no issues
So even with Canon 60D or 7D I would have had to sell my Tamron 10-24 to fund my 15-85 IS. I am not a pro yet, so as of today its either 15-85 or the 10-24.

So as a clean slate guy, I had the opportunity to choose the system I wanted.
MY choice was 7D. I love that cam. I wanted to buy it. But at 80,700 INR, it was a good 20,000 above the cost of a Nikon D7000. 60D costs the same in India as a D7000, but its not weather sealed, and because of the terrains I shoot in, I am often scared of minor spray from waterfalls, and minor snow sleet. With a weather sealed body, I will be more comfortable. I understand lens also has to be weather sealed, but I am talking about very find mist like spray, no water dunking.

So I sat down and evaluated my options. going by my history, I keep a body for 5 years minimum. So unless a picture of mine sold for a big amount, this would be my camera for 5 years if not more.

Then I evaluated the cost of adding 50mm 1.8 from Nikon and getting rid of the canon. It was very little(good resale of canon 50mm 1.8)

Only fly in the ointment was the 10-24. Its an expensive lens, and it had medium resale.

I could buy 60D, sell 10-24 and get a Canon 15-85 by putting in little extra money
I could buy the 7D, and keep this lens. That said it would have seriously overstretched my budget, while limiting my photography.

So in the end it was 60D or D7000 both costing the same. I would anyways have to buy a new wired release (7$ from ebay), and my 350D batteries will not work. I would have to buy SD cards for both of them.

After looking at weather sealing front, I looked at Image quality.
D7000 had cleaner shadows, but 60D had more resolution. So they are evenly tied.

D60 has better video though, which I don't care much about(Panasonic FZ-35 is my trusty video cam).

So from my analysis it was weather sealing vs no weather sealing, but due to my getting used to canon RAW, canon menus and all, 60D was still a formidable competitor.
The straw that broke the canons back was Infrared. Most Nikon lenses are brilliant IR lenses with no hotspot issues.
I could go back to IR. Right now I do IR on FZ-35 and with long exposures its noisy. I could pick up IR photography again!

This is how I ended up with a Nikon.
If I had even a single L lens in my arsenal, I would not have made the switch. I do not think I will buy a lens costing more than 600$ for the next 5 years, unless I am able to get some money out of photography!

borrowlenses.com wrote: »

Welcome to the dark side. We are sure you're going to love that D7000!

Thanks!

ThatCanonGuy wrote: »

Exactly. Everyone was "should I switch to Canon" when the D2X was delayed, and the Canon guys switched to Nikon when the D3 came out. It just doesn't make sense. Their current camera has been good enough, it was probably top-of-the-line a few years ago, and whatever brand they shoot will come out with something better soon! Impatience is all it is, I guess. And wanting the best as soon as it's available, at the cost of avoiding the hassle and waiting for something better from their current brand.

But if you are not invested in lenses, you can keep shifting. Esp if the only lens you own is a kit lens.

rwells wrote: »

Everybody has a reason for either sticking with a brand, or switching. They probably have a reason that's good enough for them... and since they are the ones paying for it all, is all that matters.

As to pros switching: Cameras, lenses, etc are just tools. If better tools are available, then it might (with their particular needs), be prudent to swap.

Example:
Canon has in recent years decided to split their bodies down different paths. Do you want a good/great portrait/landscape camera with not so fantastic AF, or do you want a great sports camera?

Do you want 21+Mb files or 12Mb?

Do you want great focusing in real low light, or real iffy low light focusing?

It all boils down to what you need, and IMHO, what you WANT!

I've been shooting professional level Canon gear for 35 years now, but the direction Nikon has taken the last 4 years (and evidently moving forward) fit's my needs/wants better. Will I change over? Who knows...

One things for sure, if I do change from one manufacture to another, that's my choice and I won't really care who thinks what about it.

I feel Canon mid range is moving more towards "coolness" quotent with articulating screen and all. From a photographers POV, I think Nikon has still not lost the plot. How I wish there was no video in D7000 and it cost 200$ less!

NeilL wrote: »

customisability-modularity and smart(er) lenses are in the immediate future of high end gear, as is an assault on traditional MF territory

talk of choice and the freedom thereof (in the medium future) is empty unless backed up by the required dollars. I will always be restricted (by my available dollars) to the kind of gear Nikon now offers, and which will continue to be offered as the comparatively el cheapo consumer grade kit, of a do-everything in a single body dslr. where can that configuration go? not much further

unless you can pay the man for the upcoming pro gear, choice will mean no choice. we have about as much choice now, at the dollar level of Nikon, as we are likely ever to have. indeed the no-choice will get cheaper and cheaper. the danger is that the photographer's self-image will consequently get cheaper and cheaper (and being comfortable with their self-image is typically and obviously more important and influential to pros than their photographic images)! people will always throw money after status! better tools, of course, and good therapy

Neil

Wow, thats a deliciously pessimistic view

Manfr3d · April 20, 2011

tsk1979 wrote: »

For 5 years 350D was my trusted companion.
For last one year I shot with the Tamron 10-24.

But now, it was time to upgrade body, and move away from Ultrawide to a walkabout.

So in comes the Nikon D7000 and a 50mm 1.8
16-85 and 70-300 VR is on the way, will have it by end of month.

So I am a canon defector

Nobody is perfect

Congrats on your new gear

ThatCanonGuy · April 20, 2011

I was not criticizing tsk with my post above, but rather saying how I didn't understand why pros with $1000's of dollars worth of high-end lenses will sell everything and switch to the other brand, instead of waiting 6 months for their brand to come out with something better. I agree it may be a status thing, and having to get the latest and greatest.

If I was not invested much in lenses and I did not have the money to buy Ls, I would choose a D7000 over a 60D any day. It's a much better camera, at least for my needs. I totally agree with that decision.

NeilL wrote:

customisability-modularity and smart(er) lenses are in the immediate future of high end gear

Sounds good to me! I'd love a camera that I coulld swap out a 32mp FF hi-res sensor module for a 12mp low-light module in a few seconds, while reading an email on the camera's screen. That's how cameras should be, they're too primitive today. Seriously. And the camera makers are too dense to make this, despite its economic and user benefit. I doubt we'll see such a camera anytime soon.

If you want a hint at what cameras should be like, take a look at CHDK. It barely scratches the surface.

Stuart-M · April 21, 2011

tsk1979 wrote: »

How I wish there was no video in D7000 and it cost 200$ less!

No reason to think it would cost any less without video.

Matthew Saville · April 22, 2011

Welcome to Nikon; enjoy the built-in intervalometer and manual focus lens compatibility, to name a few features that might interest an outdoor photographer... (Not sure what you shoot mostly)

=Matt=

tsk1979 · April 22, 2011

I am a landscape shooter. With built in intervalometer I can take stacked star trails also while experimenting. This was a real nice feature I think.
BTW, I took a ISO 1000 shot to try out the cam. Minimal noise reduction or post processing.
Its so clean!
ISO 1000 F2.8 1/50 handheld

I have defected to Nikon

Comments