Should I Ask Matron For More Pills? (Canon -> Nikon)

[Andy M]

For no real reason I'm considering selling all of my Canon gear, and jumping ship to Nikon. I love my 1Ds 3, and I own some of Canon's finest lenses, but I'm really tempted to try-out their Nikon counterparts.

To go would be:

1Ds Mark III
400D (my Mrs' camera)

17-40L
24-70L
70-200L IS f2.8
35L f1.4
85L f1.2 Mark II
135L f2


To be replaced with:

D700
14-24
24-70
85mm f1.4

D90 + 18-105VR (for the Mrs)

As you may note, I'd not be replacing the 70-200, 35 or 135 as these are lenses I use very rarely. Also, I've gone for a D700 rather than a D3 as I'd be upgrading to the D3x as soon as it became available, and I would think am less likely to take a hit on the D700.

I really like the fact that Nikon has the bit between their teeth, and that they've released a few stunning products recently (notably that lovely 14-24).

A few years ago I jumped from a Windows PC to a Mac for no real reason, and I can say I've honestly never looked back - would it be the same case jumping from Canon to Nikon?

[nick_bbb]

Sounds like a waste of time to me, and an expensive one at that as all your Canon gear will have depreciated.

If you were getting a Hasselblad H3D-II that would be another story.

[GetCarter]

In your position I would stay.

[beano500]

Can you rearrange the following words:

Money
Sense
More
Than

?


I'm a big Nikon fan - but even I wouldn't suggest giving up a perfectly good system. There's about a fag paper between the quality of Nikon glass and (equivalent stuff) Canon glass and there'll be a new Nikon body, that'll be 1% better than the last one, along every 18 months from here to the end of the world.....

[Simpo Two]

You wouldn't be the first to pack their Canon gear away and buy Nikon - if news reports are anything to go by, most of the pros you see there appear to use D3s.

As others have said, your plan doesn't make financial sense... but...

[flat-planedCrank]

1ds3 -> D700 ? I'd probably stick where I was (especially if that would mean giving up the 135L + 85L )

If you do prefer wide-angle shots then I can certainly see the attraction of the 14-24 (if its landscape work - what about an adapter for nikon-canon mount ? I believe you lose the AF...)



Cheers.

[Andy M]

Thanks for the advice offered

I'm under no impression that the D700 will be able to match the 1Ds. What's more the lenses will be like for like (where the 14-24 is better than the 17-40, the Nikon 85 is probably inferior to Canon's).

Definitely food for thought

[agent006]

There's no way i'd give up a 1d of any sort for anything other than a D3.

[Andy M]

agent006 said:

There's no way i'd give up a 1d of any sort for anything other than a D3.

I'm not giving the 1Ds up for the D700, neither would I give it up for the D3 (or a D3 AND D700), I'm considering swapping with one eye on the D3x and the fact that Canon is still yet to make an exceptional wide angle lens (even the 14mm mkII isn't great).

On the subject of money, I'm confident that my nose for a bargain would mean that I'd not lose a lot. The price to change would probably result in £3,500+ being put in the piggy bank, ready for the D3x (when the D700 would be sold too).

Again, thanks for the advice offered

[flat-planedCrank]

Andy M said:

Thanks for the advice offered

I'm under no impression that the D700 will be able to match the 1Ds. What's more the lenses will be like for like (where the 14-24 is better than the 17-40, the Nikon 85 is probably inferior to Canon's).

Definitely food for thought

From what i've read the nikon 14-24 is better than the canon 17-40, 16-35, and 14mm f2.8 (!!). Its certainly an impressive bit of kit!

Might argue the canon 85 1.2 is a 'different' 85mm to the nikon 85 1.4? Its not especially fast to focus, not particularly weildy, but perhaps one of the best portrait lenses made


Cheers.

[Dogsey]

Andy M said:

agent006 said:

There's no way i'd give up a 1d of any sort for anything other than a D3.

I'm not giving the 1Ds up for the D700, neither would I give it up for the D3 (or a D3 AND D700), I'm considering swapping with one eye on the D3x and the fact that Canon is still yet to make an exceptional wide angle lens (even the 14mm mkII isn't great).

On the subject of money, I'm confident that my nose for a bargain would mean that I'd not lose a lot. The price to change would probably result in £3,500+ being put in the piggy bank, ready for the D3x (when the D700 would be sold too).

Again, thanks for the advice offered

Why not just wait a bit longer and go straight from 1Ds to D3x?

[john185k]

You crazy bd. Lol.

Do it if you want to I say

[agent006]

Andy M said:

I'm not giving the 1Ds up for the D700,

Am i reading it wrong, or does your first post say that that's exactly what you are considering?

[beano500]

agent006 said:

Andy M said:

I'm not giving the 1Ds up for the D700,

Am i reading it wrong, or does your first post say that that's exactly what you are considering?

No - suggested was going from 1Ds to the fableware D3x, but with D700 in interim. Still madness.

By the time Nikon announce and then ship the D3X, Canon will have a 1Ds Mark V that'll probably run rings around the Nikon - then the Nikon will have firmware problems or the autofocus unit will be dodgy or the thing will burn out the EN EL4a or every lens will vignette like crazy, or, or.......

[Ordinary Bloke]

Ask matron for some more pills!

PS: Why not rent a D700 and lens of your choice for a day?

[Stigmundfreud]

excuse my ignorance but the d3 better than canon?

[RobDickinson]

flat-planedCrank said:

From what i've read the nikon 14-24 is better than the canon 17-40, 16-35, and 14mm f2.8 (!!). Its certainly an impressive bit of kit!
Cheers.

Not saying the 12-24 isnt better than the 16-35L but most of its 'better' rep and the only real direct comparision for a long time was made by the company making the addaptor to mount it on canon. Hardly an unbiased source.

I'm not sure you'd find too many people able to point to an A3 print and pick the nikon lens over the canon either.


IMO swapping pretty much an ideal canon top end setup for a step down in body and good nikon lens lineup seems daft as a brush, theres certainly upsides but it'll cost 20-30% of the kit value to change if you do well, thats if you bought new. All for images that wont look any better...

[Olivero]

You don't mention what type you photography you do and what you feel your current equipment isn't achieving.
I happen to use Nikon at the moment (used Canon, Fuji digital in the past) and am happy with the results I am getting.
However I wouldn't change from what you are using at the moment just for the sake of it. It is a good kit you have and not to be sniffed at. Don't forget that magazines are always pushing one make over another in the battle to sell copies.
If on the other hand you try out say a D700 (and you really should be using the grip) and it 'feels' better in your hands and encourages you to shoot more then that can only be a good thing.
My advice would be to invest in lighting in one form or another. This will have the biggest impact on your results. Without wanting to advertise the other thing that really will have a huge effect is some tutoring. Sometimes just having another pair of eyes looking at what you are doing helps.

[fergusd]

If you can afford it, do it, you may end up in a coffin next week . . .

Who really cares what other people think ?

I'll bet you don't really . . .



Fd

[Stigmundfreud]

fergusd said:

If you can afford it, do it, you may end up in a coffin next week . . .

Who really cares what other people think ?

I'll bet you don't really . . .



Fd

well if the decision to swap from excellent kit/brand is based on a lot of "pro" togs doing the same... what I dont understand is what the d3 gives you over a 1dIII? Am I missing something fundamental? Is the difference worth that much outlay? If its purely for the technical advancement why not save money and wait for an update to the 1dIII?

if the asnswer was simple then surely question wouldnt be asked in the first place