If you Canon gear was stolen...

[ben4633]

So, yesterday I had all of my camera gear stolen out of my house. All was kept in a very easy to take Pelican case, so very easy to steal. With the exception of my Manfrotto tripod I now have nothing, but thats what insurance is for. So, my question is a siimple one. If you had all your camera gear stolen and insurance was going to replace it, would you go Canon again??? My intent is not to make this thread into a Canon vs Nikon but how many of you guys would stay Canon and how many would go Nikon. Thanks for your replys.

[Perry Ge]

I would probably stay Canon since Nikon has crap all for USM primes under 200mm. Were it not for lens selection, I'd go with a D700. If I used zooms, I would go D700 + 14-24, 24-70, plus some other nice Nikkor glass.

[jacobsen1]

someone did almost this exact thread a few weeks ago I think....

anyway, yes, I would. Canon's fast wide primes aren't available on other systems, so I'm stuck.

[badams]

I'd stick with Canon. The insurance would only give you the value of the Canon gear. Some of those Nikon lenses (maybe all, I know the 500 f4 does) cost more than Canons so in my eyes you would be out some money. I would only switch if I wasn't happy with Canon or Nikon had something that fits your needs better.

[nordstern1]

i love Canon but im curious about Nikon's new offerings specifically the D700. i have a sweet spot for Nikon because they got me started in photography during my college days with their FM SLR. i just think their lenses are very expensive & they lack good prime lenses...

[nordstern1]

by the way, im sorry for your loss...

[static808]

condolences on your loss. if in your situation, i would do what i've already begun...the slow shift to the dark side! their current bodies are a joy to use. thats an understatement. if you like zooms, their 2.8 line is fairly difficult to beat. also, i do believe their consumer zoom lineup is currently the best. my 16-85VR is sharper than my 24-70, both stopped down or wide open. plus VR at 16mm is pretty handy every now and then. its just cant touch the L's build quality, but then the L cant touch the price of the nikon (400 vs 1100). biggest no-no for nikon is the lack of a f4 zoom lineup. that would be a good bridge between the uber-expensive 2.8 zooms and the inexpensive but good consumer lineup.

what i dont understand is how people say their prime lineup is total crap. sure, its not as good as the canon one, BUT its not TERRIBLE either. lets face it, if youre a serious hobbyist or a working pro, you're gonna get the D300/700/3 bodies, which means working AF even for non-AFS (USM) lenses. sure, most of nikon's sub-200mm primes arent AF-S/USM. but they are very good optically speaking, pretty darn fast at AF, and make a muffled noise during AF operation. thats about it. i've used their 35 f2, 50 f1.4, 50 f1.8, 85 f1.4 and 105 f2...they are all wonderful lenses. sure, no 35 f1.4, but their f2 version is very nice and a fraction of the price. pair it with a D700 and that makes up for the 1 stop of light.

again, sorry for your tragedy, but good luck in your future decisions!

[Perry Ge]

^ You're right, optically the Nikkor primes are pretty nice. I really like the Micro Nikkor 60 2.8 (in fact I have one), and the 105 2.5 primes. However, in my book, no full time manual = crap. They've also got no answer to the 85L :cool:.

[MJPhotos24]

Wow, sorry to hear about that - definitely one of my worst fears. I'd definitely go Canon again for the lenses, known a few that switched to Nikon but came right back to Canon.

[Village_Idiot]

No one said Olympus?

[FlyingPhotog]

Sux to hear of you getting ripped off...

I'd be very upset if that happened. Then, I'd go buy a G10 and go back to flying more often now that avgas prices have come back to earth.

[ben4633]

Looks like 6-1 in favor of canon so far, pretty interesting reads from you guys. I am going to look at the nikon stuff but am probably going to upgrade my 30 and 40Ds to 2 50Ds. I am familiar with the system and really have no complaints with any of the equipment. I appreciate all your thoughts. Thanks again.

[timnosenzo]

someone did almost this exact thread a few weeks ago I think....
Here it is: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=622987

FWIW, I'd buy exactly what I have now. :)


...ok, maybe I would replace my 24L with a 24L MKII. :o

[Perry Ge]

Looks like 6-1 in favor of canon so far, pretty interesting reads from you guys. I am going to look at the nikon stuff but am probably going to upgrade my 30 and 40Ds to 2 50Ds. I am familiar with the system and really have no complaints with any of the equipment. I appreciate all your thoughts. Thanks again.

I would call it 5 for Canon (with tim's vote), 1 for Nikon, and 2 unsure. I think Nikon's overall lineup is better than Canon's, but Canon's primes suit my needs better. If I shot different stuff, (i.e. if I didn't take into account what I shoot, and just wanted the best overall kit) I would have a D700.

[gjl711]

Though Nikons new cameras look outstanding and I have had opportunity to do some shooting with a few. I think if I had it to do over again I would still stay with Canon.

As a system Canon offers the better value especially with the lenses I'm most interested in. Canon might be playing a bit of catch up, but in the game of SLR leap frog, they will soon once again have the premier body for a short time until Nikon leap frogs them back.

[static808]

^ You're right, optically the Nikkor primes are pretty nice. I really like the Micro Nikkor 60 2.8 (in fact I have one), and the 105 2.5 primes. However, in my book, no full time manual = crap. They've also got no answer to the 85L :cool:.
hahaha, you had to and bring up the 85L!! seriously, nikon has NO answer for any of canon's L primes (24, 35, 50, 85 and 135), but their primes are still very good. i totally forgot about FTM, but thats because i use it rarely. it can be a pain to flick the AF mode from AF-C to AF-M, especially in a real hurry for a tiny focus shift.

im actually surprised im the only one persuading for the dark side. my SB-900 is coming early next week, so i'll see if i can find some more convicning arguments!! but i agree that the individual's shooting style should dictate the kit they purchase. good luck!

[Perry Ge]

I can't live without FTM. I'd rather use a manual focus lens (or permanently leave it in MF mode) than a lens without FTM :p.

Oh yes - Nikon's flash system = awesome. Built in triggers for the win. I'll join you in arguing for the dark side :cool:.

[HappySnapper90]

I'd probably go with nikon if all my Canon gear was stolen today. My only 2 Canon lenses are 50 f1.4 and 100 f2 which I believe nikon has equivelants of. My other lenses are Sigma and Tamron. nikon seems to have given users more features and have a better way of dealing with noise in a more appealing way than Canon.

nikon also has a great 14-24 that I wish my Sigma 12-24 was half as sharp as. The Sigma needs to be stopped down to f11 if you intend to print it larger.

[qtfsniper]

People always talk about bigger lens selection vs smaller ; but think of it this way. Are you going to buy every lens a maker makes? That's some HUGE cash. If that's your plan and you can afford it, ignore this. I'm happy with multiple fast zooms covering 10-200mm, a 90/100mm macro,. I would just look into the features and pro's and cons of the system you're evaluating or re-evaluating for your needs, and not just stuff that doesn't really matter.

[SQMazda6]

Keep the money and dont buy cam gear!:)