Although I'm a Canon fanboy, I'm also realistic. Canon's camera range is in a sad state at the moment.
The fact of the matter is, Canon is now like Intel was about 10 years ago. AMD was able to offer the Athlon chip with better performance, for less money than the Pentium III. Intel could only rely on its market reputation, and its contracts with computer manufacturers, to remain competitive.
We have a Nikon D3S that is in pretty much in every way superior to the 1D Mark IV. We have a Nikon D700 which is superior to the 5D mark II for those who don't need the megapixels (with its usable AF). We have a Nikon D3X which is in every way as good as the 1Ds Mark III IQ wise, and is better in all other regards.
Prior to the release of the D3, Canon were leaders in high ISO performance in every way. The 5D classic spat up and chewed even the Dx series Nikon. Now, we're content and feel relieved with statements like "the 5D2 is "only" 1 stop worse than the D3s" as if that is an acceptable margin. How sad we have become as Canon users...
Canon's eagerly awaited 5D Mark II was released with "Evolution" fanfare. Instead, it was a devolution to ISO 100 banding and the same, borderline usable AF. If they meant the evolution of the Dinosaurs to Cavemen - they succeeded
Similarly, Nikon are starting to jump ahead in the lens ranks too. They are able to offer lenses like the 14-24G cheaper than the 14mm prime from Canon, yet most will acknowledge the Nikon zoom is a far superior performer, at least in versatility if not IQ.
Hopefully, we will see Canon wake up and become the market leaders and innovators again, as Intel has done. But at this point in time, the Canon top end line up is a disgrace compared to the breadth and quality of Nikon's offerings.
My fellow Canon fanboys will offer up excuses such as:
"Canon's lens offerings are better"
> Such as? Like the 24LII? Oh, Nikon has one now. Like the 70-200 f/2.8L II? Oh, Nikon has a v2 too. Like the 24-70? Oh, Nikon has a far better one. Like the 14 f/2.8L II? Oh, Nikon has a 14-24G
"Canon's lens offerings are cheaper"
> Such as? Like the cheaper 70-200 VR? Like the cheaper 14-24G? Like the cheaper 24 f/1.4? The only Nikon lenses that are more expensive are the supertelephotos...I don't think these are everyday lenses for most of us.
"Different cameras have different purposes. The 5D series aren't designed for sports"
> Aren't designed for sports? Or just not capable of sports because of inferior features?
"Canon has better video"
> Yay. That makes our photographs better eh?
Am I being too harsh? Your thoughts?