Who's making the switch to Nikon / D800

Personally I don't care what camera or brand anyone uses. If you wish to switch then switch. When I read a thread like this in my mind I see a whole lot of people saying if only I had better equipment or not until I get better equipment can I take good pictures. I don't see throwing more money at it as the solution in most cases. I suppose I could be wrong. Good luck though.

^^^
I think your reading it wrong.

I made the choice that I wasn't going to pick either system over the other. There are things about both that I really like and I also enjoy the variation. I don't want to shoot with the SAME body every day. I get easily bored LOL. It's not the most responsible decision, monetarily speaking, but I've made it work and I like being able to use both. No, it's not the camera that makes the difference but it can affect other things that in turn affect your output.

Tonyz wrote in post #13918410
I will not switch, but I have a friend who is already selling his Canon gear. Things does not look good for Canon this time.

I mean, if you see one person who is switching because of the D800, you can be sure that there are many many others doing the same thing.

snaphappyphotography wrote in post #13918456
So true. Canon's quality isn't obscenely low, it's of course very decent. That's not what I'm worried about. It's market share, it's business. Right now Nikon looks like the little company with big ideas and that's the key to stealing market share from Canon. Canon looks like the enormous company that's flopping. Seems like an Apple/Microsoft dynamic.

Let's pray Canon redeem themselves on the 26th. They've been a marvelous company for so long, they can't have lost their mojo altogether.

Shadowblade wrote in post #13919515
So, it makes sense to pack the 5D2 successor with all the pro features previously restricted to the 1D line. It's either that or risk annihilation by the D800.

To paraphrase Mark Twain...

The reports of Canon's death are greatly exagerated!

This thread was hilarious for a while

"risk annihilation by the D800"

Wait, it still is

About a year ago, after buying 7D and being somehow dissatisfied with it I was seriously thinking of switching to Nikon. I read millions of post of d3s, d700 users and people who switched to Nikon posts and the main discussion (Nikon vs Canon) was not about the auto focus (which would be the main reason for the change for me) but about the sensors. The predominant voice was that 12MP is more than enough and it's so wise of Nikon that it is not taking part in ridiculous mega pixel rat race ("why would you put 18MP on a Crop Sensor ?! on 7D" - they were asking). They were all right. I think all things considered high ISO capabilities is more important than large number of pixels (for majority of users - not everyone owns a studio). And trust me, I compared my 7D to d3s and it is light years away in terms of noise.
After d800 was announced I read a few NIkon forums expecting some serious Nikon bashing for so Canon like sensor. To my bewilderment most voices were positive. What happened to all these people that said that 12MP is more than enough even for studio photography? Well. I just found it weird. Makes you wonder who is writing on these forums and how much is it connected to marketing.
I decided to stick with 7D for a while and wait for 5D mII successor. What made me stay with Canon were mainly 7D video capabilities which Nikon was lacking at the time. I honestly hope that new 5D will be more like d700 (which is cut down version of d3s) and will resemble 1dx making it more universal all around camera. Fingers crossed.

luke.beck wrote in post #13922814
About a year ago, after buying 7D and being somehow dissatisfied with it I was seriously thinking of switching to Nikon. I read millions of post of d3s, d700 users and people who switched to Nikon posts and the main discussion (Nikon vs Canon) was not about the auto focus (which would be the main reason for the change for me) but about the sensors. The predominant voice was that 12MP is more than enough and it's so wise of Nikon that it is not taking part in ridiculous mega pixel rat race ("why would you put 18MP on a Crop Sensor ?! on 7D" - they were asking). They were all right. I think all things considered high ISO capabilities is more important than large number of pixels (for majority of users - not everyone owns a studio). And trust me, I compared my 7D to d3s and it is light years away in terms of noise.
After d800 was announced I read a few NIkon forums expecting some serious Nikon bashing for so Canon like sensor. To my bewilderment most voices were positive. What happened to all these people that said that 12MP is more than enough even for studio photography? Well. I just found it weird. Makes you wonder who is writing on these forums and how much is it connected to marketing.
I decided to stick with 7D for a while and wait for 5D mII successor. What made me stay with Canon were mainly 7D video capabilities which Nikon was lacking at the time. I honestly hope that new 5D will be more like d700 (which is cut down version of d3s) and will resemble 1dx making it more universal all around camera. Fingers crossed.

You already have the 1Dx if you want a high-ISO, fast frame rate, low megapixel machine.

There needs to be a Canon version of the high-megapixel, low frame rate camera - a true successor to the 5D2 and 1Ds3, both of which are getting on four years old. The 1D4 is only 2 years old, so, really, the high resolution bodies are in much more need of an upfate than the action/high ISO bodies.

My 1Ds3 works just dandy. Certainly won't be swapping it for a D800.

I live and die a CANONER!

Shadowblade wrote in post #13922859
You already have the 1Dx if you want a high-ISO, fast frame rate, low megapixel machine.

There needs to be a Canon version of the high-megapixel, low frame rate camera - a true successor to the 5D2 and 1Ds3, both of which are getting on four years old. The 1D4 is only 2 years old, so, really, the high resolution bodies are in much more need of an upfate than the action/high ISO bodies.

Why was the D700 so popular? Because it offered D3 sensor in a cheaper body. 1Dx is not an answer to many due to really high price point. If you give me 1Dx to satisfy my need for mid res with high ISO capabilities, I can suggest Hasselblad or other MF bodies to all who are in need of hi res low frame camera. It's leads to nowhere because these bodies are simply too expensive.
The only solution to satisfy both parties would be 5D III (for half of 1Dx price) with two different sensors and some rumors confirm that. Let's wait and see what comes.

luke.beck wrote in post #13923323
Why was the D700 so popular? Because it offered D3 sensor in a cheaper body.

Actually, it had little to do with the sensor, and everything to do with the rest of the package. If anything, the sensor was the weak link in the D700 - not that it was a bad sensor, just that it came out just before the 5D2, and was the only weak point the 5D2 could exploit (apart from video, which is irrelevant for still photographers who would have considered a D700 in the first place).

The point is, at least there is a solution within the Canon system. If there's no new high-res body, there's no solution at all for high-res shooters within the system, regardless of price point.

I'm hoping for that. But they still need the AF and weather sealing to be the equal of the D800, which Canon seem to be loathe to do. Heck, Nikon even extended their pro AF, weather sealing and dual card slots to the D300s!

luke.beck wrote in post #13922814
...They were all right. I think all things considered high ISO capabilities is more important than large number of pixels (for majority of users - not everyone owns a studio). And trust me, I compared my 7D to d3s and it is light years away in terms of noise.
After d800 was announced I read a few NIkon forums expecting some serious Nikon bashing for so Canon like sensor. To my bewilderment most voices were positive. What happened to all these people that said that 12MP is more than enough even for studio photography? Well. I just found it weird. Makes you wonder who is writing on these forums and how much is it connected to marketing.

It's really a matter of picking your cutoff for what is 'good enough' when it comes to ISO capability and resolution. Just as for many 12-18 (or lower) MP is 'good enough' for all reasonable uses for others ISO 6400 (unthinkable in film days) is 'good enough' for their needs.

I do think some people underestimate the value of high resolution when it comes to cropping and how it could affect their lens selection or use of existing lenses. A 36 MP camera is 14 MP if cropped to APS-C, this does allow a full frame user to get the 'reach' of a crop user from longer lenses (not quite to 7D resolution but very close). The utility of relatively affordable long lenses like a 70-200, a 100-400 or a Sigma 120-300 is a lot broader for a high resolution FF camera than a lower one.

lungdoc wrote in post #13923607
It's really a matter of picking your cutoff for what is 'good enough' when it comes to ISO capability and resolution. Just as for many 12-18 (or lower) MP is 'good enough' for all reasonable uses for others ISO 6400 (unthinkable in film days) is 'good enough' for their needs.

I do think some people underestimate the value of high resolution when it comes to cropping and how it could affect their lens selection or use of existing lenses. A 36 MP camera is 14 MP if cropped to APS-C, this does allow a full frame user to get the 'reach' of a crop user from longer lenses (not quite to 7D resolution but very close). The utility of relatively affordable long lenses like a 70-200, a 100-400 or a Sigma 120-300 is a lot broader for a high resolution FF camera than a lower one.

A D800E, would be above 7D resolution.

Shadowblade wrote in post #13923475
I'm hoping for that. But they still need the AF and weather sealing to be the equal of the D800, which Canon seem to be loathe to do. Heck, Nikon even extended their pro AF, weather sealing and dual card slots to the D300s!

How is weather sealing of 7d/5dII different from d800? I thought they are on the same level.

luke.beck wrote in post #13923748
How is weather sealing of 7d/5dII different from d800? I thought they are on the same level.

D700/D800 are weather sealed to the same level as Nikon's D3 and D4 - i.e., the best available.

5D2 has some improvements over the 5D, but is in no way as sealed as the 1D series (which has similar sealing to the film 1V body, which was Canon's toughest film camera). The 7D is a bit better, but still not up there.

I've personally had several 5D2s fail on me due to bad weather, and have seen other people's 5D2s and 7Ds fail during expeditions. The only time I've seen a Nikon D300, D700, D300s, D3, D3s or D3x body fail was then someone dropped a D300s into a hot spring... and, even then, it worked fine after it was dried out for a few days, and the images on the memory cards were still intact.