I started photographing with a Zeiss Contina, a very basic viewfinder camera. No aids to focusing or metering, so everything was by estimation. You'd be surprised how good some of the results were. I would have continued using that for many more years (it had a superb lens) but I took it to an apparently good camera shop to have a small job done (adjusting the infinity point on the lens) and they broke it internally. Turned out they were cowboys. That left me looking for another camera.
I chose Canon simply because the A1 had just come out and had no peer. I used that camera very heavily over the next 10-15 years (3 or 4 reels of film a week, year-round, a lot for a casual user), with my favourite lens rapidly becoming the Tamron SP 70-210. In total I think I acquired ten lenses, four of them Canon. Photography was only a hobby for me (though I had pictures published by others) and I began to feel it was getting expensive, so I gradually used it less and less. I bought several compact P&S film cameras and ended up using them instead, easily my favourite being a tiny but very expensive Minox. I lost that to a mugger in Africa!
After a series of compact digitals (which I still use) I recently started hankering after real photography again. I did a lot of research, and for the available light photography that I've always loved couldn't find anything even in the same ballpark as the 5D. I bought it with the 24-105L and 100-400L, and I'm very happy with everything so far. Though that 100-400 is VERY heavy! Now all I need is a 50mm f1.4 and a good UWA zoom (not sure what yet). MAYBE I'll get a flash, though that's not what this camera is about for me and I probably won't bother - I use compacts for that.
In '79 Nikon was definitely dominant, and quite a few friends looked at the plastic finish of the A1 and weren't impressed. I've never dropped it, but I doubt if it would have survived much of an impact. Against that, it took the weight of the 70-210 over many years without any discernible distortion of the front of the body, which was an issue with some cameras then. The tough cameras that a professional would use back then included some of the Nikons (I forget what models were around, but I believe it was F1, F2, F4), as they were very robust. But they were also heavy beasts, and there was a new school of thought that went for the OM1 and to a lesser extent the OM2. A very prominent pro then was Patrick (later Lord) Lichfield, who was the first to be seen regularly with an OM1. He was also the first to use a compact in conjunction with his SLR. The Olympus cameras were greatly less heavy than the Nikons and every bit as robust, and were favourites with eg. mountaineering photographers. Canon were nowhere, just seen as nice but fragile toys for amateurs.
Now I've no intention of dropping my 5D, but it gives the impression of being hewn from solid metal. It feels incredibly solid and rigid (and damned heavy!). And as so many have said, Canon are in some ways currently ahead of the game, particularly for low light photography. Their technology leapfrogs with Nikon's, so that either range could be right for any individual at any given time.
To me the biggest decision was not Canon vs. Nikon, it was FF vs. cropped. And it was a difficult decision. There are far more lenses for cropped cameras out there, and they're cheaper, smaller and lighter. When i go out photographing I now always have a camera bag with me just as in the old days (though now i use backpack-style). Friends with cropped cameras can have the camera & walk-about lens round their neck, and spare lenses in their pockets. I don't have any pocket I'd trust my 100-400 to!
But compact cameras have come along in leaps and bounds, and I couldn't see any point in starting off again with a technology that overlapped so much with a pocket camera, and stopped short of the best available. So I went for the best quality i could achieve/afford with available light in mind.
I've also changed my compact camera, going from a fairly upmarket Canon (bought three years ago, so 5mp) to a much cheaper Samsung L85. Why on earth would I do that? Because I've used them, and in every respect I think it's a better camera than the Canon's (and other brands) I've used. I nearly ordered a G9, but after reading lots of reviews and questioning people who have them decided against it. I've never actually used one, though.
I never seriously considered any other brand. Canon & Nikon are without doubt the market leaders in quality cameras, and I wanted a brand/system that lots of people would be making lots of lenses for for many years. I think some more of the other brands may consolidate/disappear over the coming years, as SLR photography becomes more and more marginalised as a specialist activiity. Most people these days go for P&S, even for video (another market that I think will greatly contract).
Sony I wouldn't entertain, as even before choosing a system you're choosing a company, and my experiences with Sony have not been good. They do make some cute gadgets, often leading-edge technology with no competition, and a few years ago I bought a DAT recorder from them. Superb performance initially, but after 3 or 4 years it began malfunctioning and I asked them to repair it. They said they regarded it as "expendable" and said they neither had a repair facility (for these machines) nor did they supply parts. They said I should throw it away and buy another. If I tell you that this item sold for well over $2000 you'll see why I was unhappy. I also had a Sony mini-DV video recorder that malfunctioned just out of warranty. They accepted it for repair at my expense, but to cut a long story short it never worked properly again. They did have the good grace to replace it after i had complained several times, but so far as I was concerned the damage was done. Sony are a dreadful company.
Canon on the other hand are a superb company. They fitted several models of compact camera with a bought-in CCD that turned out to be faulty, and even though this was a good 2 years after the cameras were sold they announced that they would repair them free. I had a model so affected and had written it off (though fortunately not thrown it away) and they made it good as new. There aren't many companies as good as this, and it pays to patronise them. I had already bought my 5D so it didn't influence that decision, but it would have done.
I have no direct experience of Nikon as a company, but to be fair I believe they also stand by their products.
My only recent experience of Pentax is in buying spectacle lenses. It wasn't a happy experience and it seems their quality control has slipped badly. Doesn't speak too well for any of their products.
What other manufacturers of significant size and stability are there?
5D & 7D (both gripped), 24-105L, 100-400L, 15-85, 50 f1.8, Tamron 28-75, Sigma 12-24, G10, EX-Z55 & U/W housing, A1+10 lenses, tripods, lighting gear, etc. etc.
"I prefer radio to television. The pictures are better"
