Question is this...how many of you have owned a Nikon then changed to Canon and why...or how many have owned Canon then changed to Nikon and why.

It seems Canon owners always stick with Canon and Nikon owners always stick with Nikon. Ever wonder why?

I'm just curious as to why.

You got a good point there leaf. Those lens can cost a fortune and unless your camera pooped out along with the lens, which is really rare, then you'd stay with the same brand.

I'm sure there are some of you out there that own both and wonder which one you perfer?

There is another thing also - "hand memory" and menu items/locations. It is much harder to switch between brands than between different models of the same brand.
Even for SLR <-> PS I sometimes had troubles finding how to setup my wife's Canon PS (changed it to Nikon too recently)

over 20+ yrs I've owned a lot of Nikons, Canons, Mamiyas and Hassleblads ... mostly pro and pro-sumer level nikons and canons. However, I have had a few consumer level SLRs as well (mostly for handing off to family members at birthdays and crap like that). Nikon has always been my first pick for 35mm or digital .. for different reasons over the years varied from model to model, new technology, etc. .. but if I had to sum my preference up in one area it would have to do with the internal functions of the metering systems and white balance. Nikons are more stable in this area. You can get equal results when comparing a low-end Nikon system to a high-end Canon system. However, you rarely can get equal results comparing a low-end Canon system to a high-end or low-end Nikon system.

If I was to show up at a shoot where gear was provided for me and it was pro canons and nikons .. I could just grab one at random and not have any concerns with completing the job. Put me in the same situation with consumer level nikons and canons and there's no way I'm going to pick up the canon. I will go for the cheap Nikon and still be confident in giving the client professional results while maintaining a fast efficient workflow .... this is also assuming that I would not be doing everything manually and being forced to rely on the cameras various presets .. white balance being one of the most problematic areas with a consumer level canon.

People who love spot metering will also tend to lean towards Nikons because they offer more precise control regardless of how much you are spending. Even a cheap consumer level Nikon will give you a 2.5% spot where an equally priced Canon is only going to give you a whimpy 9%. To get a Canon that can offer that level of precision means you are going to have to spend a lot more money.

So in a nutshell, if you're using pro-level bodies and know what you're doing brand honestly doesn't matter that much but if you're an amateur/semi-pro you're going to see more advantages with a Nikon in your workflow process ... better results with less time invested in the assignment.

Nothin' of that... Olympus is a future!

Pentax !!  just as good and you don't pay for the badge ! 

I have a Nikon D300 since a while and I don't see any way to upgrade for something better with them. The D700 is the same resolution even a little lower on a full frame sensor.

Full frame would be an advantage but it's not since the 5D MarkII perform the exact same if not better and this with 9mpx more resolution. Some would say wait for a similar camera with the D3x sensor. But first it's just not comming and second, that's a Sony sensor.

I look at Nikonrumor.com everyday and no new camera is comming before at least summer 2010 if not further in the year. Nikon look like Kodak in the film industry lately. It took everything for them to go with a full frame sensor after the D2x. Now they just don't move in the pro category.

 This said I am waiting for more money to buy a 5D MarkII with a 24-105 package asap

I switched from Nikon D200 to Canon 5D2 - the simple reason is that the 5D2 covers all 7 sizes

I looked at the A900 as well.

I didn't have good glass so I wasn't locked in.

I went from Canon A-1 SLR to Nikon D50/80/300 DSLR back to Canon with a 5DMII.

Both systems have pros and cons. It's personal choice at this point.

I don't see what the big deal is with switching. Ebay everything and buy a new system. 

I switched because I wanted full frame and XXXL sizes without dropping $7K on a body. I waited for a D700x. And waited. And waited.

Glad I switched. 5DMII is awesome.

We are Canon fans here - Can't switch

over 20+ yrs I've owned a lot of Nikons, Canons, Mamiyas and Hassleblads ... mostly pro and pro-sumer level nikons and canons. However, I have had a few consumer level SLRs as well (mostly for handing off to family members at birthdays and crap like that). Nikon has always been my first pick for 35mm or digital .. for different reasons over the years varied from model to model, new technology, etc. .. but if I had to sum my preference up in one area it would have to do with the internal functions of the metering systems and white balance. Nikons are more stable in this area. You can get equal results when comparing a low-end Nikon system to a high-end Canon system. However, you rarely can get equal results comparing a low-end Canon system to a high-end or low-end Nikon system.

If I was to show up at a shoot where gear was provided for me and it was pro canons and nikons .. I could just grab one at random and not have any concerns with completing the job. Put me in the same situation with consumer level nikons and canons and there's no way I'm going to pick up the canon. I will go for the cheap Nikon and still be confident in giving the client professional results while maintaining a fast efficient workflow .... this is also assuming that I would not be doing everything manually and being forced to rely on the cameras various presets .. white balance being one of the most problematic areas with a consumer level canon.

People who love spot metering will also tend to lean towards Nikons because they offer more precise control regardless of how much you are spending. Even a cheap consumer level Nikon will give you a 2.5% spot where an equally priced Canon is only going to give you a whimpy 9%. To get a Canon that can offer that level of precision means you are going to have to spend a lot more money.

So in a nutshell, if you're using pro-level bodies and know what you're doing brand honestly doesn't matter that much but if you're an amateur/semi-pro you're going to see more advantages with a Nikon in your workflow process ... better results with less time invested in the assignment.

WB was something I worried about in the film days. I remember with horror all these kodak wratten filters, color meters and so on. Sticking all these plasticky CC  filters on Hasselblad optics made you want to cry.

Today however there is really no need for worries. You have Raw converters and PS,  programs that within seconds convert colors and WB to whatever suits you.

I use both Canon and Nikon systems extensivly. To me its all the same. However if the OP were to ask me for the perfect just shooting stock camera for micro. Then I would go for Canons MII and MIII.

So you are back in the ranks with an alien twist.

We can live with that.

Guys, you are replying to 3 1/2 year old comments, technology in cameras has advanced a whole lot since then. Zoomyimages dug up a bunch of old threads.