Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BackdoorArts" data-source="post: 370885" data-attributes="member: 9240">Difference #1, that they will all mention, is the Canon Professional Services support that they get.&nbsp; My brother worked the Belmont Stakes and they were loaning him anything he wanted to use and didn't have.&nbsp; He had a zoom go on him while working a Giants game and a rep saw him on his way back to the car to swap it out - he sent him back, met him on the sidelines with a replacement, and had a tech looking at his zoom while he shot.&nbsp; Not that Nikon doesn't do that, but he's told me stories about when he was shooting Nikon for the same paper and they were horrible with addressing any problems with the equipment.Difference #2, camera features.&nbsp; Every pro I've spoken with has said that they can't live without Canon's menu wheel on the back of the camera, and any Nikon guy whose shot Canon has talked about how much they'd love something like that on a Nikon (Kelby listed it as one of the reasons he switched).&nbsp; The jpeg engine in the pro Canons seems to more than make up for much of what they lack in sensor resolution, so if you're looking for results SOOC there isn't a lot of difference.&nbsp; And then there's the real WiFi available on the pro bodies.&nbsp; There are others, but I'd need to dig.Difference #3, Canon glass.&nbsp; It's all close, and they'll admit it, but there was a post on here a couple months back talking about the differences in focus breathing in the Nikon and Canon 70-200mm f2.8's, and if I was a pro that lived with that lens I tell you that it definitely would be a differentiator for me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BackdoorArts, post: 370885, member: 9240"] Difference #1, that they will all mention, is the Canon Professional Services support that they get. My brother worked the Belmont Stakes and they were loaning him [I]anything[/I] he wanted to use and didn't have. He had a zoom go on him while working a Giants game and a rep saw him on his way back to the car to swap it out - he sent him back, met him on the sidelines with a replacement, and had a tech looking at his zoom while he shot. Not that Nikon doesn't do that, but he's told me stories about when he was shooting Nikon for the same paper and they were [I]horrible[/I] with addressing any problems with the equipment. Difference #2, camera features. [I]Every[/I] pro I've spoken with has said that they can't live without Canon's menu wheel on the back of the camera, and any Nikon guy whose shot Canon has talked about how much they'd love something like that on a Nikon (Kelby listed it as one of the reasons he switched). The jpeg engine in the pro Canons seems to more than make up for much of what they lack in sensor resolution, so if you're looking for results SOOC there isn't a lot of difference. And then there's the real WiFi available on the pro bodies. There are others, but I'd need to dig. Difference #3, Canon glass. It's all close, and they'll admit it, but there was a post on here a couple months back talking about the differences in focus breathing in the Nikon and Canon 70-200mm f2.8's, and if I was a pro that lived with that lens I tell you that it [I]definitely[/I] would be a differentiator for me. [/QUOTE]

Verification