Michael Carter
Veteran
I was a Canon video guy for some time. Shot Nikon for stills. So, Nikkors on Canon, loved it.
Then I needed a third DSLR for a BTS fashion shoot project. Along with 2 Canons, threw my (at the time) D7000 into the mix.
When I completed the edit, I sold the Canons. Focus-ring direction, UI, glass availability - who cares. The 7000, then the 7100 and 5300 - there's something about the color that's a huge leap (for me). And the DR is a noticeable improvement as well.
Really, a pretty image takes it every time for me (and I love the BMC image, but when you throw in the need for SSDs, battery rigs, etc... I have plenty of projects where DSLRs are every bit as good in the final edit, since I'm lighting myself - and far less stressful to shoot with).
I've never bought the Canon-glass availability argument; on both Canon and Nikon, I'm often using Nikkors that are 30 years old when I want that look. And I've found the really epic, more recent Nikon zooms to be more affordable than their EOS counterparts (when bought used). The 28-70 2.8 and 24-70 2.8 are such killer lenses for video - I can often do 90% of a project with no lens changes. I know there are comparable Canons, but my 28-70 I found for $500.
This "argument" will never end... (or it will end if the Samsung NX1 is everything its specs suggest... and if Samsung's new glass has some mojo to it...). But I remember how psyched I was for the Gh4...
Then I needed a third DSLR for a BTS fashion shoot project. Along with 2 Canons, threw my (at the time) D7000 into the mix.
When I completed the edit, I sold the Canons. Focus-ring direction, UI, glass availability - who cares. The 7000, then the 7100 and 5300 - there's something about the color that's a huge leap (for me). And the DR is a noticeable improvement as well.
Really, a pretty image takes it every time for me (and I love the BMC image, but when you throw in the need for SSDs, battery rigs, etc... I have plenty of projects where DSLRs are every bit as good in the final edit, since I'm lighting myself - and far less stressful to shoot with).
I've never bought the Canon-glass availability argument; on both Canon and Nikon, I'm often using Nikkors that are 30 years old when I want that look. And I've found the really epic, more recent Nikon zooms to be more affordable than their EOS counterparts (when bought used). The 28-70 2.8 and 24-70 2.8 are such killer lenses for video - I can often do 90% of a project with no lens changes. I know there are comparable Canons, but my 28-70 I found for $500.
This "argument" will never end... (or it will end if the Samsung NX1 is everything its specs suggest... and if Samsung's new glass has some mojo to it...). But I remember how psyched I was for the Gh4...