As my camera history shows, Canon models have featured quite heavily in the line up of cameras I’ve owned.  Much like Windows computers, Canon were the popular and safe choice.  Well, hey, it’s 2009 and I’m composing this on a Mac because I believe it to be the better personal computing platform for me at this time.  As the title of this blog post suggests rather unsubtly, Canon have lost their hold on me and I’ve ‘gone to the dark side’.

Out went the Canon EOS 5D and in its place came the Nikon D700.  So, why the big move?

• Improved high ISO performance. From everything I’ve seen, read and heard from others, the D700 has arguably the best low-light capabilities of current DLSRs.  As I mostly shoot in natural light without flash, being able to use higher ISO settings without significantly degrading image quality is a significant benefit to me.
• Automatic ISO selection. This was a hugely useful feature which I missed on the 5D.  Shifting in and out of low light conditions meant manually changing ISO along the way.  Forget to change from ISO 1600 when moving from a dim room into the bright outdoors meant unnecessarily noisy images.  Then there’s the reverse of moving from bright conditions into low light with ISO 100 and trying to shoot with shutter speeds likely to suffer from camera shake.  This might not be an issue for some, but it was for me.
• Up to 9-exposure bracketing. The 5D could bracket up to +/-2 stops, but only for 3 frames.  The D700 is capable of bracketing more frames which offers potentially better material for HDR.
• Live View. I’ve found this to be a very useful feature for those times when looking through the viewfinder is difficult (e.g. when holding the camera overhead) or just not the preferred option (e.g. when shooting candids).
• Electronic virtual horizon. For landscape shooting, I usually carried a hot shoe mounted double-axis spirit level to help ensure my horizons are level, but this meant not being able to mount a flash gun or radio remote release receiver.  The virtual horizon removes the need for a separate accessory and can be layed over the Live View image.
• Bigger, higher resolution LCD monitor. Compared with the 5D, reviewing images is a whole lot easier with the D700.  A larger screen with a higher resolution gives me a better idea of whether a shot was focused correctly and is sharp etc.
• Access to the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 lens. I love shooting landscapes and usually with an ultra-wide lens.  On the 40D, I used a Canon EF-S 10-22mm and on the 5D I used an EF 17-40L.  The images and reviews of the Nikon 14-24mm showed it to be a fantastically sharp lens, even sharper than some fixed focal length lenses within the same focal range.
• Improved autofocus system. With 51 autofocus points and more focus modes than I can shake a stick at, the D700 has the best performing AF of any camera I’ve used.
• Faster access to important settings. Having more dial and switches to control important functions such as autofocus mode and bracketing means less time hunting through menus.
• Built-in wireless TTL control of remote flashguns. Who needs a separate remote flash controller when there’s one built right into the pop-up flash.
• Built-in pop-up flash. Whilst it’s not something I’d use unless I really had to having the option of a flash on board is a nice option to have when you’re desparate for light and you don’t have your flashgun to hand.
• Ability to use lenses designed for cropped sensor bodies (DX) on a full frame body (FX). When I sold my Canon 40D and old-graded to the 5D, I was forced to replace my EF-S mount lenses with EF lenses.  I’m unlikely to want to use DX lenses, but it’s nice to have the option and should also make the upgrade path for existing DX users a little smoother as they’d be able to continue using their lenses before upgrading to FX lenses.

The above are some of the main reasons why I migrated to Nikon.  At this moment in time, Canon just don’t seem to be able to offer what Nikon can at this level.  The 5D Mark II was the obvious consideration, but with all I’ve researched the D700 was the better route for me to take because it seemed to be the better overall package.

For example, Nikon’s implementation of the auto-ISO feature is an excellent example of how they’re delivering to photographer’s needs.  Not only does the D700 (and some other Nikon cameras) let you specify a maximum ISO value, but you also get to specify a base ISO and a minimum shutter speed which it will maintain by varying the ISO giving you the best quality output for as long as possible.

For example, let’s say you set the base ISO to 200, minimum shutter speed to 1/100s and maximum ISO to 6400.  This means the camera will try to maintain ISO 200 as possible as long as it’s able to use a shutter speed of at least 1/100s.  Only when 1/100s becomes insufficient for the metered scene is the ISO increased.  Fabulous!  It’s so obvious and yet not every camera manufacturer offers this feature.  Why?

So, on the whole, the move to Nikon has been a wholly successful one barring a slight defect with the D700 I received and I’m very impressed with the lenses I’ve got.  The 14-24mm f/2.8 is very wide and very sharp.  The 24-70mm f/2.8 is also incredibly sharp.  Much sharper than Canon’s equivalent L lens, I’d say.  The 85mm f/1.8 is astounding as a portrait lens.  Its relatively low cost belies its sharpness wide open and its ability to blur a background.  The built-in remote flash control has opened up a whole new area of photography for me to explore and so far, I’m loving that too.

If Canon had produced a like-for-like equivalent to the D700 then I probably would still be shooting Canon now.  Trouble is, they had their chance with the 5D Mark II and, in my opinion, blew it.