I chose (did research and wasn't bound by equipment) Nikon because of much better support for work with off camera flash (CLS and better sync speeds).

I'm still heavily in DX. If Pantax had 1/250+ snyc speeds back then, I might have considered.

I love msmoto's Nikon F with its patina of use and love. Very nostalgic and romantic!

My last film camera was a Nikon F100 that I still have and I had several lenses for it that carried over into my first digital body- a D200. The F100 remains the best 35mm film camera I have ever used. What impressed me at the time was the seamless transfer to the D200, with almost all the controls being instantly familiar. I cannot comment on Canons as I have never used one but several colleagues of mine have them and they seem to produce very good results. They like them.

It might be worth remembering that before about 1990 or so, I don't think Canon really featured on the professional scene at all (mostly being used by keen amateurs) and therefore many photographers from the 60s, 70s and 80s grew up with Nikon as THE professional 35mm. camera and continued to use them after that. They had a reputation of being literally bullet proof- Don McCullin's Nikon F stopping a bullet in Vietnam that would have otherwise killed him as I remember.

My favourite camera is in my camera cupboard, unused for a couple of years now, my beautiful Horseman 5X4 monorail. I aim to shoot some B&W on it in the spring. I regret no longer having my stunning Nikkor lenses for it though!

Other than being heavily invested in Nikon-compatible equipment, my reason for sticking with Nikon is that I find the ergonomics better than the Canon-equivalent cameras, particularly at the semi-pro and pro end. Button and dial placement is much more comfortable to me on Nikon cameras.

Safyre.......don't worry about what "some people" think about K.R.; the guy's sharp as a tack on a lot of stuff; I just think he's "all wet" about "never needs no stinkin tripod"! Lotta people around who are just jealous of Ken; (how many guys you know who can make a great living with just a website ?) (answer: not many!)

Now;
Way back in "the day" I had a very nice Canon F-1; I loved that camera! I had a bunch of focusing screens for it, a REALLY cool flexible right angle "or straight through gadget that replaced the penta prism.......(wish I could use that thing on my D SLR); also had some VERY nice Canon FD lenses; then BAM! Canon went digital.....just like that ! "but what am I gonna do with all this "glass" that cost me a bundle ?" Canon: "Not our problem.....use 'em for door stops"!

I guess they figured if they came out with a new lens mount, everyone would just "run out" and buy all new glass ! I gotta tell you....that kinda pissed me off; (and please forgive my "course" language) So.......even before I went digital, I "upgraded" to a Nikon F-5; as far as I'm concerned, the thing has the finest view finder of any 35mm camera I have EVER looked through; I even bought a 300mm/ f:4 MF for it, an 80-200 / 2.8 , and about 4 more; guess what.........Nikon "went digital too"........and all that glass still works ! How's that ? Say you can't "get by" without auto focus ? Poor you! For some stuff, I prefer MF. (And I REALLY appreciate that Nikon didn't leave all of it's thousands of customers sitting with a pile of useless "glass" that they spent a fortune on !)

(I don't tell tell anyone who asks all of that; I just say "I prefer Nikon")

Charley

I know that this is not gonna be a popular answer, but it was originally Ken Rockwell that got me on the Nikon bandwagon. Back when I got my first SLR around 5 years ago, Ken's site had a large amount of information that helped make the foray into the DSLR market less intimidating. I know a lot of people have strong opinions of him, but one needs to realize that his target audience is beginners and amateurs; and for that he does a good job of telling people whats important to get out there and shoot, and not worry too much about the technical jargon. Now, that I've developed my craft, I very rarely check out his site anymore, but but his message still applies to this day, which is spend less time analyzing on the computer and more on actually shooting.

Nice thread.
I keep it simple.
I just say it has great glass and consistent reliability over time, any conditions, under a sickening amount of use by me.
I don't have to think so much or treat it like it's fragile.
I can just count on it, and I really like that.

fjota said:
Well, it is a good and easy question to be answered.
My first camera was a Nikon FE purchased in 1982 with a 55mm 2.8 MF MICRO lens that I use until now with my D7000 DX camera. There was others many steps between both cameras.
Since 1982, Nikon, for me, is a lifestyle, that reflect the attitudes, values and worldviews of your users and mine. The yellow color in the Nikon logo and in the square logo of the National Geographic Society are representations of adventure and proficient’s photographers living together, surrounded by the yellow color of the sunset in the Africa. Romantic, probably… But it is a real connection for many.
Our lifestyle controls our use of technology, while technology influences our lifestyles, Nikon did this with me.
fjota

Well, it is a good and easy question to be answered.
My first camera was a Nikon FE purchased in 1982 with a 55mm 2.8 MF micro lens that I use until now with my D7000 DX camera. There was others many steps between both cameras.
Since 1982, Nikon, for me, is a lifestyle, that reflect the attitudes, values and worldviews of your users and mine. The yellow color in the Nikon logo and in the square logo of the National Geographic Society are representations of adventure and proficient’s photographers living together, surrounded by the yellow color of the sunset in the Africa. Romantic, probably… But it is a real connection for many.
Our lifestyle controls our use of technology, while technology influences our lifestyles, Nikon did this with me.
fjota

msmoto said:
Well, I guess I could not resist this one... mine from the 1960's... a little used maybe...

Msmoto, that is beautiful.

Well, I guess I could not resist this one... mine from the 1960's... a little used maybe...

"I was sold on Nikon years ago when I walked into the Nikon House in Ginza and decided the F2 with the was the perfect camera for me. Until then I used Contax. I don't know if Nikons are any better than your camera, but I've taken them all over the world and they have worked well for me."

I was once showing a print to a Canon user and he said "Wow, that came from a Nikon?". I don't know why users of either system are snobby about it.

I started with Nikon because that's was my boss used and recommended when I started getting into photography.

I recently used a Canon T3i and while the pictures are great, trying to navigate the buttons and menus drove me effing crazy.

I shoot Nikon because its dependable. My D5000 got thoroughly drenched due to rain. I was happily shooting while my canon friend packed up his camera and watched while I kept shooting. No damage to any systems.

I bought a used D70s on Craig's List after I'd bought my wife a D40 right after they came out. We had looked at Pentax, Olympus and Canon and settled on the D40 for simplicity. I was a devoted fan of my craptacular Vivitar point-and-shoot for about 20 years, with the occasional foray into SLR territory. I thought it was finally time to step it up. D70s was perfect for me. D7000 was the next logical step.

I've picked up Canon bodies and except for the comfortable grip, I hate them. The layout is confounding. Nothing seems to be in the right place.

Sony's feel small, weird and plastic-y.

Pentax's feel small but ok but the menu system sucks.

Etc, etc. Nikons feel good and shoot quick. Everything is right there where my fingers look for it.

Because my father used nikon for years. He left me with so many nikon lens, bags, f3a, films , straps, and other stuff that i can not switch brand. I kind got trapped into nikon world before i was born. So i ended up myself with NIKON gears too.

I usually respond with something similar to this:

With nearly 50 years of lenses available and a lot of excellent glass available for use on just released cameras the platform just makes sense. To use the older lenses conversions are needed but that is cheap compared to the quality of construction and the optics and the initial used purchase price. Few other manufacturers offer anything that close in price/compatibility compared to the F platform. Nikon's platform also makes more sense to me.

I could babble on and on on this subject since I like researching the history of how the different camera platforms got to where they are and why they are the way they are.

mine usually is....

because Nikon for me is the best and nikon is purely built around camera's and imaging at this is at the heart of what Nikon does. canon however is not, how many nikon printers,calculators,photocopiers, etc have you seen i will answer for you None.

and also i can buy a nikon lens from 1970's and it will go directly on my D800 without issue, and the same cannot be said for canon there forever changing their lens mounts, so nikon makes sense!

Don't get me wrong i have nothing against canon and im not a nikon fanboy, like most i tried both with my first Dslr and the nikon just felt right never looked back since, although i do own a 550d for video work (ducks and hides) lol

Simple.
When getting into the entry level DSLR, they gave £50 cash-back! made it £25 cheaper than the equivalent Canon.
Then I bought another lens, then I was a trapped Nikon user :)
£3500 spent later, the £25 was probably an insignificant saving.

They just work and they work well, plain and simple.

Keeping it short, I usually respond with the words of a pro friend of mine, "Canons are cheaper for a reason."

As we have some new members on NRF, I thought I would relight TTJ's thread and see what folks say. And, my first comment is that I did have a Canon 7 rangefinder camera, Leica 50mm f/2.0 Summicron. I certainly wish I had this now! But, I will reiterate my Nikon (pronounced knee-con LOL) heritage as coming out of the 1960's with my first "F" body, my second, a Photomic T, and then after being out of photography doing other things for many years, getting into the N6000 series, finally a D70 or something like that and slowly moving up the line.

My suspicions are I would be just as biased if I had started with Canon, but actually I believe they were behind in the development of a 35mm SLR in the 60's or at least, in South Dakota, we had not heard of them,ha, ha, ha. I had a Zenza Bronica from the 60's, Nikkor optics, phenomenal performance, but some mechanical film transport problems. Then Hasselblads, and others.

So, for the more recent individuals who would like to post here, please read the initial post of TTJ, then respond. Thank you.

A friend came round the other day displaying his new DSLR - the thing was a new Canon.... After the initial disappointment I took it off him and played with it. The only thing I like about Canons is the wizzy wheel on the back as opposed to the buttons on the Nikon. My impressions always are that they feel built down to a price whereas the Nikon doesn't, all Nikon controls have the right weight and feel, the glass is generally better and Canons product support let me down every time I needed it so I now own NOTHING with Canon written on it.

When asked, I say Canons are OK for the herd.....

My first DSLR was a D80. I chose it because it felt better in my hand, and the controls fell under my fingers. I had tried a Canon digital at the same time and the Nikon was just more comfortable.

Am-Expat said:
I would tell them the reason I bought my first DSLR, a D90, 3 years ago,I had planned on buying a Canon because I shoot with a A1 since they were introduced in about 1979.

I had a Canon A1. Was it really 32 years ago? How time flies.

I've always loved photography, but never really had the cash to get into it. Every time I went somewhere where I'd like to take photos, I used to borrow my dad's camera - a Canon 400D (Rebel something-or-the-other in the States). So when I finally had the cash last December to be able to buy a DSLR, I had my mind set on a Canon body. As I was about to start shopping, I was offered a D60 with an 18-135mm lens for R3000 (about $375). Liked the feel of the camera and bought it. Only after using it for a while I realised that I enjoyed it so much more than the Canon - the feel was better, it felt more solid, the menus made more sense and the colours were perfect.

My wife loved it as well, and just one camera between the two of us was just not cutting it - she soon went out and got herself a D3100

10 months later I got me a D80, and a month later I picked up a D300s for around $800 with only 1500 actuations. Can't see that I would change brands anytime in the near future, as we have a fair amount invested in glass between my wife and myself