Diane wrote:I agree with you, Cem, the camera is probably not as important as the lens.
At last I get the chance ...
Back in the old days, when lens and recording material were exchangeable, and one may have done a lot in post-processing [chemistry] I'd easily subscribed to the view about bodies not being important. That has changed radically with digital.
The change started in the early to mid-80s when ever more and ever better little helpers were added to bodies. At the same time lens quality reached an unforeseen height across the board, i.e. zoom lenses finally became usable even by HiQ-types. Today third-party manufacturers are not always [much] cheaper than OEMs, just compare the proces for Sigma Fisheyes with the Nikon 10.5 mm FE. We also know that many original lenses are actually made by the same third-party companies.
Canon and Nikon offer largely comparable systems - lenses, accessories, quality are on par. Only if you have a very specific need will you have to look who's meeting it and who not (say, you need a 1200 mm mirror lens*).
As far as the body goes I can only tell you to go out to your local dealer, and try to get yourself at least a Canon body lend over the week-end. You have to know the camera is not a hindrance but falls naturally into your habits. Since you already own Nikon gear - BTW, what camera[s]? - you may actually be well-versed in using Nikon. Personally I never found Canon's design choices [for beauty and usability] tempting. When I decided to go with Minolta in 1986 the alternative was a Canon T90. When I later went from Minolta to Nikon, the EOS-1 was on the table, too. But that's really personal taste.
Regardless of what brand your camera will be, you should have a look into Sigma lenses, the 15-30 mm for instance is quite a lens. If you decide on Nikon, you may rethink the choice of lenses if budget permits:
- although much good has been written about the 18-200 I am not too keen on these wide-ranging zooms
- Nikon's 70-200 mm VR is a brilliant lens in every respect, surely better than the 18-200 mm
- Sigma and Nikon both offer some very good and interesting wide-angle zooms; I already mentioned the 15-30 mm Sigma.
- I always recommend to get a 50 mm prime with 1.8 or 1.4 max opening (depending on budget again)
- consider a dedicated makro lens, Nikon's 105 mm is very good and now comes with VR. Sigma has a very interesting 180 mm in their portfolio.
My current set-up:
Nikon 10.5 mm Fisheye
Sigma 15-30 mm
Nikon 2.8/28 mm
Nikon 1.8/50 mm
Nikon 105 mm Makro
Nikon 70-200 mm VR
While the 28, 50 and 105 are remnants of pre-digital I still use them regularly.
*I made this up, no idea if Canon, Nikon or any third-party offers such a thing.