Its funny how the alternative to Canon is always Nikon isnt it

How about Fuji, Olympus, Sony, Pentax, Samsung, Sigma...........

By the way I called in my local Currys and they've got an end of line sale rack. There's a boxed and fully working E-420 with 14-72mm (effectively 28-105mm) that was a display model for £134. I almost bought it on the off chance someone wanted or maybe even make a few quid on eBay from it. I would imagine its gone this morning. Someone would be crazy not to pick it up at that price if they want to get into photography.

From what I've heard, I don't think that'll actually matter.

Fair comment. As far as I am concerned, Olympus and Pentax are names that should always be respected, but for some reason I only think in terms of Nikon or Canon and as far as mid to high-end setups go, no-one that I noticed this weekend seemed to have anything other than those two. I noticed Sony and other makes, but none being used with long lenses or otherwise expensive setups.

I don't know what the issue is with other makes, but to me, they just don't seem to have the same image as Canon and Nikon, at least not any more.

I like my camera for its features. Moving from a low-end Canon DSLR and a low-end Canon 35mm SLR before that, I was able to use the EOS40D competently straight away but it allows me to do so much more than my previous two and the rapid shooting (just over six shot a second) finally allowed me to catch the Red Arrows synchro' pair at the moment that they passed each other- something that has always eluded me in the past. I like most things about the camera but as I have mentioned once or twice (or three or four times) is the issues that I have had with Canon cameras that is the problem.

To be fair, after the fault has presented itself and been repaired, the cameras have always continued to provide good service- although I am convinced that there is something still wrong with the metering on my EOS300D- I need to experiment with that and see what happens as I intend to let my son use it.

I agree at the top end it does seem to be Canon and Nikon with the lens support. Look at a Premiership match and all the really long 'white' lenses on display. Mid range though I still think Sony, Olympus and Pentax/Samsung can compete but most either wont move from the popular two or simply have had no exposure to anything other than Canon/Nikon. Certainly when I bought my first DSLR the first to cameras I considered were - and no surprises here - Canon and Nikon. But for no other reason than these were popular names I'd heard of/had exposure to.

I agree. Mid-range there's a good selection from some good manufacturers. The Sony (ex-Minolta) range seems to get good reviews.

The thing is, once you're in a particular manufacturer's ecosystem, it gets harder to break out. If you buy lenses and accessories, they tend to only work with the make of camera you have started out with.

I was seriously swayed by Pentax when weighing up my DSLR decision a couple of years ago.

Mark

My last film SLR was a Pentax - I had a Pentax 24mm f/2 lens with it which was amazing. The camera was a *ist (no idea how you pronounce that) and I was very happy indeed with it.

Completely agree. I have wondered if one day I'd move away from KAF, etc mount of my current DSLR into the more common NiCan (as I lovingly see them referred to sometimes). I would imagine if photography was a more serious hobby for me and I'd invested in £500+ glass that move would feel nigh on impossible.

My first was. You've seen it. (8+)

Mark

The other thing (sorry to be so off topic) is the fact that at a price point you could get better value with another manufacturer. When I bought the GX10 the equivalent camera price wise then was the Nikon D40X. Comparing the two cameras it is simply no contest. Unless of course as HK pointed out you want to invest in the Nikon system from the start. If I were 'pro' it would be NiCan all the way. Being a useless amatuer the value surely has to be considered of the other brands.

My first SLR was a Pentax. My first DSLR by coincidence was Pentax/Samsung (it wasnt as I had K/KAF lenses cos they all got nicked at uni!)

I went Canon because at the time it was the only system that provided a full frame sensor upgrade path.

Obviously, that's all changed now.

Well I switched from Sony when a couple of my Sigma lenses got their gears stripped. The camera itself is still working but the native ISO is 200 (even though you can select ISO100 the camera adds exposure compensation within the software) and ISO400 is like ISO1600 on a Canon or Nikon.

I chose Canon because the overall cost of the equipment was cheaper at the time and it provided a clear upgrade path to full sensor (5D MkII on the horizon). The other manufacturers also come up short on the 'professional' grade of camera.

Al