Nikon is better than Canon?!

These kinds of discussion are a little pointless because the camera brands make such a wide range of models. Some of which bear a suspicious resemblance to those from rival brands, Suggests to me that many different brands are being made alongside each other in the same Chinese factory.

However, the point you make about physical controls is one I would go along with, having struggled, squinting at on-screen controls on some cameras in strong sunlight.

I'll second what fihart said. You can't go wrong either way. I personally prefer Nikon because of the button/dial layout and the fact that they haven't changed lens mount in a while.

I'll go with Nikon. Personally, I feel that Nikkor lenses are better than Canon lenses.

It depends what you need it for - currently in terms of bodies Nikon probably have better high ISO performance and colour reproduction.

However Canon have a much clearer line up in terms of lenses - all their lenses are EOS model EF or EF-s and it's relatively clear what models these do and do not fit. In comparison I once saw the Nikon lens lineup described as alphabet soup - there are lots of different lens designations some of which AF some of which don't etc.

Still on the subject of lenses Canon has a better array of good sharp primes if you are willing to pay for them and are, generally speaking, cheaper than Nikon lenses so can be considered more cost effective in that respect. They have a better array of specialist lenses as well in terms of macro and Tilt-shift offerings.

Ultimately it depends which system you prefer - try out bodies from both manufacturers and see which you like best.

I've been a Canon user 88'. I was thinking of maybe trying to pick up a Nikon for a change but, I don't like how Nikon display their number "0" zero. I have a hard time adjusting to it. Canon menu system are simpler than Nikon and easier to show how to operate to my family than the Nikon. But like others, its all depend on the model you're comparing.

Nikon somehow have more features but often times don't get to use it. I do like how the flash works though... as suppose to Canon's pre-flash.

Working in media, more of our pro-snappers have converted to Canon, away from Nikon, while my personal preference is Nikon, dating back to 1980s, i see great quality photos for publication coming from Canon...think unless you are shooting for money, go with your personal preference.

Asking this question is akin to asking if you prefer Macs or PC's, there is no right answer. In the end it really comes down to personal preference and which camera has the features you want and is comfortable. The only caveat is that if you have invested in lens and accessories in one or the other, you may be more inclined to stick with that brand.

for a beginer user, i have heard that canons are easier to take a good picture with, but otherwise the difference will only be the photographer

The pro's shift from Nikon to Canon pre-dates digital cameras -- it started in the 1980s when Canon's top of the range F1n proved more desirable than Nikon's over-automated FM3. Nikon failed to effectively replace its F1 and F2 series that had been the default 35mm for professionals.

Fashion and ad photographers stayed with Nikon (those that didn't use larger format cameras) due to the softer, flattering, lenses, while press snappers began to appreciate Canon lenses' greater contrast.

At least that's what I heard at the time.

At the moment Canon's digital cameras (at least the non-SLR models that I'm more aware of) often command higher prices than equivalents from Nikon and other brands. Nikon don't seem to be innovating like Canon and Lumix -- or Sigma, Ricoh and Olympus.

Of course this doesn't have very much to do with the actual experience of using the cameras.

Canon goes for crazy high MGPixels/shot. That seems to be their biggest selling point.
Video is good on both sides. In my view that does not make them a better brand than Nikon. And, many pros who I work with preferr Nikon. In fact, over 50 percet of them do. Ive been a photographer since the later 1980s

I dont buy the notion that those shooting for bucks will do better with Canon. Sorry-a difference of opinion.

Its all about preference at the end of the day and the differences in image quality varies from model to model. I used to lead up a team of photographers covering a music event, they were about 50/50 Nikon and Canon (note nothing else!), most of these guys were semi-pro rather than pro.

A lot of the photography was low light stuff (think concerts), so high ISO, the first few years you could spot the Nikon shots apart from the Canons due to all the extra noise (this was about 6-7 years ago now), but over the years this changed. In the end due to peoples different post processing etc, I found it impossible to tell what brand images were taken on, even upon close inspection of the images. The organisaion we were shooting for was happy with all of them.

Personally I shoot Canon, but that is because I bought one in 1995 (EOS50) because it had dials instead of those darn buttons that everyone else had at the time which in my opinion that made it more user friendly, now every thing is buttons again! I am staying Canon as in the last 15 years or so of using them I have amass quite a bit of gear that will not work with anything else.

If I pick up and try and use a Nikon it frustrates the &*#(&* out of me, much the same way as my Nikon mates do when they pick up my Canon!

These religious brand wars are pointless, Canon is there to keep Nikon on their toes and Nikon is there to keep Canon on theirs, the end result better cameras for all of us  

They're both great. Choose the model that you like at a price you can afford and move on.

This discussion is going round in circles. All things must come to an end.