>>3390551Unlike most /p/tards I've actually shot the flagship models from both systems and own one currently.
Canon is a nice system if you want maximum lens compatibility from 1987 onward. Almost every single EOS EF mount lens ever made works. You can take the 70-210 f4 Poor Man's L from 1987, push-pull motion and impaled screeching rabbit AF and all, and mount it to whatever the most expensive and newest Canon FF offering is right now, and it will 100 percent work. A lot of those old EOS lenses have identical optics to their FD-mount counterparts from 10 years prior.
With Nikon, unless you have the Df, it's another story. Their lens compatibility is all over the place, you can use these lenses from this generation except for this one, or you can use these lenses on every camera body except for this one, which defeats the purpose of retaining the same lens mount since Khrushchev was in power.
Thing is, with modern cameras, gone are the days where the succeeding generation of camera was a significant increase over the previous one. I bet at 100 ISO you can't tell the difference between a 5D4 and a Nikon D850. Even the cheap models net good results these days.
Buy the camera that works for you, if you have the money for a D850 or something of that echelon, sensor performance between models will be negligible. Buy the camera that feels best in your hands, and works with the lenses you want. I bought a Df, because I wanted actual 1959 lens compatibility and I like old Nikkor single-coat optics. And the physical dials on top like on an old FE really did it for me, but it may not do it for you. Maybe you'll like how the Canon feels in your hands, or maybe you'll like how the Nikon menus are laid out.
Go to your local camera shop, get your hands on one and figure out what it is you want. You can jerk off to specs and MTF charts all day but if the camera isn't comfortable to use and it doesn't do what you want it to do, then you just wasted your money.
