I'm stunned by all the discussions on this forum about people tossing their Nikon gear for Canon due to some technical tidbit that didn't exist a few years ago.
How did people ever get nature magazine covers published without VR? Good thing I only read Playboy.
Considering the cost of replacing (rather than supplementing) professional gear, but better be a LOT of money to make the swap. Even then, I think some folks may find that the grass isn't always greener. Improve upon this, lose out on that.
My comment on this topic has nothing to do with brand loyalty, though. I just wonder if the technology tidbits are simply there for impatient people. I love my VR lens because I get handheld shots that I wouldn't otherwise get without it...unless I took some time and used a tripod. VR (or IS) gets turned off with a tripod, right?
Well, how many of you guys are hand holding a 600mm lens to publish a nature shot? I'm sure it could happen, but is it worth several thousand dollars to replace otherwise excellent gear that doesn't have a feature you may use for a very small percentage of your shooting time?
I'm still learning and I don't make my money with photography. However, I do know the smell of gadget fever.