So I currently have a Sony A700 which I bought a year ago, and wanting to get some quality glass. I was looking at the Carl Zeiss 24-70/f2.8 lens, but then got talking to a friend who's a Canon user.
He raised some good points about Canon vs Sony, namely: - Availability - second hand gear, hire gear, borrow, etc - Repairs - if my camera breaks when I'm in the Amazon jungle, much better chance of finding somebody to repair a Canon than a Sony
I'm totally happy with my Sony A700, however if I'm going to be spending $2000 on some quality glass, I'm starting to think maybe I should spend some more and get Canon quality glass (along with a canon body of course). I could sell my Sony + lenses and recoup perhaps 1/3 of the cost of the new kit, a little less than the extra I'll be paying for a new body, so really what I'll be losing out of it is the extra Sony lenses I have, but gaining a kickass new body, a killer lens, and a new more widely supported system.
If I do this, I'm thinking the 5D (either second hand, or a new Mark II).
My question is, for all your experienced photographers/ enthusiasts out there, what would you do if you were in my shoes?
It's a tough choice, as was my original choice to go with Sony (which I am now slightly regretting).
UPDATE: Thanks for an excellent discussion everybody, I'm glad I stumbled across this site the other day. All things considered, I'm leaning towards cutting my losses and switching to Canon before I have even more invested.
I figure if I can sell my Sony kit (which I've spent about 2.3k on) for about 1k, then for a 5d mk II with 24-105 lens I'll be out of pocket another 2.4k. That gives me an amazing body, video capabilities, a great versatile pro lens, and the advantages that Canon has over Sony.
On the other hand, if I stick with Sony, I'm looking at spending about 1.7k on their 24-70 Carl Zeiss lens. that's a saving of around $700, but I'll still be on a partial frame camera, and still have the pitfalls of a smaller user base and less gear availability. I think now is a good time for me to switch... it feels like the right thing to do.
Thanks everybody for your advice... I'm very surprised to have seen such level-headed arguments about brands... amazed in fact. Nobody bashed another brand, at all, which is really refreshing.. I can see the value of Sony and Carl Zeiss (reading reviews it seems there 24-70 is best in class lens, as are their new primes), however they just don't have the market penetration I'm craving.
I still have a little while before I part with my cash, so will be partaking in further discussion here if there is more, but if not I'm happy with what I got from it. You're all fantastic.
Answer
I don't have specific Sony experience, but I'd suggest getting over the doubts. There's a number of reasons for this:
Sony bought Minolta, a camera company, and thus bought into the Minolta legacy and their glass. In other words, your friend isn't correct, there is a lot of Minolta gear on the open market and much, if not all, will work on a Sony.
When it comes to second hand, legacy, gear the only company that will better Sony in support (and that may be debatable) is Pentax. Like Pentax, Sony has shake reduction on the body and that means old glass will benefit and there is some truly great optics out there for peanuts.
Sony is a massive corporation, you can get gear repaired by them, they're everywhere. Bear in mind that a dSLR is an electronic device and Sony is the king of electronics. Frankly I'd expect it to be easier to repair Sony, they have their own stores after all, the only camera maker that does. Besides, a close friend with a 7D got to spend more than 3 weeks with film when his 7D was in for repair with Canon, not exactly speed service there, so I wouldn't assume that you gain anything from Canon on this front.
Zeiss glass will equal or exceed lenses made by Canon. We're talking one of the best lens makers on the planet with Zeiss.
Sony makes more than 50% of the worlds sensors, including sensors for Nikon, Pentax, and others. Simply put, if you aren't shooting Canon, you're very likely shooting a Sony sensor. Does it mean anything? Well, cameras making the most buzz about things like high ISO with low noise carry a Sony sensor.
Like Canon, Sony has full frame options and they're very well priced and well reviewed.
Now, after all that, Canon makes an excellent camera beyond question. They have great lenses, strong support, and their image IQ doesn't give into others. So, if you do cave in and go Canon, I'm sure that you'll be happy with them. However, I think you'll also find that you really didn't gain anything over Sony with a comparable camera.
That's my take, in any case, and I'll be curious to see what others think. For myself, I can't believe I just defended Sony!
By the way, the question is subjective and that may get it shot down but I didn't vote for that because I think it's worthwhile to have people ask some of these questions. There's a weird brand loyalty in the camera world that goes a little beyond the rational sometimes and so it's worthwhile for us to have some discussions that maybe challenges those beliefs a little bit. After all, it's a photographic tool, not a life partner... :)
No comments:
Post a Comment