Should I ditch my Sony?

[ernestoc33]

It's always nice to remind the Nikon folks that many Nikons use Sony image sensors.

I was very surprised when I found that out especially paying much less for that sensor in a Sony body.

 

[ernestoc33]

I've had a Sony alpha A330 for the last year and a half. I'm trying to get into my photography more seriously, I'm doing a few weddings for family and friends in a couple months.

Dont get me wrong I love my Sony, but I have a hard time finding 3rd party lenses and flashes that are good and affordable. I also never see pros with Sony cameras.

My question is should I continue with my Sony or should I sell it and get a Canon or Nikon?

Thanks

Sent from my LG-VM670 using Tapatalk

I thought I should address the original question. I'm in a very similar boat. I want to take my photography farther and look longingly at the CaNikon world. Particularly Canon. The thing is, I'm in no hurry. My next camera purchase will most likely by an a700. It's a great camera and I can get them inexpensive. Mainly I want it because it addresses the short coming of my current camera (sync speed, tehthering, multizone wireless TTL Flash a second control dial etc) It won't make me a better photographer but it will offer me more tools. What you need to do is figure out what tools you want. That will make your choice easier. By sticking with Sony I can take advantage of the inexpensive used market A700s @$500 Full Frame A850s @ $1250-1500. Awesome Minolta lenses like the Minolta 50mm F1.7 @ $60 the "Beercan" 70-210 f4 @$150 I can get great cameras at low prices.

If you can't find the right lenses and flashes, PM I'll try to help you find what your looking for.

Thanks Kassad. The guys over at dynaxdigital.com turned me on to KEH.com I just ordered a gently used 70-210 tamron lens for 16 bucks.

 

[chuasam]

I was very surprised when I found that out especially paying much less for that sensor in a Sony body.

and you get a Sony body to boot...which is why it is so much less expensive.

 

[skieur]

Ok... so I am STILL confused here...
What do you want? Professional or cheap?
If you want lenses and gear to shoot a professional wedding you'll need to up your budget. It doesn't matter if it's Sony, Nikon , Canon, Sigma, Tamron, Zeiss, Leica...

If you want budget you are fine with the gear you have. Sony has lenses, Sigma and Tamron make both their good AND cheap lenses for Sony.

If you want to advance to full frame and high end weddings? Get out of Sony regardless of the good lenses available for it from Sigma and Tamron. Take your budget up to about $10K-$15K.

If you are that serious? Switch. sell off the sony gear and start with a Canon or Nikon. Preferably full frame. Then begin saving your pennies because you need about $5k in basic lenses.

Irrespective of budget, Sony G lenses and Zeiss lenses are as good or better than any lens from Canon or Nikon in the wedding formats. If you are serious, move to the Sony A99 36 megapixel full frame which will be out this year, with a lot of features not on Canon or Nikon cameras.

You can buy a Nikon or Canon 35mm format and replace it every 3 years as many high end pros do, or buy a Leica S2 medium format 37.5 megapixel camera which you will have around for a much longer time. Rent one for a wedding and see how you like it.

skieur

 

[Derrel]

It's always nice to remind the Nikon folks that many Nikons use Sony image sensors.

I was very surprised when I found that out especially paying much less for that sensor in a Sony body.

As Thom Hogan wrote on Feb 16,2012: "FX sensor prices are still very high and ultimately dictate the price of the product. Manufacturing rule of thumb is you multiply parts cost by 3.5 to get retail price impact, so a US$400 sensor means that there is US$1400 worth of cost in the final product implied by the sensor alone. You still need to put electronics, viewfinder, shutter, battery, body, LCD, controls, and more into the product.So how did Sony manage a US$2000 FX body? By ignoring costs, basically. Their hope was that by underpricing cameras like the A850 they could get leverage in the high-end camera market. The strategy didn't work, and next time we see Sony in the full frame market, they'll take a somewhat different approach (EVF, for one thing)."

As he pointed out, sensor prices were at one time $5,$50,500, for compact, DX, and FX size sensors.

This past year, Sony has lost market share to both Canon and Nikon. Still, that doesn't mean Sony is "bad". Far from it. I think Sony has some nice cameras, and their lens lineup is growing. I honestly I think "most" professionals could do most of their jobs with a pair of Sony bodies, some flash units, some studio lighting gear, and perhaps five of the better Sony or Cosina/Zeiss lenses. Of course, not every,single professional shooter, nor every single situation, could be handled. I think the big-glass area of 200/2,300/2.8,400/2.8,500 and 600 4 and 200-400 f/4 zooms is the area where Nikon, and Canon are more dominant. As well as the tilt/shift lenses, where Canon has some beauties, and the new Nikkors are better than the older ones, but yet, a bit behind Canon's. And in terms of multi-flash stuff, Nikon is the leader, Canon a follower, and Sony a spectator I guess is how I'd state it.

I dunno...I do not think I would "ditch your Sony" unless you can find something SPECIFIC, that you cannot do within Sony's system.

 

[chuasam]

I dunno...I do not think I would "ditch your Sony" unless you can find something SPECIFIC, that you cannot do within Sony's system.

like work with pocket wizards, find rental places in any major city, find a first shooter or assistant that uses a similar system, have the backing of a professional service like NPS or CPS, local dealer support, confidence that the system will still be around 10 years from now (remember Minolta, and Olympus E-System?), oh yeah...and the backing of a real Camera company.

 

[ernestoc33]

I dunno...I do not think I would "ditch your Sony" unless you can find something SPECIFIC, that you cannot do within Sony's system.

like work with pocket wizards, find rental places in any major city, find a first shooter or assistant that uses a similar system, have the backing of a professional service like NPS or CPS, local dealer support, confidence that the system will still be around 10 years from now (remember Minolta, and Olympus E-System?), oh yeah...and the backing of a real Camera company.

That's exactly what made me start questioning it. I'm broke so every dollar I spend I have to spend wisely. I had an Olympus with the E mount so you can really understand my concern. I wanted to buy a 100-300 zoom and it was about 200 used for sony and about 80 for canon. And that keeps repeating every time I look for stuff.

Sent from mobile

 

[Derrel]

I dunno...I do not think I would "ditch your Sony" unless you can find something SPECIFIC, that you cannot do within Sony's system.

like work with pocket wizards, find rental places in any major city, find a first shooter or assistant that uses a similar system, have the backing of a professional service like NPS or CPS, local dealer support, confidence that the system will still be around 10 years from now (remember Minolta, and Olympus E-System?), oh yeah...and the backing of a real Camera company.

When one needs to rent "the basics", one is seriously,seriously under-capitalized. Unless one needs a 400/2.8, he ought to OWN the lenses needed for a HUGE percentage of assignments shot on 35mm-style d-slr gear. Pocket Wizards can be made to fire on any camera that has a PC socket, or with an adapter from Minolta/Sony to ISO...$15 per adapter....I'd HOPE a "pro" could figure out how to make basic cabling or basic shoe-hookup equipment work.... So that Pocket Wizard strawman is dead,dead,dead.

NPS or CPS backing really isn't much of an advantage for most professionals and the maiority of non-sports, non-PJ people are not members of either service, so another strawman shot down.....NPS has become a joke--unless you're at the Olympics, or the Super Bowl. On a regular assignment, like shooting a regular-season west-coast Pac-12 football game, NPS or CPS Services probably won't be able to give help for rank and file members.

Again...if you need to "rent" 35mm-style d-slr gear for regular assignments, you are seriously under-capitalized. An "assistant" than cannot handle a Sony d-slr isn't much of an assistant to be worried about. The system has been around in Minolta, and then Konica-Minolta, and then Sony forms, as the "A" mount since autofocus began...so it's been here since 1985 or so, which is only like 27 years of continuous production of lenses, flashes, and bodies using the same mount.

Local dealer support? In this day and age, one is more-likely to get better, faster, lower-hassle service from B&H or Adorama--or even Best Buy. "Local Dealers" do not even exist in many small towns in the USA...they went broke a decade ago...one's chances of getting "dealer support" are better at Best Buy in many localities...I know places here where one can drive 150-200 miles and not be within 100 miles of a "dealer"...but where a Best Buy is within an hour's drive...or less.

Of course, if a guy wants to construct imaginary roadblocks, manned by straw men, he is free to do so...it's pretty easy to imagine hypothetical situations and try and put the brakes on somebody else's plans. But my contention is that two bodies and FIVE quality lenses, a couple flash units, and some studio strobe gear and "most" professionals would be able to complete well over 95% of their normal, "everyday" assignments that use 35-mm style d-slr gear. Without the need to rent anything.

 

[enzodm]

That's exactly what made me start questioning it. I'm broke so every dollar I spend I have to spend wisely. I had an Olympus with the E mount so you can really understand my concern. I wanted to buy a 100-300 zoom and it was about 200 used for sony and about 80 for canon. And that keeps repeating every time I look for stuff.

Sent from mobile

100-300 zoom for Canon only 80? Maybe Canon FD, which cannot be used on EOS. Or: if you mean 70-300, Tamron does it for Canon as well as Sony for 170 new. Lost in the middle of the thread there is a post of mine to which you did not answer: please give concrete examples of what you miss, because I'm sure that if you name it, we find an equivalent solution.

And to simplify things, if this is the budget, there is nothing least expensive than maintaining the same system. Everything you buy at this price will not serve you in a future as a professional, even if Canon or Nikon. So, think at what you miss now, and tell it.

 

[chuasam]

When one needs to rent "the basics", one is seriously,seriously under-capitalized. Unless one needs a 400/2.8, he ought to OWN the lenses needed for a HUGE percentage of assignments shot on 35mm-style d-slr gear. Pocket Wizards can be made to fire on any camera that has a PC socket, or with an adapter from Minolta/Sony to ISO...$15 per adapter....I'd HOPE a "pro" could figure out how to make basic cabling or basic shoe-hookup equipment work.... So that Pocket Wizard strawman is dead,dead,dead.

When you're a pro, why bother with an extra fiddly step when you can get a pocketwizard to work right off the bat with your Canon/Nikon system. Let's not even get into the issue of high speed syncs.

NPS or CPS backing really isn't much of an advantage for most professionals and the maiority of non-sports, non-PJ people are not members of either service, so another strawman shot down.....NPS has become a joke--unless you're at the Olympics, or the Super Bowl. On a regular assignment, like shooting a regular-season west-coast Pac-12 football game, NPS or CPS Services probably won't be able to give help for rank and file members.

for Rank&File members, NPS/CPS gives you a MUCH MUCH Faster turn around time for repair. I live 15mins drive from a Nikon Depot and the benefits are awesome.
I'm not sure what CPS offers but I don't think they'd be much less.

Or you could get a Sony *LOL*

Again...if you need to "rent" 35mm-style d-slr gear for regular assignments, you are seriously under-capitalized. An "assistant" than cannot handle a Sony d-slr isn't much of an assistant to be worried about. The system has been around in Minolta, and then Konica-Minolta, and then Sony forms, as the "A" mount since autofocus began...so it's been here since 1985 or so, which is only like 27 years of continuous production of lenses, flashes, and bodies using the same mount.

So you're going to make your assistant use your gear instead of bringing his or her own gear. Or if you are the one assisting, you're going to be bungling with a foreign system instead of one that you're very familiar with.

Local dealer support? In this day and age, one is more-likely to get better, faster, lower-hassle service from B&H or Adorama--or even Best Buy. "Local Dealers" do not even exist in many small towns in the USA...they went broke a decade ago...one's chances of getting "dealer support" are better at Best Buy in many localities...I know places here where one can drive 150-200 miles and not be within 100 miles of a "dealer"...but where a Best Buy is within an hour's drive...or less.

DANG! you Americans really screwed yourselves over there.
I live in a mid-sized city but I wish I lived in someplace bigger.

Of course, if a guy wants to construct imaginary roadblocks, manned by straw men, he is free to do so...it's pretty easy to imagine hypothetical situations and try and put the brakes on somebody else's plans. But my contention is that two bodies and FIVE quality lenses, a couple flash units, and some studio strobe gear and "most" professionals would be able to complete well over 95% of their normal, "everyday" assignments that use 35-mm style d-slr gear. Without the need to rent anything.

Sure the issues I put forth are not insurmountable but why face them in the first place? What I see is a case of cognitive dissonance where you got a Sony and have been trying to justify it to yourself and everyone else ever since. Why rent something? Let's say you're on assignment in another city and something breaks and you need to replace it immediately.

 

[enzodm]

Chuasam,
the whole discussion is totally hypotethical, because when speaking of 80$-200$ expense for a lens, we are far from any pro equipment.

 

[chuasam]

Chuasam,
the whole discussion is totally hypotethical, because when speaking of 80$-200$ expense for a lens, we are far from any pro equipment.

True...but if you're gonna spend money, why not start off in the right direction? Plus, have you EVER heard of a Nikon or Canon user going "geeze! I wish I got a Sony instead."

 

[enzodm]

Chuasam,
the whole discussion is totally hypotethical, because when speaking of 80$-200$ expense for a lens, we are far from any pro equipment.

True...but if you're gonna spend money, why not start off in the right direction? Plus, have you EVER heard of a Nikon or Canon user going "geeze! I wish I got a Sony instead."

In principle I agree, but since cheap things should be bought again when going pro, and having already Sony gear, the cheapest road is to use it for learning at least.
When I bought my Canon 1000D, I was really tempted by Sony. In that case, now I would have more or less the same kind of gear -basic lenses, cheap flash, cheap trigger... and the same experience.