Sony or Canon?; General Purpose and Macro...

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by downplay, Oct 15, 2017.

  1. cherylynne1

    cherylynne1 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2015
    Messages:
    660
    Likes Received:
    251
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Neither of the subjects you bring up are my area of expertise, but I can give you my thoughts while keeping you bumped at the top of the forum.

    In-body stabilization is nice because it adds stabilization to any lens, as you mentioned. However, you’re mistaken in thinking that it’s only old lenses that don’t have lens stablization. Many modern lenses don’t have stabilization, likely to save money on some of the budget lenses. As for me, I rarely feel like I need it. I generally use very fast shutter speeds and/or flash, because my subjects are moving, or I have a tripod for times when I need a slow shutter speed. So while it’s a nice feature to have in either the lens or the body, it’s never been a deciding factor for me.

    For macro, you’ll probably usually want to use a tripod, and for moving bugs, you’ll need a fast shutter speed anyway. For wide angle landscape, the shutter speed doesn’t need to be quite as fast (shutter speed needs to get faster to accommodate longer focal lengths.) So while in-body stabilization is a nice feature, I’m not sure that it should be a dealbreaker for your uses.

    I’m not a huge fan of Canon, so I won’t really speak as to the overall Canon vs Sony debate. (My reasons are subjective and completely based on personal preference, not anything you should be concerned about. Canon makes excellent cameras.) As for APS-C for macro, however, there is an advantage. A wide aperture will provide a more narrow depth of field on a full frame camera than on a crop sensor. For instance, if you put a 6d and 80d next to each other, but the same lens on both of them (say, 50mm), and set the aperture on both to 1.8, you’ll come out with two very different looking pictures. The 80d will appear more “zoomed in,” by about 1.5 times. The 80d will also have more of the scene in focus, while the 6d will have more blurring. In portraits, this is often desireable, because they like to have just the subject isolated. However, it can become an issue with macro. Because the subject is so small and you are so close to it, the depth of field can become so thin that nothing at all looks like it’s in focus. You need to stop down quite a bit before you can get something useable, and that’s also where techniques like focus stacking come in. APS-C would be beneficial in this situation, because while it still opens up wide to let the same amount of light in, it doesn’t give as narrow a depth of field.

    I apologize if this is too technical. As far as I can see, that would be the main advantage of APS-C in your situation, other than things like being smaller and lighter and sometimes cheaper.


     
  2. downplay

    downplay TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    No, that is not too technical, I've read about all of the technical aspects of the basics and you are ringing some bells, even though it has been quite a while.

    You make a great case for APS-C for me. I think it will be fine for my business purposes and if it is better for macro in some ways, then I can save the money and put it into better glass. I've always read that the lens is most important anyway. I'm not sure this directly applies to the new digital age of cameras but even the best sensors can only capture what light we send to them.

    So, now I've got to evalute the APS-C cameras! What do you think of the evaluations on cameradecision.com?
     
  3. cherylynne1

    cherylynne1 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2015
    Messages:
    660
    Likes Received:
    251
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Most hobbyists don’t need full frame, and I agree about the lens.

    I like cameradecision.com well enough, as well as The Imaging Resource, but DPReview is far and above my favorite for reviews. I also really like Kai on YouTube (previously part of DigitalRev.)
     
  4. TreeofLifeStairs

    TreeofLifeStairs No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 12, 2013
    Messages:
    698
    Likes Received:
    169
    Location:
    California
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I had an NEX-7 (aps-c) and now have an a7II (full frame). One of the biggest differences I’ve noticed isn’t so much in the quality of pictures (which is better) but it seems to make it easier to take the pictures. The auto focus is much quicker and the layout of the buttons are easier to use. I just feel like it makes your life easier. So when deciding aps-c vs full frame, you can likely get by just fine with the aps-c but the full frame is probably going to be a more enjoyable camera. Of course this is all just my opinion.


    Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app
     
  5. Derrel

    Derrel Mr. Rain Cloud

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    39,857
    Likes Received:
    14,955
    Location:
    USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    YES, I agree with using extension tubes if you need to get very,very close with a macro lens. KEEP IN MIND, that extension tubes will NOT work with the shorter end of a zoom like a 35-70 or 28-70mm: the normal-length tubes of 12mm to 25mm tubes will bring the focus point to literally a point that is _inside of the lens barrel_, so only the longer end of say a 28-70mm zoom will work with extension tubes.

    A 90mm or 100 or 105mm macro lens would be sweet! A 'regular" field telephoto or 70-200mm zoom would work well with a 12mm to 25mm extension tube, for general macro shooting.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. benhasajeep

    benhasajeep No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 4, 2006
    Messages:
    3,741
    Likes Received:
    432
    Location:
    Eddington, ME
    I am a Nikon DSLR guy so can't really tell you much about Sony or Canon gear in terms of macro. From what I read Tokina makes a great 100mm macro lens for about 1/3 of Nikon or Canon lenses of similar length. I own 4 Nikon Micro lenses. Only 1 has vibration reduction. And that's basically good for walking around type macro shots. Other wise when your on tripod or similar sturdy support. You don't need VR, IS, OS, or what ever each manufacturer calls it.

    As for camera body. The best value / bang for buck, is probably Pentax K-1. I am a Nikon guy (for DSLR anyway), tried Canon years ago and just stuck with Nikon. Right now between Nikon and Canon I would sway people towards Nikon. As I think you get the best performance per dollar from them over current Canon models.

    I think the Nikon D7500 is a good choice for body. It's a crop sensor DSLR with a tilt screen. So, you have the viewfinder option for bright days, and the tilt monitor for low and odd angle use. I would pare the D7500 with the Tokina 100mm macro lens. The kit lenses are decent walk around lenses. But you can also buy the body on it's own and buy specific lenses for your normal needs.
     
  7. downplay

    downplay TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Thank you all so much!

    Since I last posted I've been taking a different approach as I've had time. I've been finding lenses and then pairing them to bodies. Dxomark is awesome in this regard. For example, so far I've seen lens scores for a Nikon D3400 high as 26-30 on the wide angle lens at doable prices with the inexpensive camera body, whereas for the Canon 7D mark II I'm looking at numbers around 12-16. The ratings for the lenses I could get for the Nikon are nearly double!

    What do you think about this approach?

    I'm going to check out the recommendations above like the D7500 but if you have any recommendations along these lines that might speed things up: What camera bodies have high scoring lenses available at non-astronomical prices?
     
  8. cherylynne1

    cherylynne1 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2015
    Messages:
    660
    Likes Received:
    251
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    DxO Mark is somewhat useful, and it is considered the standard, but I’m not sure I would base all of my decisions off of it. For instance, the results are somewhat affected by the sensor that the lens is attached to, and Canon sensors don’t do nearly as well as Nikon/Sony (Sony makes most of Nikon’s sensors) in testing scenarios.

    DxO Mark is also very useful in finding out how sharp a lens is, or how much distortion or vignetting it has, but it’s useless in many other regards that many photographers considered the most important parts of a lens. For instance, bokeh, or the quality of the out of focus areas, can’t be quantified in a number. Neither can color rendering, ergonomics, handling, or even aspects of autofocusing.

    So, yes, use it as the great tool it is, but don’t let it keep you from reading real world reviews as well.

    Every company has great lenses at astronomical prices, okay lenses at reasonable prices, and a couple of “gems,” great bang-for-your-buck lenses. I don’t think Canon or Nikon really has an advantage over the other there.
     
  9. downplay

    downplay TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I can see why he said the Pentax K-1 is a great deal for body features, but in terms of overall costs, lens quality, and some uses that will be common for me, the Sony A7 II is looking really good again at the moment. The A7 II might have a more enjoyable user experience like one reviewer said over cheaper APS-C machines, Sony is the sensor maker as you have pointed out, they get a lot of good ratings for photo quality, and I can get a 16mm prime rated by dxomark at 26 for all my buildings and landscapes for about $480 or a 16-50mm wide/zoom rated at 23 for $750--all ratings well above Canon equivalents and slightly edging out Nikon as well, while not really shattering the bank into pieces.
     
  10. cherylynne1

    cherylynne1 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2015
    Messages:
    660
    Likes Received:
    251
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I think you’re looking at Sony ASP-C lenses with a full frame body. I don’t know of any Sony full frame 16mm lens, nor a 16-50mm. Both are available in their APS-C E-mount line, however (for cameras such as the a6500.) APS-C lenses tend to be cheaper than their full frame equivalents.
     
  11. TreeofLifeStairs

    TreeofLifeStairs No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 12, 2013
    Messages:
    698
    Likes Received:
    169
    Location:
    California
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Right, dxo mark is great for the objective qualities that can be compared but says nothing about those subjective matters. Those need to be seen/felt/experienced in person. Read reviews, talk to people who have the gear, and go to your local camera store to use it yourself.
     
  12. beagle100

    beagle100 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2015
    Messages:
    1,714
    Likes Received:
    407
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit



    check out the macro photo sections here or at other camera forums like FM, DPrev, POTN, etc
    Canon is the obvious "hands down" choice (lens, IQ) but look for yourself
     

Share This Page