Three reasons not to leave Nikon for Sony's game changer

nerwin

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
3,784
Reaction score
2,061
Location
Vermont
Website
nickerwin.com
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
I was reading my Twitter feed and noticed Nikon Rumours shared a post on DPReview and I thought it was quite interesting. Worth a read.

With all the talk about the Sony A7R II being a game changer, it has got me wondering about the future of full-frame and why I think it still belongs to Nikon and Canon.

Reason #1

It is just a matter of time before Nikon and Canon announce a full-frame mirrorless DSLR that will be as good or better than the A7R II.

Reason #2

Smartphone cameras are just going to get better and better, but where they won't be able to compete with DSLRs is with lenses, especially in the telephoto range. Who makes better telephoto lenses than Nikon or Canon? That's really where the end game is and Sony still has a lot of catching up to do. News stories like this don't inspire confidence:

Sony restructuring in Japan camera lens plant to close with loss of 2 000 jobs

Reason #3

Sony is a huge multinational company that makes cameras, smartphones, HDTVs, laptops, game consoles, pro audio and video equipment, memory cards, the list goes on... Sony invented Blu-Ray and is even the movie studio behind the James Bond films, it also makes the image sensors for many of its competitors like Nikon, Apple and Samsung—think about that for a second: Sony is making a ****load of money from its competitor's products. I think it's fair to say that Sony is to electronics and entertainment as to what the white hand of Saruman was to Middle Earth, let's just say that the company's future is not dependent at all on its own camera sales, which is the exact opposite for Nikon.

The reality is that the people who control these giant corporations look at spread sheets all day, they don't even know what a DSLR is, let alone how to use one, but they can discontinue an entire product line and pull out of a market at the drop of a hat. It happened in Canada when the major U.S. retailer Target pulled out of the country after failing to hit its target, and that was 133 megastores opening and then closing down within a two year period with billions in losses. But what does that have to do with Sony? Everything. Because Sony also closed down its 14 boutique stores in Canada this year. Needless to say that the retail market in Canada is soft right now, not unlike the camera market that continues to lose ground to smartphones, and I don't see anything about Sony that makes me think it can weather a storm if it doesn't have to, no, I see a company that will cut its losses and look elsewhere. The fact is, Sony can discontinue its DSLR model lineup at anytime without any risk to the company's future, whereas Nikon's survival depends on it.

Source: Three reasons not to leave Nikon for Sony s game changer Nikon FX SLR DF D1-D4 D600-D800 Talk Forum Digital Photography Review
 
Reason 3 is the only one that has any weight, and is something i've thought about quite a bit.
 
My hope is that, before I become too weak to carry my Nikon D810, Nikon will come out with a really great FF mirrorless camera. That way I can save a few bucks on lenses, flash and other proprietary gear. I'm impressed by the latest Sony offering and by the Fuji camera @Gary A. used when he visited recently, but not enough to invest in a mirrorless setup at this time.

Jim
 
I think you have to be in a very unique situation to choose one brand over another. For most serious amateurs, there are a lot of camera bodies out there that do the job just fine.

I shoot Nikon and have for a couple of decades (and before that, it was a mix of different bodies). I'm less enamored with a brand then I am a specific body and set of glass.

Think of it this way, it's like buying a car. Someone can make the case that Volkswagon is the best brand for the range of products they offer and value for the dollar. But that doesn't mean that a Jetta is a good fit for me. Given that most of us are not that worried about resale value of the gear we buy, I think the real issue isn't Nikon vs. Canon vs. Sony vs. some other brand. It's really about getting a body and glass that fit our needs.
 
Canon and Nikon still are the big players in the photography game, Panasonic and Olympus found a niche where they don't need to fight the big two and they are doing good in their niche, Fuji has a very interesting offering and is fighting the big two in the APS-C front.
Sony is the only one that really offer a serious third option to the big two, it has strong products in APS-C, FF but in the mirrorless front, they are getting better and better with their camera bodies (not so much with lenses).
I think calling the A7R II a game changer is silly, there is nothing in this camera that is a game changer.

1.In body 4K - GH4
2.In body VR - done in the past by many camera makers including Sony
3.Lots of resolution - how about 5DS
4.Back lite sensor - NX1

Nothing here is a game changer, the A7R II is not out yet so I am still waiting to see real "in the field" review of this camera but I am sure its a superb camera but NOT a game changer, I bet the D810 replacement will be better then the A7R II and the A7R III will be better still, its a constant evolution NOT revolution in technology, just constant improvement by all camera manufactures.
Nothing on the A7R II makes me wanna jump ship to Sony especially when they are still lacking in the lenses department.
 
I can't wait to see the trickle down technology from the yet to be released/finalized Nikon d5 specs.

but it's always one jumping over the other ...
 
There's always going to be better and faster and smaller and more capable cameras.

Question is - can you afford to give up everything you have to invest in a new set of technology? Do the benefits outweigh the cons?

I believe if Canon / Nikon do enter the Mirrorless market with full force, with features and capabilities which exist on DSLRs, Sony/fuji etc will be back to where they were before mirrorless cameras took off. 3rd or 4th choice.

I think this is why Sony/Fuji are hitting the market hard now - to win over the mirrorless market before the big boys arrive.
 
I believe if Canon / Nikon do enter the Mirrorless market with full force, with features and capabilities which exist on DSLRs, Sony/fuji etc will be back to where they were before mirrorless cameras took off. 3rd or 4th choice.

I think this is why Sony/Fuji are hitting the market hard now - to win over the mirrorless market before the big boys arrive.
It really is all about the lenses!!!
If Canon and Nikon will find a way to continue using their lenses on their potential mirrorless then they will rule the market, if they will start a brand new lens line then Sony will have a big advantage over them.
 
This Sony may or may not be a "game changer" depending on your point of view. On another canon forum there is an awful lot of complaining by guys that have thousands invested in canon gear, but feel the Sony sensor on other brands is better for their needs(mostly landscape guys wanting better base dr). I could see a canon shooter with many lenses buying this camera as an addition or replacement for their Canons, so it is a very smart move by Sony.

Anyone starting out who buys this may well not really be tied into a single system
 
If Canon and Nikon will find a way to continue using their lenses on their potential mirrorless then they will rule the market

This is a simple issue of a correctly registered extension ring. There is no technical difference between mirrorless and mirrorful aside from the flange distance.
 
If Canon and Nikon will find a way to continue using their lenses on their potential mirrorless then they will rule the market

This is a simple issue of a correctly registered extension ring. There is no technical difference between mirrorless and mirrorful aside from the flange distance.
Thats a good piece of info!
 
But by the time you reach the flange distance so you can use existing lenses, you don't have a more compact camera any more. Doesn't matter if there's no mirror box or pentaprism in there, the flange still has to be that far from the image sensor.

So you can do FF with a new line of lenses and have a compact camera, or you can do FF with the current line of lenses and have a dSLR-sized camera. Why bother with mirrorless, then? Plus, I'd like my batteries to last all day, thank you!
 
But by the time you reach the flange distance so you can use existing lenses, you don't have a more compact camera any more. Doesn't matter if there's no mirror box or pentaprism in there, the flange still has to be that far from the image sensor.

So you can do FF with a new line of lenses and have a compact camera, or you can do FF with the current line of lenses and have a dSLR-sized camera. Why bother with mirrorless, then? Plus, I'd like my batteries to last all day, thank you!

Respectfully disagree, Sony's A7 cameras aint small, they might be smaller then FF DSLR but they aint small.
Mirrorless is known to be small and it is with smaller sensors, the MFT have nice small bodies but the Sony lost this advantage.
I think in time mirrorless technical advantage will be bigger then DSLR and because of that it will take over the market and not because it's smaller, yes its smaller but not by so much that it will make a big advantage.
Another thing is that the big fast lenses feel very weird on smaller body, I put my Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 on my D5100 and it just feels awful, on the D750 it feels natural and well balanced.
 
But they are thinner. Yet to be thin they have to use their own E-mount lens line. The A-mounts that someone might already have from using a Sony dSLR can be used with a fairly expensive adapter, and then not only are they not thinner any more, that adapter is rather chunky by itself.
 
But by the time you reach the flange distance so you can use existing lenses, you don't have a more compact camera any more. Doesn't matter if there's no mirror box or pentaprism in there, the flange still has to be that far from the image sensor.

So you can do FF with a new line of lenses and have a compact camera, or you can do FF with the current line of lenses and have a dSLR-sized camera. Why bother with mirrorless, then? Plus, I'd like my batteries to last all day, thank you!

The issue is backwards compatibility. When Nikon and Canon go mirrorless, and they will, there will also be a new line of compact lenses for the system - just as we've seen with the A7 and NEX Alpha adapters.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top