10 reasons why a Pro Photographer left Nikon...

[vvcarpio]

Not sure if this has been posted before but Trey of stuckincustoms.com apparently had also made the switch to Sony in 2013:

Hello Sony. Goodbye Nikon. The Story of why I am Switching from Nikon to Sony. | Stuck in Customs
The China Experiment – Dumping Nikon for Sony | Stuck in Customs

I had considered the A7 when I bought my A77, but I was (still am) an aspiring professional so I thought it helps to be seen with a big body in my hands.

 

[MichaelHenson]

... it helps to be seen with a big body in my hands.

Um...That's what she said! Ha!

Sorry...

I know that's quite a common thought held by most people (professionals and consumers alike). I think that as camera options change, that perception will slowly fade. Pros are slowly making the switch to other systems based on what they need and where there priorities lie...Zack Arias (one of my favs for his street photography) is basically all Fuji, all the time these days...He's even shot weddings and other assignments with it because he's able to get what he wants out of the camera and for the clients he's working with that's all that matters...

Also, I want a Fuji or two...but I'm broke.

 

[ConradM]

Sony is deeply flawed for a number of reasons, but my biggest Sony complaint, and why I still have yet to buy one, despite multiple opportunities is: Sony. Sony thinks like an electronics giant and not like a camera manufacturer. there's nothing wrong with that, by itself, but it creates hit and miss camera companies. Samsung and Sony both are giant electronics companies, but it seems Samsung is more in tune with photographers, and why that is I'm not sure, but they keep pushing out more and more intuitive gear, with better and better tech, though they still lack a solid DSLR entry and appear to be focusing more on mirrorless, I still feel like Samsung is closer to getting it right. Sony, on the other hand, it seems wanted a piece of the pie, bought up another camera company, and went at it, but more like they would for say.. a playstation, and less like say...a D800, and by that I mean, why all the Sony only accessories? Can't play nice? Why the baffling exclusions, like multi-touch screens on many models? Did these people not make the PS Vita? the whole back of that thing is a touch pad and you can't even see it, and why all the competing lens mounts with so few lenses? Focus on one! Don't make us buy more stuff, make us WANT to buy more stuff. Every time I use a Canon, Nikon, or Pentax DSLR, I want to buy more of their stuff, I'm an addict, but when I start looking at Sony's offerings I can't get past their attitude towards the end user, like "Yes our sensors are some of the best around, so we wrapped it in an inconvenient package and charged you a lot for it! Forget Canon and Nikon, they only have the best reputations in the world, dominate the market, have more lenses, more camera bodies, and a history of making history, forget them, and buy from us because it says Sony on it." to me it seems if you are going to jump in and get serious, you should anticipate skepticism, and work that much harder to appeal to your potential customers, rather than offering up what amounts to more of the same, from a manufacturer that can clearly build some incredible electronics with bleeding edge tech, if they choose.

I'd give them 5 more years, let them sort out their systems, and re-evaluate, because they don't make garbage, they are nice cameras, but until then, unless I see a used a3000 or something on craigslist for cheap, I'm pretty much meh on Sony.

Any examples to what you mean? My only experience with Sony is with the A mount but Sony DSLR's are the most intuitive and easy to use cameras I've worked with.

It doesn't get much easier than seeing real-time changes in the viewfinder as a new shooter. I was shooting in manual within the first week of owning my a33.

 

[ConradM]

Personally I think if Lanier got a load of money, Sony would have had him promote the new lenses coming out soon. They didn't and he didn't, so I have to think he was on his own. He just likes Sony for the buck. Nothing wrong with that.

I agree. I can completely understand his enthusiasm.

 

[ConradM]

The biggest reason Pros don't and won't use Sony cameras is because Sony has no clue what it means for a camera company to make a commitment to their working pro customers. Sony doesn't understand why pros don't use their cameras -- it's not the cameras, it's Sony.

Those few words are really the absolute essential truth when it comes to small, eye-level cameras for professional use. There USED TO BE more companies making eye-level, 35-millimeter type cameras, but the entire field has been whittled down to two companies that dominate the entire segment: Canon, and Nikon. Truth be told, it's actually more important to have the COMPANY behind your gear than it is to have the cameras. If you have a Canon, you can get virtually anything you need. Same with Nikon. And they are stable companies. Giants. You are not getting "a camera", but an entire system, an "eco-system" some call it.

Sony has been a big player in the video market, but for still cameras, they are a newborn. Meanwhile Canon is solidly #1, Nikon a close-ish #2, and Sony a diiiiiiiiiistant #3. The whole thing makes me think of pickup trucks. Ford F-150. Chevy. Dodge. Toyota. Annnnnnnnnd, yeah, Honda has made a pickup truck too! Sony is the Honda pickup Honda pickup truck - Google Search

You're analogy is flawed. The Honda isn't even really a truck, it's a cross over with a bed. If that was you're point then you're either misinformed or in denial.

Sony cameras are doing a lot of things better than canon/nikon and it's as plain as day. For example, the a7s low light performance, the a6000 speed and the a77 ii AF system and speed. These 3 things alone are untouchable in their respective categories.

 

[Ysarex88 82]

The biggest reason Pros don't and won't use Sony cameras is because Sony has no clue what it means for a camera company to make a commitment to their working pro customers. Sony doesn't understand why pros don't use their cameras -- it's not the cameras, it's Sony.

Those few words are really the absolute essential truth when it comes to small, eye-level cameras for professional use. There USED TO BE more companies making eye-level, 35-millimeter type cameras, but the entire field has been whittled down to two companies that dominate the entire segment: Canon, and Nikon. Truth be told, it's actually more important to have the COMPANY behind your gear than it is to have the cameras. If you have a Canon, you can get virtually anything you need. Same with Nikon. And they are stable companies. Giants. You are not getting "a camera", but an entire system, an "eco-system" some call it.

Sony has been a big player in the video market, but for still cameras, they are a newborn. Meanwhile Canon is solidly #1, Nikon a close-ish #2, and Sony a diiiiiiiiiistant #3. The whole thing makes me think of pickup trucks. Ford F-150. Chevy. Dodge. Toyota. Annnnnnnnnd, yeah, Honda has made a pickup truck too! Sony is the Honda pickup Honda pickup truck - Google Search

You're analogy is flawed. The Honda isn't even really a truck, it's a cross over with a bed. If that was you're point then you're either misinformed or in denial.

Sony cameras are doing a lot of things better than canon/nikon and it's as plain as day. For example, the a7s low light performance, the a6000 speed and the a77 ii AF system and speed. These 3 things alone are untouchable in their respective categories.

Fact: The massive majority of pro photographers don't and won't use Sony cameras. That's not disputable. That's a fact you can't argue against. I've done this full-time in one form or another for 40 years. When I shot as a pro I shot Hasselblad and Nikon. I've been partial to other brands like Contax and owned some Contax cameras but it never crossed my mind to use them professionally. When I switched into academia it didn't matter what brand camera I used, but in business as a photographer it matters a lot. I'm retired now. As an enthusiast I've bought Sony cameras. If I were to come out of retirement right now and decide to go back to shooting I wouldn't consider Sony for a second.

If you're going to make a living with a camera you need more than just a camera you need a camera system. You also need support. You need retail support, rental support, service support and stability support from the company that provides your camera system. Nikon and Canon grade A on those items while Sony grades F.

Let's assume I decided to go back into business now. I'd need a camera system. Am I going to shop on the internet for it? That's stupid. Here in St. Louis there are 3 million people and one camera store that services professionals -- W. Schiller. As a working pro you need a good relationship with a local retailer; it's stupid not to have that. I'd head straight for Schillers and walk into Barry's office. I know Barry, I'm a photographer and we all know Barry. If I were dumb enough to say Sony while sitting in front of Barry's desk he'd grab a monopod and chase me out of the store. Sony doesn't understand the importance of opening and maintaining a retail conduit to the working professionals. They won't "work" with pro-support retailers and that makes Sony a curse word for the pro-support retailer.

I'd tell Barry what I planned and what I wanted. I'd tell him that I expected to put together a working system over the course of the next 3 months and that I wanted to buy both new and good used equipment. Buy saying used equipment Sony just got cut out of the equation. Any one day at Schillers I'd have 1/2 a dozen 70-200 f/2.8 Canon L and or Nikon G zooms to chose from and ZERO Sony. (That by the way makes Sony's cheaper cameras way more expensive since I can't buy used lenses).

After I finished talking to Barry and got started picking up some of the most critical hardware I'd head for the rental department. Schillers has a large rental business. As a pro photographer who wants to make money I'd be a fool to capitalize my business with lightly needed hardware when rental was an option. In fact this will be a huge deciding factor in what system I buy into. Rental allows me to take good paying infrequent jobs that require special hardware without having to tie up thousands or tens of thousands of $$$ in that hardware that I may only use 4 or 5 times a year. Want to guess what brand camera system lenses and accessories Schillers rents? HINT: It's not Sony.

Sony makes some nice cameras and I've enjoyed the ones that I've owned. They are not players in the pro-photography business because they have not and are not behaving in ways that would earn them a playing role. For Sony cameras retail support sucks, rental support is nonexistent, service support sucks and stability support a laughable joke.

Joe

 

[vvcarpio]

Hi, Joe (Ysarex). Sony outlet when it was still around was OK but didn't suck. Calumet rentals have Sony lenses. I've had two of my Sony bodies repaired by Sony and so far have been working great. (They cost less to fix by Sony than a local and well-known camera repair shop in NYC.) Whether or not you're exaggerating, I think "laughable joke" is uncalled for. We have, after all, clients who would disagree.

 

[gsgary]

The biggest reason Pros don't and won't use Sony cameras is because Sony has no clue what it means for a camera company to make a commitment to their working pro customers. Sony doesn't understand why pros don't use their cameras -- it's not the cameras, it's Sony.

Those few words are really the absolute essential truth when it comes to small, eye-level cameras for professional use. There USED TO BE more companies making eye-level, 35-millimeter type cameras, but the entire field has been whittled down to two companies that dominate the entire segment: Canon, and Nikon. Truth be told, it's actually more important to have the COMPANY behind your gear than it is to have the cameras. If you have a Canon, you can get virtually anything you need. Same with Nikon. And they are stable companies. Giants. You are not getting "a camera", but an entire system, an "eco-system" some call it.

Sony has been a big player in the video market, but for still cameras, they are a newborn. Meanwhile Canon is solidly #1, Nikon a close-ish #2, and Sony a diiiiiiiiiistant #3. The whole thing makes me think of pickup trucks. Ford F-150. Chevy. Dodge. Toyota. Annnnnnnnnd, yeah, Honda has made a pickup truck too! Sony is the Honda pickup Honda pickup truck - Google Search

You're analogy is flawed. The Honda isn't even really a truck, it's a cross over with a bed. If that was you're point then you're either misinformed or in denial.

Sony cameras are doing a lot of things better than canon/nikon and it's as plain as day. For example, the a7s low light performance, the a6000 speed and the a77 ii AF system and speed. These 3 things alone are untouchable in their respective categories.

Fact: The massive majority of pro photographers don't and won't use Sony cameras. That's not disputable. That's a fact you can't argue against. I've done this full-time in one form or another for 40 years. When I shot as a pro I shot Hasselblad and Nikon. I've been partial to other brands like Contax and owned some Contax cameras but it never crossed my mind to use them professionally. When I switched into academia it didn't matter what brand camera I used, but in business as a photographer it matters a lot. I'm retired now. As an enthusiast I've bought Sony cameras. If I were to come out of retirement right now and decide to go back to shooting I wouldn't consider Sony for a second.

If you're going to make a living with a camera you need more than just a camera you need a camera system. You also need support. You need retail support, rental support, service support and stability support from the company that provides your camera system. Nikon and Canon grade A on those items while Sony grades F.

Let's assume I decided to go back into business now. I'd need a camera system. Am I going to shop on the internet for it? That's stupid. Here in St. Louis there are 3 million people and one camera store that services professionals -- W. Schiller. As a working pro you need a good relationship with a local retailer; it's stupid not to have that. I'd head straight for Schillers and walk into Barry's office. I know Barry, I'm a photographer and we all know Barry. If I were dumb enough to say Sony while sitting in front of Barry's desk he'd grab a monopod and chase me out of the store. Sony doesn't understand the importance of opening and maintaining a retail conduit to the working professionals. They won't "work" with pro-support retailers and that makes Sony a curse word for the pro-support retailer.

I'd tell Barry what I planned and what I wanted. I'd tell him that I expected to put together a working system over the course of the next 3 months and that I wanted to buy both new and good used equipment. Buy saying used equipment Sony just got cut out of the equation. Any one day at Schillers I'd have 1/2 a dozen 70-200 f/2.8 Canon L and or Nikon G zooms to chose from and ZERO Sony. (That by the way makes Sony's cheaper cameras way more expensive since I can't buy used lenses).

After I finished talking to Barry and got started picking up some of the most critical hardware I'd head for the rental department. Schillers has a large rental business. As a pro photographer who wants to make money I'd be a fool to capitalize my business with lightly needed hardware when rental was an option. In fact this will be a huge deciding factor in what system I buy into. Rental allows me to take good paying infrequent jobs that require special hardware without having to tie up thousands or tens of thousands of $$$ in that hardware that I may only use 4 or 5 times a year. Want to guess what brand camera system lenses and accessories Schillers rents? HINT: It's not Sony.

Sony makes some nice cameras and I've enjoyed the ones that I've owned. They are not players in the pro-photography business because they have not and are not behaving in ways that would earn them a playing role. For Sony cameras retail support sucks, rental support is nonexistent, service support sucks and stability support a laughable joke.

Joe

There was a Leica film camera pro using a Sony A7 in LFI the other month and he loved it

 

[Ysarex88 82]

Hi, Joe (Ysarex). Sony outlet when it was still around was OK but didn't suck. Calumet rentals have Sony lenses. I've had two of my Sony bodies repaired by Sony and so far have been working great. (They cost less to fix by Sony than a local and well-known camera repair shop in NYC.) Whether or not you're exaggerating, I think "laughable joke" is uncalled for. We have, after all, clients who would disagree.

 

[MichaelHenson]

Gotta say, Joe and Derrel's comments regarding the "eco-system" and support available for Canon and Nikon are EXTREMELY powerful arguments for one of these two manufacturers and a compelling reason for a pro to stick with one of the "big two."

Unfortunately, Sony is fighting an uphill battle here. Not saying that there "stuff" doesn't have potential, they just have a lot of foundation building to do in their branded camera division.

Also, thanks Joe! Now I'mma have to come to Schiller's and check everything out...I've been meaning to get over there, just difficult to make the time. (I've actually talked to Ed Crim about some of the Saturday classes but have yet to carve out time in an overloaded schedule...I will though!)

 

[Derrel]

There was a Leica film camera pro using a Sony A7 in LFI the other month and he loved it

I can totally believe that. The Sony A7 series is the current only game in town for people who want to use high-grade, adapted lenses on a full-frame mirrorless camera. The lens registration distance makes the Sony A7 series models (three of them!) a logical choice to allow a guy to use excellent glass on a new, modern, affordable body. With Leica full-frame rangefinders costing more than most small, used cars, the A7 at $1699 is almost a no-brainer.

The ONE thing I thought Lanier touched upon in a sort of roundabout way, but really failed to truly explain is the notion of preciousness, and how that perception of one's camera gear has a negative effect on the photographer.

His early talk about getting mugged or ripped off has been mentioned here, and I do know exactly what he means, but he did not explain the concept of the NON-precious camera in a compelling and convincing manner. The issue is that when a camera is viewed as a low-cost tool, one that is easily replaced, and at low financial cost, it becomes much more used, much less precious; when a camera is really expensive, the tendency is to leave that precious baby at home, or to leave it in the case, as a way to protect one's investment. That's the real difference between a small, $599 body like the Sony A6000, and a big $6,499 d-slr like a Nikon D4, or even a $3,199 d-slr like a D800 class camera.

I can understand the idea that a $599 standard body has some big advantages over a $6499 camera. I totally,totally "get" that.

 

[JacaRanda]

Hi, Joe (Ysarex). Sony outlet when it was still around was OK but didn't suck. Calumet rentals have Sony lenses. I've had two of my Sony bodies repaired by Sony and so far have been working great. (They cost less to fix by Sony than a local and well-known camera repair shop in NYC.) Whether or not you're exaggerating, I think "laughable joke" is uncalled for. We have, after all, clients who would disagree.

What's the problem? Looks like Nikon is Sony's answer to commitment to photographers pro and hobbyists. Sony is brilliant.

 

[Derrel]

Just a point of clarification: the sensor in the Nikon D7100 is made by Toshiba. Not Sony. In the past, Nikon has made its OWN sensors. The sensors of the D3, D3s, D700 and D3100 are made by Nikon | Nikon Rumors
The Nikon D4 sensor is made by Nikon. The D3200 sensor is Nikon-made. The D5200 has a Toshiba sensor. The D800/D800e sensor was made by Sony. The new D5300 has a Toshiba-made sensor.

So, yet again, the guy in the video is spewing wildly incorrect information.

Nikon DSLR (Digital Camera) Comparison by Thom Hogan

According to what I read in Hogan's column, the Sony/Nikon exclusive use agreement on the 36-MP sensor made by Sony is going to EXPIRE soon, which makes me wonder if perhaps Pentax or Canon might buy some of the awesome D800/D800e type sensors and start using those in their camera offerings. It's been rumored that Pentax has a full-frame d-slr in the works.

 

[JacaRanda]

Just a point of clarification: the sensor in the Nikon D7100 is made by Toshiba. Not Sony. In the past, Nikon has made its OWN sensors. The sensors of the D3, D3s, D700 and D3100 are made by Nikon | Nikon Rumors
The Nikon D4 sensor is made by Nikon. The D3200 sensor is Nikon-made. The D5200 has a Toshiba sensor. The D800/D800e sensor was made by Sony.

So, yet again, the guy in the video is spewing wildly incorrect information.

Nikon DSLR (Digital Camera) Comparison by Thom Hogan

According to what I read in Hogan's column, the SOny?Nikon exclusive use contract on the 36-MP sensor is going to EXPIRE soon, which makes me wonder if perhaps Pentax or Canon might buy some of the awesome D800/D800e type sensors and start using those in their camera offerings. It's been rumored that Pentax has a full-frame d-slr in the works.

Darn - That Jaca trying to stir the pot again. At least I'm trying to have fun with it. The dude in the video is serious tapedshut: did not watch it actually)

I should be in the Kansas City Royal forum.

 

[gsgary]

Hi, Joe (Ysarex). Sony outlet when it was still around was OK but didn't suck. Calumet rentals have Sony lenses. I've had two of my Sony bodies repaired by Sony and so far have been working great. (They cost less to fix by Sony than a local and well-known camera repair shop in NYC.) Whether or not you're exaggerating, I think "laughable joke" is uncalled for. We have, after all, clients who would disagree.

Pro's do shoot other things than sports the Sony A7 is perfect for documentary photography