Help not sure if i should stay in the sony dslr fam

[fotomumma09]

So, I'm really wanting to get into photography professionally and I know it'll take years to build my business, but I'm in need to a body update. I have an a200. If I'm going to start building my accessories/lenses I'll need to make the switch now. Any pro Sony users out there? Or should I look into Nikon or Canon?

 

[dxqcanada2]

What are your objectives ?

 

[skieur]

"Professionally" is rather an extremely broad area with levels that go from low to very high, with each one requiring a different quality level of equipment. You also need to consider the direction that photographic technology is taking and whether you should buy now or wait a few months for new models and important improvements.

In super simplistic terms Sony is the least expensive with $1500 getting you the A77: a 24 megpixel camera with some great innovative features or pay $4,000 in April for the Sony A99 with 36 megapixels full-frame with even more features. With new Zeiss and Sony G lenses that would give you quite a good quality base for some kinds of pro work.

The Canon and Nikon top pro cameras are more expensive but for studio work, some sports and bands they are very popular. For weddings, engagement photos, seniors, family shots, public relations, informal portraits, scenics, etc. all 3 brands: Sony, Canon and Nikon will do a great job.

skieur

 

[awdSTi]

I think it depends on what type of photography you are wanting to do! The next questionn you need to ask yourself which features you want on a new camera, such as body. Durabilities, full frame vs. Crop, video quality, screen size, and lens choices.

Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk

 

[fotomumma09]

"Professionally" is rather an extremely broad area with levels that go from low to very high, with each one requiring a different quality level of equipment. You also need to consider the direction that photographic technology is taking and whether you should buy now or wait a few months for new models and important improvements.

In super simplistic terms Sony is the least expensive with $1500 getting you the A77: a 24 megpixel camera with some great innovative features or pay $4,000 in April for the Sony A99 with 36 megapixels full-frame with even more features. With new Zeiss and Sony G lenses that would give you quite a good quality base for some kinds of pro work.

The Canon and Nikon top pro cameras are more expensive but for studio work, some sports and bands they are very popular. For weddings, engagement photos, seniors, family shots, public relations, informal portraits, scenics, etc. all 3 brands: Sony, Canon and Nikon will do a great job.

skieur

Thank you skieur, well said. I've been doing a lot of research and I'm still having a hard time deciding. I'd love to make a go of Sony dslr's.

As for full frame cropped...any suggestions? This is the first i have really understood about it. Thanks in advance!

 

[fotomumma09]

What are your objectives ?

Objectives...mostly portraits, family shoots etc.

 

[dxqcanada2]

If you are going for a studio setup ... Sony still has to workout some issues with non-dedicated off-camera flash and the EVF.
I hope one day Sony does figure out that important aspect.

Sony does have a nice array of G and Zeiss lenses ... so if you stick with Sony, budget for that and stick with full frame capable lenses.

 

[fotomumma09]

If you are going for a studio setup ... Sony still has to workout some issues with non-dedicated off-camera flash and the EVF.
I hope one day Sony does figure out that important aspect.

Sony does have a nice array of G and Zeiss lenses ... so if you stick with Sony, budget for that and stick with full frame capable lenses.

I prefer shooting outdoors

 

[skieur]

"Professionally" is rather an extremely broad area with levels that go from low to very high, with each one requiring a different quality level of equipment. You also need to consider the direction that photographic technology is taking and whether you should buy now or wait a few months for new models and important improvements.

In super simplistic terms Sony is the least expensive with $1500 getting you the A77: a 24 megpixel camera with some great innovative features or pay $4,000 in April for the Sony A99 with 36 megapixels full-frame with even more features. With new Zeiss and Sony G lenses that would give you quite a good quality base for some kinds of pro work.

The Canon and Nikon top pro cameras are more expensive but for studio work, some sports and bands they are very popular. For weddings, engagement photos, seniors, family shots, public relations, informal portraits, scenics, etc. all 3 brands: Sony, Canon and Nikon will do a great job.

skieur

Thank you skieur, well said. I've been doing a lot of research and I'm still having a hard time deciding. I'd love to make a go of Sony dslr's.

As for full frame cropped...any suggestions? This is the first i have really understood about it. Thanks in advance!

Full frame versus crop frame is a 6 of one and half a dozen of the other kind of thing. Popular Photography magazine which gets thousands of images sent in to them, indicated that they can NOT tell the difference between a full frame versus a crop frame image, so quality is not an issue.

One advantage of the crop frame is lenses. On a full frame camera an excellent 80 mm 1.4 professional level portrait lens would cost well over $1,000 even if it was on sale. With a crop frame camera a 50mm 1.4 lens that is physically smaller and costs around $100 or less will give you the equivalent of 75mm on the full frame camera. Same quality lenses and shots for 10% cheaper on the crop body.

In the telephoto area a 450mm long telephoto for a full frame camera would again be extremely costly (several thousand) and impossible to use without a tripod. With a crop frame camera a 300mm telephoto which is lighter and easier to use without a tripod and costs under $1,000 will give you the equivalent of 450mm on the full frame camera.

The advantage of full frame cameras use to be that they could produce better wide angle shots but that changed with the development of new lenses and in camera panorama shots. Another advantage use to be better quality shots but that has changed as well, as Popular Photography magazine has pointed out.

So currently it is more a matter of style and personal choice more than anything else.

skieur

 

[skieur]

If you are going for a studio setup ... Sony still has to workout some issues with non-dedicated off-camera flash and the EVF.
I hope one day Sony does figure out that important aspect.

Sony does have a nice array of G and Zeiss lenses ... so if you stick with Sony, budget for that and stick with full frame capable lenses.

In terms of EVF, the A77 is higher resolution at 1.2 million dots, brighter and with greater contrast. The criticism of a little too much shadow contrast in some shots is apparently fixable in the firmware update. The fact that Sony is still going with the EVF on the A99 full frame indicates that it is not a problem compared with the optical viewfinder of other cameras and has some advantages over them.

skieur

 

[mjhoward]

The fact that Sony is still going with the EVF on the A99 full frame indicates that it is not a problem compared with the optical viewfinder of other cameras and has some advantages over them.

Along with many disadvantages that you continually fail to acknowledge.

 

[fotomumma09]

Full frame versus crop frame is a 6 of one and half a dozen of the other kind of thing. Popular Photography magazine which gets thousands of images sent in to them, indicated that they can NOT tell the difference between a full frame versus a crop frame image, so quality is not an issue.

One advantage of the crop frame is lenses. On a full frame camera an excellent 80 mm 1.4 professional level portrait lens would cost well over $1,000 even if it was on sale. With a crop frame camera a 50mm 1.4 lens that is physically smaller and costs around $100 or less will give you the equivalent of 75mm on the full frame camera. Same quality lenses and shots for 10% cheaper on the crop body.

In the telephoto area a 450mm long telephoto for a full frame camera would again be extremely costly (several thousand) and impossible to use without a tripod. With a crop frame camera a 300mm telephoto which is lighter and easier to use without a tripod and costs under $1,000 will give you the equivalent of 450mm on the full frame camera.

The advantage of full frame cameras use to be that they could produce better wide angle shots but that changed with the development of new lenses and in camera panorama shots. Another advantage use to be better quality shots but that has changed as well, as Popular Photography magazine has pointed out.

So currently it is more a matter of style and personal choice more than anything else.

skieur

Thank you, you are a wealth of knowledge and I see on these forums you get a lot of people attacking you based on your love for Sony....so honestly if I were to stick with Sony, (and in thinking I'd like to get my hands on an a580) I could make a real go of this? Providing I invest in a few high end lenses?

 

[skieur]

Full frame versus crop frame is a 6 of one and half a dozen of the other kind of thing. Popular Photography magazine which gets thousands of images sent in to them, indicated that they can NOT tell the difference between a full frame versus a crop frame image, so quality is not an issue.

One advantage of the crop frame is lenses. On a full frame camera an excellent 80 mm 1.4 professional level portrait lens would cost well over $1,000 even if it was on sale. With a crop frame camera a 50mm 1.4 lens that is physically smaller and costs around $100 or less will give you the equivalent of 75mm on the full frame camera. Same quality lenses and shots for 10% cheaper on the crop body.

In the telephoto area a 450mm long telephoto for a full frame camera would again be extremely costly (several thousand) and impossible to use without a tripod. With a crop frame camera a 300mm telephoto which is lighter and easier to use without a tripod and costs under $1,000 will give you the equivalent of 450mm on the full frame camera.

The advantage of full frame cameras use to be that they could produce better wide angle shots but that changed with the development of new lenses and in camera panorama shots. Another advantage use to be better quality shots but that has changed as well, as Popular Photography magazine has pointed out.

So currently it is more a matter of style and personal choice more than anything else.

skieur

Thank you, you are a wealth of knowledge and I see on these forums you get a lot of people attacking you based on your love for Sony....so honestly if I were to stick with Sony, (and in thinking I'd like to get my hands on an a580) I could make a real go of this? Providing I invest in a few high end lenses?

Well, as for being attacked, I have been doing professional photography since before many of my attackers were even born, so I don't take it seriously. The cheapest approach if you were to stick with Sony is to check out some of the used merchandise stores in small towns. I once found 2 high quality Minolta A lenses,(one they call the beer can), that work on Sony cameras for less than $500 for both together. That was a steal because their value was not recognized. Zeiss lenses have a great reputation too, and some of the Sony G lenses are the best Minolta lenses rebranded.

skieur

 

[cgipson1]

If you are going for a studio setup ... Sony still has to workout some issues with non-dedicated off-camera flash and the EVF.
I hope one day Sony does figure out that important aspect.

Sony does have a nice array of G and Zeiss lenses ... so if you stick with Sony, budget for that and stick with full frame capable lenses.

I prefer shooting outdoors

Professionals OFTEN don't have a choice! It is their client's preference that counts (at least if they want to get paid!). Flash is an absolute must as a pro.. there will be times, when you HAVE to shoot.. and there won't be enough ambient light to shoot by! For Portrait work (studio level) flash is also a must....

 

[fotomumma09]

Professionals OFTEN don't have a choice! It is their client's preference that counts (at least if they want to get paid!). Flash is an absolute must as a pro.. there will be times, when you HAVE to shoot.. and there won't be enough ambient light to shoot by! For Portrait work (studio level) flash is also a must....

Well said