Nikon vs. Sony vs. Canon.

[Necrossis]

Hello.

I just need some advice - I'm planning on buying a new DSLR soon, but I'm really confused... At the moment I have Sony a200 - it's okay, but it's pretty old and also damaged and since I'm taking photography pretty serious, I need a better camera.

So I was wondering - which camera to buy? At first I wanted to buy Nikon D90, but changed my mind. Since I'm a Sony user, I wanted to buy once again a Sony DSLR (I was thinking about a380y or a350x, maybe even a550y). But...

...most of the people I know use Canon - so I'd maybe even buy a 550D. Than again, the new Nikon 3100 doesn't seem bad also.



So, what do you think? 3100, 550D, A380Y, A350X or A550Y?

 

[Markw]

How much do you have invested in terms of lenses, sony gear, etc? How much are you looking to spend? What type of photos do you like to shoot? All of this is what we need to know to help you decide. Just so you know, this will probably end up in a debate with alot of off-topic flaming. Other than that..welcome to the forum! We're good people.

Mark

 

[usayit]

^^ his Q's ^^

what type of research information have you already done?
Which of the cameras initially sparked your attention? why? (video?, etc.)

This is such an open question among brands comparisons that its bound to turn into a flame war.

 

[Vinny]

My brother in law bought the Sony full frame since he had lenses from a previous camera. I would say stick with Sony if you have a lot invested in Sony stuff as Markw said. It really doesn't matter what others use or say it comes down to the individual's needs; give any camera to a good photographer and good photos will come out!

 

[Necrossis]

Thank you very much, I'm sure I'll enjoy it here.

Anyhow, I spent nothing, no additional lenses or anything. I always thought I'm going to buy a Canon/Nikon, so it seemed pointless. I was also really young back then and wasn't sure if photography was you know... the real thing?
Anyhow, I mostly shot "macro" and with my current lens (18-70) I also crop my pictures a lot, just to get as close as possible without massivly ruining the quality of the picture... yes, I'm also planning on buying a macro lens, but first comes the camera.

Actually, I'm hating the video option that most of the mentioned cameras have (if not even all of them?) just because it's really pointless - for myself (my dad has a video camera if I feel like I have to urgently video something...).

I'm willing to spend about 900€ (camera + lens).

Well I mostly did research on the Canon 550D (reviews and stuff) and unfortunately, for all the other cameras I only read the basic descriptions.

I'd prefer buying Canon 550D, just because most of the people I know have Canons and most of them are totaly into borrowing lenses and stuff... (but of course, I'd freely take any of the other cameras).

Honestly, I don't know much about cameras, about their atributes, so that's also why I hoped you'll be able to help me. I'm just trying to get the best for the money I'm willing to spend.


Thank you very much for all of your help, I really appreciate it.

 

[Markw]

If you think that camera is good for you, then get it. I honestly dont know much about Canon as I shoot Nikon only, and own a D90. As far as video pertains, I would agree that it is not needed. However, it is nice to have on those spur of the moment things when you do want it. But by no means a necessity. If youre wanting Canon, I can offer no advice. I will say that if you go Nikon, the D90 is a great camera to start and learn with. The replacement for the D90, the D7000 will be released within the month and is expected to be great. If you decide Nikon, I will help then. I can't really sway you my way unless I knew more about the other brands, which I do not. If you can get a hold of a member on here named Derrel, he is a very, very knowledgeable person and is generally more than welcome to help. He shoots Canon and Nikon, so he could help you decide. GL. :thumbsup:

Mark

 

[Necrossis]

If you think that camera is good for you, then get it. I honestly dont know much about Canon as I shoot Nikon only, and own a D90. As far as video pertains, I would agree that it is not needed. However, it is nice to have on those spur of the moment things when you do want it. But by no means a necessity. If youre wanting Canon, I can offer no advice. I will say that if you go Nikon, the D90 is a great camera to start and learn with. The replacement for the D90, the D7000 will be released within the month and is expected to be great. If you decide Nikon, I will help then. I can't really sway you my way unless I knew more about the other brands, which I do not. If you can get a hold of a member on here named Derrel, he is a very, very knowledgeable person and is generally more than welcome to help. He shoots Canon and Nikon, so he could help you decide. GL. :thumbsup:

Mark

Hmmm, I'm not sure, but if I'm not mistaken (atleast I heard so...) they'll be removing D90 from the shops sometime soon now? I'm really, really not sure if it's the right information through. :O

Well I'm willing to wait until of the end of the year or even more, I'm not in a hurry really, so I still have a lot of time to choose. And thanks, once again.

 

[Markw]

I know they started offering to buy back your D90 in some other countries, but as for pulling it from the shelves, Im not too sure. I suppose they could. Either way, if you dont get one new, you could always get a used copy, or a refurb. Im sure someone else that can help you choose further will chime in shortly. Sorry I couldnt be of much help.

Mark

 

[Markw]

The specs for the D7000 are here: http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...3100-has-been-released-d90-replacement-2.html

Mark

 

[cfusionpm]

:thumbup:

If you can get a hold of a member on here named Derrel, he is a very, very knowledgeable person and is generally more than welcome to help. He shoots Canon and Nikon, so he could help you decide. GL. :thumbsup:

He shoots some ho-hum old Canons and does nothing but complain about Canon, especially in regards to their bodies. So, just a head's up to the OP for getting advice from him: take his words about Canon with a grain of salt. He has a wealth of knowledge about film cameras, developing, photographic theory, lenses and optics, but his experience with DSLRs often boils down to reading a lot of things on the internet about them rather than owning them or using them for more than a single short shoot; if even that.

As far as I can gather from my conversations with him, the only reason he shoots Canon was because they offered an affordable full frame body (or any full frame body for that matter) long before Nikon. It baffles me why he doesn't just buy a D700 and be a happy man. :thumbup:

Back on topic, if "most of the people you know" shoot Canon, and any of these people have nice lenses to let you borrow, perhaps Canon would be a good path to go down. It really doesnt matter which; both take great shots and both have excellent body and lens linups. They also both have vastly different menu systems and exterior erganomics, as well as minor differences in features. Go to a store and play with them in your hands and see which is more comfortable. An entry level camera from either Nikon or Canon (like D3100 or 550D) would likely be more than enough.

 

[Derrel]

:thumbup:

If you can get a hold of a member on here named Derrel, he is a very, very knowledgeable person and is generally more than welcome to help. He shoots Canon and Nikon, so he could help you decide. GL. :thumbsup:

He shoots some ho-hum old Canons and does nothing but complain about Canon, especially in regards to their bodies. So, just a head's up to the OP for getting advice from him: take his words about Canon with a grain of salt. He has a wealth of knowledge about film cameras, developing, photographic theory, lenses and optics, but his experience with DSLRs often boils down to reading a lot of things on the internet about them rather than owning them or using them for more than a single short shoot; if even that.

As far as I can gather from my conversations with him, the only reason he shoots Canon was because they offered an affordable full frame body (or any full frame body for that matter) long before Nikon. It baffles me why he doesn't just buy a D700 and be a happy man. :thumbup:

Back on topic, if "most of the people you know" shoot Canon, and any of these people have nice lenses to let you borrow, perhaps Canon would be a good path to go down. It really doesnt matter which; both take great shots and both have excellent body and lens linups. They also both have vastly different menu systems and exterior erganomics, as well as minor differences in features. Go to a store and play with them in your hands and see which is more comfortable. An entry level camera from either Nikon or Canon (like D3100 or 550D) would likely be more than enough.

Total B.S. and lies about me from my little hater, cfconfusion...

I have 37 years of experience in photography and cfconfusion is what?? 28 years old or something like that....he's yet another Canon fan who HATES to hear objective comments, numerical analysis, actual test results, etc,etc if there is any type of information even slightly not in favor of his beloved Canon 50D or 7D models....which are I suspect, the only cameras he's ever owned...

Kind of funny...a newbie who has been shooting for something like two years says I have little experience! My frame counts on most of my d-slr bodies range into the tens of thousands per year.

And to the OP..yeah....follow Matty's advice, and mooch off of your friends and borrow their Canon lenses...they'll love you for it.

 

[Neil S.]

I am not going to touch the Nikon vs. Canon aspect of this, because its a can of worms...

I will say that Sony isnt up to the level of Nikon or Canon in my opinion. They simply dont have as good or as diverse of a system compared to the other two.

Remember that you are being locked into a photographic system when buying a body.

What I mean by this is that for the most part you will be forced to buy that companies lenses, flashes, accesories, etc.

You can always buy 3rd party lenses, but you would be unable to buy a Nikon lens for a Canon for example though. I have heard that there are adapters, but I believe it makes the lens manual focus only. This is far from ideal.

This is something to keep in mind when deciding which body to buy, if you arent already invested in a system.

My advice is research the entire companies lens/body lineups, and read reviews. Look into the future and see what lenses you would like to buy down the road. This will help you to decide which system to pick.

All that being said, Canon rocks! :mrgreen:

Hope this helps.

 

[cfusionpm]

My frame counts on most of my d-slr bodies range into the tens of thousands per year.

Yep, and how many of those were not on a generation-old 5D, four-generation-old 20D, four-generation-old Rebel, six-year-old D70, or six-year-old D2X? (which was my point about experience with newer bodies like say the 7D, which you mention only a single short session with, or the 50D which you love to quote dpreview about) Feel free to correct me, I'm OK with admitting when I'm wrong on something. :thumbup:

By the way Derrel, you never directly answered why you shoot with Canons. There has to be some reason, right?

 

[skieur]

Canon tends to have slightly better sharpness than Nikon but that comes with slightly more picture noise than Nikon...moreso on some models than others. Sony has faster autofocus than both Canon and Nikon.

The new Sony A55 is a smaller than usual DSLR with a new mirror system which takes the standard Sony or Minolta lenses. It also does video with autofocus which is not usual for many DSLRs and panoramas done totally in camera.

skieur

 

[Overread]

Forget all this camera body nonsense (seriously they just love a good flame war they do :lmao. This has caught my eye in your comments.

Anyhow, I mostly shot "macro" and with my current lens (18-70) I also crop my pictures a lot, just to get as close as possible without massivly ruining the quality of the picture... yes, I'm also planning on buying a macro lens, but first comes the camera.

When it comes to choosing the right camera system its not all about bodies - infact because they upgrade and fall out of use so fast in comparison to lenses the bodies are of secondary concern mostly - its the lenses you want to look to. Canon and Nikon have very diverse ranges (both high and low cost options) whilst some companies like sony have a good pro range, but can sometimes lack in cheaper options in some areas - and vis versa. (edit forgot that sony took the Minolta lenses which greatly increases the lens market for them! )

Anyway since you say you shoot a lot of macro already I'm going to say go for Canon - not because their macro lenses are any better than Nikons, but because of the chance that you might get into high magnification macro work and for there canon has one unique lens - the MPE 65mm macro - its specailist and tricky to use, but a very good high magnifiaction lens.

I don't recomend that you just jump right in aiming at this lens and I would say get a 100mm macro (the original or the new L version) a Tamron 90mm macro, Sigma 105mm, 150mm etc.. (they vary by budget and features and its a slightly different discussion; but are all optically sound and sharp). And then play around and move toward higher magnifiaction before jumping for a tricky and expensive lens that you might not like.

So you've got friends you can shoot with who like canon - you already like the canon body from looking at it and you like macro - time to go Canon :mrgreen: