Should I switch from Canon to Sony?

[ZachDames]

Problems with Sony

1.So far from what I heard very bad customer service
2.All their cameras except the A9 has 1 SD card
3.Very poor lens selection
4.The lenses they do have are very expensive
5.Very few third party lenses
6.Overheating in pretty much all their cameras when shooting video in 4K, from what I hear some models of their A9 has overheating issues and some don't.
7.Very bad battery life in all models except the A9
8.Most models are small which makes a very bad thing if you use big fast zoom lenses
9.Menu of Sony is just horrible

The good

1.Excellent AF both for stills and video
2.Their G master lenses are very good
3.Almost all their models have 4K which makes them future proof
4.Small bodies good for travel and if you mostly use prime lenses or slow zoom lenses
5.Some of their bodies have IBIS
6.Excellent sensors with good low light performance and good dynamic range

Here are few thoughts from my experience as I own Nikon DSLR and Sony a6300
Battery life on the Sony camera is a PITA!, its annoying and I carry few batteries in pocket even if I take a walk in the park
I still don't get the menus of this camera but I do learn it slowly as I go, seems like their is no logic at all
The lenses or more lack of reasonably prices good zoom lenses for their APS-C is annoying
A big thing that somehow all mirrorless users "forget" to mention is that the AF system performance in low light, it takes much longer to lock focus or it just gives up compared to DLSR! had this issue on my Panasonic MFT and the Sony, not a huge improvement here.
In good lighting condition the AF is very good, about par with DSLR
Small size is ideal for traveling
Sony cameras are just excellent, they make amazing photos and amazing videos, their video AF is just amazing!!!

So for conclusion I am happy, I knew exactly what I got myself into, for wedding I use my Nikon, I mean to me the Sony cant even touch it, yes an A9 might be a good tool but for that I would need to spend 10000$ to be comparable to my DSLR and this is simply INSANE!!! when it comes to value for money for professional wedding work Sony has nothing on DSLR!!!
For video I think at the moment while not perfect Sony is offering the best package with 4K, amazing video AF and overall good reliability.
I am going to stay with Sony for video and travel, where will I be in 2-3 years as for my equipment depends a lot on Nikon and what they will make and Sony too, once their will be better customer service, more third party lenses options and more FF with 2 SD cards available and if Nikon will just keep making non innovating cameras I might make a switch fully to Sony, time will tell, I LOVE Nikon so I am willing to give them the chance to make more interesting cameras in the future, we shall see.............................

Should you leave Canon for Sony ?
That's something only you can answer

See I don't do weddings so I don't need a camera for that pro setting, my pro photography is like portraits, staff photos, and then my enthusiast photography is wildlife photos, and sorts photos etc. I think I would be happy with sony.

 

[ZachDames]

I see little technical or practical merit to abandoning canon, but I'll say to the OP if the sony is want you really pine for- just return the canon and go for it.

Heck, I did pretty much the same thing when I sold my existing really-nice rig to go to nikon a couple of years ago. It wasn't necessary but it made me happy. Isn't that what we are going for? (plus I can hum the tune to 'kodachrome' when I shoot now.... can't do that with a canon or sony)

PS- some of my favorite and most popular images were shot on my old canon that I ditched, which occasionally makes me nostalgic for canon- the human mind is a messy thing!

I agree. This is just something I'm passionate about so I can sometimes get wrapped up in trying to be a ''pro'' with the ''latest and greatest''pro gear. I need to get back to my roots and just get a camera that takes great photo and video and gives me an end product that makes me smile, and that keeps innovating and improving.

 

[ZachDames]

I switched brand recently. But I didn't do it for features or imagery. I did it for size and weight. I'm an old man and I no longer comfortable carrying a lot of gear. If I were a younger man I wouldn't have done it.

See me wanting to do alot of wildlife photography/videography makes me wander if the light mirrorless cameras would make hiding in a bush easier Vs a 30lb dslr. Who did you switch to?

 

[fmw]

I switched brand recently. But I didn't do it for features or imagery. I did it for size and weight. I'm an old man and I no longer comfortable carrying a lot of gear. If I were a younger man I wouldn't have done it.

See me wanting to do alot of wildlife photography/videography makes me wander if the light mirrorless cameras would make hiding in a bush easier Vs a 30lb dslr. Who did you switch to?

Fujifilm. A decent but not the best choice for videography but it does still photography as well as anybody. Sony does better videography.

My experience tells me wildlife photography is more about lenses than cameras. One of the nice things about mirrorless cameras is that you can adapt DSLR lenses to them. You lose auto focus, but you can certainly do it. I have an adapter for Nikon lenses. I've been focusing manually for more than 1/2 a century. Fuji does produce a 100-400 zoom which is about what you need for wildlife photography on APS-C format.

 

[goodguy]

I switched brand recently. But I didn't do it for features or imagery. I did it for size and weight. I'm an old man and I no longer comfortable carrying a lot of gear. If I were a younger man I wouldn't have done it.

LOL, sounds familiar, I used to carry my D750+24-70mm+70-200mm on long day trips with no real issues, now I simply cant, for that my Sony a6300 will do fine even though I know in many situations I will wish I had my Nikon gear with me.
Growing old sucks!!! don't let anyone else tell you different LOL

 

[goodguy]

I think I would be happy with sony.

I think so too

 

[goodguy]

Here's a little different take on that. I've been watching Jason Lanier and he shoots with Sony bodies. There are plenty of times that I have seen him shoot with Canon glass on them and the images look darn good to me. So if you are wanting to some day move to the Sony platform, don't let the glass stop you. (I've seen him use the 200mm f/2.0 from Canon and wow)

As you mentioned, you aren't so invested in Canon that you couldn't easily make the switch so if that is what you want, go for it. The Ziess glass that Jason uses seems to me to be pretty killer.

From few reviews I saw of Sony working with Canon glass it is possible but it does loose some quality and more over it effects the AF, it slows it down and overall less effective.
I will stick mostly to Sony lenses as I get the maximum out of Sony AF both for video and stills, I think using Canon glass on Sony is good only as a transitional method but at the end of the day until third party makers will find a way to fully work with Sony AF best is stick to Sony glass.

 

[astroNikon]

I keep wanting to add a FujiFilm or SONY mirrorless to what I use. I just can't justify the expense which is mostly new, expensive lenses.

 

[ZachDames]

Here's a little different take on that. I've been watching Jason Lanier and he shoots with Sony bodies. There are plenty of times that I have seen him shoot with Canon glass on them and the images look darn good to me. So if you are wanting to some day move to the Sony platform, don't let the glass stop you. (I've seen him use the 200mm f/2.0 from Canon and wow)

As you mentioned, you aren't so invested in Canon that you couldn't easily make the switch so if that is what you want, go for it. The Ziess glass that Jason uses seems to me to be pretty killer.

Jason Lanier has some awsome stuff! He's actually one of the people that got my eye on Sony. The lack of auto is what scares me about adapting lenses, but I don't plan on shooting birds very often so I don't think the slow auto focus will be all that bad every now and then?

 

[fmw]

I keep wanting to add a FujiFilm or SONY mirrorless to what I use. I just can't justify the expense which is mostly new, expensive lenses.

You need to work at it. I'm comfy with used products but most of my Fuji stuff is new. My X-E2 was $600 factory refurbished with a new 18-55 zoom. The 60 f2.4 macro was $300 used but perfect. The 50-230 zoom was only $100 new because I bought it in a bundle with an X-A3 that I had to return because the hot shoe didn't work. I have a Rokinon 14 that I bought for $250. I also have an X-E1 body that I bought new for $289. I don't view any of that as expensive but it was more work than just placing an order from Adorama. So for about $1500 I have a nice little system that handles extreme wide angle, wide angle, normal, telephoto and macro with two bodies.

 

[table1349]

For photographers they're great, but I'm looking for a hybrid. To many flaws in there video features. The Motion JPEG files of the 5d mark iv 4k has its upsides, but for wildlife photo and video I'm planning it on using it for that will take up a lot of cfast cards to leave camera recording for 2 or 3 hours, or just one really big expensive one.

If I understand you right you want to leave a camera recording for two or three hours. If that is so you want a video camera, a still camera that does video, all still cameras that do video are limited to 29 minutes of recording time.

 

[chuasam]

I have been somewhat tempted to switch to Sony but there a few reasons that I haven't.
1. they don't have the lenses I really use
2. horrific battery life
3. my GF uses Nikon and we share a lot of gear
4. the ergonomics are clunky

reason Nikon is pissing me off
1. lack of in-body image stabilization
2. heavy bodies

 

[astroNikon]

yeah but Nikon went with lens stabilization. At one time there was a good reason for that.
But I would prefer body stabilization as it's a one time expense, rather than for each lens with it. Of course, if the sensor VR were to have issues it would have to be sent in.

 

[ZachDames]

For photographers they're great, but I'm looking for a hybrid. To many flaws in there video features. The Motion JPEG files of the 5d mark iv 4k has its upsides, but for wildlife photo and video I'm planning it on using it for that will take up a lot of cfast cards to leave camera recording for 2 or 3 hours, or just one really big expensive one.

If I understand you right you want to leave a camera recording for two or three hours. If that is so you want a video camera, a still camera that does video, all still cameras that do video are limited to 29 minutes of recording time.

Im talking about the amount of storage necessary to hold 2-3 hours of 4k motion JPEG that the 5d mark iv outputs.

 

[VidThreeNorth]

I have not done much still photography for something like 10 - 20 years, or more. I gave up to do "other things". For the last 10 years I formed a vague plan to get back into it, but with a completely different set of interests. So for the last 5 odd years, I have mainly done video, though I did buy a Panasonic Lumix GF3. But until about a year ago, you could count the number of still pictures I took, well, ok, it would have taken a bit more than 10 fingers, but not by much. Then in the last couple of years, I started doing some more still again. Though for the last year, I think I have probably not reached 500 pictures. Some of you guys probably do that much in a day.

The GF3 almost caused me to panic. I was active in the computer industry for many years and I thought I had kept up with photographic technology basics. I vaguely remember going through the manual and not knowing where to start learning the camera. For a while (months?), I could not do more than set it to Auto and point and shoot. But my videos (mainly done with a Canon R40 and other cheap video cameras) were doing ok, so I was not concerned. I eventually did get to know the menu system, for a while, and then forgot it again. Last December I finally learned it again and found that I liked it!

I have a Sony a5000 now among other products, and frankly, I do not mind the interface that much. What I mind is that, being the bottom-of-the-line camera that it is (and ALWAYS was), it lacks features. It does not even do standard 30 fps FullHD MP4 video (it supports 24 fps in FullHD, but in AVC mode it does 60 FIELDs/sec interlace). There are other issues, but all excusable for being their "cheapo" model.

I have recently found that the Pentax Q-S1 interface is very easy for me. Apparently this is essentially the same as their regular upper line K-mount cameras. I would wonder how it compares to the upper line Fuji's.

Anyway, as far as the question of Canon lenses on Sony bodies goes, the situation seems to be constantly changing -- for the better. There are three or four "full support" adapters that with varying success support auto-focus and exposure. There are a number of YouTube videos that test them, going back many years, and yes, the latest videos show better support, but with a few "catches" (which adapters are better for which lenses, etc.).

Here is 1 (a Jason Lanier as you would guess):
"Sony A6500- the best focusing Sony Mirrorless Camera for use with Canon lenses with adapters", "Jason Lanier", Nov 30, 2016
""