Stay the course or jump ship early?

[thereyougo!]

I guess a lot depends on what you plan on doing with the camera. I prefered the Nikon system myself because I shoot a lot of stuff in lower lighting conditions and that's a place where Nikon has an edge.

However in most shooting situations to be honest the differences between Canon and Nikon really aren't that huge. Sony I don't really recommend unless your going mirrorless, wanting something light weight and don't mind having a very limited lens selection.

If everything your shooting you can shoot with say a 16-50mm lens and you really need the portability, then it might be a good option. But for the most part I don't recommend Sony because of their track record.

Sony has this history of coming up with ideas that sound really great - and then never really following through on them. With my Nikon I can buy a $1000 or $2000 lens today and I'm very confident that 10 years from now I can still use that same lens on their latest and greatest camera body should I choose to upgrade.

I just don't have that confidence with Sony. Right now their big thing is their new E mount.. but lets be honest, they never really did throw that much support behind their older A mount. And I have no idea if their E mount will still be supported 5 or 10 years from now.. for all I know they'll come up with something new and more or less abandon the E mount.

So if your looking for a very portable system that will likely only have a very limited set of lenses and that lens set works for you, then yes maybe Sony might be worth a look.

But if you don't mind carrying a DSLR then I would strongly urge you to stick with either Canon or Nikon. You can get a ton of lenses for each, the used market is very strong for both, and all in all your looking at a lot less money for a lot more capability as a result.

There's an awful lot of generalisation here about Sony. The E mount has been around for some years now. First of all with crop and then with FE - the Full frame version of E mount. You can use crop E mount on FE but in the same way as APS-C on Nikon will work on a FF F mount.

There has indeed been some discussion on the future of the A mount, and this is still under question. But it's not really Sony's mount, is it? It was Minolta's. Sony inherited it from Minolta when they took over Minolta some years ago.

Limited lens range? A little wide of the mark. They lenses from 16mm - 300mm in native E mount made by them, plus an excellent premium Zeiss in manual and AF Batis. I don't think you can accuse Sony of having a limited lens range any more. On the A mount there are many top end Zeiss and Sony G lenses.

That aside, my advice to the OP would be to stick with Canon for his own uses, unless he has a bottomless budget - that way he and his OH can share equipment when they shoot together. The only problem comes when they aren't shooting together.

 

[Derrel]

I keep seeing this thread. My personal feeling has been to say ,"Jump ship early, and get with the image quality leader."

Nikon D3400 vs Canon EOS 750D | DxOMark

Get almost two full EV MORE dynamic range from your camera. Stop by Michael The Maven's several, in-depth YouTube camera comparisons. See what the differences actually are. Canon earned a reputation for "better video" years ago, with the 5D series, but when you actually look, some of the BEST-quality APS-C format video is now being shot by Nikon consumer d-slrs. And by Samsung smartphones...and iPhone 7...

The dual pixel focus tech? Ehhhh...not all its cracked up to be. Inp-camera HDR processing...Nikon's got Canon beat in speed and in image quality, and lack of blurring. Canon makes a lot of cameras designed to sell at a lower price point than Nikon. $50 is enough for people to buy a Canon over a Nikon. I would neverm, ever,ever trade 1.9 stops' worth of scene dynamic range for $50 and a Canon.

Look at the sensor performance score of 71. Wow. That is way outdated and under-performing compared to the sensors Sony and Nikon and Pentax are using.The "new" 750D has 2007-era DR. I say again, jump ship early.

 

[robbins.photo]

I guess a lot depends on what you plan on doing with the camera. I prefered the Nikon system myself because I shoot a lot of stuff in lower lighting conditions and that's a place where Nikon has an edge.

However in most shooting situations to be honest the differences between Canon and Nikon really aren't that huge. Sony I don't really recommend unless your going mirrorless, wanting something light weight and don't mind having a very limited lens selection.

If everything your shooting you can shoot with say a 16-50mm lens and you really need the portability, then it might be a good option. But for the most part I don't recommend Sony because of their track record.

Sony has this history of coming up with ideas that sound really great - and then never really following through on them. With my Nikon I can buy a $1000 or $2000 lens today and I'm very confident that 10 years from now I can still use that same lens on their latest and greatest camera body should I choose to upgrade.

I just don't have that confidence with Sony. Right now their big thing is their new E mount.. but lets be honest, they never really did throw that much support behind their older A mount. And I have no idea if their E mount will still be supported 5 or 10 years from now.. for all I know they'll come up with something new and more or less abandon the E mount.

So if your looking for a very portable system that will likely only have a very limited set of lenses and that lens set works for you, then yes maybe Sony might be worth a look.

But if you don't mind carrying a DSLR then I would strongly urge you to stick with either Canon or Nikon. You can get a ton of lenses for each, the used market is very strong for both, and all in all your looking at a lot less money for a lot more capability as a result.

There's an awful lot of generalisation here about Sony. The E mount has been around for some years now. First of all with crop and then with FE - the Full frame version of E mount. You can use crop E mount on FE but in the same way as APS-C on Nikon will work on a FF F mount.

There has indeed been some discussion on the future of the A mount, and this is still under question. But it's not really Sony's mount, is it? It was Minolta's. Sony inherited it from Minolta when they took over Minolta some years ago.

Limited lens range? A little wide of the mark. They lenses from 16mm - 300mm in native E mount made by them, plus an excellent premium Zeiss in manual and AF Batis. I don't think you can accuse Sony of having a limited lens range any more. On the A mount there are many top end Zeiss and Sony G lenses.

That aside, my advice to the OP would be to stick with Canon for his own uses, unless he has a bottomless budget - that way he and his OH can share equipment when they shoot together. The only problem comes when they aren't shooting together.

For some of us 300mm is limited range. And yes, the do have a few telephoto options available. Good luck finding any used or at a reasonable price. As far as I know neither sigma nor tamron support them either.

So if you like your Sony, great. Me, I see a lot of issues with the Sony system, lens availability is at the top of the list, and yes longevity is a close second. Sony as a whole doesn't have a great track record on this front. It's not just the camera division.

It's a shame too because the 6000 series looks great. Sadly though I don't recommend most people invest because of some of the issues described above.

Ymmv

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk

 

[Dave442]

Sounds to me like your wife has the system she wants. You just need to find out what you want as you have your renewed interest in photography. If you already have a photography background then you probably will be happier jumping in with a higher level camera body - and the brand should not be based on what your wife is using unless your doing something like a husband/wife wedding photography team. You sure don't want your wife telling her friends that she did not get the shot because you were using the lens that she needed.

 

[DanOstergren]

Image quality isn't important in my opinion with modern DSLR cameras between Canon and Nikon because they're all going to have great image quality despite the difference between brands, and especially so at the hobbyist level. In my opinion the tiny quality details only matter with high end clients, at which point you should be billing them for the rental cost of high end gear. At your level, and the level of many professionals, it just doesn't matter with the capabilities of modern camera technology.

What I think DOES matter is saving money by using the same system as your wife , as well as both of you being familiar with that system so you can both help each other grow as photographers. I think you should stick with Canon if that's what your wife will be using. You'll both be learning the same menu system and camera functions, have the same raw file types, you'll be able to help her learn to use her camera because you'll be familiar with the system, and you'll be able to share gear. Say she does become passionate about photography, hypothetically. If you buy a single Canon speedlite, you'll both be able to use it; if you have a Nikon camera and buy a Nikon compatible speedlite, she can't use it and if she decides she wants to start using a speedlite you'll have to buy another one. Same goes for every other piece of equipment that functions only with certain camera brands like lenses, radio triggers, ttl cords, etc. If you have two different brands of cameras, you'll have to spend more money in many cases just to have the same gear.