What's your brand of choice, and why?

[EvansMomma]

I'm sure there is a similar post somewhere here, but I couldn't find it...

I have a Sony, but for some reason they decided to go with a not-so-standard hot shoe, and I don't feel like buying an adapter just to use standard equipment. Been thinking about getting either a Canon or Nikon, and keeping the Sony for outdoor stuff. Looking for some opinions before I buy.

Which is your preferred brand, and why?

Thanks!

 

[chito beach]

I'm sure there is a similar post somewhere here, but I couldn't find it...

I have a Sony, but for some reason they decided to go with a not-so-standard hot shoe, and I don't feel like buying an adapter just to use standard equipment. Been thinking about getting either a Canon or Nikon, and keeping the Sony for outdoor stuff. Looking for some opinions before I buy.

Which is your preferred brand, and why?

Thanks!

Remember that Minolta equipment also works with your Sony.

So you are going to spend hundreds to save 20.00 on an adapter?

What is your price range?

 

[Garbz]

There's nothing that really separates the supermajors. Nikon / Canon are both essentially the same with massive lens lineups and no distinguishing products outside their professional bodies where one is chasing a stupidly high megapixel count.

Olympus seem to have the edge as far as simple small bodies goes.

Not sure what Pentax's niche is.

Sony seem to be the only company in photography who are actually an evil megacorp who couldn't give a flying **** about their customers and in every aspect other cameras so far have gone to the longest possible extents to screw customers hard and painfully in the backside. Their niche is that they are hugely cheap which is their only appealing feature.

 

[Vinny]

I agree with this! Back in the 70's you took your flash off the camera onto a flash bar which was basically a handle and used a flash cord to fire the flash. Yes, there was no TTL but the flash I had (Vivitar 283) did have a sensor to adjust output. I would imagine there are still flashes today that will work the same way. If this is the reason why you're looking for something different - do some research on flashes and think about it.

I'm sure there is a similar post somewhere here, but I couldn't find it...

I have a Sony, but for some reason they decided to go with a not-so-standard hot shoe, and I don't feel like buying an adapter just to use standard equipment. Been thinking about getting either a Canon or Nikon, and keeping the Sony for outdoor stuff. Looking for some opinions before I buy.

Which is your preferred brand, and why?

Thanks!

Remember that Minolta equipment also works with your Sony.

So you are going to spend hundreds to save 20.00 on an adapter?

What is your price range?

 

[c.cloudwalker]

Reminds me of oil companies :lmao:

In a feature by feature comparison Pentax is a very good value and anyone not obsessed with names could be quite happy with one. Not to mention they make the cheapest but nice quality weathersealed body.

I have to agree that changing system because of the hot shoe seems like a pretty lame excuse. You want to change, fine, it's nobody's business but your own but not for that reason, please.

 

[VujayPrabhakaran]

Sony is not bad

 

[chito beach]

There's nothing that really separates the supermajors. Nikon / Canon are both essentially the same with massive lens lineups and no distinguishing products outside their professional bodies where one is chasing a stupidly high megapixel count.

Olympus seem to have the edge as far as simple small bodies goes.

Not sure what Pentax's niche is.

Sony seem to be the only company in photography who are actually an evil megacorp who couldn't give a flying **** about their customers and in every aspect other cameras so far have gone to the longest possible extents to screw customers hard and painfully in the backside. Their niche is that they are hugely cheap which is their only appealing feature.

So what brought that on?

 

[j-dogg]

I really don't have a brand of choice, my digital is a Canon because I got a really REALLY good deal on it. One of my 35mm's is a Canon Elan 7Ne and I got that so it could use the lenses on my digital.

I have a Nikon 35mm system with two bodies but again, I got a good deal on the first Nikon and wanted some lenses for it. I put out a Craigslist want ad "Wanted, lenses for 35mm Nikon cash in hand" I got a reply and the guy showed up and gave me a Nikkormat FTN on the side. :thumbup:

The Minolta I have is the red-headed stepchild in the bunch, I paid 50 dollars for it bag, two lenses and body and grabbed it because I remember how legendary early Minolta AF glass was.

All four serve a purpose though, the Digital is my digital, one does black and white, one does C41 and/or slide and the Nikkormat does Kodachrome, for now. Notice I said 4, the FG needs light seals.

 

[Rekd]

My choice is Canon because when I decided to get a real DSLR I had the option of using all my wife's old film lenses (from 20mm up to 210) or starting over with Nikon.

Not a difficult decision.

 

[Montana]

I went with Canon based on supertelephoto prices. I wanted to shoot nature photography, and it made the best sense to me.

 

[Derrel]

I like Coca Cola. It's not quite a sweet as Pepsi.

 

[j-dogg]

I like Coca Cola. It's not quite a sweet as Pepsi.

Jone's Cane Sugar Soda > both and it's not made with High Fructose Corn Syrup.

 

[MrLogic]

n/m

 

[EvansMomma]

Not my only reason for switching, just my biggest peeve about it. Its also very cheap, not many places here carry a lot of sony equipment, and I don't like to order electronics over the 'net without first being able to touch/play with it in person. I've used a friends Nikon & the quality of both the camera, and the pictures it produced just seemed to surpass that of the Sony even with a kit lens. So I am asking for opinions, not a lashing because I didn't go into detail

 

[Montana]

Not my only reason for switching, just my biggest peeve about it. Its also very cheap, not many places here carry a lot of sony equipment, and I don't like to order electronics over the 'net without first being able to touch/play with it in person. I've used a friends Nikon & the quality of both the camera, and the pictures it produced just seemed to surpass that of the Sony even with a kit lens. So I am asking for opinions, not a lashing because I didn't go into detail

Relatively speaking, you really shouldn't be able to notice much difference in picture quality. I would just keep shooting, practice, learn, shoot more. You have a very capable camera.