Which System? Why?

[JonA_CT]

About 5 years ago, I bought a Nikon D5000 because I wanted a nice camera, but without any other motivation. I picked it based on DPReview's recommendation and because I could get a great deal on a refurbished camera from Adorama. I used it a bit at first, but eventually, it ended up collecting dust.

A few years after that, I decided to sell it and buy a mirrorless camera. I had myself convinced that the reason I didn't carry the camera around was because it was too big. I bought a used Sony NEX-5 and went about my business until I started getting annoyed at having to use a touch screen for most functions, not having a viewfinder, and e-mount lenses being expensive.

I started shopping again about a year ago. I decided that with a daughter on the way, I needed to buy something with a fast prime lens to be able to take pictures in my house. Because of the baby's arrival, I had a pretty tight budget. I really wanted another Nikon, but the camera and lenses ended up being a decent amount more than I wanted to spend. As a result, I ended up with the Canon SL1 and a couple of primes for a total investment of about $650.

Now that camera is attached to me daily, I'm realizing I probably should have invested some more money the first time around. Some of it is ergonomics -- I have huge dutch hands that have a hard time comfortably holding my SL1. Some of it is functionality -- the SL1 still requires a great deal of interaction with a touch screen. Some of it probably just GAS -- not sure if that's a thing around here, but my guitar playing counterparts understand it to be a huge problem.

My investment in Canon is pretty modest, but I do have about $8-900 into my photography gear. All of it could be transferred to another Canon crop sensor camera, but since I mostly shoot inside I wonder if it might be beneficial to start saving for an entry-level full frame camera. If I do that, the only thing I can "bring with me" is my $100 50mm lens. At that point, I might as well open up the conversation, right?

So all of that to say -- what made you become a Canon shooter? What made you a Nikon shooter? What made you a Sony shooter? Or whatever else?

 

[petrochemist]

Multiple systems for me.
My most used are micro four thirds (usually carrying 2 bodies normal & full spectrum) followed by Pentax.
The Pentax is my older system & works better for heavy shooting occasions like airshows & motorsports.
Micro 4/3 gives reasonable quality, great adaptability & is significantly lighter. Despite carrying 2 bodies the bag weighs about the same as my DSLR bag. Focal lengths covered are roughly similar.

I also have a number of other cameras; the 35mm SLRs, large format (5x4) film ones have multiple lenses so would be classed as systems...

Altogether I'm approaching 100 lens without the various modifier bits (tele-converters, macro & wide angle adapters & project bits...) I can only assume that this must be because I'm mad some of them badly need to be sold off to make room!!
film ones include

 

[Derrel]

You've diagnosed the issue pretty well; you are NOT really "married to" the Canon system say, in the way some people are. There's some money to be had by selling off the stuff you have now, and using the money raised as money that can be added toward new camera/lens stuff.

The thing is...Canon's EF-S lenses are useless on anything but a Canon crop-frame body....if you'd have gone to a compact Nikon like a D3200 instead of an SL-1, you'd possibly have a "DX-type" lens, or perhaps two, or even three DX lenses, that would work on both DX Nikon and FX Nikon bodies.

Similarly: on some of the wide zooms, look to the Ken Rockwell reviews; there are a few wide zooms from third party makers that have a pretty large image circle that will cover ALL of the 24x36mm image area over at least a portion of their zoom range!

Cameras and lenses are things to use. I say, buy what you want to use, buy stuff you LIKE, and are enthused about. The camera market has a lot of great stuff now...mirrorless cameras, Canons,Nikons, Sonys, Pentaxes, Olympuses, etc.,etc.. The "advantage" of using adapted lenses is mostly imaginary for many people...some types of shooting require high focus hit rates to make them fruitful in a meaningful sense; you do NOT see bird in flight guys shooting "adapted" lenses on mirrorless cameras, for example; NATIVE-mount lenses are WORTH every cent for some uses.

Shooting mostly inside, with a new baby? I think that a good flash unit, and a light stand and umbrella and a triggering option would make a lot of sense, and also make some better photos than would relying on indoor, household lighting.

 

[waday]

If you shoot Canon, you can pretend to shoot cannonballs while saying, "pew pew pew".

Can't do that with Nikon.

 

[spiralout462]

Canon T6s. You get the newest technology, get to keep your lenses, and have better ergonomics than your current body. That also answers your question as to why. I shoot Canon because the controls fit me and is comfortable in hand. The fact that I can use the best lenses in the world sealed the deal.

 

[cherylynne1]

I think Derrel summed it up pretty well. There are great cameras with great image quality all over, it's just a matter of finding what works for you.

I got into photography for the same reason...a new baby. I started with the NEX-6 and now have the a6000. Neither have a touchscreen and both have a viewfinder, so that wasn't an issue for me. The menus are also drastically improved in the a6000, much more similar to Canon or Nikon. The lenses are still expensive, but to be honest, that doesn't bother me too much because I view lenses as an investment that I'll keep forever. And I'm really excited about *someday* being able to buy a native Zeiss lens. I figure by the time I can save up for one my skill set will have caught up.

However, just because it works for me doesn't mean it will work for you. In fact, it probably wouldn't if you feel the Canon is too small.

I think if I had to switch cameras and money wasn't a consideration, the Somy A7rII would be my first choice. If I had to switch systems, it'd probably be the Nikon D7200 (or maybe the new D500.) But Nikon isn't really right for me because my hands are so small...the opposite of your problem.

To reference Derrel's post again, I agree about a lighting set-up. I couldn't live without flash since so many of my pictures are of kids running around indoors. I think a good flash and a good prime lens are equally important.

 

[PropilotBW]

I purchased a Nikon D5100, very similar to why you did. Very good reviews. I invested several hundred dollars into 4 lenses. I enjoyed it. I took some very nice photos, and learned a lot with it. Over time, though, I found that the camera stayed at home more than came with.
Since I travel for a living, I wanted something smaller, but still offered similar shooting style and results.
I sold all my Nikon gear and went with the Olympus EM5ii. I have since invested a significant more amount of money into the system. I find that some of the things I didn't care for at first (Electronic View Finder) are actually some of the features I like the most. They were just different and took a little time to get used to. I've also found significant value in some shooting settings such as "live composite" which allows long exposures without EVER overexposing. It's simply fantastic.
Recently, I inherited a D5100 from a family member, played with it a little bit, comparing the two. I just can't see myself going back.

 

[Alexr25]

If you shoot Canon, you can pretend to shoot cannonballs while saying, "pew pew pew".

Can't do that with Nikon.

Which is yet another compelling reason to shoot Nikon.

 

[jaomul]

I started out with Canon, really liked there setup, but while on holidays some gear failed and I noticed lots of people were carrying these smaller ILC mirrorless cameras. I thought it made sense to have a smaller system so sold my canon gera and bought some olympus m43 gear. All was well but I do like taking photos of birds in flight and found the mirrorless quite poor here- so back to a dslr for me.

Second time around I said I'd give nikon a go. Also very happy with the nikon. Thing is I kept some m43 gear also and now I have 2 systems going and to be honest this doesn't make a lot of sense for me. The olly system is great for a lot of what I do, but the nikon takes up the rest. really I should get rid of the m43 but its my more fun system and I don't want to sell it.

From what I read your only bug bear with canon is the fact you bought a small camera that's a touch poor on ergonomics due large hands and maybe you want full frame. I'm not sure if changing is the way to go for you. You are on your third system now and I am sure every time you switch you lose money. It may be a good option to look into Canons bigger more user friendly models like the 60d/70d/7dII and trade up

 

[Solarflare]

My personal toplist of camera systems:

1. Nikon FX (36x24mm DSLR). Large high quality lens selection including more specialized lenses (400mm f2.8, 200mm macro, Tilt/Shift), with huge used lenses market including dirt cheap but very high quality manual focus or screwdrive autofocus lenses (some of which are still current production) from ages past; the Nikon F mount is also considered a kind of industry standard. High quality DSLR lineup. Good bang for the buck ratio. Probably best flash system of them all; used Nikon flashes from ages ago still work fine and can be bought "dirt cheap". Gets maximum performance out of Sony sensors. Second best autofocus system (might be best right now with the release of the D5 and D500).

2. Canon EF (36x24mm DSLR). This one might switch with the Nikon entry, depending upon your priorities. Large high quality lens selection, especially also specialization lenses (400mm f2.8, 180mm macro, Tilt/Shift, Macro beyond 1:1), large used market but no cheap manual lenses and Canon has no screwdrive in the first place, anyway. Good ergonomics (one hand operation, Cn modi). Good Video support. Recently got a new sensor factory and might improve in sensor performanc soon. Phrone to switch lens mount - EF is already from 1987, so a switch might occur any day now SCNR.

3. Fuji X (24x16mm Mirrorless). Young system that already has a pretty complete general set of lenses, with very good build quality and excellent image quality, but not many speciality lenses yet (in fact for example right now not even a really good macro lens). Lenses arent cheap but worth every penny. Good ergonomics, beautiful cameras. The autofocus is somewhat slow, but many think its sufficient.

4. Olympus/Panasonic MFT (17.3x13mm Mirrorless). Very broad high quality lens selection including some specialities (actually affordable CINE lenses). Very able cameras, though apparently the Olympus ones are infamous for being fiddly with unintuitive naming (much like Sony). The archilles heel of this system is really the sensor size.

 

[JonA_CT]

Lots of really great information! I really appreciate the thought that everyone put into their responses.

I think whatever I decide, I'll probably keep the SL1 for hiking. With the 24mm pancake lens, it fits into the sunglasses/goggle pocket of my hiking pack (yes, that's how small it is), and for most the photos I want when I'm hiking that's a decent focal length to carry.

I do have a speedlite that I've been playing with. I've been working on bouncing the flash to get some more light into the indoor shots I take. I've also been looking at the strobist webpage, and may make some investment in some light modifiers. At the very least, it'll give me some more rope to hang myself with.

It seems like if I'm looking towards new cameras, I should be looking a lot more at sensor specs, right? The big benefit of the Sony sensors that Nikon and Sony and whoever else are using is the dynamic range? Dynamic range gives me more power to fix things in PP?

 

[Village Idiot]

You've diagnosed the issue pretty well; you are NOT really "married to" the Canon system say, in the way some people are. There's some money to be had by selling off the stuff you have now, and using the money raised as money that can be added toward new camera/lens stuff.

There is such thing as divorce. And the beautiful part about lenses is that the depreciation is low compared to a lot of other items out there.

The thing is...Canon's EF-S lenses are useless on anything but a Canon crop-frame body....if you'd have gone to a compact Nikon like a D3200 instead of an SL-1, you'd possibly have a "DX-type" lens, or perhaps two, or even three DX lenses, that would work on both DX Nikon and FX Nikon bodies.

Granted the range of EF-S lenses is very small. Quite a while ago when I took a count it was less than 1/10 of their line up with several having EF counter parts that I wouldn't purchase anyways (70-300, IIRC). I don't know if it's the same with Nikon, but I'm not planning on purchasing and DX lenses anytime soon.

If you shoot Canon, you can pretend to shoot cannonballs while saying, "pew pew pew".

Can't do that with Nikon.

But you can recover more than 4 stops of shadows to still have a usable image. Oh, and the noise isn't filled with chroma noise and patterns.

 

[Village Idiot]

It seems like if I'm looking towards new cameras, I should be looking a lot more at sensor specs, right? The big benefit of the Sony sensors that Nikon and Sony and whoever else are using is the dynamic range? Dynamic range gives me more power to fix things in PP?

Yes, but there are other benefits as well. You can get creative and go beyond "fix", shooting scenes that would otherwise drowned out a portion of the photo lost in shadows or by being blown out. You can pull the shadows up and have what would be an HDR photo. That's not the HDR most people think of though with the overly processed flat qualities.

 

[waday]

(Please keep in mind that the below comments are jokes. )

If you shoot Canon, you can pretend to shoot cannonballs while saying, "pew pew pew".

Can't do that with Nikon.

Which is yet another compelling reason to shoot Nikon.

So you're saying that Canonites have more imagination?

But you can recover more than 4 stops of shadows to still have a usable image. Oh, and the noise isn't filled with chroma noise and patterns.

So you're saying that Canonites shoot the image correct in camera and don't have to rely on PP?

 

[spiralout462]

I have retained more shadow detail with the new 24mp Canon sensor as opposed to the older 18mp. This can also be attributed to an increase in skill though.

All modern sensors are extremely capable pieces of technology. differences among the same size are insignificant to 99% of the population, in my opinion.