Is Nikon or Sony any better?

H

harper

Messages
44
Name
Adrian Norris
Edit My Images
Yes
I have just purchased a new Canon R6 mark III and a Canon RF 24-105mm L IS USM (kit) from Canon's offical store.
Firstly it wasn't delivered in two days and it's seems to be either a customers return or demo unit.
Secondly I have also purchased a Canon RF100 -500mm lens from a Canon retailer which has a lovely lump of dust on the inside of the front element.

I was hoping it use it all on Sunday.

It appears to me that Canon aren't the quality they used to be.Also both the lens are plastic.

Are Sony or Nikon any better?
I'm guessing there not.
 
I’m interested in this as I’ve always been told it’s down to personal preference.

Im new to photography and all my equipment is new to me (used) I’m using a Sony A55V and I love Sony easy to use and plenty of decent lenses about for a reasonable price.
 
Last edited:
You get a wider choice of lenses if you have an MFT camera, ytour not limited to one make. he Panasonic G9ii for example is a camera often overlooked but up there with the best of tem
 
I used to shoot Nikon, now owns a Sony. It was a bit of a inconvenience to change, but I reckon it was an easier switch than Canon to Sony
I like all my Sony gear and only developed any dust after about 4/5 years of using a zoom lens. All other Elements are „problem free” touch wood!
I never owned a Canon, but I have used one and I find them much bigger in comparison, but also possibly much more versatile. For me the SOOC photos do seem „better” on Canon, just a tiny bit, similar as on Fuji on Street. But it is all down to personal preference.
Would I swap my Sony for a Canon alternative? Probably not, as the Sony system is just so hassle free and easy to use.
 
I’ve been right through the mill with all the brands and types , with both Nikon and canon the more you pay the better build quality you get . .. it’s extremely hard to quantify what you actually want , most cameras and lenses will contain a mixture of metal and plastic anyway but it’s the sensors and glass that make the picture ,with a generous helping from a decent computer and advanced software
Have fun LOL
 
I've used a lot of Canon equipment and it has always lived up to its reputation for quality and reliability.

I still use Nikon and Sony equipment and that is just as good. I can only suggest that you return the equipment, get your money back and try again.
 
I think all the camera companies are much the same - they all have slight pros and cons, but any new kit is going to be good.

Having said that, I always try to buy from my local camera shop (LCE in my case) - you can see things before buying and know if the box has been opened etc.
 
I'm assuming you mean are Sony or Nikon any better in build quality, not are they better cameras as that's a whole other can of worms ;)

I've had both Nikon and Sony and on the whole the quality has been fantastic, however it hasn't been all roses. I had a Nikon D750 that was back and forth to the service centre until they decided to replace it. Also I've had the motherboard fail on my A1, luckily it was still under warranty as it was nearly £900 to fix.
 
harper said:
I have just purchased a new Canon R6 mark III and a Canon RF 24-105mm L IS USM (kit) from Canon's offical store.
Firstly it wasn't delivered in two days and it's seems to be either a customers return or demo unit.
Secondly I have also purchased a Canon RF100 -500mm lens from a Canon retailer which has a lovely lump of dust on the inside of the front element.

I was hoping it use it all on Sunday.

It appears to me that Canon aren't the quality they used to be.Also both the lens are plastic.

Are Sony or Nikon any better?
I'm guessing there not.
Click to expand...

I can't really comment on quality control between brands and the problems you've had may just be bad luck but if you are willing to change systems I'd go Sony because there are more lens options and Sony are willing to let other manufacturers make lenses in their mount whereas AFAIK Canon do not. Sony lenses are often smaller and lighter than the competition and that's a plus too.

Good luck going forward.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
I've used a lot of Canon equipment and it has always lived up to its reputation for quality and reliability.

I still use Nikon and Sony equipment and that is just as good. I can only suggest that you return the equipment, get your money back and try again.
Click to expand...
That's what I trying to do Canon online shop takes about one month to process a refund, I think I paid £3,800 something for the Canon and lens. The 100-500mm is going back tomorrow. I could transfer more money into to my current account to buy something else but I don't want to do that. I thought a lens for £2,400 would be dust free.
There seems to be a few posts on the internet concerning the Canon RF 100-500 mm L lens having dust issues.

I sold my Sony and my Canon 100-400mm this week. I do like Sony cameras but if I went Sony route I would miss a 100 mm extra zoom that the Canon has. The Sony 200- 600mm would be too large for my needs. Mostly use between 150-250mm.

The Canon 100-400mm l( first series) lens I sold I had for twenty one years and there was no visible signs of dust internally.
 
Last edited:
Hehe, was hoping to read some nice fights with totally unreasonable arguments why one brand is way better than the other.
And here I am, reading all these way too civilised comments that all is good…

Well, it seems that when Sony entered the scene, the fights between Nikon and Canon lovers also stopped.

My god, photography starts to be booooring. :eek:
Now we can only discuss pictures I guess…
 
harper said:
That's what I trying to do Canon online shop takes about one month to process a refund, I think I paid £3,800 something for the Canon and lens. The 100-500mm is going back tomorrow. I could transfer more money into to my current account to buy something else but I don't want to do that. I thought a lens for £2,400 would be dust free.
There seems to be a few posts on the internet concerning the Canon RF 100-500 mm L lens having dust issues.

I sold my Sony and my Canon 100-400mm this week. I do like Sony cameras but if I went Sony route I would miss a 100 mm extra zoom that the Canon has. The Sony 200- 600mm would be too large for my needs. Mostly use between 150-250mm.

The Canon 100-400mm l( first series) lens I sold I had for twenty one years and there was no visible signs of dust internally.
Click to expand...

the only other option would be to 1.4x with 100-400mm. you'd have 560mm f8, which is not hugely slower, 1/3rd stop behind 100-500mm.
Personally i find both f7.1 and f8 mostly unusable in the UK weather apart from the 2 days in the year when it sunny.
 
MarkCé said:
Well, it seems that when Sony entered the scene, the fights between Nikon and Canon lovers also stopped.
Click to expand...
I’m rather glad that the puerile ‘footballification’ of photography has nigh on disappeared.

I think the last hoorah was the mirrorless v DSLR battle, but that’s all put to bed now.

I feel you’ve been really unlucky, and whilst rare, it could have been any goods (not just photography) from any manufacturer. It’s a symptom of bad staff, not business strategy.

The only outstanding point being that, plastics have replaced metal in lens and body construction largely as a weight saving. And there’s really no downside. Any trauma that’s enough to smash the 100-500 would also destroy a metal version.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top