Canon or Sony

CATALOGUEKID

CATALOGUEKID

Messages
788
Name
Tom
Edit My Images
No
Soooooooooooooooooooo confused

Wanna step up from my Sony a230.....now do I go up in the alpha range or switch to a Canon 400 or 500......?

Your opnions would appreciated...
 
What are your reasons for thinking Canon over Sony and then I also question why not Nikon?

What would any other brand bring you over Sony or is it just brand snobishness?

Do you have many lenses yet for the Sony?

Do you believe your good enough to warrant an upgrade?

Would a better lens give better results over a better body?

All questions to ask and answer really.
 
I'm a current sony user and i'm looking to change over to canon in the new year. I've decided i want to try doing something like baby portraiture/home shot family portraits part-time by the end of next year, and i feel that sony don't offer me the same choice of bodies as canon or nikon.
Add to that lens availability and it becomes more compelling to me. A canon 50mm 1.8 is £80, a sony equivalent is £140! Sony have a known problem with stripping the focusing gears in sigma lenses, so that's another bonus as it opens up the available range.
Personally i love my sony, the inbuilt stabilisation is fantastic and i'll be keeping mine for a long time yet along with whatever i upgrade to.
 
What are you looking to do with the new camera that the sony can't do at the moment?

Sony might strip gears on some sigma lenses but it seems only to be the cheaper 70-300 that suffers from it and it only a handful of people seem to have suffered. Simple solution is to buy Tamron or sony's own or older minolta lenses. As sony have shares in Tamron I'd expect their lenses to be fine.

Now the new a33 & a55 are out I'd expect the older cameras to become cheaper so now is the time to pick up a bargain :)

It's always best to pick up a new camera and try it out. You may find you just prefer a canon or a nikon over a sony so you may as well get something you're happy with.
 
Wildlife and Landscapes are what I'm in to.......I am happy with my a230 and I very nearly bought a Sigma 150-500mm lens but as Keith said there isnt much availability out there for Sony compared to Canon (and if I'd have spent the money on that lens I would have felt tied in to Sony).......now the vast majority of Cameras I see used are Canon so that must say a lot about how good they are (IMO).

But then again as Suz says what can the Canon 400/500 do that a Sony a350 etc can't do for what I want?

:thinking:
 
go and have a play with the sony a55 :)

removed

plenty of good lens options for the alpha mount imho.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Canon the snob value is better if this matters to you?

Canon as there are more lenses availible.

Canon as it's just a better camera.

Canon because your more likely to be able to borrow friends lenses as it's a more popular mount.
 
Jared said:
Canon the snob value is better if this matters to you?

Canon as there are more lenses availible.

Canon as it's just a better camera.

Canon because your more likely to be able to borrow friends lenses as it's a more popular mount.
Click to expand...

Woah woah woah.

'Canon as it's just a better camera.'?

I shoot with canon myself, but I think this statement is questionable (well I say 'questionable', what I really mean is *******s, but I'm to polite to type that ;)). After all, where is the in body stabilisation on a canon eh?

Nothing wrong with sony at all. Canon has a larger range of lenses, but sony's range looks perfectly adequate for most photographers! And you can use some older minolta lenses.

So are there any particular canon lenses you're after? I'd get your hands on a canon body to try it out before switching, personally I like the control layout, but if you don't get along with it, that's a big negative.
If you like the control layout on sony, personally I'd just invest into some expensive yet excellent lenses.
 
Last edited:
Jared said:
Canon the snob value is better if this matters to you?

Canon as there are more lenses availible.

Canon as it's just a better camera.

Canon because your more likely to be able to borrow friends lenses as it's a more popular mount.
Click to expand...

Snob value has nothing to do with it....I love Sony..my Bravia T.V and Playstation 2 are awesome!!
 
squishy said:
Woah woah woah.

'Canon as it's just a better camera.'?

I shoot with canon myself, but I think this statement is questionable. After all, where is the in body stabilisation on a canon eh?

Nothing wrong with sony at all. Canon has a larger range of lenses, but sony's range looks perfectly adequate for most photographers! And you can use some older minolta lenses.

So are there any particular canon lenses you're after? I'd get your hands on a canon body to try it out before switching, personally I like the control layout, but if you don't get along with it, that's a big negative.
If you like the control layout on sony, personally I'd just invest into some expensive yet excellent lenses.
Click to expand...

Yes thats another point, I'm happy and used to the Sony control layout.....really need a 500mm and the Sigma 150-500mm is in my price range which is available to both Canon and Sony....

Do you know of any other lenses at 500mm in the same price bracket for either Canon or Sony?
 
Jared said:
Canon the snob value is better if this matters to you?

Canon as there are more lenses availible.

Canon as it's just a better camera.

Canon because your more likely to be able to borrow friends lenses as it's a more popular mount.
Click to expand...

It's comments like that, that make me embarrassed to own a Canon.

Best snob value? Leica without a shadow of a doubt, following that Nikon would win it hands down.

More lenses? Yes. Best lenses? Not necessarily. Both Canon and Nikon have lenses that the owners of the opposite brand would love to have in their line up.

Better Camera? Oh peeerlease! Both brands have their winners, but there is no 'Best Brand'.
 
CATALOGUEKID said:
Yes thats another point, I'm happy and used to the Sony control layout.....really need a 500mm and the Sigma 150-500mm is in my price range which is available to both Canon and Sony....

Do you know of any other lenses at 500mm in the same price bracket for either Canon or Sony?
Click to expand...

The canon 100-400 isn't *much* more (bought from kerso), and is lighter, sharper, faster and smaller than the 150-500. The 150-500 has slightly more effective OS though. The 100-400 is 'sharper enough' at 400mm to resolve pretty much the same detail that the 150-500 does at 500mm, so the 100mm difference doesn't actually mean much (the 400mm f/5.6 L prime actually resolves more detail at 400mm than the 150-500 does at 500mm).

The sony 70-400 I think performs similar to the canon 100-400, not sure about it's price though.
 
Last edited:
I was a engineer at Sony. I would not touch their products with a bargepole.
 
its often the case when you see behind the workshop doors your option drops off.

i know know apple products are overpriced trash on mainly intergrated budget componants, but plenty of people with turtle necks fall for the hype and own them.

i know HP products are great until something is wrong then even the engineers at the mercy of some bad english speaking moron reading off a 10 point checklist who decides what part to send even if you have the part number you want.

I know epson have some of the best turn around for engineer call outs but they often do not have the correct tools according to the manual but are still more than capable of getting the job done!

sanyo... run a mile!

toshiba run half a mile, at least they gave up making projectors once they finally realised they made crap and buy epsons to give back after an RMA :)

i could go on as i contract to a lot of firms but i have hijacked this enough :D
 
My sony 50mm 1.8 is my fave lens ever, and I'm a newborn photographer too. I got mine recently for £120, and would say it is definately money well spent.

- sorry just looked back and realised it was Lexie that talked about baby pics. Still love my Sony gear though. :D
 
Last edited:
Elli said:
My sony 50mm 1.8 is my fave lens ever, and I'm a newborn photographer too. I got mine recently for £120, and would say it is definately money well spent.

- sorry just looked back and realised it was Lexie that talked about baby pics. Still love my Sony gear though. :D
Click to expand...

what camera body are you using elli?
 
Jared said:
Canon the snob value is better if this matters to you?

Canon as there are more lenses availible.

Canon as it's just a better camera.

Canon because your more likely to be able to borrow friends lenses as it's a more popular mount.
Click to expand...

I feel I should apologise and explain in more detail:

I don't own a canon for snob value; I usually use a range of ancient M42 lenses that cost less than a tenner on mine. I was purely offering it as a reason for some people hence the question mark. My choice to go canon was because I could use my old lenses and adaptors for even older lenses that I owned

There are more lenses available for canon so I think that's a valid reason

Personally I don't like the Sony’s to hold, I did look at them but just couldn't get on with them that and the fact I found the menu peculiar after an old film canon made me go canon and lead to me saying that a canon is a better camera. It's an opinion.

And as far as I know they are more popular so my last point stands as well, I have borrowed other people’s lenses who are friends and own canon's hence the quoted statement.

Sorry to anyone I offended, I’ll think more carefully next time before I speak.
 
I'm actually using a Konica Minolta dynax 7D (but don't tell anyone - Lol!)
Really like it though, am reluctant to change it as I know it so well and to be honest I'm still getting great images from it that sell very well. ;)

Will upgrade in the not too distant futue, but will prob stick with Sony as I can keep all my current lenses.
 
One thing in Sony's favour.... in body IS. I'd love that and if I didn't have 9 Canon lenses I'd be having a very close look at Sony as you just can't buy some lenses with IS.
 
squishy said:
Care to elaborate on why?
Click to expand...

Virtually everything about the place.

I had thought it was going to be a very good company to work for. I could not have been more wrong.

Their safety regime tries to pay lip service to some regulations but is basically non existant.

Their development of new products involves producing a prototype and flogging it then moving on to the next development.

Backup? :lol::lol::lol:

They used to be a good middle market manufacturer of consumer electronics which I suspect is what is what keeps them going, but that was the old days.
 
"Their development of new products involves producing a prototype and flogging it then moving on to the next development."

I'm pretty sure that that isn't what actually happens. Maybe what they do do was not a part of your normal role and therefore not visible to you. I don't want to try and defend Sony too much but I'm pretty sure that they are not significantly worse than anyone else.
 
woof woof said:
I'm pretty sure that that isn't what actually happens. Maybe what they do do was not a part of your normal role and therefore not visible to you. I don't want to try and defend Sony too much but I'm pretty sure that they are not significantly worse than anyone else.
Click to expand...

I've worked for them. You have not.

Further evidence - I have had one of their DVDR/HDDRs since 2005. It crashes about once a day. The problems are well publicised but with automatic firmware update on, the firmware revision level is 1.00.02 which is what was on it when I bought it.

Edit

They may not be any worse than others, but they purport to be better,and charge accordingly.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I have....I'd have to check... but I've dealt with many manufacturers all over the world. I've both taken products through design and compliance and hand held while the manufacturer does it and although there may be "issue" from time to time I seriously doubt that Sony are significantly worse than any other household name.

Just my 2p.
 
I think you need to look at where you want to end up with your photography,i would maybe switch from sony if another brand could give me something i wanted that sony doesn't but at the level i am my a300 will stay with me at least until we get a look at the a77 because it meets my needs.

Is there a particular reason for wanting to change brands?
 
CATALOGUEKID said:
Yes thats another point, I'm happy and used to the Sony control layout.....really need a 500mm and the Sigma 150-500mm is in my price range which is available to both Canon and Sony....

Do you know of any other lenses at 500mm in the same price bracket for either Canon or Sony?
Click to expand...

The Tamron 200-500 SP, a tad sharper for all accounts according to most photo forums (YMMV). The Sigma 120-400 is another option, seems to be fairly decent. Or an old Minolta f8 500mm mirror AF can be had for reasonable prices. I have the mirror and it's my favourite birding and such lens... light but not swift at F8 yet takes good photos.

One from the 500 mirror...

4679138205_24d5ba99aa_b.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top