what to upgrade to after sony a700??

TurnipFarmer

TurnipFarmer

Messages
554
Name
Aaron
Edit My Images
Yes
I am thinking about upgrading my sony a700, I have a few lenses for it but I feel for the alpha system the range of lenses just aren't there eg super wide angle lenses, Fisheye etc.

I was maybe thinking should I go over to Canon or nikon as the range of lenses is greater and some of the same version lenses for sony alpha are cheaper. Has anyone else been in this same situation? I don't want to buy another lens for sony if I have to upgrade to a different make in future.

What cameras would you all reccommend?
 
What wide angle canon or nikon lenses is it that sony don't match?

Sigma makes a great 8-16mm UWA and tokina makes the superb 11-16mm f/2.8 both come in A mount.
I'm sure sony makes their own UWA as well.

Canon and nikon do have a greater range of lenses, but Sony seems to me to have nearly all the bases covered very well. Unless you can see any particular canon or nikon lenses you want that sony don't rival (for example the canon MPe-65 and 70-200 f/4L or the nikkor 200-400 f/4 and 14-24mm f/2.8), I don't think there's really much point in switching.
 
Last edited:
why not wait a month or so to see what the A77 turns out like?
or you could always go FF with an A850/A900.

looking at your profile you haven't exactly invested in a lot of lenses - 18-70 kit, 50/1.7 & a beercan.
 
Last edited:
Is it me or is there one of these post every other day about Sony not having the lens line up?Plenty of wide angle lenses for the Sony a700 to choose from imo.I suppose if you're going to jump ship you might as well do it before you buy your next lens but personally I don't think you need to at all.
 
OK guys, point noted. There seems to be more lenses then I thought. I think it might be best to stick with sony now.

Sorry but my profile is not upto date. I've now got tamron 17-50 f2.8 to replace my kit lens. I just want to invest in a wider angle lenses, Fisheye too.

Thanks for your feedback on this guys. I just didn't realise that there was so many lenses available.
 
TBH I would switch to Canon or Nikon but only if you plan on purchasing a decent amount of kit.

There are a lot more options out there for Canon/Nikon and a fantastic amount a very good used kit. I've saved well over £1k on buying very good used kit which was only a few months old.
 
Last edited:
If you don't mind manual focus you could look at the Samyang range 8mm fisheye & 14mm wide angle lenses.
 
Do you actually need an entire range to choose from? I know for a fact I won't need a 300mm + lens for what I shoot. Sony and third party have been releasing quite a number of lenses in the past year, yes the range isn't as vast but sony has only been in the market for 5 years and in that time have reached third place in the slr market. In that time they have had been fairly innovative in their approach - highest resolution dslr, first FF camera to be under the the £2k price band (forcing competitors to follow suit), compact mirrorless APS-C camera , translucent mirrors, AF Zeiss lenses.
 
heidfirst said:
Sigma 8-16 is your widest zoom option & Sigma 4.5mm widest fisheye (surely wide enough?;))


there are more options but I wouldn't say a lot more.
& for most people 1 decent 1 is enough
Click to expand...

True, most people do only buy one type of lens in a small set (ie, wide, prime and tele) and leave it at that.

I used to be one of those persons but recently I've been doing a lot of swapping and purchasing of equipment and quickly, which I dont think I could have done so efficiently had I not been with Canon or Nikon.
 
Last edited:
evo456 said:
Do you actually need an entire range to choose from? I know for a fact I won't need a 300mm + lens for what I shoot. Sony and third party have been releasing quite a number of lenses in the past year, yes the range isn't as vast but sony has only been in the market for 5 years and in that time have reached third place in the slr market. In that time they have had been fairly innovative in their approach - highest resolution dslr, first FF camera to be under the the £2k price band (forcing competitors to follow suit), compact mirrorless APS-C camera , translucent mirrors, AF Zeiss lenses.
Click to expand...

Not all that is good though! Resolution is neither here not there and the mirroless APS-C and the translucnent mirror system is certainly not for everyone.

The Carl Zeiss lenses though.... :love: THAT is the main reason for staying with Sony (but not for choosing Sony in the 1st instance).
 
Sony have in body IS. I think I'd actually kill for that and I doubt I'd be moving away from a system that had it.
 
In body IS isnt the same as in lens IS though. The in body isnt so good at the long stuff. Nice to have though.
 
The ideal would be to have both. At the moment in body IS would be sooooo much better for me as the lenses that I use most just are not available with IS.

20mm f1.8, 30mm f1.4, 50mm f1.4+2.5, 150mm f2.8, 12-24mm... not a single one on sale with IS, not in Canon fit anyway as far as I know.
 
Must admit, I'd like my 35mm f/2 and 50mm f/1.8 to have IS as I love to use them in low light, the combination would be fantastic!
 
odd jim said:
Not all that is good though! Resolution is neither here not there and the mirroless APS-C and the translucnent mirror system is certainly not for everyone.

The Carl Zeiss lenses though.... :love: THAT is the main reason for staying with Sony (but not for choosing Sony in the 1st instance).
Click to expand...

I guess it's different things to different people, I welcome the diversity. High res can allow pretty heavy handed cropping, useful for some esp for those who cannot fork out the ££££ for MF. Trans mirror allow high frame rate burst, for the non-pro sports togs who have options at the consumer end, previously only accessible via the semi-pro and upwards body. Some of these ideas may work and some will not, but at least its in the market for people to actually trial.
 
odd jim said:
In body IS isnt the same as in lens IS though. The in body isnt so good at the long stuff.
Click to expand...
you have to take it on a lens by lens basis e.g. the Canon 100-400 L IS is only rated at 2 stops - Sony's 70-400 G not only is optically better but can achieve more stops of stabilisation on an Alpha body.
Now with Sigma releasing their OS lenses in Alpha mount we get to choose which system we want to use for which application & surely that is the ideal?
& as mentioned there are lots of lenses that there just aren't stabilised options for in either Canon or Nikon fit whereas we often have multiple options that become stabilised.
 
heidfirst said:
you have to take it on a lens by lens basis e.g. the Canon 100-400 L IS is only rated at 2 stops - Sony's 70-400 G not only is optically better but can achieve more stops of stabilisation on an Alpha body.
Now with Sigma releasing their OS lenses in Alpha mount we get to choose which system we want to use for which application & surely that is the ideal?
& as mentioned there are lots of lenses that there just aren't stabilised options for in either Canon or Nikon fit whereas we often have multiple options that become stabilised.
Click to expand...

Stop it or you'll be having me buying an FF Sony next!

I know I've never been a strong advocate of the Sony system but I'll always say the kit itself is fantastic. For me though, now, its having the massive used market. Call me cheap!
 
odd jim said:
Stop it or you'll be having me buying an FF Sony next!

I know I've never been a strong advocate of the Sony system but I'll always say the kit itself is fantastic. For me though, now, its having the massive used market. Call me cheap!
Click to expand...


We will convert you eventually. :bat::lol:
 
woof woof said:
The ideal would be to have both. At the moment in body IS would be sooooo much better for me as the lenses that I use most just are not available with IS.

20mm f1.8, 30mm f1.4, 50mm f1.4+2.5, 150mm f2.8, 12-24mm... not a single one on sale with IS, not in Canon fit anyway as far as I know.
Click to expand...

The sigma 150 f/2.8 OS is now on sale.
 
Seems a no brainer to have all your lens range available with IS. Especially those intended for low light use. I'm actually genuinely surprised canon don't offer it.

Sony used market is tougher as the really good stuff you hardly see on sale second hand. I guess as more people switch to sony then this will improve as more lenses will be available second hand so that will encourage more to switch.
 
DEANSUPREME said:
We will convert you eventually. :bat::lol:
Click to expand...

Resistance is futile
th_smiley_green_borg.gif


srichards said:
Seems a no brainer to have all your lens range available with IS. Especially those intended for low light use. I'm actually genuinely surprised canon don't offer it.
Click to expand...
imo if it wasn't for market pressure from Sony, Pentax etc. it's unlikely that Canon & Nikon would even have introduced IS to their "kit" level lenses (17-55 etc.)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top