Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I asked the same question about Canon and Nikon before I bought my first camera. What I learned that I did not know was about the value of lens and how they last a long time and one can always swap out the camera. Questions and forum are great .. what would we do without the internet for discussions!
True. That being said, I never bothered with "either Canon or Nikon" debate. Didn't have to. My first (and only) SLR was a Minolta (A-mount) in the 1990 and had couple of zooms and a prime with it. I dove into digital with Sony Cybershot-F828 in 2003, a camera I still have and use. It took a while before I felt the need for another Interchangeable Lens Camera.
About four years ago, I decided to pick up a DSLR, but finalists happened to be a DSLR from Sony (a580) and a new entry competing with DSLRs, Sony's SLT (a55). The two cameras were siblings, with SLT being more compact and light, and fixed mirror design that allowed for full time AF. Live View and EVF were winners, and I have been using a55 since.
It was a coincidence that Minolta's SLR division was taken over by Sony in 2006, so the A-mount bodies were now manufactured as "Sony Alpha". And that meant, my old lenses from the Minolta SLR were now available for use on my a55.
With the a55, I discovered the beauty of manual/old lenses. And I decided to pick up another new offering from Sony (introduced in 2010, Sony E-mount, also a part of Sony Alpha division). A cheap NEX-3 was perfect for a complete line of legacy lenses. Eventually (last winter), I replaced NEX-3 with NEX-6.
NEX-6 serves as my go anywhere camera, as a back up to a55 and also allows me to enjoy old lenses. With this camera, just about any lens goes. My oldest lens is from 1959 (a Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM II, a Leica range-finder mount lens). I have several lenses from 1980s, including a Contax Zeiss 50mm f/1.7 Planar, and some of the very first Phase Detect AF lenses manufactured for SLR mount. I no longer have Minolta 24-50/4, but do have 35-70/4, 35-105/3.5-4.5, 70-210/4 and 50/1.7 from 1985-87. All of them are great lenses, and inexpensive!
I also have Minolta 200/2.8 G APO HS (date stamped on it is 1989, so it turned 25 years old this year), and in fact, my choice for telephoto lens today, to shoot action/sports. It is small and light, and excellent. Also have Minolta 50/1.4 which is a later version (actually, a current, since Sony is still making it as the cheaper of two 50/1.4 options on A-mount, other being a Sony Zeiss 50/1.4 Planar).
So, I have quite a collection of old lenses, and love them. They will stick around. And all these lenses (except some which I can't use on a55, like the Canon 50/1.4 Leica mount lens), work beautifully on NEX-6. Also had a few Nikon, Pentax (Super Takumar) and many other old lenses.
Whopping 53-years apart: (1959 lens meets 2012 camera body)
So it happened.. had my camera on my tripod about to take a portrait, saw my daughter chasing the dog.. In what can only be described as slow motion I screamed noooooooo, hand outstretched as she turned in time to run face first into the whole set up.. Camera went to the left, flash, lens and half the top to the right....So yeah.. here I am...sad , alone and utterly lost..Camera wouldn't even turn on
I want a really good quality camera...willing to go up to probably $1000 and a bit more if I was wowed .. My sister has a Nikon DSLR D5100.. Its nice and def a consideration! Now though I've seen some commericals with some nice Cannon cameras (the new one with slow mo type video and nice pics) .... What do I choose.. I've heard NIKON is preferred by professionals but I don't know how much weight is behind that. I am starting school this year and will be majoring in Cinematography and minor in photography (motion picture). I really enjoy black and white, motion and I want to try more night photography and play with slow shutter speeds. So what would be some recommendations for now, to get me some nice quality pictures until I'm going to probably have to have to take out a loan for the camera required after college lol.
I was previously shooting with a Cannon EZ something or another (maybe like a $200 camera tops).. it wasn't what I would consider a professional camera, quality was okay but I couldn't really get decent macro or long shots and the lens wasn't detachable. I could do some slow shutter stuff but wasn't about to get any decent night photography at all. I don't want that to be a reason to not buy a more higher quality cannon however if they are decent
I am sorry for your loss. You can't photograph kids off a tripod tho...you need a telephoto lens so they can play further away, and you can capture cool snaps of them without them knowing...YOU have to run after them, not wait for them to get into your frame...You should watch some classes on KelbyOne on photographing kids...If you want to shoot a "portrait", then she shouldn't be moving, otherwise it's not a portrait...
That's BS: "I've heard NIKON is preferred by professionals"
I had someone once tell me that I should switch to Nikon, and when I asked 'why?' they gave me the same answer you posted, which is BS; they were not pro's, I am a pro...LOL....I know quite a few pro's and they all use Canon, Leica, and the majority actually use Mamiya and Hassellblad! To pro's it is the Image that matters and not what they shoot it with. I rent Hassellblads when I go on shoots...can't beat medium format really, and I use my Canon 5DMKII for family stuff.
You need a camera+lens based on what you'll be shooting...there are like a million kinds of cameras; we can all name what we use and what we like, but that might not be what you like!?...Take a trip to B & H photo and try them out...Have you read any reviews?
I can't tell from your post what you shoot the most...so, I can't recommend but maybe a Rebel for that budget...a $200 camera will not perform like a DSLR. If you never used a DSLR before, there is a learning curve and the "nice" photos you see simply don't just come out of the camera like that; they are all post processed in Photoshop/Lightroom.
My point is that we'll only make it difficult for you here, because none of us shoot with the same exact set up, not all of us have the same knowledge in photography, or shoot the same things, and lastly we don't all have the same standards when it comes to photography in general. Something I don't like, you may and so forth. Try them out...Even Sam's club has DSLR's in the store, Best Buy, Walmart...you have to find one that it comfortable to you in respect to weight, controls etc., and then a lens that will be appropriate for what you'll be shooting. You will not get good macro photographs out of a non-dedicated macro lens. That's just a fact. Those extenders only reduce the overall quality.
At least for your Canon lenses it shouldn't be an issue -- with an adapter (like Metabones), you can use Canon mount lenses on the Sony a7R.
That's a good point. A lot of Canon users also have Sony a7R-series cameras.
That said, switching all the way from one system to another won't make a difference relating becoming a better or worst photographer. But chasing after technology does help camera manufacturers
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
