Dslr for beginners?

[DoDaLeCa]

I'm not necessarily talking high end studio photography - you just can't buy cheap $100 Yongnuo speedlights for Sony and only non-TTL versions for Pentax, Minolta and Olympus (at least through my local dealer). Similarly for cheap triggers (YN-622C/N versions) and cords to use your flash off camera.

At LenRentals there are 222 lens choices for Canon and 66 for Sony, try to get a tilt shift for a Sony.

What we both recommend differs and we both think we're right but for different reasons. Depending on what is important to the OP might lead them to a choice that doesn't agree with either of us.

Any system is a compromise but in my eyes the Canon system had the least in areas important to me.

 

[havoc315]

Not suggesting Canon was the wrong choice for you. Canons are great cameras.

Just dispelling the false myth that there are inadequate lenses and accessories for Sony and Pentax. Yongnuo does indeed make cheap flashes for Sony.

Not many people will ever buy a tilt shift lens, but there are indeed a couple available for Sony.

222 lens rentals vs 66 lens type rentals is pretty irrelevant... Where much of that 222 is duplication.

For example.. Tamron makes the 17-50/2.8 for all mounts. But for Canon, they make 2 versions-- 1 with vibration control, 1 without. For Sony and Pentax, only 1 version is necessary, as image stabilization is in the body.

Want a 2.8 telephoto zoom for Sony? Several choices. Prime lenses at all the typical focal lengths? 35, 50, 85, 135... All out there. Want the highest quality modern optics money can buy? Just look at Zeiss Sony lenses.
There are some minor issues with the Sony flash system, but nothing that would affect most ordinary consumers. In fact, Sony flashes have some advantages... My current flash has a swivel system for portrait shots that I don't believe you can find in Canon and Nikon models.


Anything that a typical consumer would need is found just as easily for Sony and Pentax as Canon and Nikon. With Sony and Pentax offering far better flexibility is using high quality cheap legacy glass, really opening up affordable options for consumers.

There are indeed many reasons to pick any brand. And there are indeed some little drawbacks of buying off the major 2 brands. Such as when reading a photo book or taking a class, it will be more geared to Canon and Nikon, making the student/reader spend a few extra seconds adjusting the knowledge. And if you want to swap gear with friends, then stats say Canon would be the wisest choice.
It's also true that big box stores are less likely to carry Sony/Pentax... But they also do t carry "L" glass for example.

My only point is that there is absolutely no shortage of Sony/Pentax available lenses and accessories. In some ways, thanks to legacy glass, Sony and Pentax have more affordable high quality options than Canon and Nikon.
So it's silly for any consumer to automatically stick to the top 2 brands solely for concern about accessory and lens support.
To automatically dismiss Sony and Pentax, would be just as silly as automatically dismissing Canon and Nikon solely because they lack in body stabilization.

 

[havoc315]

I'm not necessarily talking high end studio photography - you just can't buy cheap $100 Yongnuo speedlights for Sony and only non-TTL versions for Pentax, Minolta and Olympus (at least through my local dealer). Similarly for cheap triggers (YN-622C/N versions) and cords to use your flash off camera.

At LenRentals there are 222 lens choices for Canon and 66 for Sony, try to get a tilt shift for a Sony.

What we both recommend differs and we both think we're right but for different reasons. Depending on what is important to the OP might lead them to a choice that doesn't agree with either of us.

Any system is a compromise but in my eyes the Canon system had the least in areas important to me.

By the way, I have no trouble using my Sony flash off camera, and I don't even need a trigger! (Sony bodies can trigger off camera flashes)

 

[DoDaLeCa]

222 vs 66 is of benefit even if you don't immediately recognize it - if your first choice at LensRentals isn't available then you've probably got several other alternatives.

My statement regarding tilt shift was in reference to what LensRentals currently stocks.

Maybe Sony has many f/2.8 primes (Canon's non-L are usually f/1.8)but I've got Canon versions at f/1.4. Stabilization is easier and probably overall cheaper with Sony but I like seeing the effect through the viewfinder which i don't think happens with in-body vs in-lens stabilization. For the type of shooting I often do (low light action such as dance,sports, gymnastics) the larger aperture is of value whereas stabilization isn't due to subject motion blur requiring a shutter speed way more than the reciprocal of focal length anyways.

And the Best Buys near here carry the Canon L zooms below about $2k retail.

Canon's mid line flashes and above have tilt plus shift. Zeiss lens are available for Canon and Nikon as well but aren't as mandatory as there is good OEM glass available above the consumer line stuff.

I'm not saying that other brands don't have choices but there generally aren't as many or as easily available as for Canon or Nikon which is why I recommend staying more mainstream.

 

[photo_chick]

In the end there are people who while using a pinhole shoebox camera take a better picture than me with a 5D3 setup so if you're good then it doesn't matter what system you choose.

Amen!

All anyone throws out here is recommendations based on personal experience. I would hope that anyone reading any kind of online recs would take them with a grain of salt and do a little research to find out what is right for them. And realize that the camera is just a small part of the equation.

 

[havoc315]

222 vs 66 is of benefit even if you don't immediately recognize it - if your first choice at LensRentals isn't available then you've probably got several other alternatives.

My statement regarding tilt shift was in reference to what LensRentals currently stocks.

Maybe Sony has many f/2.8 primes (Canon's non-L are usually f/1.8)but I've got Canon versions at f/1.4. Stabilization is easier and probably overall cheaper with Sony but I like seeing the effect through the viewfinder which i don't think happens with in-body vs in-lens stabilization. For the type of shooting I often do (low light action such as dance,sports, gymnastics) the larger aperture is of value whereas stabilization isn't due to subject motion blur requiring a shutter speed way more than the reciprocal of focal length anyways.

And the Best Buys near here carry the Canon L zooms below about $2k retail.

Canon's mid line flashes and above have tilt plus shift. Zeiss lens are available for Canon and Nikon as well but aren't as mandatory as there is good OEM glass available above the consumer line stuff.

I'm not saying that other brands don't have choices but there generally aren't as many or as easily available as for Canon or Nikon which is why I recommend staying more mainstream.

Seems you are making a lot of statements without actual knowledge.

Sony has a ton of 1.4 and 1.8 primes available. In fact, between new and used, there are 37 prime lenses available for Sony with aperture faster than 2.0.

Sure... Maybe Canon has 10 different 50/1.4s.. While Sony only has 5 different 50/1.4s. (Actually, I checked... Canon has 4 and Sony has 3 in current production).
But how many different 50/1.4s does a user need?

Of course... The big difference-- your 50/1.4 on the Canon probably isn't image stabilized. The 50/1.4 on the Sony is image stabilized.

And in terms of viewing the effect through the viewfinder, Sony is superior to all the other brands. Yes, you do see the effect of image stabilization through the VF... You also see the exposure, which you don't see on the other brands. Of course, the EVF is a negative to some buyers. To others, WYSIWYG is a very nice advantage.

Truthfully... There are times I've had some jealousy of other brands for some reason or another. Wish I had the high ISO performance of Nikon. Or the touch screen of the newer Canons.
But I've never had any reason to be jealous of lens selection.
In fact, Sony had some lenses that are unmatched by the competition. For example, there is a Sony 135 STF lens that doesn't have a Canon/Nikon equivalent.

To get a better sense of lens availability, B&H carries everything. They stock 244 Canon lenses and 116 Sony lenses. 116 is enough selection for anybody. For the most part, Canon has a lot of duplication (with VC and without VC models).

In fact, the only advantages I can see for Canon lenses-- they do have a couple 1.2 primes while Sony typically goes to 1.4. (Pretty tiny difference, and I'd rather have a image stabilized 1.4 than non stabilized 1.2). And Canon has a better selection of constant f4 lenses. (Sigma has a nice 24-105 f4 for all mounts, so technically it's no longer a Canon advantage).

For any amateur, and 99% of professionals, there really are absolutely no holes in the lineup of available Sony glass. With legacy glass being a real advantage for Sony and Pentax.

 

[havoc315]

.

And the Best Buys near here carry the Canon L zooms below about $2k retail.

Canon's mid line flashes and above have tilt plus shift. Zeiss lens are available for Canon and Nikon as well but aren't as mandatory as there is good OEM glass available above the consumer line stuff.
.

Not talking about tilt shift. Seems you are fairly ignorant about the Sony system.
Talking about "quick shift bounce" which allows a unique pivot system. To my knowledge, it's entirely unique to Sony. I've never seen a Canon Speedlite with the same ability.

Again, I'm not saying that Sony is better than Canon. If you absolutely need 1.2 non-stabilized primes over a 1.4 stabilized prime, then go Canon.

But overall, lens and accessory availability, is simply not a compelling reason to stay away from Sony and Pentax.
Sure, Canon may have a small number of accessory advantages over Sony (1.2 primes, better flash triggers). While Sony has a small number of accessory advantages over Canon (better legacy glass, stabilized primes (in effect), and quick shift flashes.
A buyer should indeed examine the lenses and accessories of both. For the vast majority of buyers, the differences will be inconsequential. A few buyers may like the advantages of Canon accessories. And some buyers may like the advantages of Sony lenses and accessories.

 

[DoDaLeCa]

It seems like the facts that I state in my discussions either evade you or are of no interest to you.

You were the one to mention all of the Sony focal lengths at f/2.8 - I was jsut stating Canon and Nikon have equal or faster.

You were the one to mention in body stabilization and I agree in some circumstances it is advantageous and/or cheaper. If you're shooting dark stills stabilization is a godsend (as I have many stabilized lenses) but if you're shooting low light action then stabilization isn't as important as a fast shutter speed, large aperture and low noise at high ISO.

You like EVFs but I and most sports/action shooters prefer optical VFs - again different horses for different courses. If all I shot were static scenes then I might find the EVF limitations irrelevant to the work I do.

You said big box retailers (not camera specialty shops don't carry L lens) but I know that's not true.

The B&H comparison is still 2:1 plus I think that the Sony lenses are spread out over more mount types than would be for Canon or Nikon.

Mid range flashes such as from Nissin list 10 different flashes that work with Canon or Nikon but only 2 of those will work for Sony. If you want to stick with OEM gear then this isn't going to be an issue but if you want to go aftermarket then this is typical for what is easily available for C/N versus others.

Most Canons and Nikons can use earlier lenses with an adapter but lose some functionality. I realize that Canon flash doesn't do the auto orientation change that apparently is in some Sony flashes but I generally hate low flash or side low lighting as key as it often looks unnatural so I usually bounce high or mount the flash high off camera.

You state your opinion in recommending some brands and I've stated mine in preferring the mainstream ones. We're both happy with our individual choices and reasons so it's up to others to determine what means the most to them to make their choice.

 

[havoc315]

It seems like the facts that I state in my discussions either evade you or are of no interest to you.

You were the one to mention all of the Sony focal lengths at f/2.8 - I was jsut stating Canon and Nikon have equal or faster.

That's not what I said. I said 2.8 zooms. In primes, Sony has 1.8 and 1.4m just like Canon and Nikon.

You were the one to mention in body stabilization and I agree in some circumstances it is advantageous and/or cheaper. If you're shooting dark stills stabilization is a godsend (as I have many stabilized lenses) but if you're shooting low light action then stabilization isn't as important as a fast shutter speed, large aperture and low noise at high ISO.

All these are pros and cons to be measured. Pentax gets better high ISO performance than Canon. They all have large aperture lenses available. And plenty of action shooters will happily take shooting 12fps with full AF that can only be provided by Sony.

You like EVFs but I and most sports/action shooters prefer optical VFs - again different horses for different courses. If all I shot were static scenes then I might find the EVF limitations irrelevant to the work I do.

Different preferences for different people. EVFs create a slideshow effect. OVFs have mirror blackout. Consumer grade crop Canons shoot 5fps, consumer grade Sony's can shoot 10-12fps. All factors to be weighed by each customer. No automatic superiority for any one brand.

You said big box retailers (not camera specialty shops don't carry L lens) but I know that's not true.
I've never seen L glass at my local Best Buy. But again, it's a small differentiation, that more stores carry one brand. A small factor to be weighed by customers, but a very silly reason to dismiss brands.

The B&H comparison is still 2:1 plus I think that the Sony lenses are spread out over more mount types than would be for Canon or Nikon.

False. I was comparing Sony a-mount. The 2:1 is mostly duplication. As the examples I gave, Canon will have VC/non-VC, while Sony only needs 1 type. Canon has 4 different 50/1.4s, Sony has 3.

Mid range flashes such as from Nissin list 10 different flashes that work with Canon or Nikon but only 2 of those will work for Sony. If you want to stick with OEM gear then this isn't going to be an issue but if you want to go aftermarket then this is typical for what is easily available for C/N versus others.

Most Canons and Nikons can use earlier lenses with an adapter but lose some functionality. I realize that Canon flash doesn't do the auto orientation change that apparently is in some Sony flashes but I generally hate low flash or side low lighting as key as it often looks unnatural so I usually bounce high or mount the flash high off camera.

You state your opinion in recommending some brands and I've stated mine in preferring the mainstream ones. We're both happy with our individual choices and reasons so it's up to others to determine what means the most to them to make their choice.
no... I haven't actually stated any recommendation for any one brand. I suggested any consumer should consider all the brands. You gave factually incorrect information and suggested that people don't even consider certain brands. (Based on factually incorrect information)
​

My goal hasn't been to recommend any brand. Simply correct your misinformation.​

 

[DoDaLeCa]

Canon has a ton of F/2.8 zooms too, 16-35/24-70/70-200. In a DSLR Canon 1Dx can shoot at 14 fps with a mirror and optical viewfinder.

To me it is more important that something is readily available if needed and Canon/Nikon fill that need the best in both OEM or aftermarket versions.

Used gear availability is also big to me - at a very high level quick look here in my area there are 37 pages of Canon gear vs 11 for Sony. So if other brands have older lenses that are useful on newer bodies it doesn't do any good if you can't find one when you want to buy.

In new lenses and adapters Sony lists 37 A-mount versus 59 for Canon.

Even if I have my technical facts about other brands wrong the availability advantage that C/N have is indisputable to me as a deciding factor.

If that's not important to you then so be it. But it may or may not be important to others.

If you want to see future product development then C is marginally better than N which are both profitable vs Sony's camera division which isn't (and Olympus has somewhat given up on the interchangeable lens market). I don't want to purchase new to find out I've got a stranded platform when the mother company gives up the market - I've already been there with Oldsmobile.

I am not trying to push Canon (or Nikon) but just stating my reasons for recommending a mainstream brand to a newbie (as in my original post here).

 

[havoc315]

Canon has a ton of F/2.8 zooms too, 16-35/24-70/70-200. In a DSLR Canon 1Dx can shoot at 14 fps with a mirror and optical viewfinder.

The Canon 1dx is about $5000. The Sony A65 does 12fps for $600. You keep trying to show that Canon is "better" as if no other camera can be a consideration. I never claimed that Canon lacked 2.8 zooms. I merely pointed out that all the brands have different advantages, including Sony and Pentax. Want to shoot at faster than 10fps for under $1000? Then Sony is the only answer.

To me it is more important that something is readily available if needed and Canon/Nikon fill that need the best in both OEM or aftermarket versions.

Same with Sony and Pentax typically speaking. Ok, if you are a professional shooting the US Open, you'll get more support from Canon. But no real difference for regular consumers.

Used gear availability is also big to me - at a very high level quick look here in my area there are 37 pages of Canon gear vs 11 for Sony. So if other brands have older lenses that are useful on newer bodies it doesn't do any good if you can't find one when you want to buy.

counting pages is irrelevant. Every bit of gear I own was bought after market. There is never any un availability of Sony.

In new lenses and adapters Sony lists 37 A-mount versus 59 for Canon.

Even if I have my technical facts about other brands wrong the availability advantage that C/N have is indisputable to me as a deciding factor.

It's not indisputable. It's false. Yes, if you absolutely need 4 50/1.4s instead of three...Then you shouldn't consider Sony. But the reality is, anything that is available for Canon and Nikon, is also available for Sony (and I assume Pentax)
If that's not important to you then so be it. But it may or may not be important to others.

If you want to see future product development then C is marginally better than N which are both profitable vs Sony's camera division which isn't (and Olympus has somewhat given up on the interchangeable lens market). I don't want to purchase new to find out I've got a stranded platform when the mother company gives up the market - I've already been there with Oldsmobile.

future development? Most industry sources cite Sony as being the leader in camera development and innovation.

I am not trying to push Canon (or Nikon) but just stating my reasons for recommending a mainstream brand to a newbie (as in my original post here).
and I was simply correcting your false statements. You know Canon very well, you should discuss the strengths of Canon. No reason for you to spread lies about other brands.

Reply in red.

 

[PythonFan888]

After reading all that I think I'll treat myself to a Holga - with a few rolls of 120 film.

 

[TinkerbellinNY6]

After advice on here and other sources online I have narrowed it down to either the canon rebel t3i or the Nikon d3200.

 

[photo_chick]

After reading all that I think I'll treat myself to a Holga - with a few rolls of 120 film.

Get a used Brownie Hawkeye and feel all that much cooler using a real vintage bakelite.