To those of you looking at purchasing new cameras this coming season...

[ngjere]

I'm probably going to be taken to task for throwing a grenade in the room BUT! here goes...

Why is everyone seemingly so set on either Nikon or Canon as their camera of "choice" on this board?

Has anyone given any consideration to the others? Is anyone aware of the significant technology advances
made by Sony just in the last couple of years? Is anyone aware that you can purchase into the Alpha series for a
THIRD of the cost of the other favored brands?

I keep hearing/reading how many folks seem to think the only options out there will keep them from making a purchase
due to the expense of the Canikon bus ride.

Seriously, do yourself a favor, do some research and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

You have more than two choices.

 

[Mark Blue]

I'm firmly in the Pentax camp and have no intentions on changing brands.

 

[Jason Boggs]

Probably because Canon and Nikon are the popular and most well known of the cameras. As digital cameras go, there are a lot of good ones out there. You just have to get really good glass to get really good results.

 

[Brett Roberts]

Short answer: because no one else can compete with Canon and Nikon's first-party lens lineups.

Other manufacturers are producing very compelling bodies these days. In fact, the Sony a7 and a7R would be at the top of my list for chasing and landscapes -- if bodies were the only component that mattered. But how many native-mount lenses can you buy for those Sony mirrorless bodies? Maybe 5 or 6 now, over a year after their release?

The Micro Four-Thirds system may be a compelling option for some, but the relatively small sensor size means image quality will never quite match APS-C, let alone full-frame. And if you're going to shoot APS-C or FF, Nikon's and Canon's lens selection blow everyone else's out of the water. If it so happens that another manufacturers' lenses meet all your needs, then have at it! But the big two are still by far the safest option for ensuring you're covered no matter what style(s) of photography you get into later on.

 

[Dan Robinson]

The a7r is at the top of my list for my next still camera.

 

[Rob H]

They're a well known path that many amateur photographers take, so support/accessories/options are bountiful. However, people have been shooting Fuji and Sony mirrorless in the plains for years, and several chasers are even shooting film.

If you never print above 16×20 any camera will work fine with decent glass and technique. Yes Nikon has some great glass but saying no one competes isn't really accurate, and why restrict yourself to 1st party glass - it's just a brand name slapped on a piece of metal. Fujis lenses are phenomenal, the Zeiss FE mount lenses are amazing, and with mirrorless you can easily adapt old manual glass, because you don't need AF for shooting landscapes.

Complaining about M4/3 or APS-C sensor size has always been funny to me, this video sums it up pretty well:

Watch video >

 

[Skip Talbot]

Why is everyone seemingly so set on either Nikon or Canon as their camera of "choice" on this board?

There are great reasons to go with one of the major brands including availability of lenses, third party add-ons, and accessories. When i was first in the market I looked good and hard at a Pentax body because of its amazing low light capabilities. However, I wound up making my brand selection based off my top lens choice at the time, which turned out to be the Canon 10-22.

There is a growing and active third party developer community built around Canon. The Magic Lantern mod unlocks huge potential in your camera. One of my favorites is the ability to shoot raw video, a 14 bit DNG for each frame. Another great add-on is the ability to make almost any body wifi capable and control nearly all the features wirelessly through your smart phone.

These reasons alone are enough to keep me in the Canon camp, even if some other manufacturers are outperforming them in sensor sensitivity or feature set.

 

[ngjere]

Sony bought the Minolta line when their camera division closed their doors years ago. To their credit and an unusual change in thinking, rather than re-engineer the existing technology they decided to market the existing digital line under the Sony brand. Their existing A Mount lens system goes back to the days of the Minolta Maxxum line. EVERY lens that was ever created for that line fits current day Alpha bodies. Arguably, many lenses of that era can still hold their own today and be purchased for a fraction of the cost of new. In fact, many of the lenses that are in the present Sony lineup are direct copies of those Maxxum lenses.

The e mount series is also a fantastic line and is going to put real pressure on the "Big Two" for future sales. 4K video for $700? that's going to be impossible to ignore next summer.

 

[Rob H]

Also, the low light capabilities of the Sony A7S are absolutely sick:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgbUgNiHfXM

But seriously, shoot with whatever you like. If you've bonded with your Pentax, shoot with that. The body/lens that you love shooting with will always take better pictures than the $5000 setup that is "technically superior" that you hate shooting with.

 

[Dan Robinson]

The A7S's low light abilities are mind-boggling. If it just had more resolution for stills, it would be my top choice. I've been shooting 12MP stills since 2008 and in dire need of an upgrade in resolution (I've had several calls for images this year I had to turn down due to insufficient resolution). The 36MP of the A7R is a little overkill for my needs, but will definitely future-proof things. I'm at the point now with video that I believe I need to save my pennies for a capable 4K camera, otherwise the A7S would be the clear choice (I'd have my current camera on eBay in a heartbeat).

 

[Dan Robinson]

4K now seems to barely be where HD was in early 2005. That is, the affordable (prosumer & consumer-grade) 4K cameras are of limited use for much of anything. To get a 4k camera at an affordable price means accepting some major flaws. Rolling shutter and low light performance on the current 4K offerings has been so bad that IMO their only use is static low-motion scenes, like the type of video they are playing on the display models now (city skylines, etc). I think the threat of 4k taking over sooner than everyone expects is high. I've had 3 calls for it already this year.

 

[DMMoore]

It may be an unfair judgement of Sony and Pentax, but I stick with Canon because of durability and dependability. I've used Canon cameras since my first AE-1 in 1978. They've never let me down. And I can be very hard on cameras. I just dabble in storm photography. My main thing to shoot is high school gymnastics. Last year in the 12 week January to March season, I took a bit over 19,500 shots. Based on my experience with Canon, along with Canon's specifications for the model, I have faith that my 7D can take that kind of usage. Its handled it fine for 3 seasons now. And when the time comes, my next Camera will most likely be the 7D MKII, or what ever Canon model is equivalent when it happens.

 

[Robert Edmonds]

I would be interested to hear about the dynamic range of other cameras outside of Nikon & Canon. Often we are photographing scenes where there is significant variation in brightness.

 

[Rob H]

I would be interested to hear about the dynamic range of other cameras outside of Nikon & Canon. Often we are photographing scenes where there is significant variation in brightness.

Sony's full-frame mirrorless (A7, A7S, A7R, and the just released A7II) are pretty much kings of dynamic range, and the A7R sensor is essentially (exactly?) the same sensor licensed out to Nikon to stick in the D800/D800E. At base ISO (100) they'll be hovering around 14 EV depending on testing methodology. REDs and the lesser Sonys/Nikons fall in somewhere around 13 EV, and then a smattering of non-Canon cameras like the Fuji X-Trans cameras and Canon's best are in the 10-12 EV range.

Once your ISO goes up, especially to 800 or so, any differences between the sensors are pretty much washed out:



Unless you're shooting TMax B&W film with some special processes (18-20 EV), no camera will perfectly capture the shadows under the updraft base and the highlights on the other side. Bracketing for HDR will continue to be only viable option for not losing data in the shadows/highlights.

edit: apparently Portra 400 film can also get into the 19 EV range with no special processes. It truly is a magical film, and anyone shooting color film should learn to love it.

 

[Greg Campbell]

The a7r is at the top of my list for my next still camera.

Same here. I've got a ton of FD glass that is useless on my Drebel, but will work great on an A7 series body.
W/O knowing much about the latest generation A7x-II bodies, the plain A7 seems like a decent compromise between cost, dynamic range, and megapickles. The A7s is intriguing, trading pixels for DR and killer low-light performance.

Coming from a Drebel 350D, any of the above would be welcome! I've held off partly because the 350D makes a mostly-good-enough chase camera that is essentially disposable/ cheaply replaceable when and if it gets drowned or blown off a cliff. Depending on how much better my presumed Sony is at weather, I might keep shooting the old beast until it does croak. Shooting mostly lightning, there are plenty of opportunities to shoot two areas of the sky at once.

Hoping to scrounge the $ by next Spring.