Sony DSLR review: How does Sony compare to Nikon and Canon?
Greetings JimAs you know, I greatly appreciate your site and the advice you give is fantastic. I want to make some corrections to this article because some of the things...
05/10/2021
Greetings Jim
As you know, I greatly appreciate your site and the advice you give is fantastic. I want to make some corrections to this article because some of the things mentioned here have also been mentioned on other sites and are not entirely true.
Let me state at the outset that I have owned over 30 cameras over the past 11 years from almost every major SLR brand. A few years ago it was a Sony that broke the record for over a year in my bag. Shortly after, I was hired by Sony South Africa to spend a year helping them develop Alpha in South Africa. I am no longer in the position although they are one of our customers in the photographic industry.
At the beginning of your article you point out some of the many advantages of the Sony system, some of these - like the translucent mirror technology - are the very reason the camera is able to achieve the excellent AF in video and high frame rates. It is also the only way they have been able to differentiate themselves from their competitors. The only compromise was the EVF which I was not a fan of on the A33/A55 when it first launched. The new OLED version is almost double the resolution and offers a contrast range that what you see through the viewfinder is an exact representation of what your image will look like by accurately displaying the camera's dynamic range for the scene . This coupled with the fact that you never need to take your eyes off the viewfinder to see your menus or image playback etc. is a major plus for me and sold me the new A77, A65 and NEX-7 before any other functionality was tested. I accept however that this is a matter of opinion, however I believe that this generation of EVF when experienced in real life shooting conditions could rock more people than ever before, that to me moved away from buying a conventional DSLR that I was testing at the same time I received the A77 for a thorough review.
Let's solve the problems in order. Sony is proprietary in some ways, some are of their own choosing and some are not. Let's look at Memory Stick first. In the early days of Memory Stick, the queen card of the day was Compact Flash, Mirco Drive, Smart Media and Stiffy Disks as found in Sony's Mavica range. To support the increased resolution of new cameras, Sony began to investigate other types of media. The SD card was not yet a standard in compact cameras. Olympus and Fuji were big proponents of Smart Media cards and everyone was on the eve of Compact Flash in compact cameras. All of these formats had very limited space and if my memory serves me right when Memory Stick was announced it broke all commercially available storage capacity records at the time bar Mircro Drive which was not Solid State and very fragile. I have to correct (this all happened a long time ago) but I think Sony was the first to release 128MB and 256MB cards. SD only became a viable option somewhat later and would come much later to kill Smart Media cards. Even in more recent times, Memory Stick has often offered more speed for the price than SD cards. Then about two years ago when they saw the speed standard for SD starting to pass the Memory Stick and at equal or better prices they released cameras that supported both SD and MS. There was a time no more than 5 years ago, but if you wanted an HD video camera, a Sony Handycam with a Memory Stick at the minimum speed required was more affordable than a competing SD card camera requiring at least a class 6 SD card. be due to the fact that SD cards at this speed are always more expensive than MS.
Your comments regarding Four Thirds are also a bit unfair, I think I don't have all the facts in front of me. Four Thirds was a standard developed by Olympus, Kodak and joined by Sigma, my memory serves me correctly. Although Sigma was part of the group, their own DSLR camera never adopted this standard. Later, Panasonic joined the group and helped move things to Micro Four Thirds. This new smaller mount has yet to see a lens designed for it by Sigma which I find interesting. The standard, to my knowledge, is not completely open, but if that has changed, I don't think it has since its launch. The problem with this format is that it is optimized for the smaller sensor which is half the size of full frame. Sony tried to do two things with NEX, make the camera smaller (like a more compact camera) while delivering DSLR image quality from the size of the APS-C sensor. In order to accommodate the larger sensor while making the camera mirrorless and more compact, a new lens mount had to be developed. So came the E-mount which, after about 6 months on the market – at Photokina 2010 in September last year – was announced as open to the market. Their statement was along the lines of "we would like to announce that we will be making E-mount specs available to other manufacturers." I'd like to think any other company looking to make a mirrorless APS-C sized sensor camera will take up this offer, maybe Fuji with the variable lens version of the X100 would do well although I'm afraid 'a company doesn't want to lock people into their own goals and not risk losing them to a competitor.
The comment on the hoof is a bit harsh. Remember that Sony bought Minolta and the decision to keep the mount would probably have been made to retain the existing customer base they were buying from, a percentage of whom would already have minolta digital flashes that would work fine on the Alpha A100. Does this pose a problem for the Sony Strobist, yes a little even if I see more and more compatible articles coming out for fitting. Also, the Sony system has had wireless TTL flash across the range since day one, in fact Minolta were, if I remember correctly, the pioneers of this technology already at the time of the film.
Sony's lens range isn't as diverse as their peers, I accept that. Zeiss lenses are excellent (Zuiko is Olympus' line of lenses) and for many a big plus for the system. Somewhat to their credit, Sony also does not duplicate its lenses like Canon which has a 75-300mm, 75-300mm USM, 75-300mm USM IS, 70-30mm DO and 70-300mm L. Said, they need to get the 500mm f/4 sample they've been showing for about 3 years now, and there are gaps to fill. The fact that their entry level lenses are made by Tamron is not unique and in fact almost all of Pentax's current lenses are Tokina lenses. Zeiss and Sony G lenses are exceptionally good lenses and in many ways Sony has the advantage of being able to design these lenses for the digital age rather than sitting with many legacy glass designs from the era the cinema.
There are fewer resources although this is starting to change. We run a recently launched podcast called Alpha Tutorials specifically to answer some of the questions we receive, the response has been good all things considered. I take note of your comment, however. Also keep in mind that the other guys have been at this game way longer than Sony and more experienced users are willing to share.
Accessories, of course, the guys with the lions share will get the same support. from third party accessories - although honestly I don't think Nikon and Canon appreciate it as much as we as users, they prefer to sell their own equipment - but I see more and more Sony products from third. In terms of batteries, it is mainly Canon that manufactures them across its entire range. The Nikon D3000 / 3100 / 5100 do not have Nikon's power grips.
I have already touched on the problem of the EVF.
Full frame, Sony has had two bodies before, the A900 and the A850. The A850 was actually the first full-frame to top the $2,000.00 price tag. Unfortunately the adoption of Full Frame by Sony's existing customer base has not been as high as they might have liked and from what I understand the units in the market for these models will be the latter until they launch their Translucent Mirror version. likely – we hope – at Photokina 2012.
Do I recommend a Sony to people more than Nikon or Canon, it depends on their needs. I think the Sony at the same price as a Nikon or a Canon offers a bit more bang for your buck right now because of their innovation. For most enthusiasts who will primarily own an entry-level camera with standard zoom, telephoto zoom and a fixed 50mm f/1.8, Sony will offer as much, if not slightly better, value for money. For the more serious the A77 is a great answer to something like the Canon EOS 7D, Nikon D300s or Pentax K-5 and if they don't want full frame yet or a 500mm f/4, this 6 year old system should be just fine. for another year or two when those concerns are met without the brand rushing into something that might disappoint. Alright, that's my 2 cent worth, hope people take it the right way.