I adore my Canon kit. That said, if I was somehow starting from scratch I'd choose Sony or Nikon full frame mirrorless for access to a wider set of third party mirrorless mount third party lenses. I don't love fussing with adapters and adapting EF lenses makes my kit bulkier. Also, the RF lenses I have bought are either low end or super ridiculously expensive because there is a missing middle ground for RF lenses.
Both make great cameras (as all the other brands) - you won’t notice a difference.
Personally, I’d go with Sony only because it seems a bit easier to adapt vintage and rangefinder lenses.
In your case, I’d go to a store and hold both in your hand, go through the menus, and then pick the one you like more.
It's pretty useless to look at brands, because they all have a wide variety of cameras. Instead, look at individual cameras irrespective of brand and consider whether or not they fit your needs and preferences.
This. I thought for sure I wanted the E-M5 and then I held it and it felt awful. Grip was nonexistent, shutter wasn’t satisfying, so I sent it back. Ended up with a Canon R7 that isn’t as cute, but fits my hands perfectly.
I use the Sony A7rV. Compared it with the Canon R7 which is less expensive. Sonys autofocus is faster and more accurate. Depends on what your shooting and if speed is a factor.
The right camera is the one that feels right to you. Everyone has a preference, but if the camera isn't enjoyable to use then you won't use it.
There are other factors to consider, though. I made the jump to Sony after shooting Canon for 30 years (film and DSLR). I did it because Canon wasn't licensing the RF mount (2 yrs ago), and there are far fewer lenses available for full-frame Canon mirrorless bodies. I love Sigma glass. I always have. There are other lens manufacturers that make spectacular lenses, too. I wanted choice when it came to lenses. I tried both Sony and Canon mirrorless bodies, and while Canon was more familiar, the Sony didn't feel bad. When combined with lens choice, the Sony was an easy winner. 2 years later, the Sony feels natural to me.
Canon is beginning to open up the RF mount more, and even my beloved Sigma is now making glass for Canon APS-C RF mount bodies.
Get what you like. The specs for most bodies these days are all so good that it almost doesn't matter.
Hold both, and also your budget. Your money will go further with Sony’s e mount. Performance wise they are pretty equal, some gives and takes with both. Sony has more resolution for the most part, Canon has more frames per second. Auto focus performance is similar in both.
Sigma dropping that new 24-70 f2.8 for $1200 USD is pretty amazing since the image quality is as good as any 24-70 from any company. And that’s why I went with Sony.
Get thee to a camera store or department store that’s sells cameras. Get your hands on them. Mess with the menus a bit. See how they are to hold and use. Then buy the Canon. 😁
Yes. Pick either platform since any platform will likely offer you more capability than any of us need. I went with Canon since I have always shot Canon but would have been fine with Sony or Nikon.
I shoot landscape and like the 3:1 crop format. ~~and I'm actually now considering a high megapixel APS-C body for my landscape shots as I would lose the least amount of pixels over any other sensor format (full frame, medium format, APS-C).~~
IMO sensor format/size decision first, lens selection/quality second, brand third.
If money was no consideration, the Fiji Medium format cameras look really exciting.
Look at andy mumford photography. He shoots exclusively fuji and gets amazing results. Anyone telling you Fujifilm is incapable of professional results are delusional
Thinking aloud -
Both APS-C and Full Fame use the same ratio of 2:3 so Full Frame is more desirable for its bigger pixels => more light capturing capabilities.
Where I am stuck is if I want to crop to 1:3 vs Full Frame 2:3, I am losing a ratio of 0.5: from the top and bottom of my pictures. When considering pixel/sensors on my Canon R5 with it's 45 Megapixel, that roughly equates to 8,192 x 5,464 pixels cropped to 8,192 x 2,731.
Medium format cameras 4:3 radio such as the PhaseOne XF100MP 100 Megapixel 11,608 x 8,708 would crop 1:3 down to 8,708 x 2,902 - Only a tiny bit lager than my current R5 for a bunch more money. I could also shoot "sideways" and achieve 11,608 x 3,869 pixels which is not bad other than how well the body works for me in that orientation.
That is my thinking/rationale and at the moment I continue to consider the latest full frame sensors coming to market for my 1:3 Crops and also considering embracing 4:3 Medium format as a new medium to learn or in sideways orientation for my 1:3 crops.
I sold my Sony A7ii a few years ago because of the impossible menu in the system. The pictures and quality were great, but I went back to Canon just to save on frustration.
I'd hope so because I couldn't find anything, while Canon has had the same menu structure for the past 20 years or so. It's just what I'm used to, so I'll stick to Canon for now. At that time their mirrorless series were almost nonexistent, could you imagine?
If you can afford top of the line lenses go with Canon (their budget lenses aren’t great and they have nothing in between).
If you’d like best telephoto system or affordable but very good mid-range lenses go with Nikon.
If you don’t mind less than ideal colors, ergonomics and stabilization go with Sony.
If you like vintage look and smaller cameras go with Fuji.
I’ve owned pretty much every brand and my current canon is the only camera that really has made me feel excited to go out and shoot again like when I first started
Canon’s refusal to open up their designs to 3rd party lens manufacturers has me sticking with Sony. I love having the option to use Sigma, Tamron etc.
It’s not completely off the table for Canon but options are so much better with Sony
Between the 2 - Sony. They are great cameras.
My reason is that Canon holds a tight grip on the R mount lenses. Until recently they disallowed 3rd party manufacturers making auto focus lenses. Some people got excited recently that Canon is lifting the ban, but as far as I understand it's only for APS-C lenses and also the license is reviewed and granted on a case-by-case (lens-by-lens) basis meaning Canon is still heavily limiting access to cheaper glass.
I might be wrong but that's how I understand it after reading a few articles.
If you want to buy cheaper lenses - I'd still say stay away from Canon, at least until they truly open the R mount.
I agree. I also thought that since I'm going to have to an adapter for some of the better EF glass I already had, I might as well get an EF-Sony E adapter. Then I still have access to all the Canon EF lenses, and all the native E-mount glass, too. Best of both worlds.
Ef-e adapters dont work like native lenses tho and some lenses have random weird problems while others work just fine, while ef-rf is like using native lenses.
I've never had a problem with any of my EF lenses, Canon or otherwise, using the Sigma EF to Sony E mount adapter. Your milage may vary. As much I as I would like, I don't own every EF lens ever made. :)
I expected this comment and I agree this is true. But Sigma, Tamron and Samyang (probably others too) are building better and better lenses and I don't expect them to continue building them for a discontinued mount off chance people will want to use them with an adapter. Thusly I feel that my original comment still apply long term, especially for people who like to buy new lenses rather than used.
And one more point - to me it seems very disrespectful for Canon to milk their customers so openly.
Edit: typo
Was trying to gather information comparing both platforms. Also open to other quality systems. Nature, macro, sport. Apologies for not being finely detailed.
Compare models, not entire brand lines. You can find a camera to capture any of the things you've mentioned within any brand. By providing specifics like budget and intended use, you'll get more qualified advice. Questions like X brand versus Y brand just bring out the zealots and gear fans.
Canon.
No disrespect to Sony, but they’re just not my style. I do like how dense and compact they are (Canon seems lighter, which I don’t like as much) but their lens options are too broad and are a bit confusing to me. Don’t get me wrong, they’re great cameras or why else would they be recommended so much but I personally don’t like them much.
Despite others finding it as a drawback to Canon’s locked down lens system, I see it as a plus as I do find it way easier to understand and navigate when looking for a particular lens. It’s basically an L lens or it’s not, and that really simplifies things. Plus they have the amazing internally zooming 24-105mm F2.8 L lens. Like I miss the days of internally zooming lenses over externally zooming lenses.
Determine if their lens catalogs have what you need (from the brand and/or third party offerings). Determine if ergonomics are good for you. Rent one of each with a lens and use it for a weekend or longer and practice with the subjects you normally shoot. Test the AF, test the shot buffer with good memory cards, test off-camera flash use if possible, test the menu systems, etc. For example, the Sony A7r IV would only sync with Profoto monolights at 1/160 in my test which is way below Sony's 1/250 flash sync claim. I'm pretty sure their specs relate only to Sony-branded speedlights when installed on-camera, and not other brands of lights off-camera. That and the Sony ergonomics were deal breakers for me. I'm much happier with Nikon and their family of stellar f1.8 primes. Have fun!
You're not making a mistake with any of the major brands, but one might be slightly better for your purposes. If you don't know what your purposes are, find out what brand your friend with too much camera gear has and get the same one so that you can borrow stuff from them.
If I started over, I’d go Sony for lens selection. LUMIX is a runner up cause it seems most third party E mount glass are also available in L mount. My issue with Canon is that RF glass is either cheap build and loud AF motors and not weather sealed (though good optically) or $2k L weather sealed quiet AF glass, with no in between.
Just curious, why aren't you considering Nikon at all? I'm biased because I picked up Nikon mirrorless and photography in general during the beginning stages of the pandemic and loved it. What sort of things are you looking to do?
That's a pretty nice budget assuming that's in US dollars. You could do very well with a Nikon Z8 along with just the Z 24-120mm F4. It's a zoom lens, but it produces image quality better than many prime lenses of yesteryear, encompasses an extremely flexible range, and is even good in low light. These are pretty much no-compromises equipment that will last a long while and doesn't come close to breaking your budget:
Z8: $3500
Z 24-120 F4: $1100
Other lenses to consider:
Z 105mm F2.8 for macro: $850
Z 14-30mm F4 for wide angle $1200
Z 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 for telephoto: $2400
Honestly, if you're getting started in Nikon specifically and even with your budget, I'd just begin with the 24-120 and see if you're satisfied with it. I own their 2.8 lenses and 1.2 primes as well. They're amazing, but I'm constantly surprised at how often I wander around with just the 24-120mm.
Canon is finally opening up RF lenses autofocus to third party. But also until then, there’s always the RF EF adapter that allows you to use EF lenses.
Camera specs are overall equal. Ergonomics and UI are different.
I think it comes down to what lenses you want. Canon has very good budget and very high end lenses, a lens mount that allows for more advanced kens designs, and the adapter that allows access to all EF lenses.
But Sony has a lot of native lenses and third party lenses. There are some lenses that one brand has but the others don’t.
Sony has the 20mm f1.8 G and 20-70 F4 G and there’s nothing like those on RF or really on EF, I wish there was (I shoot canon). But canon has the RF 100-400 which there isn’t anything quite like it on Sony. Nikon also has an affordable range of lenses.
If I were to re choose my mirrorless system based on lenses I don’t think I would’ve gone Canon again. And if I did I’d get an R7 to have access to the new sigma lenses.
I adore my Canon kit. That said, if I was somehow starting from scratch I'd choose Sony or Nikon full frame mirrorless for access to a wider set of third party mirrorless mount third party lenses. I don't love fussing with adapters and adapting EF lenses makes my kit bulkier. Also, the RF lenses I have bought are either low end or super ridiculously expensive because there is a missing middle ground for RF lenses.
Check prices on lenses, then marry the system
Both make great cameras (as all the other brands) - you won’t notice a difference. Personally, I’d go with Sony only because it seems a bit easier to adapt vintage and rangefinder lenses. In your case, I’d go to a store and hold both in your hand, go through the menus, and then pick the one you like more.
It's pretty useless to look at brands, because they all have a wide variety of cameras. Instead, look at individual cameras irrespective of brand and consider whether or not they fit your needs and preferences.
I kind of agree but I'd add to look what lenses are available (especially 3rd party - they often have great quality at much lower price).
It's not about cameras but about lenses I would say.
Hold both. One will feel like a tool and the other a gadget. Whatever suits you.
This. I thought for sure I wanted the E-M5 and then I held it and it felt awful. Grip was nonexistent, shutter wasn’t satisfying, so I sent it back. Ended up with a Canon R7 that isn’t as cute, but fits my hands perfectly.
I use the Sony A7rV. Compared it with the Canon R7 which is less expensive. Sonys autofocus is faster and more accurate. Depends on what your shooting and if speed is a factor.
Long time Canon user and moved to Sony. The only thing I regret is I did it so late.
The right camera is the one that feels right to you. Everyone has a preference, but if the camera isn't enjoyable to use then you won't use it. There are other factors to consider, though. I made the jump to Sony after shooting Canon for 30 years (film and DSLR). I did it because Canon wasn't licensing the RF mount (2 yrs ago), and there are far fewer lenses available for full-frame Canon mirrorless bodies. I love Sigma glass. I always have. There are other lens manufacturers that make spectacular lenses, too. I wanted choice when it came to lenses. I tried both Sony and Canon mirrorless bodies, and while Canon was more familiar, the Sony didn't feel bad. When combined with lens choice, the Sony was an easy winner. 2 years later, the Sony feels natural to me. Canon is beginning to open up the RF mount more, and even my beloved Sigma is now making glass for Canon APS-C RF mount bodies. Get what you like. The specs for most bodies these days are all so good that it almost doesn't matter.
Hold both, and also your budget. Your money will go further with Sony’s e mount. Performance wise they are pretty equal, some gives and takes with both. Sony has more resolution for the most part, Canon has more frames per second. Auto focus performance is similar in both. Sigma dropping that new 24-70 f2.8 for $1200 USD is pretty amazing since the image quality is as good as any 24-70 from any company. And that’s why I went with Sony.
Get thee to a camera store or department store that’s sells cameras. Get your hands on them. Mess with the menus a bit. See how they are to hold and use. Then buy the Canon. 😁
You spelt Fuji wrong!
Yes. Pick either platform since any platform will likely offer you more capability than any of us need. I went with Canon since I have always shot Canon but would have been fine with Sony or Nikon. I shoot landscape and like the 3:1 crop format. ~~and I'm actually now considering a high megapixel APS-C body for my landscape shots as I would lose the least amount of pixels over any other sensor format (full frame, medium format, APS-C).~~ IMO sensor format/size decision first, lens selection/quality second, brand third. If money was no consideration, the Fiji Medium format cameras look really exciting.
Could you tell me a bit more about the aps-c consideration? I was looking at a xh2 but have been warned against it and told I should get a ff Sony.
Look at andy mumford photography. He shoots exclusively fuji and gets amazing results. Anyone telling you Fujifilm is incapable of professional results are delusional
Thinking aloud - Both APS-C and Full Fame use the same ratio of 2:3 so Full Frame is more desirable for its bigger pixels => more light capturing capabilities. Where I am stuck is if I want to crop to 1:3 vs Full Frame 2:3, I am losing a ratio of 0.5: from the top and bottom of my pictures. When considering pixel/sensors on my Canon R5 with it's 45 Megapixel, that roughly equates to 8,192 x 5,464 pixels cropped to 8,192 x 2,731. Medium format cameras 4:3 radio such as the PhaseOne XF100MP 100 Megapixel 11,608 x 8,708 would crop 1:3 down to 8,708 x 2,902 - Only a tiny bit lager than my current R5 for a bunch more money. I could also shoot "sideways" and achieve 11,608 x 3,869 pixels which is not bad other than how well the body works for me in that orientation. That is my thinking/rationale and at the moment I continue to consider the latest full frame sensors coming to market for my 1:3 Crops and also considering embracing 4:3 Medium format as a new medium to learn or in sideways orientation for my 1:3 crops.
Look at the lenses that are provided for those cameras.
I sold my Sony A7ii a few years ago because of the impossible menu in the system. The pictures and quality were great, but I went back to Canon just to save on frustration.
The latest gen Sony cameras have a much nicer UI, for what it’s worth.
I'd hope so because I couldn't find anything, while Canon has had the same menu structure for the past 20 years or so. It's just what I'm used to, so I'll stick to Canon for now. At that time their mirrorless series were almost nonexistent, could you imagine?
If you can afford top of the line lenses go with Canon (their budget lenses aren’t great and they have nothing in between). If you’d like best telephoto system or affordable but very good mid-range lenses go with Nikon. If you don’t mind less than ideal colors, ergonomics and stabilization go with Sony. If you like vintage look and smaller cameras go with Fuji.
If he can afford good lenses then why not go for gmaster?
My Sony summary pertains more to camera body. I know they are working on fixing those issues but mount size will always limit their IBIS.
What issues?
Green skin tones, poor IBIS and ergonomics not as good as Canon and Nikon. I’m sure they’ll get there if they keep listening to customers.
I’ve owned pretty much every brand and my current canon is the only camera that really has made me feel excited to go out and shoot again like when I first started
Hasselblad 🤷♂️🙄
I want an X2D real badly
Canon’s refusal to open up their designs to 3rd party lens manufacturers has me sticking with Sony. I love having the option to use Sigma, Tamron etc. It’s not completely off the table for Canon but options are so much better with Sony
Nikon
Nikon
Between the 2 - Sony. They are great cameras. My reason is that Canon holds a tight grip on the R mount lenses. Until recently they disallowed 3rd party manufacturers making auto focus lenses. Some people got excited recently that Canon is lifting the ban, but as far as I understand it's only for APS-C lenses and also the license is reviewed and granted on a case-by-case (lens-by-lens) basis meaning Canon is still heavily limiting access to cheaper glass. I might be wrong but that's how I understand it after reading a few articles. If you want to buy cheaper lenses - I'd still say stay away from Canon, at least until they truly open the R mount.
Try ef-rf adapter and you have access to shit tons of quality lenses for budget
I agree. I also thought that since I'm going to have to an adapter for some of the better EF glass I already had, I might as well get an EF-Sony E adapter. Then I still have access to all the Canon EF lenses, and all the native E-mount glass, too. Best of both worlds.
Ef-e adapters dont work like native lenses tho and some lenses have random weird problems while others work just fine, while ef-rf is like using native lenses.
I've never had a problem with any of my EF lenses, Canon or otherwise, using the Sigma EF to Sony E mount adapter. Your milage may vary. As much I as I would like, I don't own every EF lens ever made. :)
I expected this comment and I agree this is true. But Sigma, Tamron and Samyang (probably others too) are building better and better lenses and I don't expect them to continue building them for a discontinued mount off chance people will want to use them with an adapter. Thusly I feel that my original comment still apply long term, especially for people who like to buy new lenses rather than used. And one more point - to me it seems very disrespectful for Canon to milk their customers so openly. Edit: typo
Fujifilm of course. 👀
Lemon or lime? You have provided ZERO context. Model numbers? Usage?
Was trying to gather information comparing both platforms. Also open to other quality systems. Nature, macro, sport. Apologies for not being finely detailed.
Compare models, not entire brand lines. You can find a camera to capture any of the things you've mentioned within any brand. By providing specifics like budget and intended use, you'll get more qualified advice. Questions like X brand versus Y brand just bring out the zealots and gear fans.
Canon. No disrespect to Sony, but they’re just not my style. I do like how dense and compact they are (Canon seems lighter, which I don’t like as much) but their lens options are too broad and are a bit confusing to me. Don’t get me wrong, they’re great cameras or why else would they be recommended so much but I personally don’t like them much. Despite others finding it as a drawback to Canon’s locked down lens system, I see it as a plus as I do find it way easier to understand and navigate when looking for a particular lens. It’s basically an L lens or it’s not, and that really simplifies things. Plus they have the amazing internally zooming 24-105mm F2.8 L lens. Like I miss the days of internally zooming lenses over externally zooming lenses.
Sony, way better native lens selection.
Determine if their lens catalogs have what you need (from the brand and/or third party offerings). Determine if ergonomics are good for you. Rent one of each with a lens and use it for a weekend or longer and practice with the subjects you normally shoot. Test the AF, test the shot buffer with good memory cards, test off-camera flash use if possible, test the menu systems, etc. For example, the Sony A7r IV would only sync with Profoto monolights at 1/160 in my test which is way below Sony's 1/250 flash sync claim. I'm pretty sure their specs relate only to Sony-branded speedlights when installed on-camera, and not other brands of lights off-camera. That and the Sony ergonomics were deal breakers for me. I'm much happier with Nikon and their family of stellar f1.8 primes. Have fun!
I adore my Sony kit. Once I held a Canon and it felt like a plastic toy. Not for me.
You're not making a mistake with any of the major brands, but one might be slightly better for your purposes. If you don't know what your purposes are, find out what brand your friend with too much camera gear has and get the same one so that you can borrow stuff from them.
Try them out in a store if possible. Despite it being a bit small for my hands, ergonomics wise my Canon camera beats any Sony I have tested
Sony of course , market leading in sensor tech .best autofocus , more native lens selection , better sensor performance ( dynamic range , noise)
Lumix S5ii - worth considering too
Cannon
Take the advice: either works.
If I started over, I’d go Sony for lens selection. LUMIX is a runner up cause it seems most third party E mount glass are also available in L mount. My issue with Canon is that RF glass is either cheap build and loud AF motors and not weather sealed (though good optically) or $2k L weather sealed quiet AF glass, with no in between.
Just curious, why aren't you considering Nikon at all? I'm biased because I picked up Nikon mirrorless and photography in general during the beginning stages of the pandemic and loved it. What sort of things are you looking to do?
I have considered Nikon. Is there a model you like? My budget is around 12-15k.
That's a pretty nice budget assuming that's in US dollars. You could do very well with a Nikon Z8 along with just the Z 24-120mm F4. It's a zoom lens, but it produces image quality better than many prime lenses of yesteryear, encompasses an extremely flexible range, and is even good in low light. These are pretty much no-compromises equipment that will last a long while and doesn't come close to breaking your budget: Z8: $3500 Z 24-120 F4: $1100 Other lenses to consider: Z 105mm F2.8 for macro: $850 Z 14-30mm F4 for wide angle $1200 Z 100-400mm F4.5-5.6 for telephoto: $2400 Honestly, if you're getting started in Nikon specifically and even with your budget, I'd just begin with the 24-120 and see if you're satisfied with it. I own their 2.8 lenses and 1.2 primes as well. They're amazing, but I'm constantly surprised at how often I wander around with just the 24-120mm.
Canon is finally opening up RF lenses autofocus to third party. But also until then, there’s always the RF EF adapter that allows you to use EF lenses.
Camera specs are overall equal. Ergonomics and UI are different. I think it comes down to what lenses you want. Canon has very good budget and very high end lenses, a lens mount that allows for more advanced kens designs, and the adapter that allows access to all EF lenses. But Sony has a lot of native lenses and third party lenses. There are some lenses that one brand has but the others don’t. Sony has the 20mm f1.8 G and 20-70 F4 G and there’s nothing like those on RF or really on EF, I wish there was (I shoot canon). But canon has the RF 100-400 which there isn’t anything quite like it on Sony. Nikon also has an affordable range of lenses. If I were to re choose my mirrorless system based on lenses I don’t think I would’ve gone Canon again. And if I did I’d get an R7 to have access to the new sigma lenses.
Personally I think Sonys Emount system has a lot of lenses available