hi again all. i'm at the point where i want to "release" myself from the 5d2 that has
served me fairly well over the past years.
some of you may remember that i now (also) use a sony alpha-6000 camera with its e-mount lenses.
here is my predicament. i like the results given by the sony a6000. far more 'balanced' than
the results from the canon in almost every way i can describe. sensor quality also outstrips the canon
that i use which is now not latest technology by any means, but still very good, very useable.
i've seen results from the canon 7d2 and am impressed with both the quality of them, and the
ability of the camera to crank out decent sports photographs (def decent: in focus).
here is what i'm resting with as a decision at the moment:
canon: wait for the next generation of 7d. its been out a while now. it may
be due an upgrade soon. i'm in no great hurry to spend money, but would love to
smell the newness of a lovely camera (sniff tests can be had on youtube).
sony: definitely dont need the video capabilities, which is a shame as it does really good 4k video.
would like the snazzy sensor that the 6300 uses. not too keen on the price of sony lenses
especially the g-master series, but they are as good if not better than zeiss glass or so
my research has uncovered. the g-master are not (apparently) rebadged zeiss but sony's own.
it does very well in tracking moving subjects, which would be its strong point for me.
my temptation is to put the canon camera into the used market, and use the canon lenses on the sony.
i will have to check on whether the 70-200 f2.8 will focus fast enough in autofocus mode on a sony a6300
with a converter. the current cheapo converter i use is ok for studio-type work, but isnt half as snappy
enough for sports.
do i bite the bullet and go all sony, selling off the canon lenses and opting for just
a couple of very decent sony lenses at hight cost but also high quality.
and this is where i get brain fade and hyper elasticity of the brain molecules.
do i jump canon ship and go all sony. i dont mean sony full frame either, as i'm finding that
apsc is producing results as good as the 5d2 ever has done, and they are good enough for my needs.
someone please just tell me what to do
the other alternative is do absolutely nothing for a few months, and just wait hopefully for
canon to upgrade the 7d2 with its latest fastest autofocus, which the 80d has and outperforms the 7d2.
and yes (sigh) (big sigh) i have considered keeping my kit as-is, and buying an 80d for the sports side
of things.... if it were 100 cheaper i'd say it was a no-brainer, but its at a price point that
makes me think twice.
ugh. is there help available for my quandary or should i just take a holiday ?
Do nothing, the new ranges are coming out about now, thats why theres a big sale round Xmas and New year, every year - clearance of old stock, making way for the new stuff.
Pick your fave lenses, make sure they are available in both systems before you dive in n choose, and buy what suits your budget and desired output best. Look at what you have, would one be compatible with the other if you had a converter for example? For sports you're talking expensive locked aperture primes, you might look into an f-mount and a digiscope though as an alternative. Sports photographers can spend thousands on just one lens... but it does the job and they can sell the images they get from it.
Better photographs though... for that you need to improve yourself, not the kit.
My personal choice, would be the Sony, if I had to move from Nikon, just remember though e-mount is a funny beast and not all lenses available on your canon, are available on Sony, so yeh, consider what you have, then what you need, and work to that.
thanks for the replies. from what i have read the 80d has by far the better focus system and knocks some others off their perches
my gut instinct tells me the wait wait wait advice is the one i will go with and bring in a high power torch to help the 5d2 focus
5d3 is an option but money tight right now and 7d2 is better at sport type shots anyway...
just have to find the right 7d2 at a price thats affordable i guess
Just my guess but I think you'll be waiting a long time for a 7D iii to come out. The 5d iii's are a great bit of kit but to be honest I use my 6d a lot more than I do my 5Diii. Not for sports obviously but I can't remember that last time I shot sports. I can't give any advice at all on Sony as I have never used them. I use my cameras pretty much daily though and I've yet to have a client turn around and complain about the quality image that either of my Canon's produce. I'm not saying the Sony isn't better quality but who really sees the difference apart from Tony Northrup and lets face it most of the viewers only tune in to look at his wife anyway!! Haha. Took that way off subject and most won't have a clue what I was on about. Short answer, get the Canon mk3.
Reaise the camera is just a tool and a means to an end. The "end" is the images. Forget comparing this and that camera manufacturer. These days there are no bad cameras. Concentrate on why you make images and try and expand your ideas in this field. Any camera will do a good job if the ideas are sound and the execution appropriate. Buying a new bauble wont make your work better.
the last two comments i agree with whole heartedly. i gave my "old" 450d to a friend, who has
produced some marvellous shots with it, and made my photography (of flowers, landscapes) look dire.
she's an artist. i've had to 'donate' a lens to her too to aid her in her development of fine
photographs. so yes, the tool doesn't maketh the workman. its only a tool.
having said that: i have a huge tekkie side to me, that is now coming out in camera and lens.
it used to be in hifi. why accept 99% when one can get 100%. LOL. you get the idea. i'm mad.
i've recently made a comparison between the raw files of
a) sony a6k
b) canon 100d
c canon 5d2.
there is a huge difference in the colour rendition of the sony vs the canon, and thats it.
im sure if i pixel peeked to the n-th degree id find something, but to all practical purposes...
i prefer the sony file as it arrives out of the camera due to its colour balance. its more
pleasing to my eyes.
the next 5 to 7 years will be using the next body i chose so i'd like to think of something like
a full frame a7-something, but why? some very excellent results are happening out of the apsc's
that totally blow me away.
so, i'm after a body that will focus. ive "had it" with low light focusing of the 5d2.
many of my lower light shots are not easily focused, which annoys the crap out of me.
its got to the point where i take along a small torch to help the camera see
the upgrade, and upgrade it surely is to the sony a6000 was mindblowing in decent light too.
but it's not the best studio camera i've come across, although capable.
so all this having been said, i am going to wait. to appease my tech psychology just a little
i may be adding a lens to the stable. i'm lacking a super wide. it may well be a carl zeiss.
gulp. i just saw the money river flowing. i'm super impressed with the otus and its reviews,
but not that kind of money... i've backed off from purchase of the batis so often its untrue.
this is telling me a story. the new batis is coming out, and i may just accept the use of
the a6k with excellent glass is all i need.
what will the models think though? i've heard of models walking out when
a chap pulls out his little one. hugely problematic.
wait alex. wait. keep your money in your offshore bank account is what i need to hear
from you lot right now... LOL