Why do you stick to Sony DSLR?
- Thread starter somefriendyouare
- Start date
Then go ahead n get ur C or N, need not wait for Sony. My Sony is definitely doing some things that C & N cant do for the price i paid.
greenieadi said:
I am a proud alpha system user..
What more could i ask?? I dont shoot for a living..,
anyway when i post my pic on facebook i usually get Great Shot! Nice photo! Good composition...
Did anybody hear somoene saying To your pic
Wow! YOUR PICTURE FOCUS IS FAST... ITS CANON MADE IN JAPAN!
Or or or
YOUR PHOTO HAS MANY FOCUSING POINTS ITS NIKON!
Hehehh
When i decide to get myself a DSLR, i do a lot of research for the camera that fall into my budget range, i am newbie on that moment, i don't know much about the tech spec for each camera. So i test each of them on spot and feel the different between them before i make the deal.
In end, i choice sony as my first DSLR for 3 reasons.
1. Good hand grid, coz i need to hold it long for shooting, so i choice what make me feel most comfortable.
2. Coz i noob, so i choice the one with the nice design menu control which explain to me each of the function on screen. By that i can easier adjust the setting i need
3. nice LCD display, many ppl use viewfinder to aim n shoot. but even now i still using LCD for most of my shoot. and so far, it still haven't disappoint me.
So i use Sony to capture the moment in my life
In end, i choice sony as my first DSLR for 3 reasons.
1. Good hand grid, coz i need to hold it long for shooting, so i choice what make me feel most comfortable.
2. Coz i noob, so i choice the one with the nice design menu control which explain to me each of the function on screen. By that i can easier adjust the setting i need
3. nice LCD display, many ppl use viewfinder to aim n shoot. but even now i still using LCD for most of my shoot. and so far, it still haven't disappoint me.
So i use Sony to capture the moment in my life
Last edited:
Recent the railway station outing. 80% are canon users, 15% mixed, 5% - Sony!
I been asked by a Canon user, why use Sony? I just reply, cheapest FF lor.
On top of that, my lens, 28-75mm F2.8, can be use on my A850. I brought it when I using the Dynax7 SLR. I also own the 5600 flash. So, pointless for me to change system. Another thing, FF body are consider RARE and for hobby only, I dont wish to invest so much on FF body (else I will get A900). Furthermore, most of them are use Sony sensor, so, if I "jump", still sony, right? Anyway, am comfortable with Sony range as in the focus length. Price wise, still ok to me, not too ex. Anyway, is the photos that matter, who cares what brand you using, right?
I been asked by a Canon user, why use Sony? I just reply, cheapest FF lor.
On top of that, my lens, 28-75mm F2.8, can be use on my A850. I brought it when I using the Dynax7 SLR. I also own the 5600 flash. So, pointless for me to change system. Another thing, FF body are consider RARE and for hobby only, I dont wish to invest so much on FF body (else I will get A900). Furthermore, most of them are use Sony sensor, so, if I "jump", still sony, right? Anyway, am comfortable with Sony range as in the focus length. Price wise, still ok to me, not too ex. Anyway, is the photos that matter, who cares what brand you using, right?
I posted this photo sometime ago in one of the forum in a country where they only know C & N brand,
the response was overwhelming, its a hit that in just few days the viewers hit 2k+++, should I say the hottest topic by that time, :bsmilie::bsmilie:
WARNING: no offence to other brands, im 99% LV shooter
title: WHY MAKE YOUR LIFE DIFFICULT GET SONY DSLR
the response was overwhelming, its a hit that in just few days the viewers hit 2k+++, should I say the hottest topic by that time, :bsmilie::bsmilie:
WARNING: no offence to other brands, im 99% LV shooter
title: WHY MAKE YOUR LIFE DIFFICULT GET SONY DSLR
Because :
1. I can use CZ lens on AF
2. Stabliser no matter what lens I use, even the 1985 good old Minolta Beercan
3. Good Dynamic Range and sharpness
4. Better IQ than all my previous bodies, L lens.
5. Cash back of around 1k plus after offloading all lens n body and get similar range Alpha lens n body
6. Wirelessly trigger flash units with body
Only regret is why I did not embrace Alpha much earlier.....
1. I can use CZ lens on AF
2. Stabliser no matter what lens I use, even the 1985 good old Minolta Beercan
3. Good Dynamic Range and sharpness
4. Better IQ than all my previous bodies, L lens.
5. Cash back of around 1k plus after offloading all lens n body and get similar range Alpha lens n body
6. Wirelessly trigger flash units with body
Only regret is why I did not embrace Alpha much earlier.....
I use Sony because i just got suan-ed by a C user..
He owns a full frame and some funky white colour lenses and after i walked past him, i heard him telling his friend,"one of my lenses can buy his whole system".
At that point of time I was using:
A33, Beercan and F58AM
I may be using an el cheapo entry-level camera from a maker that you dun fancy but dun have to say until like that right?
He owns a full frame and some funky white colour lenses and after i walked past him, i heard him telling his friend,"one of my lenses can buy his whole system".
At that point of time I was using:
A33, Beercan and F58AM
I may be using an el cheapo entry-level camera from a maker that you dun fancy but dun have to say until like that right?
I sense really awful sourness. I was like that too.
I have an a330 and I got it because their cybershots were decent and they distributed their catalogues to my house. Simply that.
Undoubtedly, Sony has two main things to boast about: Built-in sensor stabiliser and AF CZ lenses.
I have tried using the 55-200 on my a330 and another 70-200L f/4 IS on a 550D and honestly, it is very different so I don't see how it can be compared.
Regarding the AF CZ lenses point, I don't see why so many people are overrating it. It's not like they converted all of their legendary lenses just for Sony. Let's face it, it makes Sony's 24-70, 16-35 and a few others and these lenses are not absent in C/N's lineup. It could be because Sony doesn't have the reputation of making kick ass glasses so they found CZ who has been providing with lenses for cybershot and has a reputation of doing that. It's just another another class of lens in the Sony's lineup.
I think it's perfectly fine to fanboy for a while and self-comfort for a while but it's not when people just do it excessively, like how some of us dislike those C/N people who overrate their stuff too.
I am not using a Sony anymore because I needed the high iso performance which is present in other brands, I don't see anything wrong with it. It's not lack of loyalty but if Sony had a high iso full frame model in addition to their 2 similarly spec-ed FF, I would have got that FF. But no and that's not a good thing. But if I were a full time studio photographer now, I would switch back to Sony and get an A850.
Regarding those ignorant mainstream users who think Sony is worse than Nikon/Canon, I don't think there's any need to actually get so angered by them. They are just ignorant. Just be contented that you actually had the chance to use a brand, as good as theirs, but at a lower cost.
I have an a330 and I got it because their cybershots were decent and they distributed their catalogues to my house. Simply that.
Undoubtedly, Sony has two main things to boast about: Built-in sensor stabiliser and AF CZ lenses.
I have tried using the 55-200 on my a330 and another 70-200L f/4 IS on a 550D and honestly, it is very different so I don't see how it can be compared.
Regarding the AF CZ lenses point, I don't see why so many people are overrating it. It's not like they converted all of their legendary lenses just for Sony. Let's face it, it makes Sony's 24-70, 16-35 and a few others and these lenses are not absent in C/N's lineup. It could be because Sony doesn't have the reputation of making kick ass glasses so they found CZ who has been providing with lenses for cybershot and has a reputation of doing that. It's just another another class of lens in the Sony's lineup.
I think it's perfectly fine to fanboy for a while and self-comfort for a while but it's not when people just do it excessively, like how some of us dislike those C/N people who overrate their stuff too.
I am not using a Sony anymore because I needed the high iso performance which is present in other brands, I don't see anything wrong with it. It's not lack of loyalty but if Sony had a high iso full frame model in addition to their 2 similarly spec-ed FF, I would have got that FF. But no and that's not a good thing. But if I were a full time studio photographer now, I would switch back to Sony and get an A850.
Regarding those ignorant mainstream users who think Sony is worse than Nikon/Canon, I don't think there's any need to actually get so angered by them. They are just ignorant. Just be contented that you actually had the chance to use a brand, as good as theirs, but at a lower cost.
You should have said "Yes, and I can *still* take better pictures than you."
Empty vessels make the most noise. He might be jealous because he still couldn't take good pictures despite having expensive gears.
I was too angry at that point of time. lol.. anyway revenge came soon after when i saw him trying to adjust his flash to take a portrait photo and i walked to him stood beside him, tilted my camera to potrait and turned my 58, shot, satisfied and walked off.. he looked stunned.. lol
Well, maybe an A550? Not sure if you'd really see an improvement though since you usually would be using a tripod and low ISO. Maybe upgrade your lens, get a sony 11-18 or something
Similar threads
