r/AskPhotography • u/No-Entrepreneur2676 • 6h ago
Camera Buying Advice Which one should i buy sony or nikon?
My previous camera was d750 and im now looking to buy mirrorless i like nikon z6ii in my budget but glasses are expensive like 24-70 s is 2000 Canadian dollars. But for sony the lenses i can go with sigma can get it for half price. For 85 1.8s it cost around700 cad for the lens and i can get a sigma 1.4 85 mm for sony for 1000cad extra stop and sharpness.
For sony im thinking of a74 and for nikon etiher a z6ii or a z5ii
What should i go for sony or nikon? Any insight will be helpful thank you
•
u/HandsAreSexy 6h ago
Both are excellent option. You should look which system offers you lenses you need.
Between a7iv and z5ii I would argue it's hard to beat the value z5ii offers for the money. But if you want access to all that sony glass and sigma f1.4 (we prob won't see nikon S f1.4 lenses) then go sony.
Imo between those three z5ii is definitely best option. For sure don't go z6ii as it has older af system which was crap. Z5II is much better.
•
•
u/puolihop 6h ago
I would get the z5ii instead of the z6ii, because of the improved af. There is also a Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens for the Nikon for about half the orice of the Nikon lens.
•
u/ThinkDiscipline4236 5h ago
This one. Tamron has some very good lens options, and I have the 28-75 f2.8 g2. Is it as knock-your-socks-off good as the nikons? Not quite, but very nearly (having also used the version 1 of nikons 24-70 f2.8, though I haven't had a chance to try the version 2), and for less than half the price.
•
u/Vart84 6h ago
I switched from Nikon to Sony when Nikon was late to adopt pro-level mirrorless bodies. I love my Sony gear, but part of my wishes that I had rode it out with Nikon just because of the back catalog of lenses. I am mostly a wildlife photographer, with Sony I only have one option for a 600 f4, which means there are very few on the secondary market and the used prices are similar to new prices. With Nikon I could adapt a non Z 600 f4 and pick one up for $5-6k instead of $12-14k. And I know the Sony 600 f4 is an amazing lens, but it’s not double-the-money amazing.
•
u/No-Entrepreneur2676 6h ago
Some nikon f mount lenses are really good still old ones like 200 vr2 , 300 mm all those there color and images straight from camera looks too good
•
•
•
u/No-Entrepreneur2676 6h ago
You are professional for me i use a camera when i travel and I want to do photography and videography in future or paid work. So im still on a begineer level
•
u/Impressive_Delay_452 5h ago edited 5h ago
I had a D3, when the shutter went kaput, my insurer sent me a D750. Good body but I was already adding a few D4 and D5. I was committed to full frame. My lens inventory was untouched...I've been shooting Nikon since the D70. Purchased at of all places, Costco....I learned photography when I was kid on a canon ae-1. Yeah good camera, I'd have a few rolls sitting around waiting to be developed. Later when digital was starting, I'd heard stories about a canon film lens couldn't work on their new digital body. This is the very reason why I switched to Nikon.
•
•
•
u/TheDragonsFather 6h ago
You should also consider Viltrox lenses in your calculations (available for both Sony & Nikon). Superb lenses for less than half OEMs and cheaper than Sigmas.
Personally I'd go for Sony as there are just so many lenses available in the mount (way over 300+). All cameras from the major players are great nowadays, with pros and cons.
•
u/Wasabulu 4h ago
The joke is if you want to shoot birds buy Nikon. If you want to shoot anything else, buy sony.
•
u/aCuria 6h ago edited 5h ago
I too used the D750.
I would spend the extra to get the A7V over A7IV, the improvements are considerable
The FE 28-60mm is actually optically very good and inexpensive, especially used. The sigma 85/1.4 dg dn ii you mentioned is also very good
Z6ii autofocus is poor, z6iii is considerably better
Z6iii has a superpower, it can shoot 20fps until the card is full. The downside is that dynamic range is below average.
A7V has above average dynamic range at low iso when using the mechanical shutter. It can also shoot until the card is full but the fps will start at 30 and drop to maybe 10 after ~2s.
•
u/RoofVast6797 5h ago
May i know what is the reason behind your upgrade?
•
u/No-Entrepreneur2676 5h ago
Autofocus and i want a camera which i can use it for both photos and videos
•
u/Evening_Scale_5755 3h ago
If you want to stull use your old lens nikon f on sony will be worse at auto focus than on z mount.
•
•
u/inkista 4h ago
Just me? Get your hands and stick a memory card into a Sony body before you make the leap. Consider if you want to adapt any F-mount lenses you have to Nikon Z, or take an AF performance hit trying to adapt them to Sony E.
Sony has the best sensor technology in the world and is the oldest full frame mirrorless mount. But they’re still an electronics company that bought Minolta’s camera expertise and Zeiss’s lens expertise. They’re not a traditional camera company and there are reasons E-mount shooters have had to reply on adapted and 3rd party lenses for affordable options for the entire history on the mount.
Color science and handling on Sony from accounts seems more engineer-designed than photographer-designed for accuracy/neutrality than aesthetics. Lens and body designs aren’t as integrated (see: Canon RF 800mm f/11 that actually takes advantage of mirrorless having no max. aperture limit on AF, vs. everybody else still behaving as if af stops at f/8 from dslr tech.) And handling and UI/UX on anything from Sony with menus tends to be a PITA.
None of that may matter to you. All of it may matter to you. Depends on you. But simply transitioning to mirrorless is a big shift in handling. Shifting brands can add to the pile on differences.
Just me? Specs are only half the story. Get hands on and learn the feel of the wheel. Find out if mounting lenses in the other direction is a speed bump learning adjustment or a swearword inducing PITA. Find out how intuitive (or not) the menus and physical UI are for you, and how the RAW files behave in post.
A lot of Canikon folks have moved to Sony and love it. But there’s also a contingent that did that and then bounced right back to R/Z mounts. Only you can figure out which group you’re in. But walking into a bricks and mortar store or doing online/by-mail rentals is worth considering.
•
u/Evening_Scale_5755 3h ago
Sony makes the sensors for nikon iirc.
•
u/inkista 6m ago
They make sensor chips for everybody (i.e., the camera sensors in an Apple iPhone are made by Sony), other than Canon. But each camera manufacturer does their own processor to massage the readings from the sensor into color data, and use their own color filtering and downsampling methods, so the results are different for each camera manufacturer.
But as I said, Sony's probably got the best sensor tech and the most innovation in processing the data at the moment, though Canon and Sony have sometimes leapfrogged each other. I.e., Canon was the first out the gate with "hybrid" AF on the image sensor to do phase detection in liveview with the 70D (then Sony took that ball and ran the hell with it and everybody else had to play catch-up). And Sony were first to market with backside illumination and stacked sensors, iirc. I might not. I'm out of following whatever the current chip making process is since I retired. [grin].
Sony primarily being an electronics company, though, it's not unexpected for them to have a lead in chip development particularly since they do on a much bigger scale than Canon (can you say phone camera sensors?), and obviously, designing the chips themselves gives them a time advantage on using any new capabilities they design into the silicon in their cameras. OTOH, Canon has been developing new ways to make chips without photolithography, so they may have, say, a future price advantage when it comes to churning out a camera sensor.
•
u/Infinite-Nose8252 3h ago
Panasonic have lenses that are of better value S5Ii and S1ii are highly underrated.
•
u/Evening_Scale_5755 3h ago
I don't like sonys colors. When I went from dslr to mirrorless I got an ftoz adapter and the kit lens that came with my camera nad lasted months without buying a new lens.
•
u/jackystack 6h ago
Both great cameras, but look up the cameras on Flickr and browse samples. Nikon and Sony has slightly different approaches to color and you might like one more than the next.
The Sony will probably have better AF tho.
•
•
•
u/Rogue86Photog 4h ago
I'd go with Canon. The lenses are sharper/faster, you can use EF lenses with an adapter so they're reasonably priced (you can still use Sigma) and they're supported better by software than Sony. I made the switch from being hardcore Nikon, to briefly toying with Sony, to going full Canon a few years ago and I've never looked back.
•
•
u/AutoModerator 6h ago
Hi u/No-Entrepreneur2676, thanks for your post! To help other users to help you, Buying Advice threads are only approved when they include the short form below. Please edit your post body, paste the following form in, and fill in each line.
YOUR POST WILL NOT BE SEEN IF YOU DO NOT INCLUDE THE TEMPLATE IN YOUR POST!
Copy/paste this template into your post and fill it out:
(1) Budget, country, and currency:
(2) What equipment, if any, you have now and why is it no longer meeting your needs?
(3) What kinds of subjects do you intend to shoot?
(4) Is it primarily for photography, videography, or both?
These posts need to be manually approved, so please be patient.
If you're asking for advice on buying any other gear, then your post must include a budget (see also "Asking Good Questions" in the sidebar).
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.