[ad_1]
I am a long-time shooter from Canon, back in the cinema, then a Canon 10D, 20D, 5D and 6D. I mainly do landscape and night landscapes. These are great, state – of – the – art cameras when they come out, and frankly, I have never needed a single repair on any of them.
So, why switch to a Sony a7 III? Have I benefited? What about lenses? Do you use the camera in the field in terms of design, ergonomics and usability? It is complicated, but let me explain my progress, noting in advance that my experiences and my reasons will probably not be the same as yours.
When evaluating cameras, most of us, including myself, look back. In my case, Canon has always satisfied. It worked in bad weather, never corrupted a CF or SD card, the autofocus was reliable and my photos came out as expected, whether in simple mode or sometimes in bracketed HDR.
A few years ago, I made a trip to Page, Arizona, with another photographer who had just bought a Sony a7R. I was ready to tell him that Canon was so reliable, why go astray (from Nikon in his case) to something untested and without the glorious story of Nikon or Canon. He talked about the images, the size and the weight of the camera, and I have to admit, his images were beautiful, in low light, at night, in the canyons with mixed lighting. I liked the dynamic range in difficult lighting conditions. I've also noticed his enthusiasm for using the camera on the ground.
I did not succumb for the moment, but kept an eye on Sony. A year ago, I saw more and more rave reviews, this time for the Sony a7 III. It was cheaper, it was claimed to have a great dynamic range, and it was felt that Sony had learned a great deal about photography and image quality while adding features sought after by photographers.
I also felt that Canon was moving slowly, perhaps protecting its line of DSLRs. Firmware updates were more focused on bug fixes than adding new features. Sony, on the other hand, added or improved features quickly.
So as far as I am concerned, looking back at my camera experiences with a particular brand was not the only way to evaluate the purchase of a new camera . I've been trying to see how aggressive the camera brands were with the new technologies and where they were going.
For me, it was the moment of revelation. I liked the place where Sony was now (without mirror, IBIS, two SD card slots) and the ability to use my Canon glass with the help of a Sigma MC-11 adapter.
I liked Sony's focus thanks to solid incremental improvements in the range of its cameras. They acted like a company with something to prove, not a company that had already proven itself and was resting.
I almost never buy the most expensive product from a manufacturer, I install myself on a common ground that gives me the most for my money. As for the price, the A7 III is perfect.
After using the Sony for almost a year, I am satisfied with my choice. My Canon lenses and third-party lenses worked perfectly on the Sony a7 III, even with my large field Rokinon that I use for the Milky Way photography. Here is the Sony equipped with my Canon 14 mm Rokinon lens with the help of the Sigma adapter.
I like the increase in dynamic range and, although the menus take a long time to get used to, I love the many customization options.
Sony has regularly provided firmware updates, with new features and not just bug fixes. And the market seems to have validated the Sony camera, many professionals and semi-professionals having made this change.
This is not a decisive change, however. Most professionals stay with their DSLR for comfort and familiarity. This makes sense, as any new technology attempts to upset the status quo in the face of resistance. And, of course, there is nothing wrong with the image or the build quality of the best of Nikons and Cannons. Still, Sony wins a lot of photographers.
Still, I have the feeling that Nikon and Canon were too comfortable and protecting their high end instead of investing in R & D in new cases and technologies.
It is not productive to start religious debates with the cameras again. This is not my intention. I am only one photographer who made the change and I am happy to have done so. It was not really picture quality or color science, but the a7 III met me for these criteria. All big companies have their supporters and detractors. It was rather a matter of sense for Sony management and its aggressive attitude. For many, Canon's new no-mirror entries were less than painful, and I think Canon needed but failed to get a quick home run.
So, my main reasons for moving were:
- New camera (my Canon was 6 years and older)
- Sony could use my Canon lens and Canon third-party lenses (with a Sigma adapter)
- Best dynamic range
- Faster tuning
- Best performance in low light for my night work
- Lighter and smaller
- Better resolution (20 vs 24 MP)
I hope that the more the sector becomes competitive and that all manufacturers will offer better technology at lower prices. I doubt that the Sony will be my last camera. I would like to see Nikon, Canon and others offer even better products. And who knows who else might surprise us with something of innovation and breathtaking image quality.
[ad_2]
Source link