Any Reason to get D5300 over Sony A6000?

Started 9 months ago | Discussions thread
ultimitsu
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,852
Like?
Re: A great marketing line - but believe it all?
In reply to EthanP99, 9 months ago

EthanP99 wrote:

ultimitsu wrote:

EthanP99 wrote:

ultimitsu wrote:

Firstly Canon has stable work horse lenses, 24-70I, II, 70-200 I, II, non-ISO, F4IS, 16-35, 50L, 24L, 85L, 100L; Sony simply cannot compete against this complete line.

Sony has all these lenses covered

Actually Sony doesnt.

24-70 2.8 zeiss

This lens new and only competes with 24-70 II, many working pros do not spend that much on a lens, they still use 24-70I.

70-200 2.8 G

Again, this lens is fairly new and only competes against Canon 70-200II. Sony has no low cost offerings like 70-200/2.8 non-IS, 70-200 F4IS, 70-200 I (tens thousands in secondhand market).

50 zeiss

24 zeiss

85 zeiss

All of these have smaller aperture compared to Canon Ls. And I am fairly sure 24mm and 85mm do not compete well against Canon counterpart.

100 macro

sure. Canon has 3 100mm lens. a very good and affordable 100/2 USM sports and portrait lens, a very good and affordable 100/2.8 macro, and a high end hybrid IS 100L. the Sony is about the same class as the Canon 100/2.8 macro, with extra 200 bucks on the price tag.

Sony A mount does not need multiple versions of the same lens, Image stabilization is IN BODY.

You are missing the point. Sony does not have multiple price point of a particular FL, buying Sony means you have to spend big money on new lenses, or buy lenses from last decade.

You stated you wanted work horse lenses, I presented you work horse lenses, MOST pros want f2.8 zooms.

Not necessarily. I know several pros do very well with 17-40L, 70-200F4IS, and 24-105L.

You're spouting off all these expensive lenses, but then when I list the Sony offerings in equivalence, you say there are no low cost ones. Youre quite funny.

I mentioned 24-70I, 70-200 non-IS, 70-200/4 IS, did I not? they are work horse lenses and not at all expensive. On top of them there are 17-40L, 24-105L, 100 macro.

And yes, Sony has no lower cost workhorse lenses. That is one of the reasons very few working pro use Sony.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow