Thisjustin
Senior Member
They should stick to making walkmans.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Which to chOOse? Nikon or Sony DSLR.
- Thread starter gavinwongks
- Start date
Thisjustin
Senior Member
Just so you know, posted this because of the "sick of sony bashers thread" its tongue in cheek. Thank you.
No correct. You only make your point by ludicrously ignoring a whole subset of Nikon lenses. Utterly pathetic. Some of those lenses Sony don't even have in their range at all. That's presumably why you choose to ignore them
Jealous?Will the 600/4s work on the D40/60? YES. So you excluding it and the others on some ridiculous premise is utterly invalid. They work. End-Of-Story.
Incidentally, I know people who use the super-teles on D40 & D60 bodies which makes your argument completely invalid.
A search on eBay for used lenses ( these are of course only snapshots in time and different numbers will apply at different times ) :
Nikkor AF : 358
Nikkor AF-S & AF-I : 166
That's actually about half.
Minolta AF lenses : 145
Oh dear. Another of your assertions proved incorrect. Fewer Minolta lenses than Nikkor AF-S/I lenses on eBay at this point in time.
Of course eBay is only one source but it serves to illustrate your absurd guesses for what they are.
Half truths.
Used lenses available for Sony are getting harder to find owing to the demand and significantly more expensive. e.g.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1037&message=30092008&q=50mm+ebay&qf=m
Plenty more similar comments on the Sony forum.
Not much point in the theoretical availability of used lenses when they are over valued.
F
Framer
Guest
My a700/CZ 135mm f1.8 T* only takes poor images like this ; ) :
--
Neil Vanderwolf
http://thewarmland.com
--
Neil Vanderwolf
http://thewarmland.com
Thisjustin
Senior Member
and your telling me the 135 2.8DC nikon or the 135 f/2 wouldn't do that? if you think your "CZ" lenses are special you're delusional. They. Are. Sony. Lenses. CZ sells their name and nothing else.
fjbyrne
Veteran Member
zxaar
Senior Member
no matter what you say, i know one thing,
nikon is no zeiss.
nikon is no zeiss.
baloo_buc
Forum Pro
FYI Sony is no Zeiss. As well as Panasonic is not Leica.
And Zeiss has some good lenses but they are so few that you wonder what they are doing all the time.
Zeiss had some good glass for medium format and makes some lenses also for smaller formats.
If you put in one balance the lenses that are outstanding of Carl Zeiss or Leica and the lenses that are outstanding of Canon, Olympus or Nikon they will loose by a large margin.
But most people are just buying for the name, the brand.
How many of you know that Carl Zeiss disappeared in 1945? In 1950s there was a new factory built in Jena but it had no know how or anything since everything was taken away by the Russians and Americans. But a lot of companies without name used the Carl Zeiss brand and made those outstanding lenses.
--
Victor
Bucuresti, Romania
http://s106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/victor_petcu/
http://picasaweb.google.com/teodor.nitica/
And Zeiss has some good lenses but they are so few that you wonder what they are doing all the time.
Zeiss had some good glass for medium format and makes some lenses also for smaller formats.
If you put in one balance the lenses that are outstanding of Carl Zeiss or Leica and the lenses that are outstanding of Canon, Olympus or Nikon they will loose by a large margin.
But most people are just buying for the name, the brand.
How many of you know that Carl Zeiss disappeared in 1945? In 1950s there was a new factory built in Jena but it had no know how or anything since everything was taken away by the Russians and Americans. But a lot of companies without name used the Carl Zeiss brand and made those outstanding lenses.
--
Victor
Bucuresti, Romania
http://s106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/victor_petcu/
http://picasaweb.google.com/teodor.nitica/
Two Truths
Veteran Member
Even including the 5kg+ £5k+ super-telephoto lenses, that still only puts Nikon ONE lens ahead of Sony. ONE lens does not equate to "far more", so you are the pathetic one here, because you are arguing a dead point that has already been proven wrong.
Nope, I just don't see many D40 / D60 users buying a lens that costs 20x more than their camera does. Nor do I imagine many Alpha 200 / 300 / 350 users will either.Some of those lenses Sony
don't even have in their range at all. That's presumably why you
choose to ignore them
No it does not, because your claim is still untrue even with those lenses. Duh!
--
Stuart / the Two Truths
http://twotruths.net/
fjbyrne
Veteran Member
The Sony CZ 24-70 looks to be every bit as good as the new Nikon 24-70. The other CZ primes are also excellent performers. Just ignore what labels are on the lenses and look at performance and you will see Sony is right there with Nikon. Are they "true" Zeiss lenses? Not sure that it matters. Performance matter and so far the Sony lenses haven't disappointed.
--
fjbyrne
--
fjbyrne
F
Framer
Guest
Did I say my CZ lenses are "special"? I am not delusional at all, I take photos, do you? Sounds like you are hung up on your gear more than photography as an art. That's cool, if you are gear-head there is nothing wrong with that however I am not...
I couldn't give a poop what camera I am using. As long as it does what I want and is ergonomically correct for my hand(s) then I am happy. I am not so ignorant to be stuck to one brand. In fact I have Sigma, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Panasonic and more all in my cabinets at home...they all have a purpose and excel at different things.
Personally, I like the Sony a lot, if you like Nikon, that's great, I hope it works well for you, I know it works for me when I need it.
Happy shooting.
--
Neil Vanderwolf
http://thewarmland.com
gavinwongks
Member
gavinwongks
Member
genotypewriter
Senior Member
--My a700/CZ 135mm f1.8 T* only takes poor images like this ;) :
--
Neil Vanderwolf
http://thewarmland.com
http://www.flickr.com/genotypewriter
Two Truths
Veteran Member
This is what is referred to as a Pi$$ing match. Pretty common around here.
--
Check my Photo Blog
http://parisea.blogspot.com
--
Check my Photo Blog
http://parisea.blogspot.com
Two Truths
Veteran Member
I am the organiser of photography for Europe's largest fire festival, with a team of a dozen photographers using cameras up to and including the Canon 1D Mk II N and lenses up to and including the Canon 400mm F2.8 IS.
One of my most advanced photographers has had that lens for the last year and has used it effectively at numerous events over that time, including some which we have both been shooting.
It is a nice lens, zippy as I say, but no Zeiss.
An interesting advantage of being in my position is being able to compare like-for-like... e.g. the Canon 50mm F1.4 micro-USM has very slow autofocus compared to the Sony 50mm F1.4 screw-driven by the Alpha 700, especially in dim lighting.
--
Stuart / the Two Truths
http://twotruths.net/
Two Truths
Veteran Member
should have been "One of our most advanced photographers"
I don't own them!
;o)
--
Stuart / the Two Truths
http://twotruths.net/
Two Truths
Veteran Member
You people make me laugh;
First you post hilarious flamebaited coments trashing Sony, without evidence and without real-life experience,
then when anyone replies with counter-arguments you call us Sony fanboys.
duh!
--
Stuart / the Two Truths
http://twotruths.net/
First you post hilarious flamebaited coments trashing Sony, without evidence and without real-life experience,
then when anyone replies with counter-arguments you call us Sony fanboys.
duh!
--
Stuart / the Two Truths
http://twotruths.net/
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum