If I buy my 1st SLR today, I may not pick a Canon

Started Apr 20, 2012 | Discussions thread
picthis New Member • Posts: 12
Re: If I buy my 1st SLR today, I may not pick a Canon

I bought the T2i two years ago. I remember then the camera salesman all telling me to go with 4/3rd systems, especially the older NEX + PEN systems - how 4/3rd will make DSLR's like t2i obsolete. Now a bit wiser, I think it was all a marketing hype...

Still, I remember then I researched long & hard. And finally and thankfully decided on a T2i because of price/performance just can't be beat; and the tons of aftermarket lens can be found rather cheaply. If photography has taught me anything, it is that lens is everything and it still holds true today. But the most important factor for me wasn't because I was adverse to new technology, quite the contrary, it was very simple. I looked at tons of pictures from 4/3rd vs t2i and always without hesitation, the resulting IQ on t2i comes out on top time after time. Even now, I'd dare to say, with right lens, a used Canon T2i can't be touched, at least not at its current price point period.

Even today, 4/3 is still being described as 'near' or almost indistinguishable to DSLR IQ ... Maybe it will surpass t2i soon one day, but let me tell you the people at Sony NEX and all the other 4/3 systems are marketing geniuses. Those have bought into their hype (near DSLR quality) have funded their research, now in nth iteration. How many people have bought the original NEX and how many times do you have to upgrade to beat DSLR? It might do so with very expensive lenses vs a kit DSLR but at what price?

No thanks, I'll keep my cheapo t2i and wait for the day that 4/3 rds really, really without a doubt, surpass dslr's in size, performance, IQ and in price (including the lens).. I'm still waiting for dslr quality the size of Canon S100... that'll be the day I'll jump ship.

Even recently, I've looked at some pictures taken with latest Sony NEX 7's and compared it against my t2i - again, where's the hype?? You would think it was the best thing since sliced bread. It is a FASTER camera, we are talking about little performance improvements but when all said n' done, picture is literally worth a thousand words. All that whistles n' bells and fancy features - well, I'm not a bit impressed.

At least no way am I going to spend thousands of dollars migrating to another system when the system I have now, at the right hands, can still beat most, if not all, 4/3 systems today. Some may argue NEX have sharper pictures at high ISO, I say, hogwash because those situations are very rare and 99.99% of the time, t2i can stand toe-toe with 4/3rd, if not beating them all together using SAME class of lens/cost. I haven't even 1/2 way maximize the potential of my t2i.

I haven't seen a picture from 4/3rd today where I say, wow I wish a DSLR can do that. NONE. But I've seen plenty of DSLR pictures where I know 4/3 system would have a difficult time of matching.

Yes, for those who has never owned a dslr, I may see buying into a lighter 4/3rd system; still, between my t2i and Oly XZ-1, I have best of both worlds for the minimum price. XZ-1 is more compact and takes nice enough pictures for most occasions especially at low ISO. You would need a really pricey lens on the 4/3rd to convincingly beat the XZ-1. And in those situations, I'll just break out my my t2i, end of competition.

As for size, when you put a 200 mm zoom lens on the smaller, lighter Sony NEX, all arguments of its (size) is redundant and in fact, I'd be deathly afraid of that heavy lens breaking off from that puny NEX body.

Sure you can slap a pancake lens on a micro 3rd and call it compact, but still my XZ-1 is much more compact and the Canon S100 is 1/2 its size. And for all practical purposes, these advanced P&S come very close to the 4/3rd IQ. The same conundrum for those choosing 4/3rd size over DSLR. So there is a limit of size where it no longer is 'compact' and XZ-1 is at that limit for me.

And don't even get me started on built-quality. Canon has been doing this for decades, if anything, they know how to build a long lasting pro-consumer camera. I still have my banged up G6 to prove it - after being dropped dozens of times, sometimes down flights of stairs - it still works quite amazingly. On the other hand, I can't recall how many Sony cameras I had and my company has with a short-life frame 1-2 years. Maybe NEX's are the exception, but whenever I handle Sony products, the 'careful', 'fragile', 'expensive to replace' always comes to mind. With Canon, I never have to worry about its built quality. The best camera, the most valuable one, is the one that lasts you for years. It is the one that is able to offer you many many lenses cheaply to grow with you as your needs grow. Canon has a solid (decades) of history of lenses, at least 100:1 ratio when compared to Sony's. I would hate to buy into a system, and find out few years down the line, Sony come out with 'newer', 'better' system that really really beats DSLR this time, but then have to upgrade into their newest system...Like I said, my t2i and XZ-1 is all I need for now, and I would guess for at least 4-5 years. Because I think even 5 years from now, short of some new technology, the best 4/3rd system IQ when compared to t2i, would almost be indistinguishable unless you are a camera guru with too much time on your hands.

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