Have a Sony - Want a Nikon Now

<p>Lannie,<br>

Most of Sony's lenses for it's Alpha line of cameras are not made by Zeiss. They are based on Minolta designs. That's not to say anything negative about them. Minolta lenses were know for their high quality, and used ones are still a great way to get a great value lens for a Sony Alpha.<br>

If I remember correctly, the Sony Zeiss lenses are produced by Sony under license by Zeiss and using certain Zeiss components. None the less, they are excellent lenses (for people with deep pockets).</p>

<p>Scarlett,</p>

<p>I agree with all of the posters here on these points: (1) you have a very good and capable camera/system and (2) your photography would be better served by taking the time to learn how to use your existing camera rather than gear shopping.</p>

<p>That being said, if you really want a Nikon then you should just get one. Like most of the commenters have said, switching camera brands won't make much of a difference to your photos. But you seem convinced that Sony is not for you, so I think you just need to get a camera (whether it is Nikon, Canon or whatever) that makes you happy and then go use it. There are plenty of people on this forum, myself included, who rationalize gear purchases that probably aren't necessary. </p>

<p>So I say, get another camera if that is what you really want - but understand that there's nothing wrong with the one you've got.</p>

Sony/Minolta lens lines can be slightly confusing because there are both consumer and higher end lenses under the Sony

and Minolta labels, then they have their own premium line called G, then they also cross-brand Zeiss lenses, which are

another premium line.

<p>Thanks for correcting me, guys. I had gotten it into my head that the Sony Alpha lenses were all by Zeiss. Obviously I was wrong.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p>I've used Minolta for a while now, they do have some excellent lenses and at very decent s/h prices. There are some real gems out there (a few lemons too as all makers have) Many of the Sony lenses are updated Minolta ones (not all but some), smaller range or not they have some good glass.<br>

THe A390 is far from the best that A mount has to offer I would look around at other bodies. Regarding remote options there are a number of higher spec interval timer options on ebay that are cost effective.</p>

I've really been getting into photography lately. I actually have a Sony A390 thats been sitting collecting dust for longer than its been in

operation. I took it out recently to mess with it and I'm getting more and more interested.

 

I was going to make my first attempt at taking night-photos with a shutter-release cable/remote and found out last night that my particular

model only has 2 time lapse choices on compatible remotes - instant and two-secs. That blows.

 

Every video, website or magazine I read to learn more... It's either talking about a Canon or a Nikon (usually Nikon). This made me really

regret the Sony purchase. That blows too.

 

I want to try to sell the Sony but I wont get a lot for it. Not what I paid, anyway. And I really dont feel like spending $700 for a new Nikon. I

figure that the 2011 Volkswagen is more or less the same as the 2012, so can I just buy a used body off Ebay or something? Is this risky?

Which one should I get? Theres a lot of them. Ideally, I'd spend less than $400, but is that a realistic number? And does the 2011 DSLR

really differ all that much from the newest models?

 

Thanks!

 

There is a device that incorporates an intervalometer, as well as much, much more. Take a look at www.snaperturepro.com

Since it seems to be a public service to mention this these days... this is your friendly "this thread is from 2012" alert.

Since it seems to be a public service to mention this these days... this is your friendly "this thread is from 2012" alert.

 

Indeed these old threads are always interesting.

 

I'm someone who is in the process of the C-to-N switch. For me, it's driven by a desire to continue using old manual cameras and lenses, and the fact that I can buy the good quality primes I love and still get(more or less) full functionality on good high end bodies.

 

That honestly is the only incentive I have. If I were starting from a clean slate with no desire to use film, Sony would be a compelling option and probably more so than in 2012. I have a colleague who travels with nothing but an A7 and a 28mm-he has a compact package and can "shoot from the hip" and just crop to get what he wants.

Sony are certainly getting better. They've a history of being a bit slow, impenetrable and buggy in the UI (which is saying something compared with Nikon), and they still have a battery life problem. It depends what you shoot, though. If you don't need modern (Nikon) AF support, it's much easier to adapt to Sony mirrorless than between SLR systems. I don't think Sony will tempt me away from what I hope will be a decent D810 update, but I hope Nikon have woken up and realised they're a threat in the market.

I wonder if the OP switched to Nikon or not since the question was asked 5 years ago.

I wonder if the OP switched to Nikon or not since the question was asked 5 years ago.

 

Or, indeed, back by now...

Looks like Piranha is reviving these old threads to obliquely (but transparently) advertise his snappy-chewer device. Bad form old boy, bad form.

 

BTW, many Nikon cameras have an intervalometer function built in. So no sale for you here.

Oh yes. Teach me to pay attention to more than one thread I'm replying to at a time. I don't mind someone pointing out a solution even if they have a bias, but being clear about a personal interest in a product is polite. I've not been arguing that people should use a smartphone-based solution as an intervalometer, but if I was going to, I should at least point out that I work for a smartphone manufacturer. :)

 

Shame we've been ripping into the pricing on another thread...