Why Sony
p.2 #1Why Sony
I evolved into Sony when they purchased Minolta's camera division. I started with A-mount in 1986 with a Maxxum 7000. After that it was a 700si and then my first Sony, an A100, then an A700, A99, A99ii. In the late 2010's, I saw that E-mount AF was on par or better than the A99ii and that lenses were done for A-mount and made the switch to the A9ii. I sold all my a-mount stuff and moved fully to E-mount.
I currently shoot the A1ii and love it because it can do any type of photography well. Strobe: there's the 1/400 mechanical shutter and 1/200 electronic, high speed: 30 fps and 120 AF calcs per second, landscape: high dynamic range, event: amazing subject ID AF.
From a lens standpoint, Sony evolved into one of the best lens designers and makers in the business, and with the 3rd party support, there's nearly no lenses which aren't available on the mount.
I currently shoot the A1ii and love it because it can do any type of photography well. Strobe: there's the 1/400 mechanical shutter and 1/200 electronic, high speed: 30 fps and 120 AF calcs per second, landscape: high dynamic range, event: amazing subject ID AF.
From a lens standpoint, Sony evolved into one of the best lens designers and makers in the business, and with the 3rd party support, there's nearly no lenses which aren't available on the mount.
Jun 14, 2026 at 10:53 AM
p.2 #2Why Sony
Back in 2014 I changed to Sony mirroless
A7R followed by A7R3, A7R5, and now A7R6
In 2014 people laughed about mirrorless and laughed about Sony, but very soon they had the best AF and lots of lenses too.
They still do make a relative small and light camera, which at my age (79y) becomes more and more important when you use the camera for hours.
So I'm happy with my Sony's!
A7R followed by A7R3, A7R5, and now A7R6
In 2014 people laughed about mirrorless and laughed about Sony, but very soon they had the best AF and lots of lenses too.
They still do make a relative small and light camera, which at my age (79y) becomes more and more important when you use the camera for hours.
So I'm happy with my Sony's!
Jun 14, 2026 at 10:55 AM
p.2 #3Why Sony
A7r with the Sony 35 2.8 were a god send for travel compared to my then Canon kit. I took the leap and have never looked back. Really appreciate Sony understanding the need for light compact gear that still produces amazing results. Give me 99% of the quality at 50% of the bulk any day of the year.
Jun 14, 2026 at 10:58 AM
p.2 #4Why Sony
The NEX-7 was the camera that got me to Sony. It was the first high-quality camera with AF that was very compact and that was the key for me. It was a revolution in camera design and philosophy. It was small and light, produced excellent images, and was easy to manually control or to run on automatic, as a photographer would want. Never looked back.
I want Sony to make small, compact, high quality cameras--something like an A1 II in capabilities and stacked sensor but like an A7CR in terms of size.
I want Sony to make small, compact, high quality cameras--something like an A1 II in capabilities and stacked sensor but like an A7CR in terms of size.
Jun 14, 2026 at 11:07 AM
p.2 #5Why Sony
I shot Canon DSLRs for about 20 years, but when I went to mirrorless about 5 years ago, Sony was the clear leader in technology in their mirrorless bodies. Canon and Nikon have caught up and offer comparable tech for less money in the bodies, but I am too invested in Sony glass to switch now. I wouldn't go back to Canon but I'd consider trying Nikon if it weren't for the expense of switching.
Jun 14, 2026 at 11:29 AM
p.2 #6Why Sony
In 2014 I started to transition away from my APS-C and full frame Nikon DSLRs to mirrorless for the weight savings. Unfortunately, I chose to replace the APS-C cams with Samsung mirrorless. I was hoping after the NX1 Samsung would make a full frame camera but instead they stopped making cameras altogether. So to replace my D800e I chose the Sony A7 series. I started with the II but quickly moved to the RII. I chose Sony because Nikon wasn’t yet making the Z line of cams. If they had, I’d still be with Nikon.
Jun 14, 2026 at 11:39 AM
p.2 #7Why Sony
I don't think you have that cult like following of any brand anymore (thank goodness). I have owned and used Fuji and Canon in the past enjoyed them both a lot, the AF wasn't there with Fuji so decided to try Sony very happy with my A7RV the lenses are incredible and pleased to be over in the full frame camp.
I would love to try a Nikon system at some point as they also have some rather excellent looking wildlife lenses e.g. 600PF and 800PF.
My next camera will likely be a A1mk2 or a A9mk3 to tackle the more action packed shooting
I would love to try a Nikon system at some point as they also have some rather excellent looking wildlife lenses e.g. 600PF and 800PF.
My next camera will likely be a A1mk2 or a A9mk3 to tackle the more action packed shooting
Jun 14, 2026 at 11:45 AM
p.2 #8Why Sony
1. Compactness. Finally we have a modern digital equivalent of the original Leica M philosophy. Everything Sony makes tends to be smaller and lighter. This is especially important with glass.
2. Sony-made lenses. I do not know what happened behind the scenes. Maybe Sony, being a giant company, simply hired all the best lens designers. I see Sony glass as srème de la crème, something like what Leica and Zeiss used to be during the film era. And it's not just optical quality, it's build quality and variety too! You have tiny G-lenses for compactness, then you have optical perfection in the form of GMs, etc.
3. Superior sensors. There are 3 sensor manufacturers. Sony is about 5 years ahead of everyone else, and they don't let competitors use their best sensor tech. I am an IQ whore and I simply cannot tolerate the situation of not owning the best sensor on the market. It doesn't matter that all this extra resolution and dynamic range is more than I need. I won't be able to sleep unless I have them.
4. Great software [1]. I need a good native RAW converter, tethered shooting, and a mobile app. Sony and Canon can do software. Others can't. This also results in the leading auto-focus performance, and most importantly, it will always be class-leading. Sony can afford https://ai.sony/ while others can't.
5. Lens selection. My favorite 3rd party E-mount lens brand is Voigtlander, which offers more lenses for the E-mount than anyone else, except only M.
6. And finally, ergonomics. Sony, along maybe with Fuji, has recognized that press+hold+rotate ergonomics while staring on a stupid top LCD is mega-retarded approach from the early 2000s. They brought back proper aperture rings, they gave us a great selection of dedicated buttons and dials, and made them infinitely customizeable. Yes, it takes some adjustment. Yes, setting up a new camera requires effort. But once you overcome your lazy, you'll have a hard time using the retro-ergos of other brands.
[1] Clarification: actually, all software created by camera companies is utter shit. But Sony's shit is still 3x better than others, so within the realm of shitty camera software it's definitely great.
Edited on Jun 14, 2026 at 11:59 AM · View previous versions
2. Sony-made lenses. I do not know what happened behind the scenes. Maybe Sony, being a giant company, simply hired all the best lens designers. I see Sony glass as srème de la crème, something like what Leica and Zeiss used to be during the film era. And it's not just optical quality, it's build quality and variety too! You have tiny G-lenses for compactness, then you have optical perfection in the form of GMs, etc.
3. Superior sensors. There are 3 sensor manufacturers. Sony is about 5 years ahead of everyone else, and they don't let competitors use their best sensor tech. I am an IQ whore and I simply cannot tolerate the situation of not owning the best sensor on the market. It doesn't matter that all this extra resolution and dynamic range is more than I need. I won't be able to sleep unless I have them.
4. Great software [1]. I need a good native RAW converter, tethered shooting, and a mobile app. Sony and Canon can do software. Others can't. This also results in the leading auto-focus performance, and most importantly, it will always be class-leading. Sony can afford https://ai.sony/ while others can't.
5. Lens selection. My favorite 3rd party E-mount lens brand is Voigtlander, which offers more lenses for the E-mount than anyone else, except only M.
6. And finally, ergonomics. Sony, along maybe with Fuji, has recognized that press+hold+rotate ergonomics while staring on a stupid top LCD is mega-retarded approach from the early 2000s. They brought back proper aperture rings, they gave us a great selection of dedicated buttons and dials, and made them infinitely customizeable. Yes, it takes some adjustment. Yes, setting up a new camera requires effort. But once you overcome your lazy, you'll have a hard time using the retro-ergos of other brands.
[1] Clarification: actually, all software created by camera companies is utter shit. But Sony's shit is still 3x better than others, so within the realm of shitty camera software it's definitely great.
Edited on Jun 14, 2026 at 11:59 AM · View previous versions
Jun 14, 2026 at 11:49 AM
p.2 #9Why Sony
I have and use six different digital camera systems, with the Fujifilm GFX being my all-time favorite. I have no brand loyalty at all. A compact body (barely bigger than q3), a great viewfinder, an LCD screen that can be turned away or used however you want, ability to adjust exposure triangle with dials and on the lens, excellent autofocus, and a nice choice of lenses are what made me look at the a7r6. It does not fit me well. It hurts my wrist and fingers, though not as much as the previous models did, and I hope it will improve with a bottom plate.
Jun 14, 2026 at 11:58 AM
p.2 #10Why Sony
olegkin wrote:
It hurts my wrist and fingers.
It's physically impossible for a lightweight object of this size to hurt wrist and fingers of a grown ass man. What are you going to do when it's time to pick up your sword to fight zombies? I bet you haven't even thought about it.
It hurts my wrist and fingers.
It's physically impossible for a lightweight object of this size to hurt wrist and fingers of a grown ass man. What are you going to do when it's time to pick up your sword to fight zombies? I bet you haven't even thought about it.
Jun 14, 2026 at 12:04 PM
|
p.2 #11Why Sony
old-gregg wrote:
It's physically impossible for a lightweight object of this size to hurt wrist and fingers of a grown ass man. What are you going to do when it's time to pick up your sword to fight zombies? I bet you haven't even thought about it.
Are you one of those people who don't believe in anything they haven't experienced themselves?
I have ten-plus years of BJJ and CrossFit under my belt. I bet my grip is much stronger than the grip and hands of most photographers. And yet every single Sony and Leica camera without a proper grip and thumb rest causes spasms and pain after barely a minute of holding it. I never had this issue with any other cameras systems. My daily cameras are the GFX and the Z8, for crying out loud.
olegkin wrote
It hurts my wrist and fingers.Are you one of those people who don't believe in anything they haven't experienced themselves?
I have ten-plus years of BJJ and CrossFit under my belt. I bet my grip is much stronger than the grip and hands of most photographers. And yet every single Sony and Leica camera without a proper grip and thumb rest causes spasms and pain after barely a minute of holding it. I never had this issue with any other cameras systems. My daily cameras are the GFX and the Z8, for crying out loud.
Jun 14, 2026 at 12:37 PM
p.2 #12Why Sony
olegkin wrote:
It's physically impossible for a lightweight object of this size to hurt wrist and fingers of a grown ass man. What are you going to do when it's time to pick up your sword to fight zombies? I bet you haven't even thought about it.Are you one of those people who don't believe in anything they haven't experienced themselves?
I have ten-plus years of BJJ and CrossFit under my belt. I bet my grip is much stronger than the grip and hands of most photographers. And yet every single Sony and Leica camera without a proper grip and thumb rest causes spasms and pain after barely a minute of holding it. I never had this issue with any other cameras systems. My daily cameras are the GFX and the Z8, for crying out loud.
But regarding the zombies ?
old-gregg wrote
olegkin wrote
It hurts my wrist and fingers.I have ten-plus years of BJJ and CrossFit under my belt. I bet my grip is much stronger than the grip and hands of most photographers. And yet every single Sony and Leica camera without a proper grip and thumb rest causes spasms and pain after barely a minute of holding it. I never had this issue with any other cameras systems. My daily cameras are the GFX and the Z8, for crying out loud.
But regarding the zombies ?
Jun 14, 2026 at 01:02 PM
p.2 #13Why Sony
Jack Flesher wrote:
I like certain cameras from all the major makers, each offers something I see as a notch above their competitors. Unfortunately I have yet to find a single camera that does it all best.
Especially true when you consider the broad range of photographers, subjects, styles, and personal preferences! Fortunately, we have a whole lot of excellent gear to choose from these days.
I like certain cameras from all the major makers, each offers something I see as a notch above their competitors. Unfortunately I have yet to find a single camera that does it all best.
Especially true when you consider the broad range of photographers, subjects, styles, and personal preferences! Fortunately, we have a whole lot of excellent gear to choose from these days.
Jun 14, 2026 at 01:05 PM
p.2 #14Why Sony
photo325 wrote:
It's physically impossible for a lightweight object of this size to hurt wrist and fingers of a grown ass man. What are you going to do when it's time to pick up your sword to fight zombies? I bet you haven't even thought about it.Are you one of those people who don't believe in anything they haven't experienced themselves?
I have ten-plus years of BJJ and CrossFit under my belt. I bet my grip is much stronger than the grip and hands of most photographers. And yet every single Sony and Leica camera without a proper grip and thumb rest causes spasms and pain after barely a minute of holding it. I never had this issue with any other cameras systems. My daily cameras are the GFX and the Z8, for crying out loud.But regarding the zombies ?
Despite of my quickly declining eyesight I somehow still make holes in the center of the targets with other shooting. I have no idea how that works either. I am good for a few thousand zombies coming my way
olegkin wrote
old-gregg wrote
olegkin wrote
It hurts my wrist and fingers.I have ten-plus years of BJJ and CrossFit under my belt. I bet my grip is much stronger than the grip and hands of most photographers. And yet every single Sony and Leica camera without a proper grip and thumb rest causes spasms and pain after barely a minute of holding it. I never had this issue with any other cameras systems. My daily cameras are the GFX and the Z8, for crying out loud.
Despite of my quickly declining eyesight I somehow still make holes in the center of the targets with other shooting. I have no idea how that works either. I am good for a few thousand zombies coming my way
Jun 14, 2026 at 01:15 PM
p.2 #15Why Sony
Legacy.
Minolta/Konica Minolta and Sony DSLR with Minolta AF, Sony and Zeiss A-mount glass.
So, way to mirrorless was paved back in mid-2000s
Minolta/Konica Minolta and Sony DSLR with Minolta AF, Sony and Zeiss A-mount glass.
So, way to mirrorless was paved back in mid-2000s
Jun 14, 2026 at 01:34 PM
p.2 #16Why Sony
For me it was because for many years Sony was far, far ahead of Nikon and Canon in the mirrorless, DSLR-replacement camera space. When I decided to upgrade my Canon 5D3 and go mirrorless, Canon's only full-frame option was the new Eos R whereas Sony already had the A9 -- not just miles ahead of Canon's nascent FF mirrorless tech but also a significantly smaller body.
Jun 14, 2026 at 01:35 PM
p.2 #17Why Sony
old-gregg wrote:
1. Compactness. Finally we have a modern digital equivalent of the original Leica M philosophy. Everything Sony makes tends to be smaller and lighter. This is especially important with glass.
2. Sony-made lenses. I do not know what happened behind the scenes. Maybe Sony, being a giant company, simply hired all the best lens designers. I see Sony glass as srème de la crème, something like what Leica and Zeiss used to be during the film era. And it's not just optical quality, it's build quality and variety too! You have tiny G-lenses for compactness, then you have optical perfection in...Show more →
This summarizes it for me as well. Thanks for writing it up!
But in the end with Sony, you have a system that enables maximum creative flexibility. Limitations on what you can photograph for 99% of Sony shooters including myself are with our personal capabilities and not the system.
Here is one example: The 100GM macro paired with the A9iii makes it extremely fun and easy to do run-and-gun BIF. The “B” being “bee” and not bird. You can shoot at 120FPS with a 1 second precapture, extend working distance and magnification with a 1.4TC and get all this with greater stabiilization, flash sync at any shutter speed, all at a size and weight that is meaningful smaller than competing systems. This is technically impossible with the competition due to a combination of body AND lens tech deficits. If I shot (bigger) wildlife and was building a system from scratch, I’d take a hard look at Nikon due to their excellent line of telephoto glass, but for everything else, Sony has a multitude of advantages across many areas.
I’d like to add that I feel ergos are quiet underrrated, because with the same body and lens combo, you can shoot “Fuji slow” and slowly dial in the exposure triangle or sports photographer fast when the pace of the action is high. The high level of customization gives me a lot of confidence when shooting in a variety of scenarios since I can quickly make the camera do what I want without menu diving and keep focus on the subject I am shooting.
1. Compactness. Finally we have a modern digital equivalent of the original Leica M philosophy. Everything Sony makes tends to be smaller and lighter. This is especially important with glass.
2. Sony-made lenses. I do not know what happened behind the scenes. Maybe Sony, being a giant company, simply hired all the best lens designers. I see Sony glass as srème de la crème, something like what Leica and Zeiss used to be during the film era. And it's not just optical quality, it's build quality and variety too! You have tiny G-lenses for compactness, then you have optical perfection in...Show more →
This summarizes it for me as well. Thanks for writing it up!
But in the end with Sony, you have a system that enables maximum creative flexibility. Limitations on what you can photograph for 99% of Sony shooters including myself are with our personal capabilities and not the system.
Here is one example: The 100GM macro paired with the A9iii makes it extremely fun and easy to do run-and-gun BIF. The “B” being “bee” and not bird. You can shoot at 120FPS with a 1 second precapture, extend working distance and magnification with a 1.4TC and get all this with greater stabiilization, flash sync at any shutter speed, all at a size and weight that is meaningful smaller than competing systems. This is technically impossible with the competition due to a combination of body AND lens tech deficits. If I shot (bigger) wildlife and was building a system from scratch, I’d take a hard look at Nikon due to their excellent line of telephoto glass, but for everything else, Sony has a multitude of advantages across many areas.
I’d like to add that I feel ergos are quiet underrrated, because with the same body and lens combo, you can shoot “Fuji slow” and slowly dial in the exposure triangle or sports photographer fast when the pace of the action is high. The high level of customization gives me a lot of confidence when shooting in a variety of scenarios since I can quickly make the camera do what I want without menu diving and keep focus on the subject I am shooting.
Jun 14, 2026 at 01:38 PM
p.2 #18Why Sony
Lenses. I switched from a DsIII to the a900 because I was able to adapt the Summilux-R 35 via Leitax adapter. When that worked, I Leitaxed all my R lenses and had a couple of Minolta SR-mount lenses converted as well. Sony kept making things better for manual shooters, bringing out the a99 with the EFV and removable SLT mirror. And the NEXs were allowing me to adapt nearly any legacy lens. Then came the a7 and a7r and everything that followed there.
Now that adaptability is a common factor among the big producers, I stay with Sony for the 300GM, since they're the only ones covering one of my favorite lens types and doing it better than anyone has before, and the 70-200/4GII, which took the idea behind Nikon's F-mount 70-180 macro and made it exponentially more useful. Also, I don't relish the idea of breaking in new adapters. Right now, if a lens that interests me becomes available, I likely already have the necessary E-mount adapter squared and ready to go.
Now that adaptability is a common factor among the big producers, I stay with Sony for the 300GM, since they're the only ones covering one of my favorite lens types and doing it better than anyone has before, and the 70-200/4GII, which took the idea behind Nikon's F-mount 70-180 macro and made it exponentially more useful. Also, I don't relish the idea of breaking in new adapters. Right now, if a lens that interests me becomes available, I likely already have the necessary E-mount adapter squared and ready to go.
Jun 14, 2026 at 01:53 PM
p.2 #19Why Sony
olegkin wrote:
It's physically impossible for a lightweight object of this size to hurt wrist and fingers of a grown ass man. What are you going to do when it's time to pick up your sword to fight zombies? I bet you haven't even thought about it.Are you one of those people who don't believe in anything they haven't experienced themselves?
I have ten-plus years of BJJ and CrossFit under my belt. I bet my grip is much stronger than the grip and hands of most photographers. And yet every single Sony and Leica camera without a proper grip and thumb rest causes spasms and pain after barely a minute of holding it. I never had this issue with any other cameras systems. My daily cameras are the GFX and the Z8, for crying out loud.
That's weird. I had surgery on my elbow last year and even during recovery, holding a Sony camera doesn't bother my hand. Of course, I do wildlife photography so most of the weight is on the lens and on my left hand which is holding it.
old-gregg wrote
olegkin wrote
It hurts my wrist and fingers.I have ten-plus years of BJJ and CrossFit under my belt. I bet my grip is much stronger than the grip and hands of most photographers. And yet every single Sony and Leica camera without a proper grip and thumb rest causes spasms and pain after barely a minute of holding it. I never had this issue with any other cameras systems. My daily cameras are the GFX and the Z8, for crying out loud.
That's weird. I had surgery on my elbow last year and even during recovery, holding a Sony camera doesn't bother my hand. Of course, I do wildlife photography so most of the weight is on the lens and on my left hand which is holding it.
Jun 14, 2026 at 02:09 PM
p.2 #20Why Sony
I dipped a toe into the Sony waters a few years back for the AF, speed and tracking.
It has become my go-to kit for everything now.
Still like the Fuji controls better but between the lenses and sheer capability of the A1 II / A9 III they can pretty much do everything and the lens ecosystem is unparalleled.
It has become my go-to kit for everything now.
Still like the Fuji controls better but between the lenses and sheer capability of the A1 II / A9 III they can pretty much do everything and the lens ecosystem is unparalleled.
Jun 14, 2026 at 02:26 PM