I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
p.2 #1I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
So if I move to the US or UK, does that mean I should stop talking about Canada?
As long as someone has actually used a particular system or piece of gear, their experience, criticism and wishes for the future are completely relevant.
In fact, I can probably learn more from someone who shot a D850 or Z7 extensively and then moved to Sony than from someone who currently shoots Nikon but hasn't used the system at the same level.
Switching systems doesn't erase your experience with the previous one. If anything, it gives you a useful point of comparison that people who have only ever used one system simply don't have.
With OP's attitude, you end up turning a forum into an echo chamber.
As long as someone has actually used a particular system or piece of gear, their experience, criticism and wishes for the future are completely relevant.
In fact, I can probably learn more from someone who shot a D850 or Z7 extensively and then moved to Sony than from someone who currently shoots Nikon but hasn't used the system at the same level.
Switching systems doesn't erase your experience with the previous one. If anything, it gives you a useful point of comparison that people who have only ever used one system simply don't have.
With OP's attitude, you end up turning a forum into an echo chamber.
Aug 22, 2026 at 12:57 PM
p.2 #2I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
I went from Nikon to Sony. Held onto Sony. It’s an excellent system with really no reason to leave other than personal preference.
Complaining about gear at this point is pretty pointless and it’s just about taking a picture and at times I think we’re just letting ourselves play around in the minutia of everything around here. Sometimes it fun though.
I enjoy the differences between the systems I’ve held onto and plan on keeping. Just shoot with whatever makes you enjoy the process and gives you results that make you smile.
Negativity is contagious. I don’t really want to fall into that direction with something I enjoy.
Complaining about gear at this point is pretty pointless and it’s just about taking a picture and at times I think we’re just letting ourselves play around in the minutia of everything around here. Sometimes it fun though.
I enjoy the differences between the systems I’ve held onto and plan on keeping. Just shoot with whatever makes you enjoy the process and gives you results that make you smile.
Negativity is contagious. I don’t really want to fall into that direction with something I enjoy.
Aug 22, 2026 at 01:21 PM
p.2 #3I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
ps09 wrote:
I'll be 57 this year and have been shooting for 50 years. My first camera was a Vivitar XV10 that took K mount lenses. Around age 10 or so I got a Canon A1 (all black - I thought I was the bomb!) and shot that until 1988 when I got my first autofocus camera - a Nikon n8008. I also shot Rollei TLR and Hassy and even 4x5. I shot Nikon until I got fed up with the original z7 and rented an a9ii and the "new" 2-6 for an owl trip up north. I came home and announced...Show more →
I currently shoot with 3 platforms: Canon, Sony and Micro Four Thirds (Olympus/Panasonic). I used to be a Nikon fan until they went with their Z mount and abandoned the F mount. Luckily I was able to sell most of my Nikon equipment just as they were introducing more Z mount cameras and lenses.
Recently went on a two week trip to Japan. I debated thoroughly which of my systems would be my primary choice for that trip. I even requested info here and on the Canon board.
I ended up going with my Canon R6II with RF 16-28mm f2.8 STM and RF 24-105mm f4.0L with my OM-5 as backup. I left my Sony A7c and A7iv at home. Yes, my R6II outfit weighed a ton, but the ergonomics was what made me go with that choice.
Each of the platforms I use has a specific purpose for me. Even though I am super disappointed with Nikon for having put zero thought into backward compatibility (AF-D lenses do not autofocus on Z bodies with Nikon's joke of an "adapter"), unlike Canon who created a magnificent EF/RF adapter that lets me use all my older EF lenses on the new R series bodies and fully support AF, I don't mention that much on the Nikon forum. I do respond to folks who post that they are thinking of jumping ship to one of the platforms I own (Canon, Sony and m4/3). As a former Nikon user, I think I'm qualified to answer a few questions they might pose.
We can't all be "out there shooting" all the time, because weather and other constraints forces us to have some downtime. That downtime is when we post on this forum. Also, it's good to hear from other like-minded folks who enjoy photography and photography gear related topics. It's called "social media" for a reason (we are socializing...).
Side note:
Despite still being miffed with Nikon, I decided to visit the Nikon Museum while in Japan a couple of weeks ago. It was closed. I guess even that was a waste of time regarding Nikon. But I'm not bitter! 😀
Aug 22, 2026 at 02:26 PM
p.2 #4I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
Been shooting Sony since a77 and a7II days, but the camera body and lens setup we have today has zero overlap with what we had 12 years ago. We replaced our gear a piece or a few pieces at a time until today we may be shooting the same "brand," the gear is totally different.
Not gonna lie, slightly annoyed by the battery "upgrade" in a7R6, but having gone through similar previously with newer generation camera bodies, it's inevitable that things change.
At one point in time I was jealous of the Canon 85mm f1.2 lens with the DS coating. I went to the local camera store to try it out, and I realized two things: 1) the Canon body was way too big and heavy in my hands. 2) the Canon lens looked great on paper specs, but in person it was also too big and heavy, and the autofocus was noisy and sloooowww.
My husband shoots the bigger and heavier a7r6 (previously a7r5) with GM lenses, and I went for the a7cR (previously a7cII) with much smaller and lighter lenses. I hope that Sony continues to have the smaller full frame camera and lens lineup for people like me.
Not gonna lie, slightly annoyed by the battery "upgrade" in a7R6, but having gone through similar previously with newer generation camera bodies, it's inevitable that things change.
At one point in time I was jealous of the Canon 85mm f1.2 lens with the DS coating. I went to the local camera store to try it out, and I realized two things: 1) the Canon body was way too big and heavy in my hands. 2) the Canon lens looked great on paper specs, but in person it was also too big and heavy, and the autofocus was noisy and sloooowww.
My husband shoots the bigger and heavier a7r6 (previously a7r5) with GM lenses, and I went for the a7cR (previously a7cII) with much smaller and lighter lenses. I hope that Sony continues to have the smaller full frame camera and lens lineup for people like me.
Aug 22, 2026 at 04:21 PM
p.2 #5I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
As the OP, I'm surprised it took all the way to the top of page 2 for someone to miss the point.
"With OP's attitude, you end up turning a forum into an echo chamber."
I'm not looking for an echo chamber. I have issues with some Sony offerings. No fanboy here.
I come one the forum to learn from other shooting the same platform I shoot. Sometimes I share my experience on a particular subject if I feel my information can be relevant or helpful.
For those who still don't get my point, I DO NOT come on a Sony platform to hear how much better a Nikon or Canon lens is than the Sony offering. I really don't care if the 24-120 is better than anything Sony has in similar range. I'm not going to change platforms for one lens, I am far too deeply invested in the Sony ecosystem to dump all my gear at a loss because Nikon makes a better $998 lens. Once again, if I cannot get exceptional images with gear made in the last 10 years, it's my own fault.
I have 3 friends who shoot Nikon and all 3 own a copy of the 600f4 with built in tc. All 3 of them say the lens takes such an IQ hit when engaging the tc, that they believe the IQ is better if they disengage the built in tc and add an external. They have tested it and are using external tcs when needed for maximum quality. So, my point is, should I as a Sony user go on the Nikon forum and say that my Sony 600gm with tc is better than their lenses? Why would I do that? Just to be a d*ck? Who gains anything from a post like that?
"With OP's attitude, you end up turning a forum into an echo chamber."
I'm not looking for an echo chamber. I have issues with some Sony offerings. No fanboy here.
I come one the forum to learn from other shooting the same platform I shoot. Sometimes I share my experience on a particular subject if I feel my information can be relevant or helpful.
For those who still don't get my point, I DO NOT come on a Sony platform to hear how much better a Nikon or Canon lens is than the Sony offering. I really don't care if the 24-120 is better than anything Sony has in similar range. I'm not going to change platforms for one lens, I am far too deeply invested in the Sony ecosystem to dump all my gear at a loss because Nikon makes a better $998 lens. Once again, if I cannot get exceptional images with gear made in the last 10 years, it's my own fault.
I have 3 friends who shoot Nikon and all 3 own a copy of the 600f4 with built in tc. All 3 of them say the lens takes such an IQ hit when engaging the tc, that they believe the IQ is better if they disengage the built in tc and add an external. They have tested it and are using external tcs when needed for maximum quality. So, my point is, should I as a Sony user go on the Nikon forum and say that my Sony 600gm with tc is better than their lenses? Why would I do that? Just to be a d*ck? Who gains anything from a post like that?
Aug 22, 2026 at 06:29 PM
p.2 #6I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
ps09 wrote:
As the OP, I'm surprised it took all the way to the top of page 2 for someone to miss the point.
"With OP's attitude, you end up turning a forum into an echo chamber."
I'm not looking for an echo chamber. I have issues with some Sony offerings. No fanboy here.
I come one the forum to learn from other shooting the same platform I shoot. Sometimes I share my experience on a particular subject if I feel my information can be relevant or helpful.
For those who still don't get my point, I DO NOT come on a Sony platform...Show more →
I agree with you for the most part, but I almost added a Canon for one lens, so it probably does happen. Once in a blue moon.
I think a lot of people also have "grass is greener" mentality and believe that people can actually tell what camera shot what photo. The truth is people look at photos and would never be able to tell what brand name system took the photo (without peeking at EXIF data if that exists, of course).
One thing I have started seeing (not necessarily here but on other photography-related social media) is Canon people looking curiously at Sony because of the huge third party lens offering, but then they often trash talk Sony because XYZ. I think brand names are still carrying a ton of weight with people.
Maybe slightly off topic but somewhat relevant: I went to buy shoes today. I tried on some Nikes first because I know the brand name. Then I walked out of the shoe store with a pair of Rika shoes because they were simply more comfortable and fit my feet better, even though the only other time I had heard of it was two years ago when I bought a different shoe of that brand, also because it was the most comfortable.
As the OP, I'm surprised it took all the way to the top of page 2 for someone to miss the point.
"With OP's attitude, you end up turning a forum into an echo chamber."
I'm not looking for an echo chamber. I have issues with some Sony offerings. No fanboy here.
I come one the forum to learn from other shooting the same platform I shoot. Sometimes I share my experience on a particular subject if I feel my information can be relevant or helpful.
For those who still don't get my point, I DO NOT come on a Sony platform...Show more →
I agree with you for the most part, but I almost added a Canon for one lens, so it probably does happen. Once in a blue moon.
I think a lot of people also have "grass is greener" mentality and believe that people can actually tell what camera shot what photo. The truth is people look at photos and would never be able to tell what brand name system took the photo (without peeking at EXIF data if that exists, of course).
One thing I have started seeing (not necessarily here but on other photography-related social media) is Canon people looking curiously at Sony because of the huge third party lens offering, but then they often trash talk Sony because XYZ. I think brand names are still carrying a ton of weight with people.
Maybe slightly off topic but somewhat relevant: I went to buy shoes today. I tried on some Nikes first because I know the brand name. Then I walked out of the shoe store with a pair of Rika shoes because they were simply more comfortable and fit my feet better, even though the only other time I had heard of it was two years ago when I bought a different shoe of that brand, also because it was the most comfortable.
Aug 22, 2026 at 06:40 PM
p.2 #7I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
I have Canon, Nikon, and Sony gear so do I qualify to post only in those forums? 
There are plenty of gear limitations and criticism to go around. I come to FM to learn what they are and work around them.
If I wanted to hear about how great every camera and lens is I'd go on the Google U-Tube and listen to what those folks that get free gear blather on positively about.
EBH
There are plenty of gear limitations and criticism to go around. I come to FM to learn what they are and work around them.
If I wanted to hear about how great every camera and lens is I'd go on the Google U-Tube and listen to what those folks that get free gear blather on positively about.
EBH
Aug 22, 2026 at 06:54 PM
p.2 #8I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
Gear/brand fights are the best! When bored, proceed straight to the Leica forum and drop a few jokes about rechargable jewelry or hair loss. Works every time. What else is there to do on the Internet? It's either this, or torturing each other with bird shots.
Aug 22, 2026 at 06:59 PM
p.2 #9I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
EBH - read my first post. I specifically mentioned that I was not speaking about those who shoot multiple platforms. I haven't shot a Nikon in nearly 6 years, what could I offer the Nikon forum?
Aug 22, 2026 at 07:49 PM
|
p.2 #10I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
How's this for a compromise.
Sometimes experience with other platforms is relevant to the discussion of Sony gear. (Using myself as an example agin, I'm moving over from Canon but haven't made my purchase yet — but it hardly seems like I should not be here or that I shouldn't be interested in comparisons between the platform I have used and the one I will use.
Also:
It is monumentally annoying when a certain small subset of FM users jumps into a forum for another brand to knock down that brand and tells everyone how their brand is better. Fanboyism is annoying no matter the guise.
Edited on Sep 15, 2026 at 09:37 AM · View previous versions
Sometimes experience with other platforms is relevant to the discussion of Sony gear. (Using myself as an example agin, I'm moving over from Canon but haven't made my purchase yet — but it hardly seems like I should not be here or that I shouldn't be interested in comparisons between the platform I have used and the one I will use.
Also:
It is monumentally annoying when a certain small subset of FM users jumps into a forum for another brand to knock down that brand and tells everyone how their brand is better. Fanboyism is annoying no matter the guise.
Edited on Sep 15, 2026 at 09:37 AM · View previous versions
Aug 22, 2026 at 09:07 PM
p.2 #11I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
The web is the most amazing source of information, a bottomless reservoir of knowledge. And well worth putting up with a little argy-bargy at times. We make progress by criticism, and attempts to stifle opinions being expressed are IMO misguided at best. Censorship is never a good look.
One thing to add is that persuasion is more likely if you provide evidence of your opinions and takes.
One thing to add is that persuasion is more likely if you provide evidence of your opinions and takes.
Aug 23, 2026 at 12:28 AM
p.2 #12I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
Let me just say that it is so refreshing to read about legitimate opinions and experiences from folks that respect diverse opinions. I am still a Nikon DSLR shooter but that may change to someone’s MIRRORLESS
Sep 15, 2026 at 09:10 AM
p.2 #13I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
gdanmitchell wrote:
SNIP
There’s still a part of me that is intrigued by miniMF and the GFX system, but I think I’ve finally let that go. While I think they are right for a small group of photographers working in some very specific ways, I think that the great majority of us are going to be able to produce extremely good quality from cameras like the current Sony models or their equivalents from other manufacturers.
It's a great system. Its generous mount allows adapting a great number of lenses, including both Nikon and Canon DSLR TS lenses, for incredible versatility. Its native lenses are very good, but frankly nothing truly exceptional. Though the 20-35 zoom at landscape apertures was probably as good as most primes at those same apertures. The other zooms were less impressive IMHO. It is a bit more cumbersome to use in the field compared to FF, but for your type of landscape work, not much different. The files are like larger versions of your Fuji 40mp X files in both color and detail. Adapted lenses do not AF quickly, and there are a few foibles with how they integrate for exposure, but all remains workable.
Interestingly, at its 3x4 aspect ratio I found myself cropping to 3:2 frequently for landscape oriented images. I also tended to shoot a little loose so as to allow room to trim out the weaker edges and corners -- not a huge loss of net pixels, probably hit around 80 net for me, but I feel this is worth mentioning especially since you still print large. I can say in practical use scenarios at least for me, I feel the "usable" net added resolution over what I now get from my A7R6 was minimal. Add in that the superb Sony EVF and LCD, incredible AF and surprisingly, this particular body's ergonomics make it significantly more pleasurable to use. I've only owned this Sony body for a little over a month, but after my own personalization/customization everything is already pretty much where I expect it to be and to where it's basically transparent when I'm shooting. For me, I am really happy I made this move.
SNIP
There’s still a part of me that is intrigued by miniMF and the GFX system, but I think I’ve finally let that go. While I think they are right for a small group of photographers working in some very specific ways, I think that the great majority of us are going to be able to produce extremely good quality from cameras like the current Sony models or their equivalents from other manufacturers.
It's a great system. Its generous mount allows adapting a great number of lenses, including both Nikon and Canon DSLR TS lenses, for incredible versatility. Its native lenses are very good, but frankly nothing truly exceptional. Though the 20-35 zoom at landscape apertures was probably as good as most primes at those same apertures. The other zooms were less impressive IMHO. It is a bit more cumbersome to use in the field compared to FF, but for your type of landscape work, not much different. The files are like larger versions of your Fuji 40mp X files in both color and detail. Adapted lenses do not AF quickly, and there are a few foibles with how they integrate for exposure, but all remains workable.
Interestingly, at its 3x4 aspect ratio I found myself cropping to 3:2 frequently for landscape oriented images. I also tended to shoot a little loose so as to allow room to trim out the weaker edges and corners -- not a huge loss of net pixels, probably hit around 80 net for me, but I feel this is worth mentioning especially since you still print large. I can say in practical use scenarios at least for me, I feel the "usable" net added resolution over what I now get from my A7R6 was minimal. Add in that the superb Sony EVF and LCD, incredible AF and surprisingly, this particular body's ergonomics make it significantly more pleasurable to use. I've only owned this Sony body for a little over a month, but after my own personalization/customization everything is already pretty much where I expect it to be and to where it's basically transparent when I'm shooting. For me, I am really happy I made this move.
Sep 15, 2026 at 10:10 AM
p.2 #14I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
Sony sucks! Nikon is best 
all kidding aside, I shoot both systems. I like what Sony does in somethings, and like Nikon in other things. And of course, I'm always adapting Sony glass via FTZ21 Pro. Use what works for you. The brand doesn't make the photographer or photo. If I took picture with a Sony A1 vs Z9, at 50mm, people will be hard pressed to guess which shot what, in fact, anyone guessing correctly would be right simply by the 50/50 odds. I think my gripe with Nikon right now is they've been kicking out new bodies/lenses pretty slow compared to the others. But in terms of what I NEED, I am well covered. Im just lookin out for new, niche lenses from Nikon, maybe that long awaited D500 replacement in a mirrorless body. Waiting on something like 28-70mm f/2 like both Canon and Sony have, or something like the 50-150 f/2 is nice. Regardless I've had them adapted and was happy.
all kidding aside, I shoot both systems. I like what Sony does in somethings, and like Nikon in other things. And of course, I'm always adapting Sony glass via FTZ21 Pro. Use what works for you. The brand doesn't make the photographer or photo. If I took picture with a Sony A1 vs Z9, at 50mm, people will be hard pressed to guess which shot what, in fact, anyone guessing correctly would be right simply by the 50/50 odds. I think my gripe with Nikon right now is they've been kicking out new bodies/lenses pretty slow compared to the others. But in terms of what I NEED, I am well covered. Im just lookin out for new, niche lenses from Nikon, maybe that long awaited D500 replacement in a mirrorless body. Waiting on something like 28-70mm f/2 like both Canon and Sony have, or something like the 50-150 f/2 is nice. Regardless I've had them adapted and was happy.Sep 15, 2026 at 09:29 PM
p.2 #15I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
Jack Flesher wrote:
I can say in practical use scenarios at least for me, I feel the "usable" net added resolution over what I now get from my A7R6 was minimal.
That is one of the two main issues that have steered me away from the miniMF format. While we cannot question the fact that a larger sensor with more photo sites has some technical advantages on paper, the actual differences in even quite large prints just don’t really show up. (My gang includes a good number of folks who once shot LF film and now shoot FF digital, with only one who relies wholly on miniMF and one who uses it sometimes — and they produce, exhibit, and sell beautiful large prints.)
The other main issue for me has been lenses. For my landscape photography I moved to relying on zooms years ago, for their greater, more precise control of compositions. But I rely on lenses with FF focal lengths from 16mm to 400mm (sometimes with a 1.x TC). I don’t have an objection to using adapted lenses for landscape, where I do everything manually anyway, but there are no excellent long zooms for miniMF. Yes, you can adapt a Canon 100-400 by removing the rear baffle, but you still get vignetting in some cases — and it just doesn’t make sense to me to use compromised lenses with a system that is supposed to be better.
OK, I also use my FF system for some subjects that are not miniMF suitable at all. I’d still need either a FF (most likely) system or a better-than-Fujifilm AF APS-C system for that…
… so, all in all, it just doesn’t make for a good use case for me.
Ironically, I really do like the 4:3 aspect ratio, which is my default. So I trim a bit…
I can say in practical use scenarios at least for me, I feel the "usable" net added resolution over what I now get from my A7R6 was minimal.
That is one of the two main issues that have steered me away from the miniMF format. While we cannot question the fact that a larger sensor with more photo sites has some technical advantages on paper, the actual differences in even quite large prints just don’t really show up. (My gang includes a good number of folks who once shot LF film and now shoot FF digital, with only one who relies wholly on miniMF and one who uses it sometimes — and they produce, exhibit, and sell beautiful large prints.)
The other main issue for me has been lenses. For my landscape photography I moved to relying on zooms years ago, for their greater, more precise control of compositions. But I rely on lenses with FF focal lengths from 16mm to 400mm (sometimes with a 1.x TC). I don’t have an objection to using adapted lenses for landscape, where I do everything manually anyway, but there are no excellent long zooms for miniMF. Yes, you can adapt a Canon 100-400 by removing the rear baffle, but you still get vignetting in some cases — and it just doesn’t make sense to me to use compromised lenses with a system that is supposed to be better.
OK, I also use my FF system for some subjects that are not miniMF suitable at all. I’d still need either a FF (most likely) system or a better-than-Fujifilm AF APS-C system for that…
… so, all in all, it just doesn’t make for a good use case for me.
Ironically, I really do like the 4:3 aspect ratio, which is my default. So I trim a bit…
Sep 15, 2026 at 10:03 PM
p.2 #16I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
PixiPhotography wrote:
Waiting on something like 28-70mm f/2 like both Canon and Sony have, or something like the 50-150 f/2 is nice. Regardless I've had them adapted and was happy.
How was your experience adapting the 28-70mm f2 to Nikon Z? I keep getting tempted to pick one up but I hesitate to buy such an expensive lens to mainly used adapted.
Waiting on something like 28-70mm f/2 like both Canon and Sony have, or something like the 50-150 f/2 is nice. Regardless I've had them adapted and was happy.
How was your experience adapting the 28-70mm f2 to Nikon Z? I keep getting tempted to pick one up but I hesitate to buy such an expensive lens to mainly used adapted.
Sep 15, 2026 at 10:15 PM
p.2 #17I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
OK, I haven't read all the answers in the thread, but to the OP. It is about community.
This community is as much about gear as photography, it always has been. Which is kind of fun and make it unique. People like to think, reflect and discuss gear - it doesn't matter which brand. I don't mind at all - everybody's opinions are welcome (as long as they follow forum guardrails).
Now, which Sony are you getting next, youngblood? :-)
This community is as much about gear as photography, it always has been. Which is kind of fun and make it unique. People like to think, reflect and discuss gear - it doesn't matter which brand. I don't mind at all - everybody's opinions are welcome (as long as they follow forum guardrails).
Now, which Sony are you getting next, youngblood? :-)
Sep 16, 2026 at 01:27 AM
p.2 #18I used to shoot Nikon and Canon
DWOfPaul wrote:
How was your experience adapting the 28-70mm f2 to Nikon Z? I keep getting tempted to pick one up but I hesitate to buy such an expensive lens to mainly used adapted.
I haven't had issues with focus. With their party like adapting a Tamron 35-150, I noticed some hunting, but when I adapted Sony glass, it always worked almost natively.
PixiPhotography wrote
Waiting on something like 28-70mm f/2 like both Canon and Sony have, or something like the 50-150 f/2 is nice. Regardless I've had them adapted and was happy.I haven't had issues with focus. With their party like adapting a Tamron 35-150, I noticed some hunting, but when I adapted Sony glass, it always worked almost natively.
Sep 16, 2026 at 10:55 AM