OT PHOTOGRAPHERS: Sony, Canon, or Nikon? Help me pick a new camera

Personally, I'd recommend the Sony A7 family.

From your choices listed, I'd go Nikon. Be sure to grab a model with full lens compatibility. By that, I mean:

Some brands have changed mounts over the years, some have kept the same.

Nikon and Pentax, I believe, have kept the same mount throughout their history, and you can grab used old prime lenses for reasonable. Canon changed several times, so lots of old glass gets abandoned.

Sony took over Minolta, and kept the Maxxum mount for their full dslrs.

I use Olympus, and have adapters and lots of "orphan" prime lenses. These are manual lenses, not AF. But if you're shooting precise, you want to manually focus. And going orphan route can save tons of cash- I have an entire lineup of Minolta Rokkor prime lenses for under $300 total.

quote:

---

Personally, I'd recommend the Sony A7 family.

---

I second that and I’m a photographer that carries a Canon.

To the OP, for $1000, you gonna get shite as far as new. I would look into buying used. I have two cameras, and four lenses. That’s nearly $7000 in equipment, and I don’t have shite compared to some stuff I see guys carrying. If you want to get into photography, buy nice, high dollar, used equipment in either Canon or Nikon.
If you want to just take garden variety pictures, go with a new Sony mirrorless. Now, the A7 is a little expensive, but the lower quality Sony cameras run about $1000.
A camera and lens, no matter the cost, don’t take good photographs. A good, trained photographer that knows his equipment takes good photographs. A higher dollar camera doesn’t take better images than a lower price camera, it just allows you to do much more with it.

Nikon Z 7

Cannon isnt what it used to be.

Canon 5D Mkiii if you want a very high quality DSLR that also shoots video. Originally about $4500 new (body only), then Canon produced the Mkiv about 5 years ago, so you can likely get a pretty good used iii for $1000 to $1200.

I would suggest shopping B&H Photo in New York as they refurbish and rate the quality of used cameras. One drawback of buying elsewhere is that you cannot tell the shutter count on this model without being a rocket scientist and hooking up with Canon. B&H will tell you the shutter counts and relative condition, and prices range accordingly. They are rated 150k snaps but often will go well over 200k. The Mkiii body is also made of titanium alloy so is virtually indestructible if a little on the heavy side. There may be a glut of used cameras available as the virus thing plays out and would-be photographers trade their cameras for cash (or in NY they die and their heirs do).

Caveat: It should use most if not all Canon EF lenses, but NOT the EFS (S for short) lenses.

If you just want to get a DSLR to learn, check with local camera clubs to see if anyone may have gear they want to sell.

Nikon is hard to beat. But they're in danger of going under.

You might want to stick with Canon or Pentax. Not sure about the sony's. I think they mutated from Minolta in the dsl arena.

Additionally Canon is usually made in Japan which is a plus.
Nikons non high end stuff is usually made in Thailand. Still quality gear.

Sony A7iii. I had nikon for years, finally switched and won't be going back. Love it for photos and video.

Pick one brand and stick with it. Wife and my dad both have Nikon. Dad has had nikons going back to the early 90s with 35mm. The mounting and servo systems are the same so he can still use lenses on his new dslrs.

I'm a Canon guy and you can get a mirrorless Canon right now - but if you want Canon, I would wait a little while longer.

I would strongly consider something in the Sony A7 family of mirrorless - the only knock is they've released so many in just a couple of years you may have to sort through what is going to be the best feature and capability to cost ratio choice for your specific needs.

I'm sure the Nikons are fine, but Sony has been a gamechanger with their "all in" approach to mirrorless.

Fuji -
Pros - Best JPGs in the mirrorless (perhaps beyond) business, great looking compact systems that make you want to take pictures and make you look more like an old school camera enthusiast than a soccer mom or wannabe pro. Among the best build quality lenses for mirrorless systems (if not the best) until you get to a much higher price range, and generally at a smaller size than FF equiv. Controversial, but IMO Fuji lens magic is pretty real. Very good to excellent ergonomics (for most).

Cons - Crop sensor, if you care about that (most probably shouldn't, but it's a fair point in price comparisons), very few third party lens options, some controversial design variations between models that can leave you feeling "stuck" and having to make sacrifices. AF has lagged Sony, but is pretty close now.

Sony -
Pros - Full featured, nice bodies. Good enough build quality, and fairly compact. Leading edge of the mirrorless tech. Lots of shooters, amateur and pro alike, so plenty of support/accessories, etc. Great autofocus tech.

Cons - Shitty baseline lenses, arguably lower build quality than competitors, inferior handling according to most (though debatable/personal opinion obviously a big factor here).

Canon and Nikon both have impressive mirrorless options, but I'll leave assessments to others. I was a Nikon shooter for film/DSLR so I'm fond of Nikon. But if I left Fuji it'd probably be for Sony, at least at this stage.

Sony