There are lots of stories here on Fstoppers about photographers, including fellow writers, who are giving up their current camera brand and changing it for a different one. If you feel you're late for the party, you're not alone.
Preliminary Conclusion
That's for the eager folks. Brand switching is a subjective decision. If you don't have a technically sound reason for that, you don't have to do the switch.
Am I Switching Anytime Soon?
No. I'm not late for the party at all, because I've never felt the need to attend it. The type of work I do goes well with the camera and lenses I currently have. In my photography, I'm working on commercial portraiture projects. For my style, it requires a camera in full manual mode that can capture a portrait of a person, most of the time using strobes for lighting. I can do that with pretty much any camera that's built for professional use (mainly from materials' perspective).
In my opinion, there are only two factors for changing the camera brand or the camera model.
Price
Whatever the reason for buying a new camera is, it may be cheaper to get one from a different brand. This can be dictated by the need for a second camera or your current one already falling apart. Before making that decision, you need to do the math and see if that will be good for your wallet relative to your current camera and lenses' investment.
Insufficiency for a Certain Type of Work
Some people switch to a different camera, because some of the characteristics of their current gear are not as good as other brand's ones. If you base your decision solely on that ground, you will end up spiraling down the rabbits hole. After next year's NAB event, you'll find cameras with yet better overall characteristics.
Why is blindly comparing camera features not the right approach? Because you may not need that feature. I started my business with a Canon 40D, which, back then, was already a discontinued model. It had bad noise above ISO 800 and was only 10 megapixels. Why did it work for me? The price was right, the build quality was right. Most of my work was lit with strobes, and I used the lowest native ISO. The file size was enough for my clients' needs: publishing on the web and 8 by 10 prints in magazines.
Let's have another example on the high price point end: medium format cameras. Most people are drooling over the quality of a Hasselblad or a Phase One. However, if you're a sports photographer and can afford such gear, that will be the worst choice of your career. ISO performance is not that great. The cameras are very slow, because of the large files they create. You won't be able to use them in burst mode. The bodies are heavy, and they usually don't shoot video. Can you say they're worse than a mirrorless or a Nikon D5? No. It's just not the type of camera for every job.
Conclusion
Next time you see someone switching camera brands, don't get anxious. They have their own style and their own needs. You walk your own path.
I love how just because you notice some posts about people who say they are switching brands turns into "Many photographers are switching camera brands". I'd bet real money that more people are brand loyal and the percentages of photographers that do switch is very small and probably hasn't changed that much over the years. The one thing that is proven is that sales in professional cameras have gone down overall so maybe the article should be about why "many photographers" are deciding not to be photographers anymore. Seems more relevant in today's world than people switching brands.
Fellow photographers around me (not writing for Fstoppers) are also of the many.
The article, however, is very general and can be an answer to the question: Do I need to change my camera if my neighbour changes theirs?
Most photographers I know aren't switching... in fact not one of them. The only place I've seen people switching brands are on sites like these trying to sucker people into buying a whole new set of gear when they don't need to. lol!
Switching to another brand and showing it on the news sounds to many like half of the population is switching camera brands. This is why I decided to write this one.
He’s got 60 comments and no photos but claims to be a photographer with photographer friends...
Ain’t making any friends in here so bye Felicia !
Eric, you should really get off this kick about ‘no photos’ on here: many of us don’t post our pics here for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that your opinion of our work doesn’t matter one whit to us. It’s even possible we are too busy making money at photography to bother posting to people who have no relationship to our target audience.
Unless your whole goal is just to have a reason to insult people? Maybe that makes you feel good... small minds focus on what other people are doing.
Or they tell you that they switched but really they still shoot with their old gear..the telling that they switched was just some sort of marketing or click bate. YouTube is full of this
I have never considered switching brands myself. Whilst I understand it's different for everyone I see it as nothing but a waste of time and money.
Nikon user 1979-1993 Canon 1993-2015 Sony/some Canon 2015- 2019.
I already did the brand switch, but for me, it was to achieve a return to the technology I started photography with. I just don't care for a camera that does the thinking for me.
After quite a few years from when I was active in film photography during high school, I returned to photography with @Sigma_Photo digital ( I have and still use my two #SD14's ) and later switched to @Sigma_Photo analog ( I have and still use my #SA9, which, with two kit lenses, cost me a whopping $35 ) to @leafimaging #Mamiya #RB67ProSD which didn't even come to $300 when purchased with a 150mm lens and 6x8 motorized film back.
As the successors to @Sigma_Photo's SD14 and competing brands all quickly climbed into the thousands, I could not justify the expense when 35mm and medium format film provided, for me, greater image quality at a fraction of the price.
The #RB is what I now use the most frequently and is my favorite, but the @Sigma_Photo cameras and lenses still have their place.
The only move I would contemplate at this stage would be to step up to a large format view or field camera, but even here I'd probably use medium format film shooting 6x12
ive never seen anyone use a sigma camera nor knew who that person was
all my life ive tried to track you down with no success.
the greatness of the legendary sigma camera user is amongst us!!
its not a myth. im jk.
what do you shoot?
I shoot a range of subjects comprising Nature, Landscapes, Meteorological Astronomical, and Rural Texas scenes.
Please go through my 500px page and I identify what camera I used for each image.
https://500px.com/steaphany
My recent images tend to be more with my Mamiya RB67, so if you want to focus on my Sigma camera work, scroll down to the bottom, I just have 70 images there so it's not that long, and start there.
your view is unique and youre unique for using 2 systems which are rare
bravo well done Steaphany
Thank you
There’s not a compelling reason to switch between the big manufacturers. Anything one has, the other will get within a year or two and your lens investment will be much more valuable than if you switch and replace glass. Switching between formats makes a little more sense (e.g. 4/3, 35mm or Medium Format), but only if it’s really going to open new doors for your photography. If you’re older, reducing weight to a minimum can be very valuable.
Take advantage of the trend followers dumping great gear for very little due to their FOMO. It’s crazy you can get the image quality of a Nikon D610 for around $600 used.
Yes, I strongly agree with your opinion.
Started in 2010 with photography. Started with a Olympus E-PL1 and now use an E-M5 Mark II. For me there is no reason to switch to another brand or system. Think the switching is more an thing when someone use an dSLR and want to go MILC.
"i walked my own path; you should walk my path, too," seems to be the gist of this post.
Привет Tihomir. Thank you for the article. I will stick with what I have, however, I use various brands anyway so.....I switch when I want or need to.
Exactly
no
I'm in a spot where my 6D is showing its age both in video and stills. About a year ago I decided to hold out to see what would get released, and right now the A7iii looks mighty tempting. A casual Brand Switch might be popular among the wealthy, or the sponsored CeleBroTographers but for us mere mortals it's a very expensive proposition; we only get to do this once. Then it has to WORK for the next 3-5 years. So yes, I'm considering switching, but it's not casual, and it's because my 2012 camera body is starting to be deficient. And it's taken me a year of research to know where I'm going and why--why some features matter to me, and why some do not. Your advice here is good--and I think the cost of switching definitely makes it important to take seriously.
Call me a cynic, it's what camera manufacturers want you to do. To throw money at cameras instead of locking in people into their eco-system like the old days. There's no real money to be made on the hardware any more especially with cheap and cheerful kit coming into the market. They'll make more money selling all that new glass and as well as the bodies, plus the added bonus is that kills much of an extended second hand market that dSLRs enjoy.
Not saying changing eco-systems is a bad thing, but people swapping systems and then writing up about it is a blasé sales tactic and, much like selling actions, a crap way to make money instead of generating new and interesting content. There seems to be an article every other week about swapping eco-systems, which means they're likely not a successful as a sales tactic.
More than 40 years of experience in the world of printed advertising (magazines, posters, billboards, etc.) have led me to the following conclusion: Canon, Nikon, Sony, Hasselblad, Sinar, Phase One, etc. once printed, in 95% of cases, you get the same s..t........
The brand you use doesn't change that in any way.
So why change it?
:) Exactly.
Unlike a good amount of people who just want the best of the best and the newest, I'm perfectly happy with what I have and have no reason to switch to anything.
I wonder who said there were no differences between full-frame and medium format?
People who switch systems sometimes have their subjective valid arguments. Let's say someone decides to shoot only PJ and has to travel a lot. An understandable decision would be to get two smaller cameras and sell their heavy DLSRs. Or someone's been using a mirrorless and wants to shoot sports. They would probably get something like a Canon 1D X or Nikon D5.
I am not a pro but I go shooting with an amateur photo club from time to time. A couple of years ago, most people had a Canon or Nikon and I was the only one with a Sony. Most people even didn't know that Sony made cameras.
Then Fuji started to appear and this year about 7 out of 10 cameras were Sonys. A lot of a7 (most of them the first or second type).
Also in a very large chain of camera stores in the Netherlands, Sony used to be hardly visible. It was all Canon and Nikon.
Now Sony has the largest front and Canon and Nikon take up a much smaller space.
I think a lot of people are changing brands. Don't forget, the pros make up the smallest percentage of sales. Most of the sales are done to amateurs.
And if you don't have a large investment in glass and flashed it is of course far easier to switch.
That's a correct observation.
Let's be clear. The more you have invested in a system, the harder it will be to switch.
I have often noticed that the real pros don't often have the newest equipment but often use older cameras. For them, the camera is nothing but a tool, just like a hammer for a carpenter. Why switch if it still does the job?
So people least likely to switch are pros. Added to that the psychology of change. There are many people who hate any kind of change (look at the reactions to mirrorless).
Strangely enough the newest equipment is often used by rich amateur. And they are changing in droves.
Very correct, professional photographers who have switched brands usually don't make big noise, they are too busy taking photos, finding clients & get paid. Also, the real pro-share makes about 4~5% overall camera market.
It's something that has gone on forever. Not a new thing at all. There are those that switch and witch again and there are those who just get on with it.
Blaming kit.
Peer pressure.
Wanting to be in the cool gang.
Bit bored of all the peer justification articles 'Why I switched'
A camera is a tool, if you don't like it, buy another, simple.
I drive a Volvo SUV but have been thinking of the new Kia SUV. Its like that, who gives me what I want for the best value. I switched from Canon to Sony - only because they offered a much smaller and lighter camera without sacrificing image quality. if anything I had a negative perception of the Sony brand, but only they had a product that fit my criteria at a competitive value.
I’m not smart enough to switch brands. I don’t even want to upgrade my body unless there is a very good reason for doing so. Of course I look at Willie Nelson’s guitar and think maybe you can take not changing equipment too far. That’s why I no longer exclusively shoot a Spotmatic with a nifty 50.
Many people are jumping off a bridge. Should you too?
Different tools for different jobs of course. I’ll quickly share my recent gear moves. In order to backup my FS7 and run multicam stuff I had three A7sii’s. I decided one of them would be good enough for what I do photographically and it was. Move over to another type of work I do with a Red Epic and Canon lenses I wanted a Canon body to come with me to utilize the glass. I got a 5d mark iv cheap. Simply put, for the work I do I’m never going to get Sony E mount AF lenses and that’s where my a lot of my gear choices are motivated.
What's the point of this article? It makes no relevant points, doesn't back up the statement in the headline, doesn't make a single argument for switching and doesn't bring anything to the table?
Maybe I'm being harsh, just seems like it was written for its own sake and my already thin-patience is being tested with these constant "Should you switch brand / DSLR to Mirrorless" articles all reaching the same conclusion: Depends.
Can we have some fresh content please and discussion/discourse on the actual tech, techniques or craft behind what we're all doing here, rather than an endless supply of random folk wading in to subjective discussions simply finding new ways of saying "it's subjective".
I'm bored.
As someone commented above, it's mostly the non-professionals that are more frequently switching systems. Professionals switch systems, based on very well-thought decisions. This article is for all those who don't know if they may have missed something along the way that may make them look like fools if they don't make the switch.
There are lots of studies, based on that psychology that deals with something that has been done by many people or said/written on the news (which sounds like "many people" as well).
I know people who tell you that it doesn't depend if you should buy a mirrorless. You ought to. There are some of that breed on the internet as well.
You know the answer? That's good. Thanks for reading the article anyway. You didn't learn anything new from it. I hope others do.
I get it, but I don't see how even an amateur photographer can take anything tangible from this article and form a coherent decision based upon it. The decision is so nuanced. It's easy say base your decision on price and what you need... And then say "If you can afford it and you need it" then it's for you, but there's a whole gamut of grey you haven't even discussed.
I feel like you want to write an article, so then write an article. Get into the weeds of it. Really work out what "Price" means. Really work out what "Utility" means and then rip those areas to bits and get into them.
This article is nothing more than a "I intend to write an article"... Without actually being an article.
The article gives enough clues so that a non-professional photographer can comprehend and analyze what direction they should follow. The article is not a tutorial on how cameras work. We've got plenty of tutorials here, both free and paid. Knowing how a camera work in full manual mode (also explicitly mentioned in the article) should easily slash 90% of the hesitation to switch to a new camera. If one doesn't know what manual mode is all about, here's the place to start and ask questions, search for information, or buy a tutorial like the Fstoppers Photography 101.
If someone doesn't like to learn how cameras work they won't learn. If they have the money to spend on another camera, that will make manufacturers happy. That will make the camera owner happy as well (at least for a week).
And by the way, the article's got quite a lot of attention so far. This means there are plenty of people who found it helpful. Of course, there are people who don't find it helpful like you and this is not an accusation. I find lots of articles not helpful to me, but they resonate well with others. Those kinds of articles are always subjective both from writers' and readers' perspectives. I find that normal.
Several years after Nikon introduced the D300 and then failed to follow up with a D400, I added a couple Sony A77IIs and Sony 70-40 (for college football). While I now have a D500, the A77IIs were no slouches at 24MP and 12 FPS.
Been shooting Nikon for 40 years and just changed to Fujifilm.
That's quite a turn.
I sold all my digital gear and went to film. Still shoot Nikon though...
Sounds great!