他的意思大概是，Canon的Body比Sony的差很多，Canon的镜头和Sony基本一样多而且很
多是重复建设的。。。
“Tired of hearing the endlessly and tiresome song “The A-mount has a very
limited number of lenses; I would wish to post this comparison, so everybody
could speak knowingly.
Debunking myths… if only a little
It is a truth repeated and accepted by everybody that Sony lacks the breadth
of catalogue of Canon or Nikon. And that is often used when evaluating the
Sony products: “Yes, it could be a good camera, but when you need to make
grow your gear
Not long ago, on a thread on the Sonyalpha.es forum, a user said: “And
after the A580… what?”, questioning the growth capabilities of his Sony
gear
Some months ago, taking pictures with some Canon and Nikon users, where only
a girl with an A300 and myself with the A900, were Sony users, were holding
the jokes and ironies of one of them. I didn’t want to argue; so I just
asked him for a memory card, took some pictures, and while I handed it to
him, I told him “Just look at these at home, and then we can talk about Why
I’m shooting with Sony”… Now this Canikon user has a problem, because
his gear doesn’t give him pictures with so much dynamic range, sharpness,
detail and colours. Now he doubts a lot but… “There are so few Sony lenses
”!
It would be naive not accept that today Canon’s lenses list is much larger
than the Sony’s one but… How far? So I decided to compare their catalogues
, and now I’m presenting the result.
The only aspect I try to answer is if Sony’s lenses list is as short as it
’s said. It should be necessary to analyse some other aspects which would
take the study a little bit further. There are a lot of reviews
There are already many reviews that assess lens performances. I’m not
talking about qualities, although I must say that G lenses can talk face to
face with Canon’s L and L-II, if not overcome them, and all CZ lenses
outperform their respective Canon counterparts, according to the different
reviews I’ve been reading.
Talking about the sealed Canon lenses, I remember an article of an A900 and
a 24-70/2.8 Carl Zeiss lens, shooting on the Paris-Dakar rally, completely
full of desert sand and dust, while continued working perfectly; or the
Luminous Escape experience praising the A900 reliability that outperformed
some failing Canon bodies
You can find here a Canon vs Sony’s catalogue comparative, you can use it
to take your own conclussions …
Firstable, is important to realize you can find a lot of similar lenses on
Canon’s family; some of this “duplicate” models have been developed to
achieve quality improvements (for the L and L-II series) and some others
because they are stabilized lenses (LS). But, in the Sony family ALL lenses
can work as stabilized lenses because all Alpha bodies (except the NEX
bodies) have in body stabilization, and you don’t need to duplicate
versions.
Second, there are some Canon lenses with no AF motor, but its use is limited
only to Canon bodies with integrated AF motor. In the Sony system the
camera bodies include an AF , which has shown their advantages; newer in-
body engines now are outperforming in terms of speed and precission some SSM
engine“
