Nikon DSLR VS. Sony DSLR. Which is ultimately better?

Question

I know my question is very, very broad but I just wanted to know which of the 2 camera brands essentially take sharper pictures. I've seen some from Sony and I get the feeling that their image quality is super sharp.... even sharper than Nikon, perhaps?
If you had to compare the Nikon D90 with a camera from Sony's line (something similar to Nikon D90) which one would it be and would the Nikon be better or the Sony?

I really need some solid answers because I'm leaning toward buying the Nikon D90 but something tells me Sony's images are sharper...Help!
Thanks!

Answer 1

Ok both make good cameras. that said I am a Nikon person. Yes sony makes Nikons sensors but they use Nikon proprietary achitecture and software so they are not the same sensors. Some Nikon sensors even have different micro lenses than the ones on the sony cameras. Think about it your favorite car brand had parts made by other car manufacturers but its not the same car. The D90 has excellent image quality, one of the best image processors on the market It does result in better image quality for the D90. Here are the DXO mark comparison on the D90 and the A700 the sony in the class



http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)/294%7C0/(appareil2)/308%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Sony



Notice the D90 has better performace in overall rating 72.6 to 66.3 then look ath the tabs the Nikon is higher in dynamic range, tonal range color sensitivity and has a slightly better signal to noise ratio.

the D90 has more white balance options 12 positions, 5 manual preset and Kelvincompared to the A700's 7 positions, plus manual. The D90 has more options on flash settings with Front curtain, Rear curtain, Red-Eye, Slow, Red-Eye Slow for the D90 vs Auto, Fill-in, Red-Eye reduction, Slow Sync, Off for the Alpha. the alpha shoots a little fastere 5 fps to the D90s 4.5 fps but I am not sure a half frame a second faster is too important. There are more lenses and accessories both from the manufacturer and thrid party for Nikon than Sony. And I find Nikon in general has better build quality. As to the IS in the lens vs the body. Both Nikon and Canon chose to put it in the lens because thier studies showed it would work better. The amount of sensor movement needed in body on a 300mm lens according to a sony white paper is far greater than any in body system currently made. Also in lens systems according to thier literature have a lower impact on focusing time. I can send you a link to the white paper if you need it



I have used Nikons since the 70s so I love them and always recommend them. That does not mean you would not be happy with the sony its really your choice



One last thought Nikon has just come out with a new model in the class you may want to look at its called the D5000

Answer 2

Neither is ultimately better. If Sony really made better cameras, there would be no reason for anyone to buy a Nikon, people would stop buying them, Nikon would stop making them, and you wouldn't be struggling over the choice because you wouldn't get one.



The fact that you have doubts speaks for how similar their products are. Many, many variables contribute to an image's sharpness, foremost being the discipline of the photographer and the resolving power of the lens, in that order. Cameras have little to do with it. The truth is that Nikon and Sony offer essentially identical image quality at the same price.



Here's my advice: Pick one, learn how to use it, shoot, be happy. You can't make the wrong choice because there simply isn't a wrong choice to be made.

Answer 3

It is so funny when I read the bunch of stupid answers. First of all, if you buy a Nikon Camera, you buy a piece of Sony since until today there has not been any Nikon camera working without a Sony capture device. In simple words, the sensor that captures your shot in a Sony Camera and in a Nikon camera are exactly the same. Note that Nikon belongs to Mitsubishi.

The whole looks different in the way that Nikon puts much more value on inside camera software cheating, mainly pushing ISO rates by flattening noise. Nikon does this quiet good as long as you do not look too close on the picture. Noise reduction is indeed the better way to destroy a shot.

Sony stays with it's cameras in the physical range of what is possible. For sure they do noise flattening as well, but do not reach the skills that Nikon reaches. Now, I use both brands and others like Fuji and can tell you that I always switch noise reduction off and stay within what the capture device can do by it's own. If I do complex things, I do this on computer software and here, even the best in camera soft can not compete. Above all, on a computer soft you select how much and where you want to flatten noise.

What I do like in Sony cameras is that they are real cameras without being or becoming walk around computers that do all for you.

A camera like A700 or A900 are among the most amazing tools I know, no useless junk like live view and artificial horizons, just only what a camera needs and, all of them have anti shake included in the body.

Sony dslr's are Minolta's since Sony bought the whole factory and it just stamps it's name on them. Those that make Sony dslr's at Minolta never have seen or met those that make Sony's Point and Shoot, and, I hope they never will.

On the end, notice that for the price of one single Nikon lens, you can buy 4 to 6 excellent Minolta used glasses on E-Bay and most of them are as good and some even better then Nikon's. If your goal is to dance in the court of those that have big money to spend, stick to Nikon. Concerning quality of material and picture, both are at equal level.

Answer 4

If you want a camera body with the smallest viewfinder in any APS-C sensor body, ISO problems at 400 and above and a snails pace frame rate of 2.5 f/s then by all means buy an A300 or A350. Or you can use your head, pay no attention to those here who have bought a Sony and do not know any better, and you can listen to photographer such as myself and take my advice and avoid them.



The A700 and A900 are nice cameras, at least they have a large viewfinder!. But your money is better spent on Nikon (I can promise you that)

Answer 5

I don't know much about the DSLRs specifically, but generally Sony products tend to be more expensive because you end up paying for the fact it is a Sony rather than the quality, when you could pay for an equal Nikon product for less. Nikon and Canon brands for cameras are my choices.



Just my two cents.. hope that helps

Answer 6

apart from what everyone else has said i just want to add that i bought the sony a 350 18-250 sony Lens and i am delighted with it. it has great build quality and is simple to use with lots of useful features. Another reason for sony is their great aftercare service which i have used after warranty expired and no charge.

Answer 7

Sony loses every time. Sony produces great TVs and Video quality, but they should stick with that. yes, their image quality is amazing but they are a hassle to use.