>>3945501>EF lenses work better on Sony than canon RF
No they do not. Don't lie to shill shit.>(and Sony doesn't lock you out of the old sigma autofocus lenses).
There are very few, very old Sigma AF lenses that will work on a Sony with a 3rd party adapter but not on modern EF/RF. There is only ONE I can think of that might be worth owning, the old Sigma 300 f/4. The rest are consumer zoom crap by today's standards.>Canon refuse to open their mount, so will never have these options.>hurr durr no one can ever reverse engineer anything, ever
If you have Nikon glass, you would get Nikon. If you have Canon glass, you would get Canon. Adapters exist for Sony because at first they had a shit lens catalog, and Canikon were making people wait for "muh mirrorless."
An AF Pentax adapter might be the only argument for jumping to Sony with existing glass since Pentax will never do mirrorless. Then again if you're stills only and don't give a shit about video, you could just as easily stick with the Pentax 36mp FF body forever. Outside video mirrorless is a lot of hype with some real benefits, but nothing Earth shattering.