Sony A100 or Nikon equivalent

carusoswi · Jul 16, 2007

I am considering the A100 or a Nikon, what is the equivalent.

Influencing my decision is my desire to make use of some of my existing lenses. My original loyalty was to Minolta, having owned an X700 and a Maxxum 9000. The X700 I do not have anymore, but,I still have the Maxxum 9000 with it's stock 28-80 zoom and a 28-300 mm, both AF lenses.

I also purchased a Nikon N60 several years back for my daughter. She didn't like it, and, instead of returning it, I bought it back from her and kept it. It came with a Tamron 28-200 mm lens that I just like a lot.

So, the question is, should I go with the Sony A100 or the Nikon equivalent (I'm not certain which camera that would be). Is an N200 a better system than the A100?

Just curious.

I am a little hesitant to get any new camera - but, I'm thinking I really need to get into the digital scene.

Oh, I have a small Minolta 4mp point and shoot, and we bought a Nikon point and shoot for my wife last December, but, those are not real cameras to me. I hate the shutter lag and the imprecise zooming, hidden menus, etc.

Any suggestions welcome.

Caruso

Don Simon · Jul 16, 2007

Hi there.

While you understandably would like to use lenses you already have, you're not by any means heavily invested in either system, so personally I would consider your options open to all systems/brands... unless of course you have a preference for these two companies.

I don't think there's necessarily a direct Nikon "equivalent" to the A100. They are different cameras in different systems. In terms of price, I think maybe you could say the A100 is somewhere between the D40x and the D80.

There's no N200, but the D200 is one of Nikon's finest dSLRs, with very strong construction, weather sealing, and very good specifications... and a price tag to match. Sony don't have a comparable model at the moment, but apparently their higher-end models are due pretty soon. If they can live up to the heritage of the Dynax 7D and high-end Minolta film SLRs, they will be very impressive indeed. Of course you could still buy a Minolta dSLR, since they should now be very affordable.

As for which system (Nikon or Minolta/Sony) is better... that's really up to you. Nikon has more bodies, more lenses (which are more widely available), a much larger user base and support network. Sony have Minolta glass, Zeiss glass, and can combine their Minolta heritage with Sony's resources... however I think the Sony dSLR system is something of a "work in progress" at the moment - there's only the one dSLR body, lens choice is a bit limited, and some of the higher-end lenses are "ambitiously" priced... I expect that in a year's time the Sony dSLR system will look a lot more impressive. Of course even with these reservations, the Sony system now may be perfect for you... as may any other system. When looking at a system, check the available camera bodies, check out the lenses, flashes and other accessories (including availability and price)... and see if you can get your hands on the gear in person and play with it... doing this you may find the decision is made much easier.

carusoswi · Jul 17, 2007

ZaphodB:
Thanks for your informative reply. I have been holding off on purchasing a DSLR since they first came out, hoping to purchase something that will be as satisfying to me as my trusty old Maxxum 9000. As film camera's go, that one has served my needs and has steadfastly satisfied my film SLR requirements for years. I subscribed to photo mags and enjoy reading about equipment development over the years with great interest and enjoyment, and, never really lusted after any of the newer stuff. The 9000 was always that satisfying to me.

Over the years, there have been many a "throw-away" - one of Kodak's cartridge cameras (can't remember the name of that fairly recent film system where the film (and developed negs) stay in the canister, a small Minolta point and shoot 4 MP digital, my wife's 4 MP Nikon (I hate the shutter lag of those cams).

When I make my purchase of a DSLR, I would like it to be in the league that my 9000 was in when I purchased it. I would like to avoid feeling like I would have been happier if I had purchased X instead of Y.

I know that no one can answer that question for me, but welcome suggestions from anyone.

While I am not heavily invested in Minolta or Nikon systems, my thinking was that I could, at least temporarily, use one of my two existing lenses and simply buy a DSLR body, either Sony or Nikon.

My attraction to Sony is only that its heritage is Minolta, and I have had great experience with Minoltas over the years. OTOH, I have always respected Nikon, and am certain I would like that camera, as well.

. . . and, so, for now, I remain undecided . . . I was actually browsing Ebay for Minolta M9's. They are finally coming down to respectable prices, but, I doubt I would ever invest in another film cam.

Thanks again for the response.

Caruso

Don Simon · Jul 17, 2007

Well if nothing stands out, you could always keep waiting and continue shooting film... there's no law against it

Honestly I think you would be happy with any system. If Sony's next dSLR lives up to the specs I have been reading lately, it will be very impressive indeed... Nikon has some great bodies (especially the D200) and great availability of lenses... same with Canon who also have the full-frame thing going on. Olympus have their more unusual Four-Thirds system with nice compact bodies and great glass... Pentax give you a lot of features and quality for a good price... really it's just a matter of choosing a system that suits you. You can take a purely pragmatic approach, but let's be honest, are we always completely logical about why we choose brand A or B? Sometimes one just "feels right".

As for not buying more film cameras... I keep telling myself I won't, but I do it anyway... it's a sickness :lol: