The A58 might be the deal of the year...

[DiskoJoe]

I'd agree, but people want to use what the pro's shoot.

Not necessarily the name for THAT reason. Sony has been unstable for years. I refuse to buy their products no matter what it is... every sony product I ever purchased was crap or broke way earlier than it should have.

Besides... nikon and cannon are IMAGING and CAMERA companies. They don't make toasters, cd players, dog toys... lol ok a little stretch but you get my point

I'm sure they make fine cameras but not for everyone.

The camera division of Sony is basically Minolta under another name which was a well established camera company. The technology and build f the products they offer are of similar quality to canon or nikon. However lens selection for Sony cameras is somewhat limited when compared to canon and nikon. Still waiting for a tiltshift to come out in a-mount.

But as for quality of images Sony is pretty decent. I have friends with nikon and canon and they like my images that my a580 produces which has the same sensor as your D7000. The output is almost identical to a d7000. And im sure you are aware that Nikon has been outsourcing chip develop to Sony for their higher end cameras.

People should really not get so hung up on a name. These are small pieces of electronic equipment and have about 99% of the same components and are made in the same countries by the same workers. There is a lot less difference then you would expect.

 

[DiskoJoe]

For me low light photography is what its all about, while 1/3rd stop doesnt sound like much it is a lot for me and in a sad heart I had to sell all my lenses and move to Nikon, I will be happy in the future to buy Sony if I will see it is in par or leading in low light photography.
This was not a vote agains Sony I simply went with a camera that worked better for me for my specific needs and I think this SLT technology has many people loving it or not loving it, to each his/her own.

Sony makes good cameras and anybody that just stays away from it just because of the name is loosing a good option and potentialy a good camera.

I recommend that you give the A99 a try; the low light performance is GREATLY improved over the other models... And ISO noise control is very much in check. I posted some months ago a comparisson between the A77 and A99 in low light and high ISO situations... Even at 25,000 ISO, the A99 produced "usable" (noise, but usable) results. While with the A77 I never go over 1,600 ISO, in the A99 you can go quite a lot higher and not have to worry about digital noise...

Ive heard nothing but good things about the performance of the a99. A friend was thinking about selling all his Sony gear and opting for a D4 until he saw what the a99 could do.

 

[jfrabat]

Ive heard nothing but good things about the performance of the a99. A friend was thinking about selling all his Sony gear and opting for a D4 until he saw what the a99 could do.

I work for Sony, and I have the A77, but was dissappointed about the noise issue at higher ISO. But I got a sample of the A99, and took it out for some testing, and I was very much impressed with the results. WAAAAAAAYYYY better than the A77 in high ISO / low light (mind you, I still think the A77 is still a great camera; it just that I dont think ISO's higher than 1,600 are of enough quality for me). The only reason I have not yet pulled the trigger on the A99 is that I would have to buy an everyday lens to replace my Zeiss 16-80 (APS-C optimized), which would mean going for a 24-70 Zeiss, and that's a pretty penny to do now that I was just relocated back to my home country.

 

[goodguy]

Ive heard nothing but good things about the performance of the a99. A friend was thinking about selling all his Sony gear and opting for a D4 until he saw what the a99 could do.

I work for Sony, and I have the A77, but was dissappointed about the noise issue at higher ISO. But I got a sample of the A99, and took it out for some testing, and I was very much impressed with the results. WAAAAAAAYYYY better than the A77 in high ISO / low light (mind you, I still think the A77 is still a great camera; it just that I dont think ISO's higher than 1,600 are of enough quality for me). The only reason I have not yet pulled the trigger on the A99 is that I would have to buy an everyday lens to replace my Zeiss 16-80 (APS-C optimized), which would mean going for a 24-70 Zeiss, and that's a pretty penny to do now that I was just relocated back to my home country.

I know its silly but you know what is the one thing that I really dont like in the a99 ?

I find it to be an ugly looking camera.
Yes I know camera should produce good pictures and not look good but still I think Sony could have design a nicer looking camera.

Saying that if I could afford an a99 the looks would not be the thing that would prevent me from buying it! I know its a good camera but sadly I dont have the money for it.

 

[jake337]

I love gear wars...



They're all cameras people!!!!!!!! They take pictures pretty much identical to the equivalent product from another manufactuer!!!!!



I think I might sell my D90 and pick up a D40x....

http://www.flickr.com/search/groups/?q=portrait&m=pool&w=437782@N22&s=int

http://www.flickr.com/search/groups/?q=macro&m=pool&w=437782@N22&s=int

http://www.flickr.com/search/groups/?q=landscape&m=pool&w=437782@N22&s=int

 

[DiskoJoe]

I love gear wars...



They're all cameras people!!!!!!!! They take pictures pretty much identical to the equivalent product from another manufactuer!!!!!

Thank you. This really sums it up. Pick one and stick with it.

 

[o hey tyler]

I love it when people compare noise performance between a crop frame (a77) and a full frame (a99).

Obviously the full frame camera will perform better.