Upgrading SONY SLR camera, Advice?

[minicoop1985]

Don't discount the Minolta AF Maxxum lenses either. There's some fantastic glass that I've been able to sample-the 70-210 "Beercan," the 28-135 "Secret Handshake"... there's some great stuff out there, and it's dirt cheap too. Sure they may be a bit loud and heavy, but they're sharp and, most importantly, well built.

 

[DiskoJoe]

Minicoop makes a good point. Lots of great Minolta glass out there. Also if you can find any older Sigma APO glass its excellent quality. I have an old 70-210mm f2.8 by Sigma. The AF is a little busted but the picture quality is immaculate. I got it for like $500. Its super sharp and really nice bokeh since it has 9 blade aperture.


Kayla First Take by DiskoJoe, on Flickr

 

[Stevepwns]

I am sure they are but if you need to shoot in low light sutuation the a77 is not at its best, no crop sensor camera is at its best.
A pro need to have the best equipment to do its job, you cant tell your client Ahhh sorry but I dont have enough light to take the shot or you take the shot with high ISO and get a very grainy picture.

I think a serious pro needs a full frame camera and maybe have a crop sensor camera as a backup or second body.

Being a pro just means you get paid. There countless award winning photographers that use crop sensors. This is simply not a true statement. Not everyone starts out with the best gear, not to mention ALL cameras out now are better than what was pro 20 years ago. So the body he has is more than capable of producing quality shots.

There are many film cameras that are far superior to many digital cameras out now. I personally dont know any pro photogs that use crop sensor.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/nature-wildlife/342117-snowy-egret-flight.html

He has 2 of them, award winning and professional.

 

[skieur]

Thank you for the information. I have never used a EVF so I can't really judge what they're like however after reading up on them it does put me off as it's not quite the same as looking yourself. I have looked into the a65 but I don't think I could really afford it. If I had it my way I'd be getting an A99 but I don't have much of a budget and whilst I am just spending out don't want to spend too much and not get as much I spend back if that sort of makes sense. Do you know how the guy at the club finds the EVF? I had been thinking of a Canon and I know a lot of photographers use Nikon but I really don't want to move out of a brand to find another isn't what id expected or as good. I was reading online just before and apparently Canon and Sony are rated the best brand for professional photography so I really don't know what to do. Thank you for your comments, it's of great help

The advantage to the EVF is that it shows the visual effect of your tech choices in real time through the viewfinder BEFORE you take the photo. For example if you inadvertently put the spot light meter point on something dark, it would show the rest of your viewfinder image as over-exposed. That would tell you to change your metering approach. If you are shooting in black and white, then your viewfinder will show your view in black and white BEFORE you take the photo. The viewfinder also provides much more information than an OVF, which is helpful as a quick visual check of your settings before shooting.

 

[skieur]

Some pro are very happy with the a77.

Sony has pro lenses too...

I am sure they are but if you need to shoot in low light sutuation the a77 is not at its best, no crop sensor camera is at its best.
.

Having compared shots side by side with different cameras: Canon, Nikon and Sony, I find that when looked at them closely ALL images start to deteriorate at ISO 1600.

The A77 by the way allows you to shoot at slower speeds handheld which helps in low light situations....1/8 sec. to be precise in my experience.

 

[dxqcanada]

The advantage to the EVF is that it shows the visual effect of your tech choices in real time through the viewfinder BEFORE you take the photo.

Yup, I can't count the number of times I forgot that I had Exposure Comp set when I was shooting with my Canon nF-1.
+2 on slide film is not a good combo !!!

 

[jfrabat]

I would not recommend the A55 mentioned by many others because you cannot adjust the EVF for low light (that was corrected in the A57). I also prefer the A57 to the A58 (except for the low light noise; there, the A58 comes out on top - even better than the A77, in fact - but you are using lightboxes, so this should not be an issue). In case of the A65, the EVF goes from LCD to OLED, which means that there is no lag time (by the way, the A58 is also OLED EVF). The big diffence would be when shooting action sports or other fast moving subjects, but otherwise, the LCD works just fine.

Now, I agree with the comment, if you are planning on going pro, you shoul dconsider full frame cameras... You could probably pick up a used A900 cheaper than the A99, but I would save up and move to that camera. I tried it when it came out, and low light images are AMAZING! Of course, if you do not plan to shoot in low light situations, the crop sensor will do just fine, but as a pro, you need all the advantages you can get, and a full frame is hard to beat when shooting a wedding when no lights are allowed...

 

[Bob01721]

"... I cant upgrade to the top notch brand nor camera yet as I don't yet have the money to do so..."

Then, why don't you just stick with what you have until you can afford Your Dream? Sony has some nice lenses planned for introduction this year.

Seriously, upgrading your camera "just to upgrade it" is a waste of money. Put that money towards Your Dream.

Your "vision" has far more to do with your results than your equipment. With today's technology, just about all cameras are capable of producing great images. I'd venture to say that if you doubled the amount of investment in equipment, the images you'd produce wouldn't be noticeably "different," much less "better" than what you're doing now.

Anyone here disagree?

 

[skieur]

Just as there is no such thing as a top notch brand of car, there is no such thing as a top notch brand of camera. It really depends on the type of shooting you plan on doing. A lot of journalists use Nikons and a lot of sports shooters use Canons. Leica lenses are apparently the best for nature photography but overall differences are minimal. Complicating things, internally within a brand of camera there are quality differences in the images from various models. Moreover features are often dissimilar between cameras, so it is like trying to compare apples and oranges.

A point and shoot with a large sensor, 20 megapixels and fine lenses would produce a sharper image than some DSLRs but most photographers would still go for the DSLR.

 

[DiskoJoe]

Being a pro just means you get paid. There countless award winning photographers that use crop sensors. This is simply not a true statement. Not everyone starts out with the best gear, not to mention ALL cameras out now are better than what was pro 20 years ago. So the body he has is more than capable of producing quality shots.

There are many film cameras that are far superior to many digital cameras out now. I personally dont know any pro photogs that use crop sensor.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/nature-wildlife/342117-snowy-egret-flight.html

He has 2 of them, award winning and professional.

Sorry, didnt think about wildlife photogs. Crop sensor actually makes a lot of sense because the crop factor addes more focal length which is crucial unless you have gobs to spend on high end lenses.

 

[minicoop1985]

Just as there is no such thing as a top notch brand of car, there is no such thing as a top notch brand of camera.

HASSELBLAD UBER ALLES :hail::hail::hail:










:mrgreen: You all knew that was coming, I'd bet.


What Sony did you go with? If I had to pick it would be the a850. Older, sure, but personally I prefer a prism to an EVF and the 850's barebones approach. That's personal preference, as the technology in the a99 is far beyond that of the a850.

 

[Fox_Racing_Guy]

HASSELBLAD UBER ALLES :hail::hail::hail:

Maybe you would be interested in the "New" Hasselblad HV for $11,500 (re-badged Sony A99)





Official: Hasselblad HV A-mount camera launched! Costs $11,500! | sonyalpharumors

 

[dxqcanada]

It puzzles me why Hasselblad is doing this ... though I have not paid attention to this company's past to see if they did this before.
... and whoever their designers are ... they really need to get their vision checked ... or their head.

 

[skieur]

Just as there is no such thing as a top notch brand of car, there is no such thing as a top notch brand of camera.

HASSELBLAD UBER ALLES :hail::hail::hail:.

mmm. Hasselblad is swedish and uber alles is German. It is medium format and more a photo studio camera than anything else. It produces excellent photos but it is definitely not for getting the shot in sports, photojournalism, etc.


:mrgreen: You all knew that was coming, I'd bet. ...................Yes, I did.


What Sony did you go with? If I had to pick it would be the a850. Older, sure, but personally I prefer a prism to an EVF and the 850's barebones approach. That's personal preference, as the technology in the a99 is far beyond that of the a850.[/QUOTE]

I went with the A77. It is quiet and easy to handhold at very low speeds as in 1/10 sec. 12 frames per second is great for burst shooting and the DRO adjustments and in camera HDR provide some options in difficult lighting. Multi-shot noise reduction and burst bracketing can also be useful even without a tripod. I did not pick the A99 because I am waiting for a better processing chip.

 

[jfrabat]

The advantage to the EVF is that it shows the visual effect of your tech choices in real time through the viewfinder BEFORE you take the photo.

Yup, I can't count the number of times I forgot that I had Exposure Comp set when I was shooting with my Canon nF-1.
+2 on slide film is not a good combo !!!

Of course, this is only useful if you actually pay attention to the settings in the EVF (I am just saying, because, obviously, I have NEVER EVER - fingers crossed - done this rookie mistake before)...

HASSELBLAD UBER ALLES :hail::hail::hail:

Maybe you would be interested in the "New" Hasselblad HV for $11,500 (re-badged Sony A99)





Official: Hasselblad HV A-mount camera launched! Costs $11,500! | sonyalpharumors

Darn; you beat me to it!

Don't discount the Minolta AF Maxxum lenses either. There's some fantastic glass that I've been able to sample-the 70-210 "Beercan," the 28-135 "Secret Handshake"... there's some great stuff out there, and it's dirt cheap too. Sure they may be a bit loud and heavy, but they're sharp and, most importantly, well built.

I myself have the Minolta 50mm 1.7; had to fiddle a bit with the AF micro adjustment to get it to work right, but it is a pretty sharp lens (I typically use it at f/2 and above, though, as it gets a tad soft in the edges at f/1.7, but ALL lenses are sharper when not wide open anyway).



On different subjects, I agree that it would probably be best to invest in new glass and save the body for last, but if you are dead set on changing your body, I would go to the A57; even though the A58 is better in low light, the A57 is tougher (I think). From what I have heard (not officially, of course), the A57 was actually the body of the A65, but, because of the floodings in Thailand, the body planned for the A57 could not be built, so they used the one that was originally planned for the A65, which is why the A57 has such a great body to it.

Anyway, keep us posted on how everything turns out...