Ready to step up to a new camera, what to buy?

[rajvarma]

I collerlate Sony to DSLRs as Nike to Golf. In th begining Nikes stuff was second rate, today they produce some fine equiptment but it took them a while. I would be pissed if I invested good money into one of there early iron sets. Its not a direct correlation but something to think about.

Nice analogy. i'm suspect of sony too since canon and nikon have been making SLR's for a long time.

 

[MX962]

Correct. Sony has undercut similar cameras such as the Canon 40D with the Sony Alpha A350 at hundreds less. They have produced the best live view implimentation with no lag, blackout,or focus issues and the Dynamic Range Optimizer considerably reduces harsh dark shadows in bright daylight present in Canon shots. Their flagship camera with approx. 24 megapixels will be coming out sometime this year and it will probably undercut the Canon Mark III in price as well.

In lenses, with Minolta lenses, Sony lenses, Zeiss lenses, and Sigma lenses, all compatible with the Alpha series, you can purchase your own quality level.

Sony is determined to undercut and steal market share from Canon and Nikon and with design that appeals to users they have a good chance of succeding.

skieur

And so did Kodak a few years back.... I think they will only add compotition is all ,and this is where we win as consumers

 

[fragged3d]

I went to local best buy today and held a Nikon and a Canon 40D. I would have to say for the feel I loved the Canon hands down, the canon felt beefy and the right weight. The Nikon felt light and cheap! So my choices are narrowing down. The comment about Sony and buying into their dslr, I already own an A100 and I love my A100, I just want more versatility, mega-pixels, quality, technology and oh, the battery grip for the A700 would be so wonderfull!!! I know glass is expensive and I know the more toward pro glass you get it keeps getting higher! I just like to learn and I love to shoot, I don't think I will ever be a pro nor do I think I want to. I do however cherish my photos and I have never been one to pinch the pennies for my technological needs. I am happy with Sony and I might stay with them and get an A700 but it doesn't hurt to look. I hear so much good stuff about Canon and I know they have so many different lenses available. I am one of those people that wants the best or very close to the best and I think if I'm right the L series for Canon is the best and also expensive. I know I can use Minolta Lenses and I just watched something about Zeiss starting to make lenses for the alpha. Sony has really made it easy with putting the image stab. in the camera, I like that. Still soaking up all your comments, researching and looking!!!

Oh, didn't know they were going to do a 20 something mp, might wait it out and get that one!

 

[skieur]

And so did Kodak a few years back.... I think they will only add compotition is all ,and this is where we win as consumers

The difference is that Sony has more money, chip manufacturing, and the expertise of the Konica/Minolta camera designers to add to the mix. Kodak's expertise was always more film than cameras.

skieur

 

[*Mike*]

For the OP, if you've only been seriously shooting for a year or so, I would wait to upgrade bodies. Unless you really are going to switch systems. Otherwise, invest in lenses.

Obviously, if you're switching systems you want to do it as early as possible - before you're heavily invested. But, photography wise, a new body isn't going to do a whole lot for you... A flash system and/or good lenses will.

There isn't a dSLR on the market today that won't take incredible images. You have to be pretty impressive before you start to be limited by your camera body. However, inexpensive lenses will hold you back. So will inadequate or poor lighting.

Often, it's newbies that will churn through camera bodies. They tend to overemphasize the significance of a different feature set. From what I've seen and heard, the Alpha is a great camera. The reasons you gave, "versatility, mega-pixels, quality, technology" are so indefinite that it's hard to see where you feel constrained by the camera you've got.

So, my best suggestion... buy a good flash and start to learn it inside out. Really want to see a difference in your photography? Learn how to get it off-camera. Next, buy some good glass. Kit lenses are great for most consumers... but if you're starting to invest in classes and equipment upgrades, good glass should be at the top of the list of priorities.

Let us know what you decide! )

 

[eravedesigns]

I have the a700 and it is a much more professional camera imo than the canon 40D which I also use a lot. The A700 just allows more access to custom features and has way more buttons that allow on the fly quick adjustments and extra features like AEL and Focus locks. The D300 is also nice but its more expensive. If I were you I would stick with Sony as they are moving very fast to the Top spots in DSLR. Not only do that have konica minolta technology but they also have their sensor making technology that they used to make nikon sensors and their great reputation with point and shoots. There is a ton of glass out there and its a great system. I also shoot Canon with school gear and I find their menus for changing settings are very annoying and hard to use. The reputation that Canon has is great but its a brand I just cant see myself buying.