Sony Progress, State-of-the Art vs. Canon-Nikon Nerd Cameras

[A1000]

Don't forget the real bargain of Sony, Minolta, Tamron A-mount, etc. lenses.

What will give you better IQ, Nikon 50 mm non-stabilized lens at 1.2 or stabilized Sony lens at F4? Result: Poor contrast at F1.2 and such a high cost.

The Sony in-body-stabilization translates to saved $$$.

[David Kilpatrick]

Also, Canon and Nikon users are no more 'nerds' than Sony Alpha users. Many people use several systems, not just one.

While it's true that some forums are dismissive of the Sony models without real knowledge (just repeating the same misinformation), I've seen more than few converts to Sony fighting this attitude effectively. Knocking Canon and Nikon within Photoclubalpha forums does not help at all; I very nearly issued a warning because of the tone of some posts from A1000 a few days ago, but decided to let the majority here put their own pressure to keep opinions moderate.

By all means flag up misinformation or anti-prop in other forums, so that our own members can visit and - if they want to - correct the situation. Just do not call other photographers nerds. Remove one letter and call 'em neds* instead

David

(*Ned - Glasgow, now general Scots, term for 'Non-Educated Delinquent' - generally applied to any kid who is more stupid and badly behaved than your own kids, increasingly to kids who have grown up but remain neds).

[Javelin]

particularly damaging to kids named Ned ...

[Greg Beetham]

Yep I agree, if it's a camera It's deserving of respect, regardless of brand.
Greg

[alphaomega]

David Kilpatrick wrote:

I very nearly issued a warning because of the tone of some posts from A1000 a few days ago, but decided to let the majority here put their own pressure to keep opinions moderate.

I actually think that was a good decision. I very much like the factual information that is mostly brought to our attention in this Forum compared With DPR*****
and I find a lot of the NIKCAN people objectionable in their attitudes and views in that forum. David is quite right in highlighting that the Sony users appear to be the most sane by and large.

I thought that A1000 came up with a lot of interesting information but was too dismissive of CAN/NIK. I think he has moderated a bit as some of us kind of objected to the more extreme views. I would still welcome his more informative contributions and appreciate moderating views from other members to put things in perspective.

I personally plumbed for Sony when purchasing my A700 and then A350 but I am certain I would equally well have been able to produce the images I do with a similar Canon or Nikon DSLR. At the time I thought the A700 marginally beat the 40D on sensor and D300 on reduced "complexity" and then the A700 had SSS as well as sensor cleaning and I could fit a CZ 16-80 I had come to love on my R1. I am also convinced through usage that the A350 has the best LV in the business. So I am quite happy but it is all quite marginal in the overall scheme of things. I still feel good about having chosen Sony, but I am still equally convinced that A Nikon or Canon would still have seen me OK. If I ever go FF I am equally convinced for what I have seen that for my type of photography the A900 would do fine and match anything that competitors can deliver. I don't need or want video.

[A1000]

Sony is new at this. Although they did inherit the Minolta division; Sony's approach is different, so it took so long for the models to be introduced. They needed to fill the gaps in thir DSL range first. Now they will be concentrating on improvements of these 3 body types they have, the A200-350, A700 and A900. Expect at least two bodies for each of the body sizes. This is how Sony operates - more variations of the same model. Expect A500, together with improved A700. Expect FF A800 after that. Don't expect a more advanced model above the A700 APS-C model. Sony will expand the FF range down, not the APS-C range up.