The sunshine did arrive this morning - and it didn't melt the frostuntil mid-day, even then not completely, so the EOS 5D MkII got an hour's walk at ISO 100, f8, Av, relying on the stabilised lens to fix occasional 1/20th or 1/8th exposures. It worked well. Most impressive aspect - absence of noise in the blue sky at ISO 100. The Alpha 900 produces a really noisy, gritty sky even at 100 - the Canon has no perceptible noise at all. Least impressive aspect - need to correct very strong, sharply defined CA on the 24-105mm (not always easy to spot because the primaries are very desaturated compared to Sony), followed by generally dull colour and an odd feeling that the images are not quite as sharp as they should be. Also, a very misleading rear screen brightness which had me using minus over-ride on many shots which would have been much better left alone though apparently overexposed when chimped.
Here's a couple:
http://www.pbase.com/davidkilpatrick/image/106512468
Kelso Abbey with Minolta 77mm polariser on the Canon at 24mm, cropped off at the bottom (and a waste bin and floodlight cloned out in the bottom right corner). The strange effect on the windows is caused by ice adhering to the anti-pigeon mesh, it resembled sheets of veined marble with a soft edge.
http://www.pbase.com/davidkilpatrick/image/106512504
Crosses for the town's fallen, still in place from November 11th (I also got some great shots of the main poppy wreaths for the Royal British Legion and the King's Own Scottish Borderers, frosted, with the respective crests in the centre, and fallen oak leaves on the KOSB wreath). Here the resrtricted minumum focus of the 24-105 Canon at 24mm made this shot the closest composition I could get. I would have liked to have moved the wide-angle in even closer. The pic is cropped at the top where there was some messy background.
The 5D MkII is much slower to use than the A900 because so many controls don't show in the viewfinder and have no efficient single-button actions or shortcuts. Exposure compensation is effortless on the A900 but just needs a bit more attention on the Canon because the button doubles up for changing ISO and the top LCD panel uses really tiny pictograms which I can not see at all without taking off my distance viewing specs. Reviewers have slated the comparatively crude big symbols on the A900 LCD but I can tell you, they cause me no problem and can be seen at a glance even if not 'eye focused'. The Canon LCD almost needs reading glasses and time to study it. So, I ended up using the rear screen which has a Quick Navi like new interface. You press the 'nipple' controller to bring up the screen, and from there it works like the Sony but with some functions missing. However, Canon decided to prevent this press action from working unless you have made first pressure on the shutter release in the last X seconds (I think it's 20 seconds). So you press it, and nothing happens, then you have to press the shutter lightly to restore 'the camera knows I am here' operation, then press the controller again to get the screen, then turn your wheel for compensation (it does remember the last control used, so will return to the compensation pane if that's what you are generally using).
After last night's night shooting (many more pix taken after dark with flash and combined time etc) and today's walk, and viewing-processing the files using CS4/ACR5.2, I am more aware of the difference between 21MP and 24MP - 24 offers me better scope for square and panoramic crops without dropping below Alamy (17MP) size. First conclusion - I would like the Canon image quality, especially in both low and high ISO noise levels - but with the A900 body, A900 detail sharpness and A900 colours. Oh, and the Canon lens hood with its lovely flock lining now looks like a time-worn secondhand item after being shoved into my pocket with coins and keys during pol filter use. I did the same with the 28-105mm Minolta lens hood last week and there's not a mark on it. Different sort of plastic?
David