New Camera needed

What's wrong with Sony? They make Nikon sensors IIRC?

a camera is not just the sensor, there's a host of other variables. while sony has made strides since acquiring minolta, nikon and canon are proven and still the preferred choice among pros.
 
a camera is not just the sensor, there's a host of other variables. while sony has made strides since acquiring minolta, nikon and canon are proven and still the preferred choice among pros.

Sorry, I realise that and didn't mean to come across as doff. :p I find it interesting though.

Any detailed analyses on why Nikon or Canon are better than Sony?

I'm seriously considering the A350 with the swivel LCD...
 
assagai : beyond your personal opinion... whats wrong with Sony's DSLR's?

They make some awesome camera's and the glass they have is just as good as Canon or Nikon's equiavalent glass.

and being the choice of Pro's is one thing, since they're spending big money on the body getting things like the 1d or the 5dMkII... we're talking the bottom end of the DSLR range... with the 450d, 1000d, a200, a350 etc....

Postman : the a350 is a luverly camera... If i was looking to get a 2nd body I'd look at one of them, but I'm looking at upgrading to the A700 or the a900 atm.
 
assagai : beyond your personal opinion... whats wrong with Sony's DSLR's?

They make some awesome camera's and the glass they have is just as good as Canon or Nikon's equiavalent glass.

+1 Most definitely Sony is on a par with Canon and Nikon.
 
I have a lot of faith in Sony. After all, they have been making the worlds best video cameras since forever. So, they know what they are doing.
 
i didn't say there's anything wrong with sony, just that you can't go wrong with either the canon or nikon. Sony are relative newcomers in the dslr field. A dslr is not a digital video camera, the technology is different. There are loads of comparisons out there, just google and see what suits you best. from what i've experienced though i'd say canon outperforms sony and nikon in low light conditions, and i often shoot in those conditions so my preference is canon.
 
Sony dslr's are not relative newcomers at all.. they're Minolta cameras for all intents and purposes, so have been around for as long as Canon and Nikon, if not longer.

Your preference is Canon, fair enough.... But ultimately thats what it boils down to.. personal preference... I like the way Sony feels in my hand over Canon or Nikon.
 
Sony dslr's are not relative newcomers at all.. they're Minolta cameras for all intents and purposes, so have been around for as long as Canon and Nikon, if not longer.

Your preference is Canon, fair enough.... But ultimately thats what it boils down to.. personal preference... I like the way Sony feels in my hand over Canon or Nikon.

sony bought minolta and made a new line of cameras, it's a bit misleading to say sony is minolta, they used new technology, created a new line and the sony branded cameras are relatively new on the scene.

yeah it's all about preference, specially in the mid range a lot of the dslr's are very very similar - i guess you couldn't really go wrong with nikon or canon OR sony :) but do a bit of research. in the 5-6k range the three contested brands here are largely similar - one advantage sony DOES have in this range is built in image stabilisation, so you can use cheaper lenses.
 
If it becomes a proper hobby, it will bankrupt you fairly quickly, no matter which manufacturer you choose.

it will only bankrupt you if you're stupid enough be buy stuff you can't afford and/or need :) if you're making money from it, then that's a different story

rather feel sorry for the video guys:D - $6,000 for a Sony EX1:( - $10,000 for Panasonic HPX300 :o
 
ldm : Its a hobby... you need everything you can't afford :D


assagai : From everything I've seen and from my own experience.. sony bought minolta, and then rebranded the Minolta camera with a better sensor and upgraded the software slightly.... but its pretty much a reworked Minolta camera....
 
Last edited:
Perhaps Nikon D40 on special for R4999 or less at most places, the R1000 leftover can be spent on a bag/tripod/memory card/accessories.

+1

...as opposed to most DSLRs with which you have to use the viewfinder).

You say it like it's a bad thing. Then again, given the size of some of the entry level DSLR viewfinders (and their pantamirrors), I guess the argument for live view is a little stronger.
 
ah ok... i will do that thanx bwana... so there isn't one specific one that stands out above the rest?
No, not really. Whatever fits his hand and his wallet the best is probably the one he should get. :)
 
You say it like it's a bad thing. Then again, given the size of some of the entry level DSLR viewfinders (and their pantamirrors), I guess the argument for live view is a little stronger.

Nope not a bad thing, the live view perk is just appealing [to some] etc.

Especially in my case, being short-sighted and all. :cool: :D

Will have to get a viewfinder extender thingy when I eventually get my DSLR methinks.
 
have you tried the built in adjustment feature many cameras come with?

I will do so when I test them out. Dioptre is what they're called I think, remember I created a thread a while back about this very issue. Still worries me though.

I think dioptres go to -3, I think I am about -3.5. :(
 
I will do so when I test them out. Dioptre is what they're called I think, remember I created a thread a while back about this very issue. Still worries me though.

I think dioptres go to -3, I think I am about -3.5. :(
I think that's what it is called. I'm on my bberry atm so I can't look it up.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X