Sony full frame 24 mpixels for $2000

[bohdank]

Ya, I know it's a Sony but that is aggressive pricing.

I firmly believe Canon delayed the 5DII's release, to rethink the feature set, after Nikon came out with their lower priced FF.

So, will this pricing sway someone who is not tied to any system, wants a FF and doesn't want to pay $3,000 for a Canon ? I'm sure Canon will lose some sales.

So, what's Canon's next camera ? A cheaper 5DII. Hardly. There isn't much they can trim from the 5DII and still have a functioning camera, imo. Lower the price of the 5DII ?

[Mystwalker]

5DIIc (c for cheaper)
Remove the video maybe?

[Madweasel]

Reviews I've seen are a bit disappointing for the Sony, considering the very high pixel count. I agree that competition for Canon has got very fierce in the last year or more. I understand a lot of pros have gone from Canon to Nikon for the recent bodies with high ISO and low noise, formerly a Canon strongpoint.

[bjyoder]

Reviews I've seen are a bit disappointing for the Sony, considering the very high pixel count. I agree that competition for Canon has got very fierce in the last year or more. I understand a lot of pros have gone from Canon to Nikon for the recent bodies with high ISO and low noise, formerly a Canon strongpoint.


I've seen the same. Just look at the review of the A900 on DPReview; I think they have it up against the 5D (classic) and it spanked the 900 in terms of high ISO performance. I think Sony just jumped into high MP too early and it shows.

[KenjiS]

Sony's high ISO performance blows but at lower ISOs the 900 has a very good color rendition and such..also the detail is amazing

Sony has a few high end lenses with optical quality equal to or better than Canon...

Sony also has in-body stabilization, which is good or bad depending on how you want to look at it..

However, the cost is Sony's service is to be blunt, poor, Sony has not been doing this for very long, and well, Sony's lenses are a mishmash of new designs, CZ-sourced lenses, old Minolta lenses and a bunch of lenses sourced from Tamron with massive price hikes [See the new 28-75 f/2.8? Thats the Tamron, thats not bad, but the fact Sony is charging $800 for it is VERY bad]

Also with Sony's recent introduction of SAM lenses I predict Sony is trying to be Nikon and phase out the in-body motors ASAP, meaning a lot of the current Sony lineup could be rendered useless and almost worthless very shortly...That said at least Sony is doing this in the right order, Lenses first, THEN bodies

And going beyond the a850, Sony's entry level bodies are pure junk...They have one redeemingly good feature and thats quick AF in liveview....

[tkbslc]

If you don't shoot above ISO 1600, the Sony has the best resolution and Dynamic range of any camera. The DR is significantly better than Canon's Full frame cameras. So if you shoot landscape or Studio, the A900(and by assumption A850) could very well the best camera on the market. For shooting parties at ISO 6400, maybe not.

[dkim3202]

I started off with an Alpha A300 and for the most part it was a decent camera. The Sony lenses were a bit pricey so I opted for their Sigma counterparts which did the job. Sony promised a slew of new lenses in the coming months but I think only the 70-400G was released and super hard to find.

With the introduction of the A230, A330, and A380 Sony went backwards IMO. I kept on reading from diehard Sony/Minolta fans that these models were geared towards absolute beginners instead of adding more pro features, add to that awkward button placement and that's a recipe for disaster.

Granted, I think the A900 is a superb camera and if you can survive with only a handful of Sony lenses and trying to search for Minolta AF lenses on ebay it is a great buy at $2000. It's not for me though cause as the saying goes: "Been there done that."

[KenjiS]

With the introduction of the A230, A330, and A380 Sony went backwards IMO. I kept on reading from diehard Sony/Minolta fans that these models were geared towards absolute beginners instead of adding more pro features, add to that awkward button placement and that's a recipe for disaster.


I tried the a380 for a while in a store, its complete crap, its full of poor design decisions, Bad ergonomics and button placement and lack of discrete buttons to do certain things [AF was my most infuriating complaint, its in submenus, To change the AF point you have to go into SUBMENUS]

The viewfinder is abysmal, its like a 4/3 camera but worse..

The 500 and 550 are just even more insulting, They both dont look at all compelling to me, I looked at them for 5 minutes and said "Right, So why would I get this instead of a D90 or a T1i?" the wonky ergonomics are still there and they still seem to be lacking a few buttons...

Sony is pulling one of Minolta's mistakes it seems, They want a ton of models with very little seperating them, and all it will do is confuse the consumer...

Remember, Minolta at one point had a 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and a 9 series...

Each had more than one model...

Now explain to the class the difference between each model...

Can you? just by looking at the numbers? Ballpark guess? This is in the film era too...

[Thorrulz]

One thing to maybe consider is who will be carrying the new Sony. At 1,995.00 or lower will BestBuy and the local camera shop's like Harold's where I live carry this camera? $2000.00 seems to be the cutoff point at these stores in determining wether or not to carry aforementioned on hand.

[Stereodude]

There's a thread on this already here (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=744087).

[fWord]

Prior to buying a second camera, I would have definitely bought the A900 and accompanying Zeiss 24-70/2.8, if I had AUD$6000 to spare.

The point that Sony's high ISO performance isn't as good as some of the FF competitors out there will be a sticker for some. But for those who are prepared to look past this (and indeed, high ISO noise should really be a small problem for most photographers), the A900 offers superb value for money.

The package is very sound with in-body IS, huge viewfinder, the incredible resolution and also dynamic range, which although is not class-leading like the Fuji S5 Pro, is certainly greater than most other cameras out there. IMHO, these are the important features. High ISO noise should be secondary.

[KenjiS]

One thing to maybe consider is who will be carrying the new Sony. At 1,995.00 or lower will BestBuy and the local camera shop's like Harold's where I live carry this camera? $2000.00 seems to be the cutoff point at these stores in determining wether or not to carry aforementioned on hand.

My Best Buy had D700s, 5Ds and 5D Mark II bodies...I think they might even still have the 5D Mark II...

[versedmb]

...So, what's Canon's next camera ? A cheaper 5DII. Hardly. There isn't much they can trim from the 5DII and still have a functioning camera, imo. Lower the price of the 5DII ?

If I had my choice....

FF, 12-15 mp, better AF with better AF point spread, 5-6 fps and I'd be sold.

[Thorrulz]

The highest end camera at our Bestbuy or Harolds stops at the 50D. Harolds can special order the 5DII, but how many first time buyers are Canon or Nikon loyal yet and will buy the Sony because they can already put their hands on it.

[ozziepuppy]

A while back I was in Best Buy looking at cameras. This was before I even bought my first DSLR. At the time, I was thinking that I wanted a Nikon. Anyway, I had just started looking at Canons after reading reviews online and I wanted to see them in person. In other words, I was in the process of doing research before spending my money. Anyway, as I was standing there, feeling the first pangs of lust for the 40D (50D was not out yet), this guy walks up and starts talking to the salesperson who had been talking with me. This guy says he wants a DSLR but does not know which one to get. The salesperson says, "This Sony is on sale and you get two kit lenses with it." The guy says, "OK," and buys it.

There is Sony's target market, right there: People who do not research their purchases, but basically buy on impulse based on very little information and salespeople's recommendations.

JMO.

[ozziepuppy]

The highest end camera at our Bestbuy or Harolds stops at the 50D. Harolds can special order the 5DII, but how many first time buyers are Canon or Nikon loyal yet and will buy the Sony because they can already put their hands on it.

Our Best Buy has a 5D Mark II.

[Hogloff]

I've seen the same. Just look at the review of the A900 on DPReview; I think they have it up against the 5D (classic) and it spanked the 900 in terms of high ISO performance. I think Sony just jumped into high MP too early and it shows.

But high ISO is not everything. The Sony spanks the 5D ( 5DII ) at low ISO and dynamic range...exactly the conditions I shoot.

[KenjiS]

There is Sony's target market, right there: People who do not research their purchases, but basically buy on impulse based on very little information and salespeople's recommendations.

JMO.

Which also leads into "Idiots buy it because its Sony"

Sony makes SOME good products, in my experience, Cameras are not one of their good products...

[bjyoder]

But high ISO is not everything. The Sony spanks the 5D ( 5DII ) at low ISO and dynamic range...exactly the conditions I shoot.

Looking at the review again, the Sony is the least usable of the bunch by ISO 800, which is hardly out of bounds. The Nikon D700, Canon 5D, and 1Ds MK III all did better. By ISO 3200, the results were terrible, with the D700 probably being the best choice. I won't even go into ISO 6400. And, just for full disclosure, I'm at the opposite end of the spectrum, living at ISO 1600.

I don't want to totally trash the camera as it has redeeming qualities. Overall as a camera system, however, there are better choices out there.

[reng2009]

I’ve always maintained that going to 15 mp on the 50D was going “a bridge too far.” If Canon were to come out with a 60D, it would probably still be 15 mp, making it an incremental update (they’d add video and maybe a couple of minor new features). Not really worth the trouble.

So it makes sense that the time has come for Canon to make a bold move: offer an affordable full-frame model and begin a new product line, the 7D. This is especially timely, given the newly announced Sony A850.

I predict the 7D will be around 16 mp (similar to the 1Ds Mk II). Not high enough to cannibalize the 5D Mk II, but better than the Nikon D700. It may or may not have video (most photographers don’t really care for video). BTW, the Sony A850 does NOT have video.

The 7D will be priced at under $2,000 -- not much more than the Nikon D300s! This will give Nikon execs conniptions!

[KenjiS]

I’ve always maintained that going to 15 mp on the 50D was going “a bridge too far.” If Canon were to come out with a 60D, it would probably still be 15 mp, making it an incremental update (they’d add video and maybe a couple of minor new features). Not really worth the trouble.

So it makes sense that the time has come for Canon to make a bold move: offer an affordable full-frame model and begin a new product line, the 7D. This is especially timely, given the newly announced Sony A850.

I predict the 7D will be around 16 mp (similar to the 1Ds Mk II). Not high enough to cannibalize the 5D Mk II, but better than the Nikon D700. It may or may not have video (most photographers don’t really care for video). BTW, the Sony A850 does NOT have video.

The 7D will be priced at under $2,000 -- not much more than the Nikon D300s! This will give Nikon execs conniptions!


Uhm, the 7D has been confirmed to be APS-C

[fWord]

Sony makes SOME good products, in my experience, Cameras are not one of their good products...

Their 'Walkman' series of MP3 players are surprisingly good. I never used to think much of them, feeling that they were great for design but not for sound. That opinion changed dramatically after I bought one on recommendations from a couple of audio enthusiasts. It's an incredible sounding device.

The A900 looks like a great product IMHO, it's a surprisingly mature product for a company that only just got into the FF DSLR market.

[KenjiS]

Their 'Walkman' series of MP3 players are surprisingly good. I never used to think much of them, feeling that they were great for design but not for sound. That opinion changed dramatically after I bought one on recommendations from a couple of audio enthusiasts. It's an incredible sounding device.

The A900 looks like a great product IMHO, it's a surprisingly mature product for a company that only just got into the FF DSLR market.

I've heard good things about the Walkmans, I used to have a Discman and it was really good :) I also had a Sony WEGA 27" flat tube TV that was pretty great [GREAT picture on that thing :)]

Currently the only LCD TVs I've seen in a store that I like the look of are the Sony Bravias

I have a Sony PS3 and despite mocking some things on it its a pretty good console, I'm glad I have a 360 as well however :)

However I briefly owned a Sony DSC-H5 and I must say it was GARBAGE

I bought it because I was returning a little Panasonic compact i bought online from Circuit City because I thought it looked nice...in reality it was junk and couldnt take a noiseless picture at ISO80..so no big deal, went to my local Circuit City, they told me there would be a restocking fee unless i spent MORE money at CC...

So I got locked into spending more than the Panny, the guy at the service counter was a rude ******* in addition which only pissed me off..I woulda just said "fine take it back i dont care" but i really needed a digital camera because my EOS-3 was dead and i was leaving on a trip in 2 days and I NEEDED a camera NOW [online wasnt an option obviously..nor was waiting for my card to be credited back]

So I went over, Went right to the Canon S3 IS, one problem, it was CHEAPER than the Panasonic I bought...Well ****, so I take a 20% restocking fee and then that would have meant paying out MORE out of pocket to get the S3...

So I looked to spend more...There was the Sony, seemed nice, good viewfinder [actually ill admit better than the Canon] nice rear screen, better ergonomics oddly, So I said "alright fine.." and bought it..

Got it home, toyed with it a bit, seemed ok, though the rechargable batteries died after 50 shots...no big deal, I just grabbed my non-rechargeable lithium AAs and threw em in it...The IS seemed rather poor but i figured oh well I'll deal..I didnt have IS with my EOS-3 and still managed!

So I go on my trip, to Washington DC, going in the air and space museum and such, Fun times!

Oh, except it couldnt expose worth a **** indoors in dim light, everything was underexposed, IS didnt work worth a damn and didnt give me decent speeds, blew highlights constantly, no matter what i did to override it with its manual controls, it still sucked..

Everything had rediculous ammounts of noise...other pictures were soft, or rediculously over saturated...i did a lot of shooting mind you, Candids of people on the street, all sorts of things, it really failed in most situations and just disappointed me

Came home, had 500 shots, Kept maybe 10, only 2 were really good [They were of a friend i visited and they are indeed very good shots...But 2 really good shots out of FIVE HUNDRED]

I was pissed, but by the time i came home it was xmas...low and behold, I get a 30D from my parents for xmas

The first words out of my mouth were "That ****ing sony is going back now"

So I've had my 30D since then, Guess how many times i've -ever- regretted owning the 30D? :) How many shots have i downright missed because it couldnt perform..

I maintain if i had gotten the S3, I'd have been happier, if i ever get another point and shoot, its a Canon, Canon proved to me it can make a good camera, even a point and shoot [My mom's SD1100 IS actually impresses me sometimes with just how good it can be]

[foxesamu]

A while back I was in Best Buy looking at cameras. This was before I even bought my first DSLR. At the time, I was thinking that I wanted a Nikon. Anyway, I had just started looking at Canons after reading reviews online and I wanted to see them in person. In other words, I was in the process of doing research before spending my money. Anyway, as I was standing there, feeling the first pangs of lust for the 40D (50D was not out yet), this guy walks up and starts talking to the salesperson who had been talking with me. This guy says he wants a DSLR but does not know which one to get. The salesperson says, "This Sony is on sale and you get two kit lenses with it." The guy says, "OK," and buys it.

There is Sony's target market, right there: People who do not research their purchases, but basically buy on impulse based on very little information and salespeople's recommendations.

JMO.
I completely agree although that applies to all of the brands I think. Unless it's really a smart shopper (such as yourself), there will always be people who will walk into BB and play with the T1i/D90/a380 and pick one because the zoom lens goes longer or because it has more MP.

[S.Horton]

Reviews I've seen are a bit disappointing for the Sony, considering the very high pixel count. I agree that competition for Canon has got very fierce in the last year or more. I understand a lot of pros have gone from Canon to Nikon for the recent bodies with high ISO and low noise, formerly a Canon strongpoint.

I think that Sony is after the I-think-more-pixels-are-better-and-that-is-cheaper crowd.

[Tee Why]

I hope Canon also produces a competing product. Hopefully, this is the start of sub $2000 full frame bodies from Canon/Nikon/Sony.

I'd like a 16MP full frame in a magnesium sealed body, 19 AF points, 5fps, pop up flash and MSRP $1999. Personally, I think this is what the 7D should have been.

Canon can also skip the articulating LCD and Movie features too if this means lower price.

[reng2009]

Uhm, the 7D has been confirmed to be APS-C

Nothing's been confirmed since the 7D hasn't been announced yet. As of this moment, it is still rumour.

And the latest Best Buy rumour makes no mention of 7D specs, though the rumoured price of $2,700 is highly suspect.

[HappySnapper90]

Ya, I know it's a Sony but that is aggressive pricing.

I firmly believe Canon delayed the 5DII's release, to rethink the feature set, after Nikon came out with their lower priced FF.


Lower priced FF? The 5D was selling for about $2200 when the d700 was announced. The only thing that could have been "added" to the 5D2 after the d700 anouncement was video. It was already said to be going to be 21MP.

[HappySnapper90]

Nothing's been confirmed since the 7D hasn't been announced yet. As of this moment, it is still rumour.


Canonrumors.com have the 7D as being 95% "confirmed". It'll be aps-c. Heck it's been shown with an EF-S lens on it!

[nuffi]

But high ISO is not everything. The Sony spanks the 5D ( 5DII ) at low ISO and dynamic range...exactly the conditions I shoot.


Show me the eveidence of said spanking...?

[bjyoder]

Canonrumors.com have the 7D as being 95% "confirmed". It'll be aps-c. Heck it's been shown with an EF-S lens on it!

I look at rumors kind of like election-day predictions. There are plenty of people that have some info, and can make a fairly accurate prediction, but, in general, no one knows but the folks at Canon. I've seen rumors of a 7D/3D ever since I joined the forums. We'll see if it actually happens...

[HappySnapper90]

I look at rumors kind of like election-day predictions. There are plenty of people that have some info, and can make a fairly accurate prediction, but, in general, no one knows but the folks at Canon. I've seen rumors of a 7D/3D ever since I joined the forums. We'll see if it actually happens...

It's from a source of their that is right 95% of the time, CR3. Plus there's been a new Canon camera body top shown that is rather different than any other Canon dSLR. Someone is putting together a new Canon dSLR that's for sure. ;)

[bjyoder]

It's from a source of their that is right 95% of the time, CR3. Plus there's been a new Canon camera body top shown that is rather different than any other Canon dSLR. Someone is putting together a new Canon dSLR that's for sure. ;)

I'd be sad if there wasn't something new coming! ;) :lol:

It's that 95% thing. Yes, they're right a lot (just like the afformentioned election predictions), but Canon could be up to something, and we, the masses, could just be letting our hopes get in the way. ;)

[KenjiS]

I look at rumors kind of like election-day predictions. There are plenty of people that have some info, and can make a fairly accurate prediction, but, in general, no one knows but the folks at Canon. I've seen rumors of a 7D/3D ever since I joined the forums. We'll see if it actually happens...

Well they do have a bloody 7D poster now that clearly shows an EF-S lens bolted on it :)

Now I'm sorry I still dont understand the "everything should be full frame" thing I guess, I get it for some types of photography, but for telephoto stuff like wildlife and sports, I'd much rather have the 1.6x FOVCF...it means higher frame rates and you get less FOV than with FF which is a bonus to me...

To me, Canon has a lot of good full frame bodies and most of their great glass is "only apreciated on full frame" I was feeling forced into going to full frame to get the couple things I wanted, Canon to me was saying "Ok APS-C newbs, stay here, play with the crap hand me down toys and keep quiet" If you want full frame on a budget you have the 5D classic which is less than $2000...But what does someone like me get if he wants to maintain having FOVCF, not be stuck in a dead format [see APS-H] and get better AF, weathersealing and pro features??? Nothing...Not a thing...

Nikon on the other hand embraces both because both have a place in photography, They give their crop people good toys to play with and respect the fact that sometimes that 1.5x FOVCF is useful...This is why I was seriously thinking of ditching to Nikon for a while, They offered the D300, which has everything I wanted, and they offered the walk around lens I wanted, a 24-105 equivalent for an APS-C camera...

All I wanted was Canon to give me a competetor to the D300 and a APS-C equivalent to a 24-105 with image stabilization, and it looks like they're doing that...and I'm glad, because honestly? The 7D looks great to me, its what I wanted Canon to give me for ages now...

[bjyoder]

Well they do have a bloody 7D poster now that clearly shows an EF-S lens bolted on it :)

Now I'm sorry I still dont understand the "everything should be full frame" thing I guess, I get it for some types of photography, but for telephoto stuff like wildlife and sports, I'd much rather have the 1.6x FOVCF...it means higher frame rates and you get less FOV than with FF which is a bonus to me...

To me, Canon has a lot of good full frame bodies and most of their great glass is "only apreciated on full frame" I was feeling forced into going to full frame to get the couple things I wanted, Canon to me was saying "Ok APS-C newbs, stay here, play with the crap hand me down toys and keep quiet" If you want full frame on a budget you have the 5D classic which is less than $2000...But what does someone like me get if he wants to maintain having FOVCF, not be stuck in a dead format [see APS-H] and get better AF, weathersealing and pro features??? Nothing...Not a thing...

Nikon on the other hand embraces both because both have a place in photography, They give their crop people good toys to play with and respect the fact that sometimes that 1.5x FOVCF is useful...This is why I was seriously thinking of ditching to Nikon for a while, They offered the D300, which has everything I wanted, and they offered the walk around lens I wanted, a 24-105 equivalent for an APS-C camera...

All I wanted was Canon to give me a competetor to the D300 and a APS-C equivalent to a 24-105 with image stabilization, and it looks like they're doing that...and I'm glad, because honestly? The 7D looks great to me, its what I wanted Canon to give me for ages now...

Yea, I saw the poster. :p We'll see on Tuesday, I suppose; I highly doubt my thoughts of Canon truly surprising are going to be real. That said, I'm still hopeful they'll shock the camera world. :)

I'd love to have a FF option at about $1,800; I have my 1.6 that will go into backup mode once a (any) new camera arrives. FF has the potential to offer much more than 1.6 as far as IQ, and I think it should be (and can be) offered for less than $2k.

[KenjiS]

Yea, I saw the poster. :p We'll see on Tuesday, I suppose; I highly doubt my thoughts of Canon truly surprising are going to be real. That said, I'm still hopeful they'll shock the camera world. :)

I'd love to have a FF option at about $1,800; I have my 1.6 that will go into backup mode once a (any) new camera arrives. FF has the potential to offer much more than 1.6 as far as IQ, and I think it should be (and can be) offered for less than $2k.

I think it can be too, and I like FF, I just dont want a FF as my primary camera

I like 1.6x crop and have been dreading buying a new camera, I was VERY close to saying ^&#$ it and going Nikon given the fact I was feeling forced by Canon to go to a 1D Mark III ...

So I'm happy with the specs of the 7D...

[tkbslc]

Someday I am still hoping to see a basic FF camera for $999. It can be spec'ed like a Rebel XT for all I care. For basic portraiture, walk-around, and landscapes who needs all that other crap anyway? :)

I think Canon really needed a D300 competitor more than anything. This will be a good move if the 7D is as rumored. The 5Dmk2 sells well agains the D700 as is, even if it is not a direct spec competitor.

[fWord]

Show me the eveidence of said spanking...?

Here's the DR spanking:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/page25.asp

While I've been a long time Canon user (since starting the hobby actually) and use one of their older cameras on a regular basis, as it stands now, I would take the A900 and Zeiss 24-70/2.8 over a 5D MKII and 24-70/2.8L.

Sony's weakness becomes more evident when you look closer at their lens lineup. The choices are far more limited than Canon at this time, and I'm willing to wager, more expensive. That said, if all you wanted was a 24-70/2.8 zoom on FF with an external flash, Sony would be a very good choice indeed.

Sony has now also released their A850, which is the poorer cousin to the A900, although still FF and claimed to be cheaper. Not sure when they are due to hit the shelves.

[KenjiS]

Here's the DR spanking:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/page25.asp

While I've been a long time Canon user (since starting the hobby actually) and use one of their older cameras on a regular basis, as it stands now, I would take the A900 and Zeiss 24-70/2.8 over a 5D MKII and 24-70/2.8L.

Sony's weakness becomes more evident when you look closer at their lens lineup. The choices are far more limited than Canon at this time, and I'm willing to wager, more expensive. That said, if all you wanted was a 24-70/2.8 zoom on FF with an external flash, Sony would be a very good choice indeed.

Sony has now also released their A850, which is the poorer cousin to the A900, although still FF and claimed to be cheaper. Not sure when they are due to hit the shelves.


Seconded, if i shot stuff and only used ISO400 and below, I'd kill for the Sony side of things

a850, Zeiss 16-35, 24-70 and the 135 f/1.8 would be an awesome system for the wide end of what I do actually...

As for the lenses, the Zeiss 24-70 is the best out there and the 16-35 easily beats the Canon and is second only to the beastly Nikon 14-24...

If I wanted a second system for full frame, I'd do Sony for the 135 f/1.8 if anything else :)

[fWord]

...and the 16-35 easily beats the Canon and is second only to the beastly Nikon 14-24...


If the Sony could mount the Nikon 14-24mm that would be an absolute blast. Unfortunately I still have to rely on a trusty 1Ds for that. At this time I don't wish to splurge additional for the newer Nikon or Canon FF cameras. Canon made, and still makes some excellent cameras, but newcomers to the market who aren't fully invested in a particular lineup should certainly give the new guys like Sony a close look.

[DStanic]

That new sony camera looks like a fun camera for day trips with good lighting (or nighttime on a tripod). I don't think it would work as well for weddings and stuff like Canon/Nikon.

The new 500series (or whatever you want to call them) Sony DSLRs finally have CMOs sensors in them, that should give them a needed boost in IQ.

[KenjiS]

If the Sony could mount the Nikon 14-24mm that would be an absolute blast. Unfortunately I still have to rely on a trusty 1Ds for that. At this time I don't wish to splurge additional for the newer Nikon or Canon FF cameras. Canon made, and still makes some excellent cameras, but newcomers to the market who aren't fully invested in a particular lineup should certainly give the new guys like Sony a close look.

The problem with that is Sony's entry level stuff [The a230, 330, 380, 500 and 550] are not that good, the a700, a850 and a900 are..but their Rebel competition is very much lacking imho...

Maybe the 550 will surprise me, but I was VERY unimpressed with the 380, Especially since its the same cost as a T1i or a D5000, both of which to me were easier to use and more powerful for a beginning photographer...

Of course the 550 is going against the D90...Thats a tough sell again, the D90 is a very good body :)

For beginners, my recommendation is the T1i in the entry level [$750-800] and the D90 in the advanced level [$1000]

Canon has nothing in the advanced level right now..or else it would be a split between the D90 and the 40D :)