Crisis of "faith"/brand/etc and a bit of resolution

[laydros]

Not to be biased, but if you're going to reinvest in a new system and want ISO performance, you're going for Nikon right now and not Canon. We'll see how and if that changes in 2009...

Yeah, I think the D90/D300/D700 represent better high ISO capability overall than the 50D/5D Mk II.

There is a little more used Canon gear out there, which is nice. But the price difference in the D300 vs 40D and 5D vs D700 is tough. I know those two Nikons are better cameras, but they are a lot more expensive.

What about medium range lenses. All three sell the f/2.8 wide, normal, and 70-200. I can see a valid argument that the CZ are the best, but I expect all three are about as good as each other. But one thing I like about Canon is the f/4 range of L lenses. 17-40, 24-105, and 70-200 in f/4 make a much more affordable line of very high quality glass. In Sony I could get the 17-35 and 24-105 used, and much cheaper, but I think they are a lot lower quality. Does Nikon offer a "mid-range" like that?

Don, I read that review at dpreview. They seem to really like it. Indication seems to be that turning off the NR on the A700 along with using a PP NR program will get results about as good as the competition. That is promising. And one would expect (hope) that Sony realizes the high ISO NR is a BIG complaint from users, and should be a major focus of the next round of bodies. Whenever they will come out.

[SONYNUT]

Flash brought the a900 to life..

[picman]

Strange, these Canikon users spreading the Nikon and Canon gospel in the Sony specific forum trying to gain our lost Sony-souls back. Oh boy

[DonSchap]

Personally, I hate the idea of Jason being locked out of opportunity. Having a CaNikon exclusive dealer down the street is a hard row to hoe ... I know, I have the same thing here in Des Plaines. The best part, though, is when they do get Minolta trade-in stuff ... I have an ear when it arrives and can usually get a good deal on it, because I have no competition for SONY/Minolta stuff. If they don't sell it to me ... it sits on the shelf. LOL

I can pick my fights, that is for sure. If I went in for CaNikon stuff ... I'd have a price-fight on my hands, because it is more popular, by default, and the buyer competition is worse. The higher end, IS-equipped lenses are terribly expensive. The store owner can easily hold out, saying, "I can get my price for this" ... and he's got me. WHen it comes to the SONY/Minolta stuff ... I've got him, because it could be weeks before another SONY owner walks in. Also, with the SONY I can use any Minolta-mount third-party glass and ALWAYS have IS when I need it, no matter what the price. It's the way I roll.

[Rooz]

Strange, these Canikon users spreading the Nikon and Canon gospel in the Sony specific forum trying to gain our lost Sony-souls back. Oh boy

it has nothing to do with gospel. if you're so sold on the sony brand, where are the pictures ? where is the evidence of how good its working for you ? you havent posted a single photo yet despite the fact you have $5k worth of the best sony has to offer. put your photos where your mouth is.

in this case the questions revolved around hi-iso and i stated the facts of the matter. thats not bias or gospel...its just the truth. if a poster asks a question then i try and answer it without letting the brand dictate the terms. i do that for nikon guys thinking of switching aswell btw...

you dont have alot of glass so a switch is pretty much cost neutral and shouldnt even be a consideration for you. if you prefer canon, you're not invested enuf in nikon to let that stop you.

my advice is to hold both the nikon and canon in your hands. have a good play around with them and pick the one that feels most comfortable.

[DonSchap]

You know something, Rooz ... back in 2005, I did this very test between the Canon EOS 20D and the Nikon D70s. The Canon won ... mainly because I didn't have a SONY camera (at that point in time) to hold next to either one. Well, that quickly changed ... and when I shot, handheld, with the TAMRON 135mm f/2.5 (no IS) at 1/15th-second, indoors ... and did the same with the SONY ...

Well, you already know how that story CLEARLY ended.

[Peekayoh]

My first camera was a minolta srt-101..35 years ago..i have been with m/sony ever since..i almost gave up a couple weeks ago becuase some dumbass salesman didn't know jack about what they were selling..(national camera)..but i pushed forward..mainly cause i have about 5 g in lenses..lol

Ha! just read this. You've been a MINOLTANUT as long as I have. Still got an SR3 body and X-700.

[DonSchap]

Strange, these Canikon users spreading the Nikon and Canon gospel in the Sony specific forum trying to gain our lost Sony-souls back. Oh boy

Bob, thanks for steppin' in and stopping me from saying something ... unpleasant ... and regrettable ... and true.

[Rooz]

You know something, Rooz ... back in 2005, I did this very test between the Canon EOS 20D and the Nikon D70s. The Canon won ... mainly because I didn't have a SONY camera (at that point in time) to hold next to either one. Well, that quickly changed ... and when I shot, handheld, with the TAMRON 135mm f/2.5 (no IS) at 1/15th-second, indoors ... and did the same with the SONY ...

Well, you already know how that story CLEARLY ended.

hey, different strokes for different folks. if you need that sort of capability to shoot stationary objects at 1/15s, then by all means go for it. i just dont know too many people that need the capability to shoot dragon claws in a dark room. even if you do, you can always get a far superior 105VR for that.

[SONYNUT]

I went through every series they made..till they went af..i stuck with the x700 for many years. Then fired up again with the 5d

ha! Just read this. You've been a minoltanut as long as i have. Still got an sr3 body and x-700.