Considering a Sony SLR...

[calun]

Hi again

You guys crack me up, you're quite funny :-). I see all the nuances in the business and understand that I need to make my pick from which features I want. You have given me much information and my choice is between the a330 and 500D....

Thanks again.

[Rooz]

the d5000 smokes them both. lol

[calun]

the d5000 smokes them both. lol

In which way ?

Carsten

[dr4gon]

.... It's sarcasm.

It seems like you've already made up your mind anyway.

Give the A330 till the end of the month. Rumor has it that on the 18th we should know a lot more about the new camera.

[Elisha]

if it were up between the T1i and the D5000, i would go Nikon. although it concerns me that the video is wobbly. but i prefer the bigger body to the Rebel sized ones!

[DonSchap]

Well, if it were me .. and we know it isn't, I would go to a store (with my own set of CF cards -> one for each camera) that had all these "bad boys" available (since they are the cheaper models, there is an excellent chance of this) and shoot an identical series on each one. I would then spend a day or two, at the comfort of my own PC, reviewing the shots and see how it worked out.

I would also take note of how they each fit in my paw ... because that's were they should be spending most of their time. Checking the controls and whatnot. This kind of in-house test is a real world approach and one that the Internet just cannot duplicate.

Then, Carsten ... make your decision. Report back your findings, difficulties and other salient details. Try to remember, you are in the SONY forum, here ... and we'd be real interested in your experience with those models, too.

At this point ... the arguments are too dynamic to make a complete decision. If video is important ... weigh that too.

Personally, when I got my Canon DSLR, I had it shipped to the house, because no one had it in stock. I also had the Nikon s70D (relatively new) shipped for comparison. Obviously, as history shows, I kept the Canon and sent the Nikon packing. That costs real money to do that, with shipping and all. You can save the money because these low-end models are like 'everywhere' to look at, try and test.

When the SONY DSLR was released, things rapidly changed, because the Canon did not offer me what I wanted (in-the-body stability for ALL lenses) and I had a boat-load of 'legacy' lenses for the Minolta-mount. I eventually sold off all my Canon stuff ... and, by then, I had myself a bag full ... but like you, I kind of knew what I wanted and COULD NOT reasonably get it from the Canon DSLR product. To this day, I still cannot. They had made their collective minds up, back in 2004, to only offer in-the-lens Image Stabilization - which is effectively and across the board a higher cost of doing business for their customers ... and they insist that this decision is permanent. Therefore, so is MY buying decision.

"You and Nikon can keep your sh-sh-shake prone primes", I say. I have this "low-light" beauty ...

[dr4gon]

if it were up between the T1i and the D5000, i would go Nikon. although it concerns me that the video is wobbly. but i prefer the bigger body to the Rebel sized ones!

I think I would rather go with the T1i based on the limited reviews I've read and on paper based on the camera (not system) only. The screen on the t1i (resolution and nice viewing angle) are much better and it does offer 1080p, although not 24fps and does attempt to autofocus, sort of. Still video is no where near there and still has a lot to do, but it's one step in the right direction.

[seanhoxx]

The debates and views go around and around! makes for good reading, and some education at the same time. I guess here is my take on the whole movie mode thing. Buy the a300 or the new aXXX whatever, or see if the a700's don't come down again in the next 3 to 6 mo. And also buy a video camera!! the new ones out with the hard drive memory, the mini size etc etc. are fantastic! A guy I work with has a JVC vid camera that is the size of a pack of smokes, he carries it with him everywhere. Sony has some very video cams out now, as do other brands. It is really 2 different things photo / video, look at your options and prices and balance it out get a DSLR that you like and fits your needs, and then get the slimest smallest video cam. and carry them both in your gear bag. If video is most important spend the money and get the very best camera you can, and then get a base DSLR or a really high end point and shoot. Any way thats just my thoughts.

[calun]

Wait a minute, I see the T1i on canon.com, but not on canon.dk, I'm afraid it's not available in Europe !?

What's the difference between the two ?

DON: Great idea testing the two/three, but like the master I am, I'm way ahead :-). No, seriously, I borrowed a 450D and an a350, I like the house and buttons better on the Canon, but the pics from Sony seems a little "warmer". Haven't tested the RAW photography though...

About the IS and whatever names the stability/antishaking systems have, which is best: The one in the camerahouse or the ones in the lenses ?

About the video, I only want to have ONE camera with the limitations that gives, I'm too lazy carrying aroung two separate :-)

BTW: I will offcourse let you know what I decide, but I'm waiting to see the a330...

Thanks.

[dr4gon]

Wait a minute, I see the T1i on canon.com, but not on canon.dk, I'm afraid it's not available in Europe !?

What's the difference between the two ?

DON: Great idea testing the two/three, but like the master I am, I'm way ahead :-). No, seriously, I borrowed a 450D and an a350, I like the house and buttons better on the Canon, but the pics from Sony seems a little "warmer". Haven't tested the RAW photography though...

About the IS and whatever names the stability/antishaking systems have, which is best: The one in the camerahouse or the ones in the lenses ?

BTW: I will offcourse let you know what I decide, but I'm waiting to see the a330...

Thanks.

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...ilization.html

That has a lot of info in it, but probably won't help make your decision, unfortunately.

It seems like they both are about equivalent overall, I mean there are differences, but it definitely varies person to person (how steady are you?).

I was actually messing with this last night. I turned off SSS stabilization and started shooting away with a 50mm prime and then turned it on and see how far I could go where I could still maintain a decent number of shots that were sharp. Got down to 1/6" with SSS on focusing on a notecard with a diagram about 1.5m away. Without SSS I could only get about 1/2 sharp pictures at about 1/25". Could have sworn before I could get down closer to 1/10 without stabilization while still getting a fair number of shots, oh well. Again, it varies. But the #1 feature I would miss is stabilization.

If nikon integrated in-body VR (which would undoubtedly hurt their VR lens sales as Bob pointed out), I would make the jump. It would be awesome to have both, which brings me back to the common consensus. In-body while affecting all lenses seems to be more effective at shorter lengths while lens/optical stabilization seems to have the advantage of longer lenses (<200mm or so maybe?).

Just play with it and see what you think.