About to Buy -- What do you think ?

Started Apr 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
123Mike
Senior MemberPosts: 4,306Gear list
Like?
Re: Takes a licking and keeps on ticking
In reply to headfirst, Apr 16, 2013

Mike, you are sticking your head in the sand/fingers in ears & going la,la,la ...

The Canikoners are refusing to acknowledge that the Sony provides more value for the same, and that it is a better choice for most newcomers looking to buy a consumer digital SLR camera.

I'm a long-time Minolta/Sony shooter so I should be in your court & in many ways I am. I believe that Sony are driving towards a change in cameras that will eventually become universal & I believe in their future which is why I have invested further in the system. & I believe that for 99% of people the lenses available for Alpha are more than enough in both quality & quantity.

Others are downplaying what Sony offers, they're laughing at it, and they're claiming that what they have is superior and that Sony isn't worth it. I know they're full of crap. I'm just doing my bit that new comers know that too. The Canikoners seem to think that they've got some sort of overlord status and that they're the big boys.  I say Sony is just as good, and provides more for the same, and offers some uniqueness not offered elsewhere. It's a very worthy player.

The A57 is an excellent lower mid level body & probably better value than it's equivalent Canon & Nikon competitors. However, it isn't a universal panacea - if you can spend more you can get better in some ways or else Sony wouldn't bother making the A65, A77 & A99.

The A57 offers much more than anything else on the market, even at double the price.

Even these can be bested for certain needs if you have the money e.g. the best APS-C action/sports body is the Canon 7D. I might not like that but denying it or ignoring doesn't change it ...

I have actually never claimed that the A57 is better than the 7D for sports photography. I have fended off false claims how the A57 is supposed to be no good or inferior for sports photography. The A57 is great for sports photography. Of course, the Canikoners want to see this differently, and they hinge on a silly incorrect evaluation on DPR. It said that 10 and 12 fps has some compromises and that therefore it's no good. I say those compromises are manageable. Where it's not manageable, there is still 8 fps where there are no compromises. The 7D does 8fps which is impressive. But it's got mirror slap, possibly causing a lower percentage of shots succeeding in difficult lighting conditions. So, is the 7D better for sports? Not for shooting speed it wouldn't be!

Why is it the best? Because it has the best AF system & buffer depth by a head both of which are extremely important for that use, moreso imo than sheer fps. Providing that is why it's also the dearest though.

I was focusing on the shooting speed and its compromises because that was the argument that was made. The A57 was supposed to be no good because at higher fps rates there are compromises. I have never said the 7D has an inferior AF system. My stance has not been to put other cameras down. My stance has been to highlight what the A57 is good at. Others are putting the Sony down. That's not my tactic. I look at the positives. Others here have been wanting to project negatives. So while I'm being accused of being aggressive, I'm actually not the one being negative here! If the 7D has a really efficient AF system, that's really interesting, and I'd like to know about that. If I then come across someone that has a specific need for it, I would be more than happy to bring up the 7D in the discussion and that that camera should be considered. What I think the Canikoners won't do, is highlight or bring up the Sony in forums where beginners ask for what camera to buy.

The OP started out mentioning the 60D - I'm quite sure that the A57 can keep up with that in the overall feature/performance stakes {& I would put the 16-50/2.8 SSM up against the 17-55/2.8 IS} but imo it will fall behind in the ergonomic/ease of use stakes simply due to the 60D having 2 control dials -  that's very important to me. It's 1 reason that I have an A77 rather than an A65 or A57.

Others might appreciate shooting at 12 fps and taking 1080 60p video. Many ordinary people looking to shoot pictures of the kids would be happier with a Sony than a Canon. You get a ton of goodies that are just awesome.

Because he came in with that & he hasn't posted back we don't really know what features may or may not be important to him but normally one would try to match the features to the needs. It maybe that 1 of the A57's features may outweigh the ergonomics for him but we just don't know as he hasn't had any more input.

I'm sure there'll be gloating and more derogatory comments ahead.

 123Mike's gear list:123Mike's gear list
Sony a6000 Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS A3000 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow