I was going to buy a Sony A65, but the D7000 went on sale...

That is very personal. Some like the features some just look at a body as a tool to attach the lens to.

HDR can be done on the pc with the right software

I am assuming that you don't have any lenses to be taken in account. I shoot Canon but in your case I'd pick the D7000 and benchmark other body's to the Nikon.

Maybe with a firmware update the D7000 gets new features.

Have a look at lenses and acc. I think here Nikon takes a lead over Sony as a system.

It's a personal thing basicly, just have a good look at what you find important.

If both body's can do your kind of photography (and video) you can't go wrong with either but my advice is to have a good look at lenses etc. too.

Recently I was to buy a feature rich camera but it was sold out, I got a discount on a model up (better viewfinder,AF and burstrate) with less features but an ergonomicly better tool for certain kinds of photography and got that with no regrets.

--
Cheers Mike

Limburger is right. This is a difficult one to answer. I have a D7000 and love it. Don't worry about the age, it is feature packed and I can assure you, you will take a long time to master it, if ever. As for Sony, well they make good televisions.......Now only my opinion you understand...

Buy the Nikon and enjoy.

I think you have answer your own question the d7000 is getting a bit old and lacking features

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/loubella/

I appreciate your opinions guys, that's why I posted here.

I understand that my question is a personal one, and I also understand that you really can't go wrong with any modern SLR (I haven't heard of any bad SLR currently on the market). I just want to make sure that by selecting the D7000, I'm not buying some antiquated SLR. I know it might sound bad to say this but if it weren't for the fact that the D7000 is 2 years now, I think I would not be having any doubts about getting the D7000. I guess that is my techie side showing trough. In the IT industry, 2 years is enormous, but perhaps in the photography world 2 years is not that old.

Does the D7000 have a HDR mode? I understand that it`s possible to do that on a PC, but it would be great if I could do it right on the camera. I understand that Sony SLRs are some of the best when it comes to videos, but is that D7000 really so far behind in that regards. Video is not massively important to me, but I do take my fair share of videos.

Looking at the specs I think a question you need to ask yourself is do you want to post process?  I'm humble opinion the d-7000 is better camera if you're willing to shoot raw and do the HDR and panoramas on your computer.  The thing with the A65 is that all the cool tricks it does it does in J-PEG which means that if the you want to further modify the picture you have less latitude.  I'm sure you'll get great results from either cam how you want to achieve those results is what I would be asking myself.

Well if you're into tech than you know that generally mechanics are still more reliable then electronics. Speaking of antiques, I just bought a 7D.

If it has a bracketing mode you can shoot HDR, but I don't know if the D7000 can merge the images together into one shot in camera.

Basicly you can do the bracketing yourself shooting three different exposures, but that's not what you're looking for.

Maybe good to know: Do the shops have a return policy, in case you don't like the camera you bring it back and no questions asked?

--
Cheers Mike

+1

--
Cheers Mike

That is very true. You bring up a great point.

The Sony is not actually an SLR, it's an "SLT". What that means to the user is that the Sony has an electronic viewfinder while the Nikon has an optical viewfinder. These are quite different, and most people have a preference between one and the other. The viewfinders in both cameras are very good examples of their kind, so, in the end, it's up to you.

--
Leonard Migliore

My opinion, lightly based on scant experience ;

If you take RAW photos and want solidity : Nikon D7000 is an impressive camera.

If you take Jpegs and want a tilty screen : Sony

I had a D7000 and liked it very much but sold it to buy the D600. I also have the A77 which is one model above the A65. I find that I like the EVF more than I thought I would. I think you need to consider the lenses you want. Nikon has more to offer but you can find many great old AF Minoltas that work on Sony fairly cheap, in fact I have more Minoltas than Sonys.

That's interesting because I often read that Sony's SLTs produce rather soft jpegs. I plan on shooting jpeg + raw. The jpegs would be to quickly show to friends and family upon returning from vacation and then I could play around with the raw files.

As for tilting screen, I don't feel like I need it. If the camera has it, great, if not no big deal. I just want the camera to have good screen (hi pixel count), and I believe both if these cameras have a great screen.

I would like to have an A77, but unfortunately the A77 is currently on sale for $1100 (body only). That's more than I'm prepared to spend.

As for the lens, short term I plan on buying a 18-200 or 18-250 and I'd like to get a 50mm prime.

Someone said it earlier: 'Sony make good televisions' .... and the sensors and the lenses that equip the best video cameras. Stands to reason they're at the leading edge of digital techno-trickery.

Buy Sony if you want a camera that does things the modern way. Buy Nikon if you are looking to invest in a load of gear and a class-leading system that will take you up to pro level if that's where you need to be.

Go to camera store, handle the two cameras side by side. The wow factor of the 2.4mp OLED viewfinder shoing as much or as little data as you need and the basic effects of setting changes, plus 24mp sensor are likely to decide it for you.

--
John.
Please visit me at:
http://www.pbase.com/johnfr/sony_18135
http://www.pbase.com/johnfr/digital_dartmoor

Keep in mind that camera's in this class are meant to shoot in RAW with jpeg just a nice bonus.

You're looking at "consumer" features (which are nice, no bad word about features) on a say semi pro body.

Ask yourself if you will get more serious with photography and eventually will be doing serious PP and be buying more lenses and flash for example.

What kind of lens(es) are you looking for right now?

The one thing I try to point out is to try to oversee the big picture, you more or less have to oversee where this hobby is going, it can save you a lot of money (changing glass is expensive).

--
Cheers Mike

I have played around with the A57, A65, A75 and I even tried the A99 and I really do like the viewfinder. I keep telling my Nikon friend to come with me to a Sony store and try out the OLED viewfinder as he thinks optical is way better. I`m not saying that the OLED viewfinder is better, but it`s not the same as the crappy point & shoot viewfinders.

I don`t see myself ever going professional, it`s just a hobby that I really enjoy.

I definitely want a 18-200 or 250 as well as a 50mm prime. After that I`ll see what else I`d like or need.

No, my Ricoh KR-5 is getting a bit old and lacking in features (it still makes perfectly fine photographs though) - the D7000 has more than anyone needs.

OP - HDR is overdone, overblown and old news; don't be suckered into thinking that you need that 'feature'. If you actually find a use for HDR, do it in your computer instead.

--
Rob.
'Stores' are places where things are kept. 'Shops' are places where things are sold. Buy from a shop, not a store.

There's a major loss of image quality with superzooms - you may be disappointed when you see the results. But the convenience may outweigh the loss for your uses.

--
Rob.
'Stores' are places where things are kept. 'Shops' are places where things are sold. Buy from a shop, not a store.