I read through this whole thread, and I'd like to offer a few observations.
First, I'm between DSLR's right now and am looking around for the next one. (What I last had and why I dumped it are really not germain.) So I'm looking at all the lines. One of the things I've noted is that Nikon and Olympus have the best selections of low to moderate cost lenses for their cameras (E-510 and D40X). The Nikon 18-135 is the pick of the bunch, plastic mount and all. Sony has a rather limited selection of moderate price glass so you have to rely on Sigma, which I totally do not trust for quality control or reliability; or Tamron who has a limited line. Same for Canon. Lots of lenses in their line, but most are costly, and the low cost ones are not all that good. Pentax is the worst off by far.
Second, the Minolta legacy lens inventory is weak in wider angle zoom lenses, those starting at 17 or 18 mm. Plus, finding one of the few models that do exist is chancy. Lots of primes, and lots of 70-210 and 70-300's available though. Pentax has the same issue.
Third, I sense a lot of defensiveness in this forum. I surmise it's because all the established brand followers are picking on the "new kid on the block". Once the line expands, I think that will pass, although there will always be brand rivalry and "feature envy". I totally don't understand the Sony versus Minolta friction. If it wasn't for Sony there would be no ongoing body to use all those legacy lenses on. As an outsider I really don't see a break here, just a name change.
Fourth, one of the strengths of the Sony is the ability to use the pop up flash as a master for remote units. Canon totally lacks this. I hardly see it mentioned.
Fifth, Nikon pretty much had the D40X planned in or it would not have come so quickly. The AF-S only issue is a good thing for sale of Nikon lenses, of which there are 14 reasonably affordable current AF-S models plus a few discontinued ones. I really don't see that as a drawback, because like most potential new Nikon buyers, I have no inventory of legacy stuff. I do think Nikon is making a mistake in not offering the 18-135 and D40X as a kit. Oddly, Nikon has 6 current AF-S zoom lenses that start at 12-18 mm and only two longer zooms.
Sixth, Pentax is the real loser in all this. The K100D is a nice camera. AF is a little slow, and the lens selection is very limited, but it's still a nice camera. But it's only 6 MP. That's enough if you don't crop a lot, but it's not enough from a sales standpoint.
Seventh and last: To some extent, we're "preaching to the choir". Most of the contributors on this forum are experienced photographers and have had the time and opportunity to learn about our likes and dislikes and to learn photography. But, we are a minority! Most of the folks buying DSLR's these days are graduating from P&S models. They have no carry over gear and little real photographic knowledge. For them any DSLR is a big step up in what they need to learn. I think a lot of those cameras will end up on a closet shelf or stuck in a drawer after a couple of years, and they'll go back to their P&S cameras. Kind of what happened in the 70's with film SLR's. The Sony A-100 is a cut above what they need. The Olympus E-410 or E500 is closer and so is the D40 and D40X. The Pentax K100D and K110D are in that group and so was the Canon Digital Rebel. I really see the A-100 as closer to the Canon XTi and Nikon D80 and maybe the Olympus E-510.
Intersting thread, I just wish it wasn't so rancorous.
-
Jerry
