My partner and I are considering our first DSLR purchase .. we are moving on from a Panasonic Lumix Point and Shoot which is a few years old.
When I started out I compared all three brands, to me Sony's menu system, as well as their price point were the most user friendly. Also their live view was simply the best in the business. That pretty much sealed the deal for me.
Our photography needs are simple and mostly for holidays, travel, the occasional party at home or work and occasions like new years and that in the city.
My partner is thinking of taking a few classes for an intro of DSLRs and photography coz she has recently taken interest into photography.
Any one of the three will deliver what you want (and much more), the only main factor is the operator (you, the photographer). Taking lessons, reading books will help, better yet, just take pictures, lots of them, you will learn by yourself quickly.
I am fixated on the A55 and think it has a host of features like quicker autofocus, 10fps, panorama, GPS. My partner thinks that it has to be the Nikon on Canon if we want to go for an SLR.
Sony supply image sensors to all the camera makers, but Sony isn't just another DSLR, the world doesn't need another traditional dSLR. What Sony brings is something different, useful, out of box thinking products, backed by their vast electronic know-hows and innovative engineering talents. Sony has THE BEST live view on the market, fast auto focus works full time even during burst shots and video, the 10 fps is for real (with auto focus, in RAW format too) only limited by the buffer size (camera's internal fast memory) and memory card speed. On the other hand, A55 has regular burst mode that take "only" 7fps (to me is still "too fast"), which can be fully manually controlled. One feature my wife likes the most is panorama, of course, having all the photos with GPS tag is very handy (when import to photo management software like Adobe Light Room or Apple's Aperture).
Can anyone help us out with what we might be loosing if we opt for the sony .. or is it really worth paying the big bucks for the nikon or canon?
Canon and Nikon have more lens line up simply for their longer history (heritage) but keep in mind a lot of them are film era lenses, they are not optimized for digital cameras. While Sony has smaller line up but they cover most what you need already. Also the world famous Zeiss is in partnership with Sony to make some best pro lenses. The only auto focus Zeiss lenses available are for Sony camera. What more can you ask for?
Sony has in-body image stabilizer so every lens designed for Sony Alpha mount is stabilized (including $20 ebay hunt). This is a huge advantage.
And also any comments and suggestions on purchasing online vs brick n motor stores.. as the price difference seems to be substantial.. ?
For camera and lens I always buy from local store because: 1) I can compare, test different brands, models, can't get that experience from internet retailers; 2) if anything went wrong I can simply exchange or return the products right away; 3) support the "smaller guy", the camera shops are usually run by photographers so it's good place to ask question, test new gears, etc., and usually they are willing to match internet price. I bought 70-400G lens from my local store (Vancouver Canada) for $1499 while typical online price was US$1599 plus international shipping and currency exchange. My friend bought his A55 with kit lens from the same store for only $699! Its all about relationship. Once you bought dSLR (or SLT) you enter a relationship with the system, as well as local shops (for all the things you need in future - bags, filters, lights, tripod, etc.). Once you familiar with your gears and knowing more about your shooting preference, you will be more confident ordering things online. I bought quite a few niche gadgets from Amazon, ebay to enhance my system.
There are many suggestions/onions expressed here, but in the end you need to make your own mind. Trust your own gut feeling, and have fun!
