A77 system to recommend

After getting some excellent responses to my posting on the Sony NEX forum it seems that for my type of photography (street and landscape/wildlife) an A77 system versus NEX7 would be better, and mostly due to the E-mount lenses not being available for the type of lenses I'm looking to get

What I'm considering then is the A77 with these lenses: the Sony 16-50mm (mostly for the 35mm equivalent 24mm wide angle) and 70-400mm (mostly for the 35mm equivalent 600mm telephoto) lenses, and also the F43 flash (later looking at the CZ85 F1.4 or CZ135 F1.8 because everyone seems to say they're really nice lenses and fun to shoot with.)

Since due to my work I'm perpetually traveling and do little photography from home, I was looking for something lighter than what I have now (Nikon D300 - that is broken so that's why I'm looking to buy, Nikkor 18-200mm, Nikkor 80-400mm, and SB-6 flash.)

However, the Sony system is only slightly lighter than the Nikon (which is why I looked at the NEX7 first.)

Just in case I've missed something (I don't think so unfortunately), does anyone have a suggestion as to lighter or just better alternatives to the Sony system above (keeping in mind that I like the APS-C sensor because I do enlarge and crop and in fact would prefer FF but weight is prohibitive)?

Thank you.

If you want light you can always get the Minolta 100-300 APO lens. It equals 450mm on the A77.

I carry it when I don't want to lug the 70-400 around or when I'm in a bad neighborhood.

Also the 35-105 Minolta is pretty good. Both are light.
I have them both along with the 16-50mm.

Owen

If you want a nice one lens solution go with the Tamron 18-270 PZD. It does a nice job but IS NOT going to give the quality of the two you are considering. A77 probably isn't the best choice if you are looking for small and light. Have you considered cameras such as the A65?
--
Dave

Thank you both for you're responses.

The 2 Minolta lenses mentioned are nice and I've considered them. The Tamron I haven't but will look at it. My problem, and it is my problem, is the limitation I've imposed on myself by not wanting to compromise a 24mm equivalent wide-angle and a 600mm equivalent telephoto nor the quality with the 2 Sony lenses I'm looking at. With my Nikon setup I frequently use my Lumix LX3 for the wideangle (equivalent 24 vs 27 with my 18-200) and whenever I use the 80-400 it's almost always at 400 for its 600 equivalent and often wishing it was more.

The A65, I have considered but the A77 has very attractive specs: great IQ, weather sealed, tough build, sophisticated autofocus ... more so than the A65 which I've also read is a great camera, but the A77 a bit more so.

Of course this is all exacerbated by the fact I fly every 21 days coast-to-coast Australia and always insist on taking my camera with me. So it's not so much a walking around problem but an airline cabin baggage limitation problem.

Thanks again, I will consider your suggestions, the lenses and the body, I'll have a closer look at the A65.

If you want to go light and use good glass, you should give a look at the micro for thirds system.
There are very good glasses there now, and the sensors are quite good too.

I am unfortunately have so many lenses with alpha mount so...my suggestion will be an inexpensive 35/1.8, 16-80 ZA (which is incredibly compact) and a 70-300G. I am not sure if you prefers even a lighter body because a77 weighs about 700gm. What you lose using an A77 from D300 will be the AF system. Nikon seems to have better AF.

If you do not mind older lenses, then a beercan Minolta 70-210/f4 is highly recommended.

--
Mark K

Thank you.

You're right. Some of the four thirds systems are really good. But because I enlarge and also crop the larger APS-C sensor is nice to have.

Thanks for the information about the Sony vs Nikon AF. Didn't know that. Something to consider.

Don't mind older lenses although I like the auto-focus and image stabilization.

Still want the 24mm equivalent wide angle (looked at the ZA16-80 but a lot of people didn't have good luck with the build quality and weren't entirely happy with the image sharpness either, that's why I considered the 16-50.)

Thought about the 70-300, but I'd miss the 400 reach I have now. When ever I use my telephoto it's always fully extended (looked at 400 prime but very expensive and heavy to boot.)

8-16 sigma, 16-35 ziess, 50 1.4 sony, 85 1.4 rokinon, 70-400 G, 100 macro/sony, HVL F58AM flash.

db

Mark K said:

What you lose using an A77 from D300 will be the AF system. Nikon seems to have better AF.

Click to expand...

I think that's a bit too generally stated.

For example, the A77 is faster to focus on static objects (up to twice as fast according to Imaging Resource) and a multitude faster when using Live View (on the D300 as the A77 always operates with LV).

The D300 does have more focus points (and 15 vs 11 crosstype). But I haven't seen any direct comparisons regarding tracking capabilities.