I switched to Sony...

[kevin_b.2]

<p>This is a long post sorry... I will put it into sections.<br>

Old camera: 40D<br>

Lenses: 70-200 2.8 L IS, 60mm 2.8 Macro, 18-50mm<br>

1. Why<br>

Was looking for an upgrade for awhile now. Had my hearts set on a 7D. I was very close to buying one many times. I wanted a pure upgrade on every aspect, faster burst, better noise, more resolution, more mega pixels, weather sealing. This looked like it (with future upgrade to FF). Here is what made me change me mind.<br>

Sony A850 Full frame camera = $1850 brand new (broadway photo)<br>

I could not justify spendy $1700 (1600 now) for another APS-C when I could have a full frame powerhouse for a few hundred more.<br>

2. Why not a 5D MkII<br>

A 5DMII was way out of my price range. It would obsolete 2 of my EF-s Lenses, and leave me with the one lens i use the least and could easily have went without this whole time. For awhile I thought I might do portraits or sports/action but now i'm usually in the 30-100mm macro range. I can literally sell all my Canon gear and break even if I bought the Sony and comparable lenses (minus the 70-200)<br>

3. But sony sucks...<br>

Not really, well not anymore :). They have steadily become better and better. Their prices are great and have caused Canon to drop many of their prices. Here is what scared me about the Sony but why I overcame.<br>

Noise, worst in class above ISO 1000 - no big deal for me since I always shoot less than ISO 400. I don't do low light and I don't do action sports anymore.<br>

No live preview, that kinda sucks for when I do macro work however there is a magnifier add on. This is the one feature everyone complains about. And once it because standard lookout. Some of the brand new Sony's have the best Live Preview.<br>

Limited lens selection<br>

4. Why the Sony, other than obvious FF advantages<br>

1. $1850<br>

2. Built in camera hardware image stabilization. (any lens, old or new has IS now)<br>

3. Ability to use crop lenses, not that it affects me since I have none, but its a nice feature. Gives me an option of using 3rd party aps-c lenses @ lower resolutions.<br>

4. Class leading resolution and megapixels @ low isos<br>

5. Sony 135mm 1.8 / Sony 135 2.8 STF<br>

6. Dual memory cards<br>

7. Weather sealed<br>

8. Micro lens AF adjustments<br>

9. Built in HDR like features<br>

<br>

If Sony can fix the live view and build a better lineup of lenses and improve their noise issues I think more people will jump ship. Especially for the aggressive prices. But for now I have a really good camera with great IQ as long as I don't boost up the ISO. And the 3fps burst doesn't bother me either. I have the camera on order and it will be here in a few days. I will report on what I find. Hopefully I don't have to eat my words. </p>

[sattler123]

<p>Did you write all this to convince yourself that you did the right thing?</p>

<p>Good Luck!</p>

[peter_j2]

<p>Wrong forum Kevin B.</p>

[kevin_b.2]

<p>No I wrote it so Canon will drop the 5DMII down to 2200. </p>

[peter_j2]

<blockquote>

<p>I wrote it so Canon will drop the 5DMII down to 2200.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><strong>?!? </strong> Why write here? Why not write Canon directly?</p>

[wooi_loon]

<p>Good to hear you found what you want, but I think Canon have better lens choices. If you can afford for $1850 by now, why not just save a bit more for 2-3 months and you will have a brand new 5DII or trade your ef-s for extra? In anycase, you can't use your ef-s with sony. Anyway, enjoy your new toy. </p>

[walter_strong5]

<p>Don't come down with a bad case of "buyer's regret", just grab the ball and run with it. You'll score lots of touchdowns!</p>

[walter_strong5]

<p>Uh...................make that "buyer's remorse"!</p>

[mike dixon]

<p><em>No I wrote it so Canon will drop the 5DMII down to 2200. </em></p>

<p>I bought my 5Dmk2 about three months ago for $2400. If $2200 is within your price range, then $2400 is not "way out of your price range."</p>

<p>But if you're pleased with your new Sony, that's cool. I hope you both live happily ever after.</p>

[PuppyDigs]

<p>Hopefully it works out. I've had a long history of bad experiences with Sony products from TV sets, Walkman, stereos, headphones, pro DAT, etc. It will be a long time before I buy anything from the big S again. I assume they must have bumped up their IQ and ergonomics as competition has gotten really good.</p>

[dennisgg]

<p>I hope you will be happy with your purchase, but how is it a savings over the 5D MK II if you have to buy glass all over again? You said that you can break even with Sony and all new glass except that 70-200 f2.8 IS (well that is a $1800 lens). That doesn't sound like a savings to me. Per Adorama, the Sony equivalent is a $1800 lens. So my math says that the switch cost you about $1100. <br /> Good luck with your purchase, I hope you made the right decision for yourself.</p>

[bob_king2]

<p><em>"This is a long post sorry..." </em> A long post is actually called a pole. </p>

<p>I bought into Canon DSLRs in 2004. Since then I've accumulated lenses and bodies, film and digital. Since the 300D/DRebel the rest of the pack, especially Nikon, has in many ways caught up with and even surpassed Canon. </p>

<p>For me to switch brands now would require another manufacturer to blow Canon out of the water with an overwhelming new technology in an area of my shooting style/needs. That is unlikely. At various times different platforms will have differing advantages over others - some with lens choice, others with price, others yet with quality and so on. For me, none of the other systems have an advantage that I desperately need, so I stick with Canon and enjoy its advantages.</p>

<p>Cheers, Bob</p>

[jim_h.2]

<p>, Well I think Canon is the best for me, the use of many lens that are affordable is a big factor and the fact that they make a great camera is convincing enough. I looked at all models form every line and spoke with studios in the area and the majority suggested Canon and , no regrets, </p>

[ken schwarz]

<p>It's interesting how system lock-in and brand loyalty are tested (and sometimes lost) at the switch from crop to full-frame. I don't really see much marketing directed at this at all, so my guess is that it happens pretty rarely, but maybe there's more opportunity for poaching than the vendors might have guessed.</p>

<p>Let's hope the Sony forum is as entertaining as we have been!</p>

 

[JohnMWright]

<p>Even if the camera is cheaper, you still need lenses... that seems to eliminate any short term savings in the switch. </p>

<p>Anyway, I hope it works out for you.</p>

[daniel martins]

<p>Was a used 5DMII not an option? I picked one up in like new condition for $1900.</p>

[lukeap69]

<p>I have a friend/colleague who started with Sony A200 and acquired Sony/Minolta lenses for quite sometime and wanted to 'upgrade' to full frame. He thought of A850 but then got himself a Canon 5D classic, 100 macro and 17-40L. What a contrasting story.<br>

BTW, I have some minolta A lenses (beercan, mini-beercan, 28 2.8 and 50 1.4) which are good lenses and will work on sony dslr, I can recommend those to you except the 28 2.8. My main gears are Canon but I shoot Sony/Minolta and contax once in a while.<br>

Enjoy your A850. It's a nice camera. Wish I could say the same for the system esp. flash.<br>

Cheers</p>

[thomas_k.]

<p>Great! If camera system change does not improve your photography then change photographer behind the camera.<br>

(I could not keep myself from some sort of joke on the topic of changing systems, anyway have fun and shoot a ton of great pictures)</p>

[wpahnelas]

<p>ever since i read the article linked to below, i have stopped being dismissive of other camera platforms i may not be very familiar with. don't let brand loyalty blind you to the rest of the market.<br>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00V98v">http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00V98v</a></p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>Why apologize? The Sony is an excellent camera. The only downside I see is that the prices of its good lenses are higher than Canon, and there are fewer of them. The big plus is the nice Zeiss lenses. If you shoot a lot at 3200 you may notice more noise than with the 5DII.</p>

<p>The built in shake reduction is a feature Canon and Nikon will have to embrace one day.</p>

[paul_de_ley]

<p>Enjoy the A850 Kevin, and show us some shots in the Sony/Minolta forum when you've received it!</p>

[charles_wood]

<p>Sometimes negotiating with a vendor brings results. I purchased a 5dmkII a couple of months ago. I convinced the supplier to drop the price of the 5d/24-105 lens kit by $200.00. I then sold the lens and the net result was purchasing the 5dmkII for $2200 and some change. I have used the a900 and it is a very nice camera as I am sure the a800 is but sometimes a bit of research and arm twisting can yield the desired result.</p>

[DickArnold]

<p>One of my students in a photo class has one which I got to use. I really liked it. I got locked into Canon EOS 22 years ago. Maybe there is a lot better out there but I'm stuck. However, it is my firm belief that they are all good, Nikon and Sony and it is what's what is behind the viewfinder that's important. Good luck. </p>

[Member69643]

<p>Just a note here - Broadway Photo is notorious for offering these "great deals" and then never delivering. Or sending the order, but with the battery and charger not included, that's extra...</p>

<p>Good luck</p>

[silverfox]

<p>I did that once, then quickly realised what i'd done.</p>