A700 anyone?

[randomlinh]

lookie here

 

[Zenmervolt]

Luminous Landscape has an A700 Field Report, looks very good.

I've always liked their more use-based approach as opposed to the lab approach of other sites.

ZV

 

[Heidfirst]

I'll almost certainly be getting 1 next year (unless I get an A900 )

 

[randomlinh]

it's always good to see the competition heat up. get canon and nikon off their asses

 

[GrJohnso]

Yep, nice little upgrade that I'm considering. Have to see how my bonus shapes up from work this year though... Still like my A100, but... faster focusing, faster continuous mode, better high ISO, amazing DRO+ to help with funky light, and yah, a couple more mp's... Just have to be weary of the funky noise correction issues at higher ISO's when you post-process RAW with something other than Sony's tools...

Anyone want a well taken care of A100 to help fund my upgrade?

Oh, and for the A900 or what'ev it's called when it comes out, that would be a nice dream. However until this hoby starts making me money, can't justify something that expensive... At least not yet. $2.5 to $5k isn't quite in my budge..

 

[AndrewR]

Definitely looking to upgrade to the A700 when money (and wife) allows. I'm really looking forward to better focusing with my wide angles because I've noticed some issues with my A100 lately, and one of my best lenses is a 28mm prime.

 

[QueBert]

The Battery Grip is $249! that's like $100 more then Canon's, camera sure looks nice. I'm thinking about going DSLR sometime in the next 12 months and as much as I dislike Sony I like this camera

 

[Heidfirst]

Originally posted by: QueBert
The Battery Grip is $249! that's like $100 more then Canon's, camera sure looks nice.

Yes but it's also a better grip (many people think that it's probably the best grip of any on the market) so it's not really an apples to apples comparison.

B&H has the Canon BG-E2N for the 40D as $200 so it's only $50 more.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: Heidfirst

Originally posted by: QueBert
The Battery Grip is $249! that's like $100 more then Canon's, camera sure looks nice.

Yes but it's also a better grip (many people think that it's probably the best grip of any on the market) so it's not really an apples to apples comparison.

B&H has the Canon BG-E2N for the 40D as $200 so it's only $50 more.

That's after the $100 price drop recently though.

However, that being said, the price drop is a great indication that the popularity of the camera and the vertical grip has had a positive (or negative, I guess depending on your meaning) effect on the pricing.

I've read from more than a few owners that the A700+vertical grip combination is damn near perfect. Very much looking forward to finding that out for myself. I do shoot vertical quite a bit at times, and it would be nice to have the extra battery power available.

 

[GrJohnso]

Yes, the Sony grip feels pretty nice in the hands. All the functions, including thumbpad there for ya... Nice... Although for as much as I'd use the camera, I think I'll be budgeting that money towards a nice 85 - 135mm, higher speed (2.8 or better) prime for available light portrait work and a little sports action. My lens collection has some definite gaps in this area.

So, for best price, looks like Berger Brothers is pretty good right now at $1299 for body only with free shipping and no salestax out here to Cali... Anyone else find a better price? Heard Circuit City sometimes has a good price and they do have a 10% coupon for big ticket items... Just the sales tax there kinda evens things out... Hmm...

 

[QueBert]

will we ever see much of a price difference from store to store on these? I don't know much about how Sony does their cameras, but everything else Sony seems to pretty much be a fixed price regardless of where you purchase it. I think my 12% off at Best Buy excludes DSLR's *doh* My desire for this camera is much more of a simple want then a need. So maybe I can wait a year until the next model comes out and hope Sony pushes this one down, $999 would be a sweet spot for me.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: QueBert
will we ever see much of a price difference from store to store on these? I don't know much about how Sony does their cameras, but everything else Sony seems to pretty much be a fixed price regardless of where you purchase it. I think my 12% off at Best Buy excludes DSLR's *doh* My desire for this camera is much more of a simple want then a need. So maybe I can wait a year until the next model comes out and hope Sony pushes this one down, $999 would be a sweet spot for me.

$1,299

Decent, but not a huge discount. And yes, the store is trustworthy. They have a good reputation from the people on DPreview I've talked with.

EDIT: I am not affiliated with this store in any way.

ZV

 

[QueBert]

Found this on DCresource, don't know anything about the company, but it's the lowest price I've seen...

$1274 a whopping 25 bucks less ha, but it is cheaper, plus no tax and free shipping.

 

[Zenmervolt]

dBuys doesn't have the most stellar ratings lately. Then again, the overall seems good and you tend to get more dis-satisfied people filling out those ratings because they're more motivated.

http://www.resellerratings.com/store/IbuyDigital

ZV

 

[Daaavo]

If anyone is interested, the DPReview is up on the A700.

 

[soydios]

Originally posted by: Daaavo
If anyone is interested, the DPReview is up on the A700.

seems like it's a good solid camera. DPReview has been busy, what with the 40D, A700, E-3, 1DmkIII, 1DsmkIII, D3, and D300 all released recently.

I'm really pleased with Sony, Olympus, and Pentax putting such quality cameras on the market. it gives Nikon/Canon some incentive to keep innovating.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Too bad Sony has sh!t glass by comparison...it is a nice body.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Too bad Sony has sh!t glass by comparison...it is a nice body.

You're either joking (badly), grossly mis-informed, or trolling.

Sony's selection is not as wide as Canon's or Nikon's, but Sony's lenses are easily a match in quality for anything that Canon or Nikon put out. The 70-200 f/2.8 G SSM, even though carried over from Minolta, is consistently rated above Canon's equivalent L lens and above the equivalent Nikkor.

Just like Canon and Nikon, the cheap lenses are cheap. But the good lenses are every bit a match for Canon and Nikon's best.

ZV

 

[Heidfirst]

No, it doesn't.
It may have a limited own label range of glass atm with some serious overlap in some areas & holes in others but there are some very nice (albeit some are overpriced) lenses in the line up especially if you factor in Minolta lenses & Sigma/Tamron etc. e.g. I think that any brand would be happy to have the 16-80mm ZA on their bodies & the 18-250mm seems to be a very nice lens for it's role as a mid-range walkabout.
& then there are new lenses to come from Sony - they are talking about a 54 lens range in 2009 which should cover most people except those needing fairly exotic ones.

As for Dpreview's A700 review there are some distinct anomalies:
I can't see how they reckon that the A700 is a full 1.0 down on build quality compared to the 40D - I would put them as even or possibly even slight advantage to the A700.
& they compared the best jpeg output from the Canon & Nikon to the 2nd best from the Sony?
No mention of wireless flash etc. etc.

Having just gone all through this with the 40D, A700, D300 & E3 my A700 arrived today (a bit earlier than I originally expected to get 1 but Sony have a £150/$300 cashback on atm in the UK).
They are all nice & no doubt capable of taking better pictures than the photographer but imo:
there is actually very little IQ difference between the 4 of them at least in the regimes that I shoot in.

1st to be discounted was the E-3 - great build but not really struck on IQ & lens availability isn't great.
They do have a few stunning lenses though albeit at stunning prices too.

D300 got discounted on price/vfm - no doubt it's the best overall body but it's also the dearest by far & what extras it brings I don't really need.

So, A700 v40D:
price was neither here nor there
imo the A700 ergonomics/ease of use (albeit some of it is no doubt due my Minolta background so it's largey familar but then that's why I also went Minolta XD 25 years ago instead of Canon A1) is far better (yes, I did go to a store & try them all) & the camera just feels nice to my hand.
I like in-body IS
The fact that I already have an extensive lens collection obviously didn't hurt but it didn't really come into it either as with the second hand market as it is I probably would have actually come out with a profit if I sold my MAF fit lenses.

 

[rml]

Nice camera

 

[kalster]

seems like a good camera, having the in body IS is a big deal, i love my k10d, the in body IS is a life saver, not to mention it works with any lens

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Too bad Sony has sh!t glass by comparison...it is a nice body.

*cough* Troll *cough* Troll *cough*

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Too bad Sony has sh!t glass by comparison...it is a nice body.

*cough* Troll *cough* Troll *cough*

You can call me a troll when you go to a major sporting event and see mostly Sony lenses instead of all those Canon white lenses.

I am sorry, but taken as a whole and considering their use amongst professional, Canon puts Sony to shame.

But don't get me wrong, I hope Sony follows through and adds pressure on Canon and Nikon. Should be good for prices/features.

 

[AmigaMan]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Too bad Sony has sh!t glass by comparison...it is a nice body.

*cough* Troll *cough* Troll *cough*

You can call me a troll when you go to a major sporting event and see mostly Sony lenses instead of all those Canon white lenses.

I am sorry, but taken as a whole and considering their use amongst professional, Canon puts Sony to shame.

But don't get me wrong, I hope Sony follows through and adds pressure on Canon and Nikon. Should be good for prices/features.

oh so you buy stuff based off of what other people have. We're sorry, we should have called you a fanboi, not a troll. Good luck keeping up with the joneseses.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
You can call me a troll when you go to a major sporting event and see mostly Sony lenses instead of all those Canon white lenses.

I am sorry, but taken as a whole and considering their use amongst professional, Canon puts Sony to shame.

But don't get me wrong, I hope Sony follows through and adds pressure on Canon and Nikon. Should be good for prices/features.

Prevalence is not related to quality. Yes, Canon is the most widely used. However, until the late 1980's, Nikon was far more widely used than Canon. Does that mean that Canon's lenses were sh!t before then? Absolutely not. It just means that Nikon had more market penetration at that time, before Canon started "permanently loaning" lenses to press outfits.

Or maybe it means that Leica lenses are sh!t, or Zeiss lenses. After all, there are many more Canon lenses in use than Leica or Zeiss lenses.

Taken as a whole, lens for lens, Sony's offerings easily match Canon's lineup in terms of quality. Canon is in wider use, that's simply not disputable, but that doesn't mean that Canon's lenses are any better. There are far more Chevrolets on sold each year than BMW's, but that doesn't mean that Chevrolet is a higher-quality brand.

ZV