OK, I guess I'll be the first. I used to own a Nikon D50, and found that, in spite of using a tele-zoom, I was cropping a lot of shots, and the six MP was a bit limiting. Low-light performance is in the big leagues for that camera. However, I wanted to upgrade to more MP (for cropping and enlarging). I also wanted in-body image stabilization, so I had three choices. Pentax, Olympus, and Sony. I went with Sony A300 for several reasons.
1. Almost everything electronic that I own is Sony, except my computer. My wife has a Sony N2 which takes outstanding photos, right out of the camera. It is a company which I have come to trust over the years. I don't believe Sony would put their name on something they did not think was high quality. They have also been very innovative with their products. The info-lithium battery is an example. Their particular brand of live view is arguably the best out there presently, although I don't use it. On the subject of the viewfinder being smaller than a non-live-view camera, it's true. Not a deal breaker for me, but maybe for you.
2.I had access to quite a few minolta AF lenses at a very low cost, some of which have surprised me favorably, while others not so much.
3.When I bought my camera, it was being offered with the HVL-42AM flash as a bundle for basically the same price as just the camera, so price was a factor, since I was going to have to buy a flash later.
Anyway, I apologize for getting long in the wind, but I can say that whichever one you choose I think you will be thrilled with the results.