Sony Alpha is for Nikon fans

[maxxum7d]

Well said. And now, Minolta is going to shake the Nikon/Canon market in a new avatar. I worked with a photographer yesterday who uses a Canon 20D. After 4 hours of shooting together she admitted that the 7D was definitely superior to her camera when it comes to colors and ergonomics. But like many people she is stuck with canon lenses and will probably upgrade to a D5.

If you are siding with Nikon in a Nikon vs. Canon debate, its because you haven't test driven a minolta yet

[Kewjoe]

My friend,

There is a Sony/Konica forum for this type of post.

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/view_forum.php?id=84

No need to troll over here.

[big_potato]

maxxum7d wrote:

If you are siding with Nikon in a Nikon vs. Canon debate, its because you haven't test driven a minolta yet

OK, I am one of the lazy, stupid, stubborn, superstitious ...etc Nikon users, who don't even bother to try a Minolta.

Then so what? Would I switch system just because of this just one seemingly irritating post in an open forum?

I guess most other Nikon users (especially in this Nikon Forum), like me, wouldn't.

Sometimes, as a casual consumer, you don't have to try out every product in order to accept / reject it. You just analyse or listen to the credible reviews and general user comments from respectable organisations or individuals.

So what's the point of your postings here? I can't see much productive or effective content in them.

You'd better post your arguments on the "General" or 'What camera should I buy" ... forum. I second that here titled as Nikon Digital SLR, may be a wrong place for you.

[big_potato]

Sorry duplicated post submission. Deleted.

[rsturgill]

What's the current view of you guys with tons of Nikon glass towards Canon these days? The Nikon reps I met last month turned green when I asked about their plans for a full frame sensor and I've got at least one semi-professional photographer buddy who's selling his D100 setup to get into the D5. Is this becoming more common? If not, is the compelling factor for you to stay with Nikon:

Legacy glass?
Familiarity with the Nikon user interfaces?
Trust in the company?
No compelling reason to move to Canon?

No need to flame me - just wondering where your heads are at.

Thanks.

[chris89]

if i had the d100 and didnt have more then 3 lenses, i would switch to the 5d (or d200) as well. the d100 had some .. "problems". and its in no way a fair comparison to a 5d

its just like somone exchanging a d70 for a 1dsmkII

[rjseeney]

rsturgill wrote:

What's the current view of you guys with tons of Nikon glass towards Canon these days? The Nikon reps I met last month turned green when I asked about their plans for a full frame sensor and I've got at least one semi-professional photographer buddy who's selling his D100 setup to get into the D5. Is this becoming more common? If not, is the compelling factor for you to stay with Nikon:

Legacy glass?
Familiarity with the Nikon user interfaces?
Trust in the company?
No compelling reason to move to Canon?

No need to flame me - just wondering where your heads are at.

Thanks.

I really don't see a need, epsecially at the consumer/prosumer level for a full frame sensor camera. Sure you may get better noise handling and some of your ultrawide lenses back, but really what else is there to gain??I've printed as large as 16x20 with a D70/D50, with no realproblems,so its not a details or MP issue. As more and more lenses are developed for APS sized sensors, the need for full frame disappears. All full frame is is a point of reference. With lenses developed for APS sensors the need for this point of reference becomes obsolete. Full frames are more expensive to produce as well further removing any advantage.

[NHL]

rjseeney wrote:

... but really what else is there to gain??

What about dynamic range???
... and why some of the larger (digital) formats are still around as well! :idea:
-> the 5D just makes it more affordable, that's all (same idea when someone picks a Fuji over a Nikon)

[maxxum7d]

If I post under Sony/KM, my posting would be greeted by readers who already have a bias towards Minolta the same way you are resisting it a Nikon area. Also the "What camera" forum is too moderate for this kind of discussion as well.

If you notice, I didn't make my OP in a Canon, Pentax, or Olympus forums either. The sole reason I posted here is because Nikon and Alpha are two brands connected under their bodies by a single component: the CCD.

In the past you could have argued that Nikon can boast of superior lenses and hence the CCD being similar itself doesn't make a difference. Its not true anymore in the light of the fact that several Carl Zeiss lenses will be soon available for the alpha line. I can confidently say that the Alpha will make it to the best cameras list on steves digicams once it comes out. My question is, why wouldn't you choose alpha over Nikon (assuming you are not tied to a vast collection of Nikon glass already)?

Kewjoe wrote:

My friend,

There is a Sony/Konica forum for this type of post.

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/view_forum.php?id=84

No need to troll over here.

[rjseeney]

Good point about dynamic range:idea:. However, with the cost difference, I don't think the slight incremental gain in dynamic range is worth the extra price. If the 5d was closer in price to the smaller APS sized sensor, maybe it would convince me to make the jump. Also, the fact that the nikon D200 stacks up well against the 5d (aside from some noise issues), I'm in no rush to get a full frame DSLR.