Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 17, 2010, 9:42 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Oakland county Michigan
Posts: 121
Default

yes but if i sell it i will retain some of the money i would have to pay out anyway.. i came into the sony for a great deal.. so i will be able to break even.. easy.. i just got the 2 lens for it last week.. so that is why i was thinking of exchanging and going into a canon.. i have the money now to do it for jobs.. but later i might not.. and that is why i was wondering what way to go.. and thanks for all the input tho..i was just told that i should think of the FF i wanted a900 but i was told to look at the 850
lonefeather93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2010, 2:32 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,543
Default

The A850 and the A900 are identical except for the rate of continuous shooting and the size of the viewfinder. The A900 can shoot up to 5 fps and has a 100% viewfinder, while the A850 can only shoot 3 fps and has a 98% viewfinder. Also, the A900 comes with the Remote Commander, while for the A850, it's a $30 option.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2010, 2:35 AM   #13
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lonefeather93 View Post
i know that. but tamron makes one for the canon.. but i did see that it doesn't come with IS. so that is why i'm trying to decide on what one. the saleman is really pushing me into the 850, cause i just got the lens last week. so when i look at the price of it.. then i see the reviews of the 7d. i wonder if i should just switch my lens over to a canon mount, and just buy the 7d. i can still use my a350 for my backup.. that is my dilema. or i'm thinking of saving money and just buying an a700 for 800 and save money...
Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
If you can return the tamron and get the canon version. Then there is no real lost. Well the lost of the a350 and it's lenses in the big scope of things.
Are you saying that you can get a full refund on the Tamron 70-200?

As I mentioned earlier (but possibly not overly clearly) you don't want to be using the Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 on any body for sports shooting, the AF is just too slow. The only options if you want a 70-200mm f2.8 is the Sigma or the manufacturers own (Canon, Nikon, Sony). AF plays a huge part of sports shooting and trying to use the Tamron is going to be a total waste. Don't get me wrong, it is a lovely sharp lens, quite a lot sharper than the Sigma, but just no good for sports.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lonefeather93 View Post
but the 850 is only 3 fps. and if i start doing sports.. i might need something faster.. its a tough call.. but im about to put out even more money and just wondering if the salesmen is just pushing the FF on me.
The problem with sales people is that they will often sell you what is going to help them out the most, so it could be that there is a higher reward on the Sony.... I can't say, but I've been in the sales game at many levels for a long time. Also, depending on where you are shopping they are likely not to be high level shooters, and very unlikely to be sports shooters who are aware of the limitations of kit/specific needs and difficulties in shooting sports.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lonefeather93 View Post
i was just told that i should think of the FF i wanted a900 but i was told to look at the 850
Was this by the same sales person? Are they aware of your desired needs or thinking you are just wanting portrait use?

For the portrait side of things, with the right lenses it is possible to get very similar results with anything from pretty entry level bodies up to FF. It is only the more skilled who will know and also the photographer will find it easier to get the desired results with the better cameras and FF can play a part in this, depending on the look the photographer is going for.

With every wedding I've shot, I've always had a FF camera as my primary, but my 2nd camera which I use with a long lens has been a crop body with a faster lens. In the Canon lineup the FF bodies have had better noise handling at high ISO settings than crop options which is key for low light shooting. With the 7D and the a850 however you don't see such a difference so that is less of a concern especially as at ISO3200 and 6400 they come into line with each other.

I know you've not picked up on the Nikon D700 but truly it is in a different class if you can get to it as it really will take you up a level from the two options we are discussing.

Here is how I rate them for you uses.

Sports
D700
7D
a850

Normal light portraits
D700
a850
7D

Low light portraits
D700
7D = a850

A slightly deeper discussion on why the D700 is a long way ahead and also how the extra price might be offset.

For volleyball you can't use flash and with a lens that is f2.8 you often need to be working at ISO6400 depending on your gym. As people are asking you to do sports for them I guessing you will be paid. If so, depending on the size prints expected you might not get overly usable shots at these ISOs from either the 7D or a850. That being the case you would need to look at something like an 85mm f1.8 for the Canon (about $380) and for the Sony you are looking at the 85mm f1.4 (about $1,400 and I'm not sure even how well this focuses, so that needs to be checked out).

Remember I'm a Canon shooter so I don't have an agenda to get you onto a camera I use or anything, I just don't want you to get a few months down the line and realise that you've made a huge error.

The D700 will allow you to shoot at ISO 6400 with about the same or even better noise handling as ISO 3200 on the other 2 options. This means you can shoot with a 70-200mm f2.8 lens in basically 95% normal sports conditions. You might find a horrible gym where you need a fast prime lens but you are going to be in a far better position with the D700.

If you can't get to the D700 then as can be seen with the lens prices, the Canon is working out better if needing to add a fast prime to allow you to shoot in darker conditions, saving you a lot of money.

I should possibly mention that I made the switch from Konica Minolta (bought by Sony so same mount etc) and moved to Canon when I started shooting sports more seriously. At the time Nikon didn't compete well in the mid range cameras so Canon was the only choice, now with the D700 Nikon is well ahead. If we were looking at the D300s and the 7D then the Canon just has it, but Nikon really has an ace with the D700.

Well there you have it, I think I've covered nearly everything you need to consider when making this decision. If you were not going sports I would say stick as you are, you are not having to go through the upheaval of changing systems, but with the move to sports I think you have to take a long hard look at the options, the current cost implications and also the future ones with potential lens needs.

If I were you I would be holding out for a D700, if you can't wait then the next option is the 7D.

Just a quick sample of the 7D at work.... this was using an 85mm f1.8 lens due to being indoors and not wanting to push the ISO. The 70-200mm f2.8 was on the 5DmkII.
Attached Images
 
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2010, 6:37 PM   #14
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

i agree wholeheartedly that the D700 is the ideal camera for your needs, giving you amazing af, ff, and noise handling that goes beyond anything else made. and they are going for 2400USD right now, which is just a steal. i would think long and hard about it.
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2010, 6:59 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Oakland county Michigan
Posts: 121
Default

i know. but now i would be 500.00 over budget. and that will be without any lens.. i'm pretty sure i'm within my 30 days to return or exchange my lens.. but i then would need to go get more batteries lens.. that would put me way over.. so i'm trying to think on this.. i thought it would be real easy decision with the sony set up. but now im finding out that maybe it was a wrong set up to with.. i was just thinking of the IS that is built into the body of the 850 or a700.
lonefeather93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2010, 7:06 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

IS on all lenses would be nice, but not needed all the time. I shot mainly primes, and none of them have IS form canon. But the sport shooters can weigh in on weather IS is a must have with sports.

Also if I shot sport more often then once in a blue moon, the higher burst rate would be more important to me the IS on all lenses. JMTC.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.

Last edited by shoturtle; Feb 18, 2010 at 7:08 PM.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2010, 8:29 PM   #17
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

budgets are like promises, they are made to be broken....

all jesting aside, if the d700 is above reach, if sports is a priority, then you will want a camera for sports, and as mark says, the 7d is probably your 2nd best bet here, and the one that is within budget.
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2010, 8:47 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Also the 7D it is a very good camera also.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2010, 2:54 AM   #19
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 77
Default

There might also be A700 sucessor comming soon (maybe PMA, two days from now).
oneguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 20, 2010, 6:36 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

But op will be paying full msrp for any new camera, and if it does not do a higher burst rate then the 5fps, it may not be ideal for sports.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:44 AM.