I am looking to get a new DSLR due to the availability of the lenses for the Sony. I currently have a Sony A100 and am looking to get a Cannon or Nikon as a replacement. Any suggestions on which way to go? I am a beginner right now but do not want to buy a lot of lenses for a camera (Sony) that has limited expandability. Your suggestions are appreciated.

 

clicky

 

5D.......I wish people would search for these things

 

thanks for your opinoin. That is all I was asking for not a run down on the cameras. I have already done the spec research and wanted to get some real world opinions.

 

IMO it's all budget dependant. If your budget allows, go 5D. Pick up a 5D, slowly amass a selection of lenses, and then stop, you don't need anything else (provided you aren't shooting sports and don't need faster FPS and the additional .6 crop factor that makes 200mm lenses pretend to be 320's). However, if your budget doesn't allow for that, a 30D or even better a 40D would be a great place to start. And all depending on how far down the rabbit hole you want to go, that might be where it ends. Not knowing your intentions for the future makes it tough to give suggestions. If you want to be hardcore and your checkbook can handle it, hell pick up a 1DsM3 and call it a week.

Notice every camera I referenced was from the superior Canon brand. Yup, that's how we roll here (well, almost all of us).

Oh, and if the choice has anything to do with a 5D, wait a few days. Rumor has it word will either come down or not come down on January 24th on the next iteration of the camera. Be a bummer to make an ill informed decision. No clue how reputable the rumor is, but personally I'm putting off my 5D purchase at least another week.

 

Jimmy - I can definitely recommend Canon

 

I'm not sure what you are complaining about re lens choice. Your Sony A100 uses a Minolta A-mount, which means you have a large number of lenses to choose from. Anything that mounts on a Minolta Maxxum mounts on your camera, and there are plenty of new lenses on the market for your body.

But you point out the real deciding factor people ought to consider prior to buying into an SRL system - lenses. Questions are always "which takes better pictures," or "which has a higher burst rate," when the question should be "which has the lenses I want?"

FWIW, a perceived imitation in lens line-up isn't a handicap that one might think. Unless you plan on dumping tons of money on special-purpose lenses that are really not suited to the kinds of photography most people actually pursue, there isn't anything lacking in the Sony Alpha/Minolta A-mount line-up. And Minolta had made several lenses for Leica as well as produced a Leica-branded body so it's not like they were sub-par manufacturers or something.

 

You suggest he trade his $600 body in on a ~$1500 body? I'm thinking the OP would have started with a $1500 "beginner" camera in the first place if that's what they wanted to do.

I really wish people would think a little about these things.

 

the general budget rule is that you pay 1/3 for the camera body and 2/3 on lenses. then you go over budget when you want a flash and other goodies :]

 

Well I'm selling my Canon 400D. Good entry level DSLR. Body + grip, with batteries, warranties, software, everything you need except the lens.

PM me.