Discussion in 'Photography Forums' started by loz, Sep 5, 2007.
Can someone post the specs for this for me !
It looks really nice, I went right through the UK flash site. I don't know the cost though.
I would have one over a D40 just from the spec though we still have to see what the performance is like.
The announcement day was always tomorrow so if you missed the flash site, it should be up again soon.
There is tons about the spec info on camera site forums like DPReview.
There are some new lenses too including a 16-105mm std zoom.
Noticed that warehouseexpress have just today dropped the sony alpha body price to £349.00 from £389.00
As expected, it has the D300 sensor. Interesting that it shares the same LCD. Canon will NOT be happy if the A700 and D300 trap the 40D in a pincer movement
Sony don't have a great choice of lenses... and have you seen the price of them?
But yeah, great to have some healthy competition, that can only be good for Canon users in the long run.
I hope it not too cheap, only got my A100 a couple of weeks ago.
I wouldn't worry to much. I'd be very surprised if it's under £800 for the body.
/me prepares to eat his hat
My Alpha body & Sigma 17-70 lens has just arrived in my office via city link
(3 days late)
And i dont care what the new model costs because i chose what i chose because thats what i wanted, and it did not cost me a bean(see my post in the alpha thread last friday)
Now what do i do, do i leave it in the sealed parcel and have the pleasure of slowly unwrapping it at home or do i open it now
I think i will just stare at the parcel now and again for a few hours and think about it.
Get the battery charged !!!!! and read the manual
Yandros, how do you know that it is the same sensor in both the A700 and the D300?
Looks like your hat is safe Scott or at least you should nibble the brim
Just googled it and on photographyblog it says body only is $1400.00
Hands on preview on DPReview
Just got an email from Sony you can now pre-order.
* Body only
* 12.24 Megapixels
* 3” LCD (921K dots)
* Magnesium body
£999.00 inc. VA
Was hopping around the 40d price but it don't look like it for a while.
I don't think it is competitive at the price.
I am sure Sony think it has a better feature set than the 40D which justifies it, but it won't attract new DSLR users at that price when they compare it to the 40D, nor persuade any Canikon users to switch....
So just get an A100 and love it as I do! All this keeping up with 'NEW' stuff is rediculous! Unless you need a higher level model, most of us mortals are satisfied with our entry level models. Leave the big stuff for Pro's and those with rediculous bank balances.
I love my A100 to bits . . it's more than I hoped for. Hurrah for me!
Well of course I already have...
And not only have you bought the same camera as me, you also take the same pictures, just days after I did
(taken on 2nd sept)
You're not stalking me are you.
Well there's a thing! Talk about a small world. NY is great innit!
Yep. Will be back there again week after next... work, work, work
God Pirate, don't you get it? The A700 is 7 times better than the A100
Pricing wise, at £999 it seems to be between the 40D and the D300 which is where it seems to be positioned on features. However it's way outside my budget and the images that I have seen haven't convinced me that it's worth moving on from the 5D to it.
I guess that I will have to hope that the 5D remains reliable and wait for the A100 replacement or sell my lenses and go elsewhere (which I don't want to do).
I read the A700 has much better noise levels at 1600. If so, it it is a very good upgrade and worth the extra cash for me.
Its your money and can spend as you wish, but it does seem a bit strange to spend all that extra money just because it is better at controlling noise levels @ ISO 1600, unless of course you intend to shoot the majority of photos at this ISO, maybe thats what you do and its an important issue for you, in that case spend the extra money and be very happy with your purchase.
But consider how often you would actually want or need to shoot at ISO 1600
i think the majority of photos we take are usually between 100-400 ISO
Only an opinion Tambiman and i am sure you will be very happy if you decide to go ahead and buy the A700 (and make us all envious)
If you didn't have a DSLR or lenses already my guess is that either the 40D or D300 would be more attractive options than this new Sony offering.
Do they still stick that ghastly red alpha sign on their dust caps, chav stylee?
Actually noise levels in general are much better, also at 800/400 ISO. This means better PQ in low light settings. Which is great for me, because that 's the only real complaint i had of my A100. (indoor wedding-photography)
If reviews are as positive as the previews, I will consider an upgrade. Probably the kit with the CZ 16-80, because I have great expectations of that lens.
Why would the Canon 40D for example be a more attractive option than the Sony A700?
I guess from your comment about the logo that you just don't like anything from Sony.
At a guess, lenses, lenses, lenses....
Erm . . doesn't Sony have all of Konica/Minolta's 250+ back catalogue of lenses . . plus Sigma, Tokina, Tamron and Sonys own brand?
I don't think lenses has anything to do with it. There's more than enough in Sony's lineup.
Once the dust settles and the price starts to fall off, there will be a new Pro version available. I wonder if the Nikon/Canon owners will be selling their D40's and 400d's if any new models have the features of Sony, Olympus, Pentax and Panasonic!
In any case, everyone made their choice for whatever reason. Live with it!
I agree with Radiohead, I think lenses have a lot to do with it. I use a Minolta Dynax 7D, and also have a couple of Minolta 35mm bodies although they don't see much use. I'm currently on the lookout for a decent zoom (Ideally a Sigma EX 70-200 F2.8 but Sigma no longer make a Minolta fit), but nobody seems to stock new, and most of the second hand market seems to be taken up by Canon and Nikon system lenses. Even when they do come up for sale the Minolta fit lenses seem to command a premium.
I recently enquired in Jessops about the Sigma 10-20, but was advised that they didn't stock anything in a Minolta fit and it could take up to 3 months to get hold of one.
I'm tempted to move to Canon or Nikon, but begrudge doing so as the 7D is a great camera.
Separate names with a comma.