# Sony Alpha SLT-A77



## truetifoso

Hello. I'm new to photography and would appreciate some help in choosing a new camera. 

The camera will be used mostly to take pictures at my kids' sporting events. Between the two of them, they play tennis, basketball, baseball, and soccer. 

I know enough to know that Nikon and Canon are the industry giants, but, that said, I saw the specs of the Sony Alpha SLT-A77, and for the price it seems that this camera blows away the comparable Nikon D300s and Canon 7D. 

Am I missing something? Why does the Sony cost so much less but seemingly offers so much more? 

Is there a reason I shouldn't get the Sony?


----------



## kassad

IMHO Sony offers the best value for the money.  They also offer nice features for the amateur.    Things a Pro would do on the computer, many of the Sonys do in camera.  (HDR  Panorama).   Two things to watch out for are the electronic viewfinder.   I felt the first generation EVF in the A55 was a bit crude.   I have read that the newer EVF used in the A77 is a huge improvement.   I would try it out in a store before deciding.    Another issue that I'm concerned with on the A77 is the buffer size for burst shooting.   It is only 18 images when shooting jpegs.    This may or may not be a problem, continually shooting at 12 frames a second for 1.5 seconds isn't bad.  If the camera locks up for 30-45 seconds while clearing the buffer then it's a deal killer for sports.  This was a problem with the A55.  I'm sure this issue has been addressed with the new camera.   Bottom line is we won't know until we start seeing reviews with cameras with the final firmwares.   

I was looking the jump ship on Sony because of the lack of an enthusiast level camera.   The A77 is make me reconsidering jumping ship.


----------



## dxqcanada

Sony has aggressively tried to place their target pricing below what the big two offer on all their cameras.
With the new A3/5/6/7/8?/9? SLT series they are trying to dominate the market with product.

By all reviews the viewfinder in the A77 is vastly superior to the one in the A35/55 ... I find the viewfinder in my A55 very good.
Also consider the A65 if you want a lower price point.

Note that not matter what camera you get, most of your money will be going into the lenses ... so find out if Sony (or third party) has the lenses you need/want.


----------



## Jan Matis

kassad said:


> If the camera locks up for 30-45 seconds while clearing the buffer then it's a deal killer for sports.  This was a problem with the A55.  I'm sure this issue has been addressed with the new camera.   Bottom line is we won't know until we start seeing reviews with cameras with the final firmwares.



this I believe can be addressed by proper card ( to my knowledge you have currently 2 choices ) : 
Memory Stick PRO-HG Duo&#8482; HX ( latest ones go up to 50MB/s ) 
SanDisk Extreme Pro SDHC UHS-I Memory Card ( 45 MB/s) 

there is a wee bit about this here : Sony Alpha SLT-A77 Camera Performance - Hands-On Preview


----------



## Dp-PARIS

Sony Alpha SLT-A77 preview | Cameralabs do not rate it for sport.  I think the camera looks great, though you have to take the 12 FPS for what it is, a headline grabbing feature which when you look at it, is not that great.  It does not have a focusing system as good as the 7D for example (not as many cross type sensors), 7D will shoot JPG at 8 FPS until the memory card is full, 1.5 secs burst  on the sony really does not give you much time to capture the action.  To get 12 FPS, you need to fix the aperture, otherwise it drops to 8 FPS.  A great camera, though there are limitations.


----------



## truetifoso

First of all, thanks so much for your advice. I really appreciate it. 

So, all things being equal (including the choice of lenses, would buying the Sony over a Nikon or Canon be reasonable/prudent?


----------



## dxqcanada

Looking over the three brands ... with comparable sensors/functions/build/price ... I would go for the A77.


----------



## skieur

dxqcanada said:


> Looking over the three brands ... with comparable sensors/functions/build/price ... I would go for the A77.



I would too!

skieur


----------



## rgregory1965

I have the A55 and love the EVF and the 10 fps....it clears alot faster than advertised


----------



## RainyDay

I was considering getting the A77 when it was first announced, but I did a bit of shopping around, and ended up getting Nikon's D7000. So far I've been thrilled with it, and I wouldn't trade it for a Sony at this stage, not even the A77, as seductively awesome as it sounds!

What you have to consider is lenses, as they are the biggest factor in taking a photo. Camera bodies are nice, but in the end the optics attached to your camera is what takes the picture! I personally was not all that impressed with the Sony lens lineup. That's not to say it's not a good selection, it's just that the lenses were way to expensive for my price range! Of course, that has to do with the Zeiss optics no doubt, and if I had money to throw away, I'd do it but at the moment I can't really afford to go with Sony...

Just do your homework, so that you're aware of what you're getting yourself into. If you're into wildlife and action shooting, I'd go with either Nikon or Canon. If you're into street photography, fine art photography, or portraits, go with either a Pentax (I've owned a K-7, it was pretty alright!) or a Leica (but pretty much only millionaires can afford these). Sony is something of an odd one out for me. 

Anyway, that's my rant, hope it helped!


----------



## dxqcanada

Yes, RainyDay is correct in the aspect of lenses.
Even though there are older Minolta lenses around, the current Sony lens line up needs work ... we shall see if they work as hard on lenses as they do on the cameras.


----------



## skieur

Why are lenses a problem?  There are Minolta, Sony, Sigma, Tamron and Zeiss lenses.

skieur


----------

