# Upgrading SONY SLR camera, Advice?



## RCJPhotography

Hi everyone. 

 I am beginning to build a business after a good response with my portfolio. I have been using a DSLR basic camera the Sony A390 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sony-DSLRA3...UTF8&qid=1382189959&sr=8-1&keywords=sony+a390 for four years now and now that I am beginning to build a portfolio for a business I would like to upgrade but I cant upgrade to the top notch brand nor camera yet as I don't yet have the money to do so. I have decided to upgrade to a camera around the £399 budget as in my eyes it'll still be an upgrade. I would quite like to stay with Sony due to the lenses I have but I am not entirely sure to be honest what the best choice is. I am worried that if I go with a new brand I'll be disappointed as I have to admit I do love my camera. I found this camera Buy Sony SLTA58K 20.1MP DSLR Camera with 18-55mm Lens - Black at Argos.co.uk - Your Online Shop for Digital SLR cameras. but after searching had seen the odd negative review which made me feel doubtful. If anyone has any camera recommendations in the Sony range (for a budget) or they feel there is a better range than Sony I'd be happy to listen. I don't want to be limited manual wise as I shoot in manual and RAW. I am admittedly a bit worried about upgrading in case I don't like the upgrade, or I spend money to find its not added anything to my photography. Thank you for your time x


----------



## jaomul

People are much more likely to post negative reviews than take the time to post positive.  For the money the a58 is nice but what lenses do you have? What lighting do you use and what do you generally photograph?


----------



## RCJPhotography

I mainly use the basic lens kit I got with my SONY a390 and I have had great results with it, I also have a Sony DT 50mm AF f/1.8 SAM portrait lens. I use both natural and studio light - 2 soft boxes. I am quite basic with my equipment. I photograph people, families, children, models and so forth. I also photograph pets.


----------



## jaomul

You seem to have a good set up.  Just one more question, what is not good enough or what would you like to improve?


----------



## RCJPhotography

I am really just looking to improve the image quality. The set I have is a really old set and feel as if I am faltering behind. It's quite basic. I'd quite like to improve the quality of image I produce especially in Raw & I also find speed in which it takes photographs isn't up to scratch making it difficult to capture fast moving objects which is frustrating when capturing moving children


----------



## jaomul

The a58 should do all that for you.  But do remember it has no ovf it has an evf. Some love these and some hate them. The a58 seems to be the fastest in its class at the moment.  A guy at a club I am in uses one and gets great images but to be fair I think he could with any camera.  Another option would be to add a little and look at the a65.  This seems Sony's best value dslr.  To many options.  If the ovf  is a deal breaker for you there is no option but change brands if you want a "new"  camera


----------



## RCJPhotography

Thank you for the information. I have never used a EVF so I can't really judge what they're like however after reading up on them it does put me off as it's not quite the same as looking yourself. I have looked into the a65 but I don't think I could really afford it. If I had it my way I'd be getting an A99 but I don't have much of a budget and whilst I am just spending out don't want to spend too much and not get as much I spend back if that sort of makes sense. Do you know how the guy at the club finds the EVF? I had been thinking of a Canon and I know a lot of photographers use Nikon but I really don't want to move out of a brand to find another isn't what id expected or as good. I was reading online just before and apparently Canon and Sony are rated the best brand for professional photography so I really don't know what to do. Thank you for your comments, it's of great help


----------



## jaomul

I wouldn't say sony and canon are the most pro. canon and Nikon are probably on top due popularity alright. Others such as sony are often not looked at as serious photography companies by some. I'd say its all going to change in the near future.

It is hard to recommend a camera to you. Your lenses are not top dog but if your using them with softboxes in their sweet spot that should not be an issue. The EVF is a decision only you can make (by the way that a99 you mentioned has an evf as well, albeit of very high quality). If you change brand you also have to change lenses, flashguns and any accessories. I recommend staying with sony but don't buy for the sake of it


----------



## jaomul

Oh the guy in the club upgraded from a bridge camera so would be used to an evf either way


----------



## minicoop1985

The A58 is a great little camera. I like the fact that with the EVF, you see EXACTLY what you'll get from your photo before you take it. The translucent mirror tech seems to work quite well, and it makes for very, very little vibration in the camera, and less moving parts to eventually break. I was pretty impressed with the one I played with. Another option is a used A55. My wife just snagged one on ebay pretty cheap.

Is your 18-55 lens the SAM or SAM II? I've had horrible luck with the woman's 18-55 SAM, but her 50mm f/1.8 (probably the same one you have) is a fantastic little lens.


----------



## dxqcanada

Go and try out the newer Sony's at your local shop to see how you feel about the EVF.
The A57 is still considered the best mid range unit over the A58 which replaced it.
I really suggest you upgrade your zoom lens as it is not the best in image quality.


----------



## RCJPhotography

Jaomul - Thank you for your advice. I am used to SONY so you're right I should consider staying with them. I am considering saving a little extra to get what I am after. Thank you for your advice and help. 

Minicoop - Thank you for the advice! I am thinking of now saving a little extra to get what id really like but we'll see. Mine is the 50mm f.18. I love it but usually use the lens I got with my camera at the start as its best for capturing everything I need to capture. 

DXQCanada - I was wondering if I might be able to try the cameras out. I wasn't sure if the shops would allow you to do that. I've never heard of it being allowed but then again I haven't really spoken to anyone upgrading there camera. I'll definitely pop along and have a look. Its probably the better idea to try before I buy. Do you have any recommendations for a zoom lens? I have had a look but with my budget struggled to find one. Thank you


----------



## goodguy

All the cameras in Sony line up except the a99 are for enthusiasts and not pro's.
If you are serious about working as a pro you need pro gear.
Yes a crop sensor camera will give good results, I know I am on my 3rd crop sensor camera and love it but a pro needs pro gear and that means full frame, the low light performance of full frame is on a whole different league.
Any camera you will get from Sony new lineup will be good but not pro good, think well before you buy something that will not suit you in the future and hold you back for doing the job clients expect you you do and give the level and quality of product you should give.
If you are serious about working as a photographer then get the money you need to build your business and get the pro gear.
There are no shrort cuts if you are serious about being a pro and from my life experience the more shortcuts you will take the loger the road will be!


----------



## Kolia

Some pro are very happy with the a77. 

Sony has pro lenses too...


----------



## goodguy

Kolia said:


> Some pro are very happy with the a77.
> 
> Sony has pro lenses too...


I am sure they are but if you need to shoot in low light sutuation the a77 is not at its best, no crop sensor camera is at its best.
A pro need to have the best equipment to do its job, you cant tell your client Ahhh sorry but I dont have enough light to take the shot or you take the shot with high ISO and get a very grainy picture.

I think a serious pro needs a full frame camera and maybe have a crop sensor camera as a backup or second body.


----------



## Stevepwns

I shoot with an A77 and love it.  If you are getting good responses then keep what you have and buy lenses.  You can upgrade the body later. You will get the most improvement in image quality buy buying better lenses.  I upgraded from an A33 and it was a huge improvement but saw the most improvement after buying better lenses and doing a little testing between the two. IMO spend the money on some good glass. Sony has the 16 - 50 F2.8, great lens. They also have the Ziess glass but its really expensive. I use the Minolta 50 f1.7, Sony 16 - 50 F2.8 and the last generation 70 - 200 F2.8 primarily and have started selling prints pretty quickly. Again, in my experience, I saw the biggest improvement with new better glass. 

Whats your total budget you are working with?


----------



## Stevepwns

goodguy said:


> Kolia said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some pro are very happy with the a77.
> 
> Sony has pro lenses too...
> 
> 
> 
> I am sure they are but if you need to shoot in low light sutuation the a77 is not at its best, no crop sensor camera is at its best.
> A pro need to have the best equipment to do its job, you cant tell your client Ahhh sorry but I dont have enough light to take the shot or you take the shot with high ISO and get a very grainy picture.
> 
> I think a serious pro needs a full frame camera and maybe have a crop sensor camera as a backup or second body.
Click to expand...



Being a pro just means you get paid.  There countless award winning photographers that use crop sensors. This is simply not a true statement. Not everyone starts out with the best gear, not to mention ALL cameras out now are better than what was pro 20 years ago. So the body he has is more than capable of producing quality shots.


----------



## DiskoJoe

If youre serious about making this a business then leverage your assets and get a line of credit. Use this credit to go out and purchase a full frame and better quality lenses. If the business is successful then the gear will pay for itself. If not you still have assets that have a better resale value. Aps-c has basically no resale value what so ever.


----------



## robbins.photo

RCJPhotography said:


> Hi everyone.
> 
> I am beginning to build a business after a good response with my portfolio. I have been using a DSLR basic camera the Sony A390 Sony DSLRA390L Alpha Digital SLR Camera with SAL1855: Amazon.co.uk: Camera & Photo for four years now and now that I am beginning to build a portfolio for a business I would like to upgrade but I cant upgrade to the top notch brand nor camera yet as I don't yet have the money to do so. I have decided to upgrade to a camera around the £399 budget as in my eyes it'll still be an upgrade. I would quite like to stay with Sony due to the lenses I have but I am not entirely sure to be honest what the best choice is. I am worried that if I go with a new brand I'll be disappointed as I have to admit I do love my camera. I found this camera Buy Sony SLTA58K 20.1MP DSLR Camera with 18-55mm Lens - Black at Argos.co.uk - Your Online Shop for Digital SLR cameras. but after searching had seen the odd negative review which made me feel doubtful. If anyone has any camera recommendations in the Sony range (for a budget) or they feel there is a better range than Sony I'd be happy to listen. I don't want to be limited manual wise as I shoot in manual and RAW. I am admittedly a bit worried about upgrading in case I don't like the upgrade, or I spend money to find its not added anything to my photography. Thank you for your time x



My advice, take a look at the cameras available in your price range, make a list of features you'd like, and narrow the list down to maybe 3 or 4 cameras that fit your budget and have the features you want.  Then head to a local camera store or two and try them out.  See which one is the best fit for you personally.  I don't shoot Sony so I'm afraid I won't be of much help giving you specific advice on Sony camera's, but hopefully the more general advice will come in handy for you.


----------



## robbins.photo

jaomul said:


> The a58 should do all that for you.  But do remember it has no ovf it has an evf. Some love these and some hate them. The a58 seems to be the fastest in its class at the moment.  A guy at a club I am in uses one and gets great images but to be fair I think he could with any camera.  Another option would be to add a little and look at the a65.  This seems Sony's best value dslr.  To many options.  If the ovf  is a deal breaker for you there is no option but change brands if you want a "new"  camera



EVF quality can vary - a lot.  The EVF on the Canon SX50 I used to have, for example, was barely usable.  The EVF on the Panasonic FZ200 I have is very usable, but still no where near as good as the pentamirror view from my Nikon D5100.  As for Sony's EVF, I can't really judge as I've never used one - but I highly recommend if it's at all possible that you test one first prior to purchase.  The quality and clarity of EVF can vary widely.


----------



## goodguy

Stevepwns said:


> Being a pro just means you get paid. There countless award winning photographers that use crop sensors. This is simply not a true statement. Not everyone starts out with the best gear, not to mention ALL cameras out now are better than what was pro 20 years ago. So the body he has is more than capable of producing quality shots.



You dont seem to understand what I am saying.
I have a crop sensor camera and for my needs it is perfect, I dont think I will get any better picture if I would buy a full frame camera.
No argument crop sensor can create good pictures but for a professional crop sensor camera is a limiting factor due to low light performance.
If a client walk into your store and need pictures being taken in a low light situation then the full rame has the advantage.
What will a pro do say sorry but I cant provide high quality product because I have a crop sensor camera ?
Today full frame cameras are becoming cheaper and cheaper and I dont see the logic to get a crop sensor camera by a pro especially when the price difference is not big.

If I am a professional car mechanic I dont buy 10$ tool that can break and damage a customer car.
I buy 100$ tool that will last me a life time and I can trust never to break.
A pro attitude needs to be very different then a hobbyist, its simply a completly different world.
If you want to be a pro then get pro equipment period!


----------



## Victo

The main difference between a pro and a (good) consumer camera these days is it's durability and different working regime. It has very little to do with IQ.


----------



## goodguy

Victo said:


> The main difference between a pro and a (good) consumer camera these days is it's durability and different working regime. It has very little to do with IQ.


I am glad you agree with me, IQ in both cases is excellent but low light performance is the realm of full frame and gives a professional the flexibility to work in different environments that a crop sensor camera would be limited in.


----------



## cosmonaut

I know it seems outside your budget but the best move I ever made was going full frame. The added color depth and dynamic range is nice to have. You might consider a used a850/900. They are a pure joy to use. Even if you have to settle for some old primes to me it's worth it.


----------



## brunerww

cosmonaut - Even a used A850 is £775 on eBay UK, and a little over £300 is where RCJ said their budget limit was.

DiskoJoe - As far as borrowing goes, I am not a fan of buying capital equipment on credit, especially for unincorporated small businesses.  When such businesses fail, the owner's personal assets are often at risk.  

RCJ - in my view, it is better to operate within your means until the business is generating enough income to upgrade to full frame.

In the meantime, you can save a few pounds by keeping your existing lenses and buying your A58 for £335 from Camarthen via Amazon instead of Argo.

As others have said, your next investment should probably be quality glass, and after that, full frame. Since you'll be invested pretty heavily in Sony Alpha glass - perhaps a Sony A99 or, with an LA-EA3 adapter, the new Sony A7r.

Cheers and best of luck in your business,

Bill


----------



## Stevepwns

goodguy said:


> Stevepwns said:
> 
> 
> 
> Being a pro just means you get paid. There countless award winning photographers that use crop sensors. This is simply not a true statement. Not everyone starts out with the best gear, not to mention ALL cameras out now are better than what was pro 20 years ago. So the body he has is more than capable of producing quality shots.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You dont seem to understand what I am saying.
> I have a crop sensor camera and for my needs it is perfect, I dont think I will get any better picture if I would buy a full frame camera.
> No argument crop sensor can create good pictures but for a professional crop sensor camera is a limiting factor due to low light performance.
> If a client walk into your store and need pictures being taken in a low light situation then the full rame has the advantage.
> What will a pro do say sorry but I cant provide high quality product because I have a crop sensor camera ?
> Today full frame cameras are becoming cheaper and cheaper and I dont see the logic to get a crop sensor camera by a pro especially when the price difference is not big.
> 
> If I am a professional car mechanic I dont buy 10$ tool that can break and damage a customer car.
> I buy 100$ tool that will last me a life time and I can trust never to break.
> A pro attitude needs to be very different then a hobbyist, its simply a completly different world.
> If you want to be a pro then get pro equipment period!
Click to expand...



I agree with you actually.  But I get the impression OP doesnt have the ability to go spend 2 or 3 thousand on pro gear.  Everyone has to start somewhere.  Some of us start with less than pro gear and work our way up from there. OP seems to be in that situation. So in my opinion I would advise to work with what you have abnd what you can afford until a time comes they can upgrade to pro gear. Thats all.


----------



## goodguy

Stevepwns said:


> I agree with you actually. But I get the impression OP doesnt have the ability to go spend 2 or 3 thousand on pro gear. Everyone has to start somewhere. Some of us start with less than pro gear and work our way up from there. OP seems to be in that situation. So in my opinion I would advise to work with what you have abnd what you can afford until a time comes they can upgrade to pro gear. Thats all.


Very good point, better get basic equipment and work with it then nothing at all.
Still I think its worth taking a small loan and buy pro equipment but if OP cant then really any modern DSLR will do.
I am a strong believer that all modern DSLR whether made by Sony, Nikon, Canon Pantax...etc are very good and capable cameras that can produce very good pictures.

a57 and a58 are very good basic cameras and very well priced, they are ok to start a business with I guess.

I mean no disrespect to Sony but I think I would consider Nikon or Canon because of the huge amount of used lenses to get in the second hand market.
There are lots of good very affordable lenses of these 2 companies which is a big plus to a person who wants to start a photography business and is strapped with cash.


----------



## DiskoJoe

brunerww said:


> cosmonaut - Even a used A850 is £775 on eBay UK, and a little over £300 is where RCJ said their budget limit was.
> 
> DiskoJoe - As far as borrowing goes, I am not a fan of buying capital equipment on credit, especially for unincorporated small businesses.  When such businesses fail, the owner's personal assets are often at risk.
> 
> RCJ - in my view, it is better to operate within your means until the business is generating enough income to upgrade to full frame.
> 
> In the meantime, you can save a few pounds by keeping your existing lenses and buying your A58 for £335 from Camarthen via Amazon instead of Argo.
> 
> As others have said, your next investment should probably be quality glass, and after that, full frame. Since you'll be invested pretty heavily in Sony Alpha glass - perhaps a Sony A99 or, with an LA-EA3 adapter, the new Sony A7r.
> 
> Cheers and best of luck in your business,
> 
> Bill



Incorporating is easy. And yes there is risk when going into business or else there would be no reward. The worst thing that could happen to him is that he is stuck with a FF camera and some sweet glass that he could sell off if needed.


----------



## DiskoJoe

Stevepwns said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kolia said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some pro are very happy with the a77.
> 
> Sony has pro lenses too...
> 
> 
> 
> I am sure they are but if you need to shoot in low light sutuation the a77 is not at its best, no crop sensor camera is at its best.
> A pro need to have the best equipment to do its job, you cant tell your client Ahhh sorry but I dont have enough light to take the shot or you take the shot with high ISO and get a very grainy picture.
> 
> I think a serious pro needs a full frame camera and maybe have a crop sensor camera as a backup or second body.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Being a pro just means you get paid.  There countless award winning photographers that use crop sensors. This is simply not a true statement. Not everyone starts out with the best gear, not to mention ALL cameras out now are better than what was pro 20 years ago. So the body he has is more than capable of producing quality shots.
Click to expand...


There are many film cameras that are far superior to many digital cameras out now. I personally dont know any pro photogs that use crop sensor.


----------



## DiskoJoe

goodguy said:


> Stevepwns said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with you actually. But I get the impression OP doesnt have the ability to go spend 2 or 3 thousand on pro gear. Everyone has to start somewhere. Some of us start with less than pro gear and work our way up from there. OP seems to be in that situation. So in my opinion I would advise to work with what you have abnd what you can afford until a time comes they can upgrade to pro gear. Thats all.
> 
> 
> 
> Very good point, better get basic equipment and work with it then nothing at all.
> Still I think its worth taking a small loan and buy pro equipment but if OP cant then really any modern DSLR will do.
> I am a strong believer that all modern DSLR whether made by Sony, Nikon, Canon Pantax...etc are very good and capable cameras that can produce very good pictures.
> 
> a57 and a58 are very good basic cameras and very well priced, they are ok to start a business with I guess.
> 
> I mean no disrespect to Sony but I think I would consider Nikon or Canon because of the huge amount of used lenses to get in the second hand market.
> There are lots of good very affordable lenses of these 2 companies which is a big plus to a person who wants to start a photography business and is strapped with cash.
Click to expand...


There are plenty of Sony lenses available out there.


----------



## minicoop1985

Don't discount the Minolta AF Maxxum lenses either. There's some fantastic glass that I've been able to sample-the 70-210 "Beercan," the 28-135 "Secret Handshake"... there's some great stuff out there, and it's dirt cheap too. Sure they may be a bit loud and heavy, but they're sharp and, most importantly, well built.


----------



## DiskoJoe

Minicoop makes a good point. Lots of great Minolta glass out there. Also if you can find any older Sigma APO glass its excellent quality. I have an old 70-210mm f2.8 by Sigma. The AF is a little busted but the picture quality is immaculate. I got it for like $500. Its super sharp and really nice bokeh since it has 9 blade aperture. 




 Kayla First Take by DiskoJoe, on Flickr


----------



## Stevepwns

DiskoJoe said:


> Stevepwns said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am sure they are but if you need to shoot in low light sutuation the a77 is not at its best, no crop sensor camera is at its best.
> A pro need to have the best equipment to do its job, you cant tell your client Ahhh sorry but I dont have enough light to take the shot or you take the shot with high ISO and get a very grainy picture.
> 
> I think a serious pro needs a full frame camera and maybe have a crop sensor camera as a backup or second body.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Being a pro just means you get paid.  There countless award winning photographers that use crop sensors. This is simply not a true statement. Not everyone starts out with the best gear, not to mention ALL cameras out now are better than what was pro 20 years ago. So the body he has is more than capable of producing quality shots.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There are many film cameras that are far superior to many digital cameras out now. I personally dont know any pro photogs that use crop sensor.
Click to expand...




http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/nature-wildlife/342117-snowy-egret-flight.html

He has 2 of them, award winning and professional.


----------



## skieur

RCJPhotography said:


> Thank you for the information. I have never used a EVF so I can't really judge what they're like however after reading up on them it does put me off as it's not quite the same as looking yourself. I have looked into the a65 but I don't think I could really afford it. If I had it my way I'd be getting an A99 but I don't have much of a budget and whilst I am just spending out don't want to spend too much and not get as much I spend back if that sort of makes sense. Do you know how the guy at the club finds the EVF? I had been thinking of a Canon and I know a lot of photographers use Nikon but I really don't want to move out of a brand to find another isn't what id expected or as good. I was reading online just before and apparently Canon and Sony are rated the best brand for professional photography so I really don't know what to do. Thank you for your comments, it's of great help



The advantage to the EVF is that it shows the visual effect of your tech choices in real time through the viewfinder BEFORE you take the photo.  For example if you inadvertently put the spot light meter point on something dark, it would show the rest of your viewfinder image as over-exposed.  That would tell you to change your metering approach.  If you are shooting in black and white, then your viewfinder will show your view in black and white BEFORE you take the photo.  The viewfinder also provides much more information than an OVF, which is helpful as a quick visual check of your settings before shooting.


----------



## skieur

goodguy said:


> Kolia said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some pro are very happy with the a77.
> 
> Sony has pro lenses too...
> 
> 
> 
> I am sure they are but if you need to shoot in low light sutuation the a77 is not at its best, no crop sensor camera is at its best.
> .
Click to expand...


Having compared shots side by side with different cameras: Canon, Nikon and Sony, I find that when looked at them closely ALL images start to deteriorate at ISO 1600.

The A77 by the way allows you to shoot at slower speeds handheld which helps in low light situations....1/8 sec. to be precise in my experience.


----------



## dxqcanada

skieur said:


> The advantage to the EVF is that it shows the visual effect of your tech choices in real time through the viewfinder BEFORE you take the photo.



Yup, I can't count the number of times I forgot that I had Exposure Comp set when I was shooting with my Canon nF-1.
+2 on slide film is not a good combo !!!


----------



## jfrabat

I would not recommend the A55 mentioned by many others because you cannot adjust the EVF for low light (that was corrected in the A57).  I also prefer the A57 to the A58 (except for the low light noise; there, the A58 comes out on top - even better than the A77, in fact - but you are using lightboxes, so this should not be an issue).  In case of the A65, the EVF goes from LCD to OLED, which means that there is no lag time (by the way, the A58 is also OLED EVF).  The big diffence would be when shooting action sports or other fast moving subjects, but otherwise, the LCD works just fine.

Now, I agree with the comment, if you are planning on going pro, you shoul dconsider full frame cameras...  You could probably pick up a used A900 cheaper than the A99, but I would save up and move to that camera.  I tried it when it came out, and low light images are AMAZING!  Of course, if you do not plan to shoot in low light situations, the crop sensor will do just fine, but as a pro, you need all the advantages you can get, and a full frame is hard to beat when shooting a wedding when no lights are allowed...


----------



## Bob01721

RCJPhotography said:


> "... I cant upgrade to the top notch brand nor camera yet as I don't yet have the money to do so..."



Then, why don't you just stick with what you have until you _can _afford Your Dream?  Sony has some nice lenses planned for introduction this year.

Seriously, upgrading your camera "just to upgrade it" is a waste of money.  Put that money towards Your Dream.  

Your "vision" has _far _more to do with your results than your equipment.  With today's technology, just about _all _cameras are capable of producing great images.  I'd venture to say that if you _doubled _the amount of investment in equipment, the images you'd produce wouldn't be noticeably "different," much less "better" than what you're doing now.

Anyone here disagree?


----------



## skieur

Just as there is no such thing as a top notch brand of car, there is no such thing as a top notch brand of camera.  It really depends on the type of shooting you plan on doing.  A lot of journalists use Nikons and a lot of sports shooters use Canons.  Leica lenses are apparently the best for nature photography but overall differences are minimal.  Complicating things, internally within a brand of camera there are quality differences in the images from various models.  Moreover features are often dissimilar between cameras, so it is like trying to compare apples and oranges.

A point and shoot with a large sensor, 20 megapixels and fine lenses would produce a sharper image than some DSLRs but most photographers would still go for the DSLR.


----------



## DiskoJoe

Stevepwns said:


> DiskoJoe said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stevepwns said:
> 
> 
> 
> Being a pro just means you get paid.  There countless award winning photographers that use crop sensors. This is simply not a true statement. Not everyone starts out with the best gear, not to mention ALL cameras out now are better than what was pro 20 years ago. So the body he has is more than capable of producing quality shots.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There are many film cameras that are far superior to many digital cameras out now. I personally dont know any pro photogs that use crop sensor.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/nature-wildlife/342117-snowy-egret-flight.html
> 
> He has 2 of them, award winning and professional.
Click to expand...


Sorry, didnt think about wildlife photogs. Crop sensor actually makes a lot of sense because the crop factor addes more focal length which is crucial unless you have gobs to spend on high end lenses.


----------



## minicoop1985

skieur said:


> Just as there is no such thing as a top notch brand of car, there is no such thing as a top notch brand of camera.



HASSELBLAD UBER ALLES :hail::hail::hail:










:mrgreen: You all knew that was coming, I'd bet.


What Sony did you go with? If I had to pick it would be the a850. Older, sure, but personally I prefer a prism to an EVF and the 850's barebones approach. That's personal preference, as the technology in the a99 is far beyond that of the a850.


----------



## Fox_Racing_Guy

minicoop1985 said:


> HASSELBLAD UBER ALLES :hail::hail::hail:



Maybe you would be interested in the "New" Hasselblad HV for $11,500 (re-badged Sony A99) 





Official: Hasselblad HV A-mount camera launched! Costs $11,500! | sonyalpharumors


----------



## dxqcanada

It puzzles me why Hasselblad is doing this ... though I have not paid attention to this company's past to see if they did this before.
... and whoever their designers are ... they really need to get their vision checked ... or their head.


----------



## skieur

minicoop1985 said:


> skieur said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just as there is no such thing as a top notch brand of car, there is no such thing as a top notch brand of camera.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HASSELBLAD UBER ALLES :hail::hail::hail:.
Click to expand...




mmm. Hasselblad is swedish and uber alles is German. It is medium format and more a photo studio camera than anything else. It produces excellent photos but it is definitely not for getting the shot in sports, photojournalism, etc.


:mrgreen: You all knew that was coming, I'd bet. ...................Yes, I did.


What Sony did you go with? If I had to pick it would be the a850. Older, sure, but personally I prefer a prism to an EVF and the 850's barebones approach. That's personal preference, as the technology in the a99 is far beyond that of the a850.[/QUOTE]

I went with the A77. It is quiet and easy to handhold at very low speeds as in 1/10 sec. 12 frames per second is great for burst shooting and the DRO adjustments and in camera HDR provide some options in difficult lighting. Multi-shot noise reduction and burst bracketing can also be useful even without a tripod. I did not pick the A99 because I am waiting for a better processing chip.


----------



## jfrabat

dxqcanada said:


> skieur said:
> 
> 
> 
> The advantage to the EVF is that it shows the visual effect of your tech choices in real time through the viewfinder BEFORE you take the photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yup, I can't count the number of times I forgot that I had Exposure Comp set when I was shooting with my Canon nF-1.
> +2 on slide film is not a good combo !!!
Click to expand...


Of course, this is only useful if you actually pay attention to the settings in the EVF (I am just saying, because, obviously, I have NEVER EVER - fingers crossed - done this rookie mistake before)...



Fox_Racing_Guy said:


> minicoop1985 said:
> 
> 
> 
> HASSELBLAD UBER ALLES :hail::hail::hail:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you would be interested in the "New" Hasselblad HV for $11,500 (re-badged Sony A99)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Official: Hasselblad HV A-mount camera launched! Costs $11,500! | sonyalpharumors
Click to expand...



Darn; you beat me to it!



minicoop1985 said:


> Don't discount the Minolta AF Maxxum lenses either. There's some fantastic glass that I've been able to sample-the 70-210 "Beercan," the 28-135 "Secret Handshake"... there's some great stuff out there, and it's dirt cheap too. Sure they may be a bit loud and heavy, but they're sharp and, most importantly, well built.



I myself have the Minolta 50mm 1.7; had to fiddle a bit with the AF micro adjustment to get it to work right, but it is a pretty sharp lens (I typically use it at f/2 and above, though, as it gets a tad soft in the edges at f/1.7, but ALL lenses are sharper when not wide open anyway).



On different subjects, I agree that it would probably be best to invest in new glass and save the body for last, but if you are dead set on changing your body, I would go to the A57; even though the A58 is better in low light, the A57 is tougher (I think).  From what I have heard (not officially, of course), the A57 was actually the body of the A65, but, because of the floodings in Thailand, the body planned for the A57 could not be built, so they used the one that was originally planned for the A65, which is why the A57 has such a great body to it.

Anyway, keep us posted on how everything turns out...


----------



## minicoop1985

Fox_Racing_Guy said:


> minicoop1985 said:
> 
> 
> 
> HASSELBLAD UBER ALLES :hail::hail::hail:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe you would be interested in the "New" Hasselblad HV for $11,500 (re-badged Sony A99)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Official: Hasselblad HV A-mount camera launched! Costs $11,500! | sonyalpharumors
Click to expand...


I have a better idea. Buy a99, rebadge it as the Hasselblad HV.

Why the hell... What's happening to Hasselblad? They're turning into a two bit rebrander... This Stellar thing looks like it's just a rebranded Sony too, I think. Not sure about the Lunar.

Hasselblad's Swedish, and yes, that's German, because why not.

As for studio... Depends on what you use. I rarely use my Hasselblad stuff in a studio. I only shoot with my Oly (soon to be a Nikon through magic) in my studio. I use my 1600f for street photography, landscapes, my son, macro, and basically an all-around, all purpose camera if I want all 6x6 shots (no chance using it for sports as the focus ring is way too slow), and my 2000FC/M for staying put on a shelf because of ripped shutter curtain photography. 


Enjoy your a77. I hear a lot of good stuff about those things.


----------



## skieur

goodguy said:


> Kolia said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some pro are very happy with the a77.
> 
> Sony has pro lenses too...
> 
> 
> 
> I am sure they are but if you need to shoot in low light sutuation the a77 is not at its best, no crop sensor camera is at its best.
> A pro need to have the best equipment to do its job, you cant tell your client Ahhh sorry but I dont have enough light to take the shot or you take the shot with high ISO and get a very grainy picture.
> 
> I think a serious pro needs a full frame camera and maybe have a crop sensor camera as a backup or second body.
Click to expand...


A few years ago, one of the editors of Popular Photography indicated in the magazine that related to the photos submitted for their articles, they no longer noticed any quality difference between crop sensor and full frame shots.


----------



## jfrabat

skieur said:


> A few years ago, one of the editors of Popular Photography indicated in the magazine that related to the photos submitted for their articles, they no longer noticed any quality difference between crop sensor and full frame shots.



I think there IS a difference when there is bad (little) light; I own a Sony A77, and I got my hands on a A99 a while back (I work for Sony, so I took the A99 sample hom for about a week to play with it), and the difference in low light/high ISO is DRASTIC.  With good light, the A77 will make AWESOME pictures, but the A99 blows it out of the water in poor lighting conditions.  Can't speak for the other brands, but there IS a difference there...

I still prefer the A77, and it is STILL the camera that best suits my needs (cost, fps, pop-up flash to control off camera flash, etc.), but the A99 does have an advantage in certain situations...


----------

