Sony A100 v's Canon 400D

countryjimbo

Hi, I'm planning on buying a new DSLR in B&H week after next. I'm new to DSLR's and am trying to choose between the A100 & the 400D. Most reviews I read have them pretty even with some favouring the 400D's sharpness. I have a Minolta Dynax 500si and a 100 - 300 af zoom lens. I'm hoping the lens will fit the A100. I'm thinking of getting a 2gb CF card, something like the ultra III from Sandisk (133x). I intend to get some action shots using continuous mode, is the ultra III fast enough and is 2gb big enough. Any advise greatly appreciated. Thanks Jim.

Roen

2Gb is plenty, and the 400D has the same AF system as the 20/30D so yeah the camera/card combo is grand...only thing is you'll need pretty fast glass (expensive) for action shots. I am assuming you mean sports and not wildlife when you say action by the way. The 3fps may or may not be fast enough though in either case.
The 2Gb card will take about 500 max quality jpegs or about 180 ish Raws.

I don't know anything about the Sony camera so I can't offer any advice there I'm afraid.

countryjimbo

Is anyone using the Sony A100? Am I mad to be even considering it??

Peteee

The wiki entry ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_alpha#Lenses_and_Tele-converters ) would seem to suggest that virtually all Konica/Miolta lenses made in the last 20 years will work fine with the Sony.

I've heard nothing but good things from what I've seen in reviews. One thing to note is the Sonys inbuilt SteadyShot

from dpreview.com

"Super SteadyShot is an (according to Sony) improved version of Konica Minolta's CCD stabilization Anti-Shake system. In our tests we observed a two stop shutter speed advantage using Super SteadyShot, which is good but not quite up to the 3.5 stops claimed. I'm also still not convinced that the 'hit rate' of sharp images is as good as a lens based optical stabilization system."

Alun

I kind of wish this had been available when I got my dSLR. Previously I had a pretty top-of-the-range Minolta Dynax film SLR and quite an investment in lenses. I looked at the Minolta offerings at the time (Dynax 5D?) and was singularly unimpressed. A nice camera in some ways, but it was (as were the Dynax film SLR's) an ergonomic nightmare with buttons and knobs you didn't know whether to pull, push, twist or what. The Sony on the other hand, looks nice and logically laid out, and a lot easier to use. In the end I sold every bit of my Minolta kit I had and bought a D70s. No regrets really, but if the Sony had been available at the time I may well have gone for that instead.

TempestSabre

I was looking at both of these and I reckon you should go try them in a shop. They are very different to hold. The Canon is a lot smaller and the Sony a lot bigger. Personally I decided to look past the technical specs, (I'm only starting out anyway) and went for the one I liked handling better, and that was the Nikon D70s. I think I would have gone for the Sony next though, as that felt closer to the Nikon in terms of handling, and just felt better than the Canon.