I planning to purchase a digital SLR?

The Sony Alpha is my top choice beacuse I'm told that Minolta film SLR lenses fit (I own one of these). Is this a good choice? I plan to get the body only. Do I need to buy memory or does this come with camera?

If you're planning on getting a Digital SLR, I think you'd be better off getting a new camera and lenses. The old SLR lenses just might not have the technology new DSLRs give you. I highly suggest getting a Canon EOS series. They tend to be the best bang for your buck and Canon has one of the best reputations in camera making.

Well considering you have your money already invested in the Minolta lenses then yes a Sony Alpha would be your best choice. If your Minolta lenses are the lower grade lenses then you might consider just going with a Nikon or Canon SLR which both make superior lenses.

The camera comes with NO memory. The Alpha's stabilization system is in its body. A nice thing and makes the really good Sony lens cheaper than Canon EOS which each lens is stabilized. Your old Minolta autofocus lens will work depending on their quality. There's a lot of excellent quality used Minolta autofocus lens around too. Spring for a bounce flash too. You won't regret it.

Sony's Alpha is really bad. I would either wait till they get the kinks out of their camera or just buy a different brand. I never liked Minolta mounts, they seem too tight in my opinion. Compared to the rest of the DSLRs out there right now the Sony Alpha is one of the worst. I would consider the Nikon D80 or the Canon Rebel XTi (400D). No Sony's built in stabliztion is not as good as Canon or Nikon's IS and VR lenses. Its better to have an optical IS or VR than a bulit in stablization. The sensor cant always match the focal point and you cannot preview the stablization before you take the shot so you do not know where the sensor is picking up light. Optical stablization shifts the acutally focal point onto the center of the sensor by move the lenses inside. This gives you a live preview of your shot and you can see what the lenses is doing with the shot.

My choice is the Xti (400D). Its cheaper the the D80 and it takes about the same quality picutres as the D80. The D80 does have more professional features on it such as the spot meter, but most of the features on the D80 I didnt need like trimming, red eye reduction, small picture, etc. The D80 is a great camera but for the price, I could get the 30D, but I do a lot of sport shots so the 30D isnt the most appealing camera if you dont need the fast FPS. The Canon cameras do take better JPEG files, which are great if you do not want ot do any post production after wards. But at the RAW level, both the D80 and the XTi are evenly matched, from there it depends on your skills and the type of lenses you get. For Canon get their red ringed lenses, I tried one and I couldnt go without one, any Canon with a red ring should have xx-xx mm f/x L <--- the L stands for Luxury which is Canons pro line. For Nikon their gold rings are the best ones they have (I do not know the name for their pro lenses)

Nikon vs Canon, this agrument can go on forever with flame wars. Nikon has better optics in my opinion (my dad owns a film Nikon) and Canon seems to have better in camera firmware than Nikon ( I own the XTi so I am a little biased to my camera).

The D40 I would not recommond. Just get the D80 if your going with Nikon, all lenses work for it and it will blow your mind with the imagine quality.

If your going with Canon get the XTi if you are a starter. If not the 30D is like going from one scoop of ice cream to a ice cream sunday. I didnt need all the features on the 30D like the spot meter so I just got the XTi. Plus the all in one LCD makes it easier to read my settings rather than looking at the status LCD on the top of 30D.


Just remember 80% of chocing a SLR is based on personal opinion (rough est.). If you have used a Canon use a Canon, if you have used a Nikon use a Nikon. Go to a local camera store and try one out yourself and see which one you like.

hey...i hav tried the sony alpha dslr before...and i must say i was a little disappointed with it. for the price it is nt worth it..i rather spent that amount of money on the nikon d80 or the canon 400d. Spending a little more money...and i can get the canon 30d which is an awesome fast response camera which is great for sports photography.

the sony is nt worth the buck...the IS is tacky and the noise lvl is high.

if u dun mind spendin ur money ...get the canon 30D or D80
if ur tight on budget get the canon 400d or nikon d40/40x instead

I'll just echo the chorus. I would normally say to buy into the system where you already own lenses, but you only own ONE lens. In the big picture, this does not justify sticking yourself with what is apparently a mediocre camera.

Check these review sites and see what they think. I won't get into the Nikon vs. Canon debate tonight, but stay away from the Sony.

http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/3569/10m...

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/elect...

http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content... [Note the navigation menu near the top of the review]

Given that you already own some Minolta lenses you probably shouldn't worry too much about getting another camera.

Memory usually needs to be purchased separately, although some serious wholesalers like B&H in NY include 2GB cards as packages with some camera bodies.

Hope this helps!

Ignacio