Dynax Digital Forums

I currently have a minolta 7D with a sigma 24-70 EX2.8, minolta 50 f1.7, sigma 105 f2.8 and the minota 70-210 f4. However I need to set myself up with a system that will allow the following:

- main passion is landscapes and some wildlife
- however started doing weddings for friends and some portraits
- Also need to be able to do band gigs

The problem I have is that I love the look of the A900, however, I can't see one camera that will do all the above well. I have been toying with the idea of a two body system, such as:

Sony A900 & A700
Nikon D700 & D300
Canon 5D MKII & 50D

All the systems seem to have their merits and short comings. I would love to go FF and therefore need to invest in a few new lens toget the most out of them which ever system I go with (16-24, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 85 f2.8 or better)

 The nikon seems to have the most advance AF system for wildlife ect, great high ISO for gigs/churchs! but the lowest resolution for blowing landscapes up (and the D3x is just to expensive). Canons new ones look good bar the black dot issues. However I loved the Minolta way of tings and see many good things to come from Sony, but what do people think of using this system professionally? I'm tempted with the A700 but is that daft if its soon to be repaced? I think I've started to out think myself to much about it all!!! but any advices peoples experiences with these would be greatly appreciated. thanks in advance

I really don't see the need for APS-C anymore because you can just crop the 21+mp FF picture, unless you want the extra DOF.
You lense line up looks fine, all you need to do is add 16-35f2.8 and if Sony, Zeiss version will be out soon.
I think the Canon 5DII is fine, people tend to exagerate "issues".
Logically with all the lenses you already have you can just go A900 and CZ 16-35f2.8 and be all set. That is why you are here correct?

..
I think computers have still got some catching up to do before an a900 FF sensor is viable on most consumer hardware. Laptops are the thing now and a 250GB (which is still on the high end for most laptops) just isn't going to cut it with 36MB RAW files.
..

I guess if we take ourselves back to the days of the KM 7D, the filesizes of the 7D in its time were actually larger than the A900 files today (relatively, since PC HDD have increased faster then camera MP ).  Same goes for the performance with processing the files.

I was actually shooting RAW with the A700, but I've now switched to cRAW for everyday use (landscapes etc I'll still use RAW) so filesizes are not that much bigger for me between the A700 and A900.

I guess we are in an age where 1TB of external storage how costs less than £100.  I remember paying £100 for 512MB of CF for my KM A1 Prosumer camera - I guess you can get a 16GB CF for £100 nowadays.

The A900 high ISO performance will significantly outstrip the 7D.
I've not heard anything about a900 having problems with humidity up in Brissy - I can't see why it would have any more trouble with than the nikon or canon.

I think you'd get very comparable, and very good results, from either the sony or nikon. Personally I'd put the canon aside.

I guess the advantage of having a 7D back up and a few lenses might tip it toward Sony, but either way you're looking at an fantastic setup

Oh, and if you're thinking of getting an 85mm lens, make sure you check out the Sony/Carl Zeiss 85/1.4. It's stunning

Yer its all really helpfull so thanks for everyones reply. I'll get to reading those reviews latter in teh day (wife wants an IKEA run  ;(   ). But just to clarrify this, you reckon the A900 has better ISO useability than the A700 (or D300)?

dhroser- I will try to make this a short answer 'cause there is a very long one that would explain much more about the different systems... for my personalt credentials I shoot regularly with all three sytems and with the top end models of each. I can only tell you about my very own experiences and this has to do with a lot with what LIKE...
1. there is no camera out there that can do all perfectly well or I guess we would have it all by now
2. all three camera brands are perfectly well able to deliver outstanding image quality
3. image quality depends mostly (beside the photographer) on the lenses you use- so don't go for a top camera with crappy lenses or you will regret it
4. Canon has been the camera of choice particulalry for landscape- and (!) I said "particularly" and to some extent for wildlife as well
5. Nikon has been in the past mainly associated with reportage style and low light photogaphy- so good for your gigs
6. Sony has off lately become a serious contender- even so serious that it appears that some Canikon users are now considering the system for the first time
7. Noise issues are very relativ: there are very good programs out there that can deal with that problem. It also depends on carefully shooting style. There is a lot out there on the net that explains how to set each of the cameras to optimally perform in low light situations. Nikon has the edge on low light (for your gigs) at the moment but one more persone trying to tell me that you can blow up a 25600 ISO shot of the Nikon camera for exhibition purposes and I will turn into a killer- this is rubbish!
8. The lens line up/and quality of lenses is IMHO best with Sony- Nikon has some problems on that front- Canon comes very close but I prefer CZ lenses and not for the name!
9. So it comes to handling and preferences: flash system with Canons are purely crap (IMHO)/ Nikon is the best on that front with Sony following closely. I personally hate the menu system of the Canons and love the handling of the Sony.

So in a nutshell: for me it would be between the Nikon or the Sony. Now one other point between these two: Nikons tend to accumulate very easily dust on the sensor- so more cleaning needed. On the other hand you can use the Nikon as a hammer- it is very well build!

My advice: go to a shop and really handly both. If you can affor financially rent both systems for a days and see how you get on. Really it depends a lot on handling and how you like the "feel" of it; also on how quickly you get used to the menu systems and so on.
Last point over -exaguration or not: the Cano does have a problem and until it is not clear what it is I would not spend all that money. For me it is not a question of how big the problem is but the fact that very like Canon knew about it but could not solve it. It appears that this little black dot issue is a sensor problem and after the AF problems with the DsMKIII which was played down by Canon for a long time before finally admitting this problem I just don't trust the company- but than... that's my very personal opinion. (If I would own that particular Canon model I would also not be amused about the fact that Canon brought out the new 5D MKII with literally nearly identical specs just a "couple" or thousand pounds cheaper...)
Good luck with your decision!
Stef.

Thanks very much for your reply I eally appreciateyour thoughts......although I'm always up for hearing the long answer to about he different systems. Its  good to hear that the Sony system is gaining popularilty with pro users as this must be a good thing in continuing the development of the sony setup. Two things I especially found interesting in your comments were;

- that Nikon have a problem with their lens line up, I for a reason I'm not really sure why always had it that canons lens were seen as not quite as good as the Nikor ones? But its really reasuring to hear that the sony CZ lens are truely regarded as being top players. For interest what about the non-CZ Sony lens?

- I don't know enough about thesony flshes, however I have seen really good things using the Nikon, I love the way you can control 4 remote units (change intensity ect) from the master one, does sony have any feature like this?

I also need to read up a lot more about the ISO levels and noise. One of the things I am trying to establish is if there was a Sony unit that would allow me to produce decent (A5 magazine type) prints from gigs at higher ISO (1600+). I have had a play around with all three makers cameras and generally find the Sony the easiest to use, followed by the Nikon and definately last the Canon.  I'm goingn to go into to town later this week to have a play with them, thanks again for your help, much appreciated.

And some more bedtime reading...

Sony A900 and Canon 5D MKII  - The New Market Leaders Duke it Out
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/a900-5dmkii.shtml