Is the Sony A550 a good choice?

[Colin Southern]

I think that there's often a tendency for people (when comparing cameras) to mentally or physically list the specs and then give each spec a winning vote ... eg

Weight: Camera A is 625 grams, Camera B is 655 grams - so 1 vote for Camera A ...

... and so on and so forth for megapixels, frames per second, video capability, ultrasonic sensor clean etc.

However instead of voting one area of one camera better than the other, I think they often need to have a column that says "no real difference" and perhaps another that says "more than adequate". eg in the real world when you're lugging around an 80kg body, a difference of 30g between cameras is approx zero. The difference between a 12mp camera and a 14mp camera is again - in practical terms zero etc.

The problem with doing this though is that when you do this for all cameras in a given price bracket, they pretty much ALL come out with specifications and features that are - in the real world - pretty much the same. In - say - the sub $1000 market you're not going to find one brand that stands out with 21mp - 10 fps - 6 inch review screen etc. For a given price point nearly all cameras will have similar features, functions, and specifications; there's certainly a HUGH overlap between most models. And to be honest, to a large degree it probably doesn't make a heck of a lot of difference what you get, within your selected price bracket - I'm sure if I got an equivalent Nikon body instead of my Canon, once I got over the learning curve, the shots would probably look much the same.

[Shadowman]

I think that there's often a tendency for people (when comparing cameras) to mentally or physically list the specs and then give each spec a winning vote ... eg

Weight: Camera A is 625 grams, Camera B is 655 grams - so 1 vote for Camera A ...

... and so on and so forth for megapixels, frames per second, video capability, ultrasonic sensor clean etc.

When it comes to weight my only concern is the weight of the lens. I'm thinking of purchasing a lens that will add another 1700 grams to the weight of the body and I know that even with image stabilization, vibration reduction I am going to need a tripod, bean bag, tree, or fence to support the camera. Luckily, I won't have to carry the tree or fence around with me but if I need to rely on a tripod, I want to be able to carry it with me on long trips. The bean bag is not an option if the ground is wet.

[Philjam10]

Reply to All: Just to show you I'm listening, I took a test drive yesterday of 3 equivalents- the Sony, the Canon and the Nikon at a specialty camera store which has quite a few branches, not an electronics store thet has everthing for the obvious reason. And additionally, I'm in the middle of nowhere. I didn't drive the Penetax or the Olympus because they're not popuar up here and that causes a distance problem for repairs etc.
To my feel:
a-The Nikon is excellent; sony a550 a little less,and the Canon not at all. All cameras had their 200mm lens in for weight. Remember I'm a bit of a crippled on my right side, especially at the end of the day.
b-The heavier 300mm Sony lens is a beauty-weight ,ease of use etc. Its the one I should buy, but its close to $900 with tax.
c-After reading the reviews---I think brand name has a big loyalty factor, but I don't want to pay for it. I want the camera to do a good job for me as I grow. The store made me an offer on the a550 with the 18-55, and 18-200 of $1249 which is one lens better than the others right now.
d-I'm not buying until Feb-March so I'll watch all prices but especially Nikon and Sony until then. For price, I can get the stores to match and give me something-a strap?
I'v got the 550manual and I'll read it.
I'll continue this shortly-please comment.

[Philjam10]

Hi Again: I checked out the web sites that Amberglass provided for Lens and the prices are good. The $Cdn is almost at par and I think the customs duties are about 20%, and US postage is cheaper than Cdn. So this is sure a viable alternative.

Still on Lens---I read a review of the Pro-optic 500mm mirror lens (all camera Brands) for about $159 as a viable cost alternative to 500mm glass lens.It said the shutter spead is slower but it or its 800mm edition is OK for wildlife.

Any comments?

[Amberglass]

Phil,

Spring would be a good time to purchase a camera because often times many brands will be offering rebates.

Be aware the Sony's have the same crop factor reach of 1.5x, just like Nikon's smaller sensor series of D300s and below. So please remember to multiply the focal of the lens by 1.5x to give you the equivalent.

Ex. when mounting a 50 mm lens on your camera and looking thru the viewfinder, you're actually getting the equivalent of 75 mm not 50 mm. A 300 mm would actually be 450 mm; in practical daily use (unless you're into shooting wildlife or some field spots) that's beyond the call of duty.

Also most kit lenses have apertures that are too small for indoor or poor lighting. Since you're on a tight budget, a hot shore mounted flash would currently be out of your reach. The pop up flash gives off a very harsh light, a pop up diffuser would soften the light for poor lighting, but I would recommend that you get a faster prime instead of the kit lens.

By getting a wider aperture prime of f/1.8-1.4 (focal length between 24-50 mm), it will allow more light in and basically you can get away without supplementing with flash (depending on the available light) in poor lighting conditions. This would also be a perfect way for you to learn all about exposure and depth of field since you're making the jump to dslr. Oh and a Joby Gorilla Tripod (http://joby.com/gorillapod/slr/).