i love my d7000 so i dont think i would switch over. BUT, do have my eye on Sony.

I am not temped by the A77 so much as I am by the NEX7. I'm sick of large cameras, and though the A77 isn't as large as my D200, it is larger than I want. I thought that eventually Nikon would release a digital version of the FM2. I was wrong. I'll probably buy a NEX7 or its 35mm~ successor, and get some adapters, possibly selling all my Nikon lenses so I can get small rangefinder primes that fit the body much better. As long as the EVF is high quality and lets me take my photos relatively well, that's all I care about as any digital camera now will kick the tail of my D200 in every single way.

And from I've seen, the A77/NEX7 ISO is very good till 3200, maybe even higher. I'd put it at the same level or higher than the D5000, which amazed me next to my D200.

NikoDoby said:
Anyone else tempted by the just announced Sony a77? I think the new OLED electronic viewfinder is the way of the future! The a77 has 24 megapixels, 12fps, and lots of video features like buil-in stereo microphone! The body design and layout reminds me of Canon, which in this case means Sony is improving their ergonomics. I think the a77 will steal a lot of business from the D7000 because of it's advanced video features and amazing frame rate. Sony is also doing well to improve their lens line up.

Most certainly not tempted, Niko! My first DSLR was a Sony and it was dire; by far the most disappointing camera I've owned in 40+ years of amateur photography.

But I do think we're getting a glimpse of the future here. Two of my early digital cameras (bridge-style) had electronic viewfinders. The technology back then wasn't really up to the job, but I did think electronic viewfinders held huge potential. They are small, compact, light and accurate compared to pentaprisms for starters. But think of the potential. Think of the things we routinely check during post-processing that could be there, live, in your viewfinder as you compose your shot. Drawing your attention to overblown highlights, for example, immediately springs to mind.

Video and stills camera technologies are converging. So the abilities of stills cameras to do video (and video cameras to do stills) will converge. So 25fps (video frame rate) on your DSLR will become the norm. Adding stereo microphones is trivial in the grand scheme of things.

If a camera salesman tries to sell me a Sony camera, I will run away from the shop as fast as my old legs will carry me. But if he wants to show me the technologies, I'll be there all day!

NikoDoby said:
If you truly believe Sony is ignoring the laws of physics then PLEASE email them directly. Don't derailing yet another thread with this.

I just saw this and got a good chuckle.

Casperwb makes a good point about lenses and investment. I have 4 Nikon lenses that I'd have to replace as well as the body if I went to another manufacturers system. Way too much money to put out right now...

CarryTheLabelGuy and Godless have this morning both said everything I feel about the current generation of "over the top" megapixel bodies that seem to be the marketing man's desire. I think the prefix "mega" is what they latched onto... Nikon should say that they have cameras with "Mega-quality" with an index of "Mega-quality" (a range of 1 to 10) which would give all those marketing people out there a super time... So easy to please them! LOL!!

The reality is that manufacturers will either find an engineering/computer based way to suppress or correct the distortions and problems with a sensor at the cutting edge and we will see those in the next generation of products. Either that or they will go the way of 110 film.

If 24MP is at the bleeding edge in 2011, when we get the 2012/2013 models, the technical issues we all worry about today will mostly be solved. My bet is that by 2015 or so, it'll be a time for 28 or 32 (or whatever mega-pixels) and we'll all be saying that they are impossible in anything smaller than an FX sensor and that 24MP is the limit and someone will remind us that in 2010 we were all blown away by the 16MP D7000 and look how far we have come since then...

Look how far we have come since the 6MP cameras we were all so blown away by just how few years ago????

I am actually really impressed with the A77's sensor, although it exhibits dissapointing diffraction @ about f/5.6. I'm impressed with it's SnR and DR, considering the pixel pitch of this APS-C sensor @ 24MP. It is impressive, so I wonder what Nikon could do with the sensor. Nikon's tweaking of Sony's sensors is amazing and always outperforms Sony's version. Hell, Nikon probably helped Sony develop the sensor to begin with(if they planned on using it themselves). But, not sure if that's the case due to the insane pixel pitch of the sensor. I doing Nikon is willing to limit IQ with diffraction setting in @ f/5.6. This is what makes the D7000 sensor perfect for DX. Diffraction starts around f/9 and the DR, SnR and resulting IQ is the best you can get in the industry for APS-C and in a lot of ways(DR and SnR), better than some FF sensors. Why wouldn't Nikon just re-tweaked the D7K for the D400? It's already really close to the D700 in terms of SnR and exceeds it in DR. It exceeds Canon's FF cameras in SnR and DR(not to mention destroys their APS-C sensors). The linear resolution difference between 16.2mp and 24.3mp is very small and not really worth the loss of IQ.

too much money invested in Nikon lenses

also, Nikon has stood the test of time, with canon pentax and some others.

having a sony sensor in the camera is not the same as having a sony camera, it is more than the camera specs, it is how the camera feels in your hands, how it fits and how the controls just seem to be in the right place when you use a nikon.

look at how many F series cameras are still out there,
not to mention lenses from way back that's still being used.

50 f1.4
105 f2.5
55 micro
85 f2
35 f2

I am sorry, but I still have and use the above manual focus lenses, and they still work as good as the day I bought them, add to that the 3 afs and 1 afd lenses that is in my bag, I am stuck with Nikon.

TVs and playstations : sony

Cameras: Nikon

after that, the fuji x series seems to be the place to go for a second camera.

NikoDoby said:
Anyone else tempted by the just announced Sony a77? I think the new OLED electronic viewfinder is the way of the future! The a77 has 24 megapixels, 12fps, and lots of video features like buil-in stereo microphone!

Probably not.

I would not mind 24mp. Although noise is going to be a problem again.

The alpha 55 buffer clearing time was definitely too long, we´ll see if that is fixed on the 77.

The OLED viewfinder is tough on the eyes. Very good feature otherwise, though.

Sony glass selection is really inferior compared to Nikon. Only a few really good pieces out there (like the 24mm f/2 Zeiss). And not enough primes.

I don´t shoot video, so the video features are unimportant to me.

----

To be honest, I was a bit disappointed with the August Coolpix release. I hope the September release will bring a professional DSLR or two to the table.

I´ll stick with Nikon for now, although I might get an used Canon 1Dmk3 with a new 100mm f/2 for fast action shots if nothing happens on the pro DSLR front.

When I checked the Sony was twice the price. Nikon doesn't play the pixel game like other companies. They won't sacrifice noise just to be a pixel "poser". I love my D7000. The colors are perfect.

Hi all,

The Sony technology is nifty. OLED takes some getting use to, and I'm not a personal fan - but then, paradigms shift. Losing the mirror, increasing the fps, proving more frame rates, allows for more camera.

My best,

Mike

NikoDoby said:
Anyone else tempted by the just announced Sony a77?

$5-10k wrapped up in 16 lenses, accessories, etc - Ummmmm No. And then there is that weird Sony shutter sound - makes me cringe and wonder if I broke the thing.

I really do like seeing what Sony does. Unlike others saying they want to make a run for the top, Sony is putting the wheels to the pavement. Usually Nikon comes out with something close (sensor) but much better. OLED electronic viewfinder sounds good - I do like the one on my X100 and love it in low light - but I think the tech is still a few years off. The one thing this it is not good with these VFs is when you are shooting in low light, they eyes adjust to the OVF and when looking away you are basically blind for a second or two. It is hard to pick up action way off frame. Put a 300mm lens on and it will have a hard time keeping up I would think. Video demand will drive this feature.

I do think that if Sony can do video better than the rest, they will take more business from Canon and Nikon.

Well I guess I am not getting my hopes up but like all things to put more MP in a sensor you have to give up other things...like high and clean ISO. As technology advances you might get both but for now I know Nikon could make the D300 with a D7000 sensor.
At this point I am looking for another NAS or I might even build my own server just because the files keep getting bigger. I might start taking pictures again with my D200 for things that would just end up in a scrap book or something to save hard drive space for more important things.

From 16MP to 24MP you can not tell the difference on an 8X10 so long as you do not crop the origonal (maybe I should say I can't tell the difference but thats my opinion). If the sony's color, ISO, or other factors effect the quality of the picture I don't care how many MP you have your just blowing up a bad picture.

I will agree....
1. More MP makes it easier to crop and isolate your subject to possibly recover a shot or increase the size without distorting the picture.
2. If Nikon is stuck in the 16 or 18 MP range I wouldn't have enough cheese to go around for all the whinning going on.

If I was going to have a wish, would be to take the D7000 sensor and take it to full frame size. I believe this would give the 24MP everone is looking at and in my opinion the D7000 has pretty good low light ablities (way better than my D200 anyway). But until I see it, I will just have fun with what I got.

I don't think 16mp will be "enough" for the "D400" Scoob. You wouldn't want an amateur with a sony NEX 7 "point & shoot" to have more pixels than your "$1999" "pro" camera would you? ;-)
The next generation of "pro" competitor cameras are going to be pushing 30 plus megapixels. I can just imagine all the whinning if Nikon is "stuck" at 16mp or 18mp.

I hope so too sevencrossing!

scoobysmak said:
I hope other manufacuters new products just force Nikon to improve their product line as well.

We are all waiting to see, but can our credit cards handle it?

NikoDoby said:
Or will Nikon trump the a77 and Canon with a full frame D400? :-)

Ooooh I hope so

Well I would love to have the D7000 sensor in a D300 body. I hope other manufacuters new products just force Nikon to improve their product line as well.

I would love to have a high MP camera so if I wanted to print something bigger than your average print, so far I have not even tried it to see what I can get from my current camera(s). If that becomes a need later at least the D3x is out there.

I would imagine for most people on this forum we are "invested" in Nikon due to the lenses we own. I notice when my glasses get dirty I can't see crap, our eyes are way better than any camera body. I prefer to have good glass than a better camera body for this reason. I am not saying sony does not make any good glass but your options are limited. In time this may change but for now I will say nice camera and hope it makes Cannon, Nikon, and others want to improve.

To answer the origonal question...not really tempted but happy something new hit the market.

^^Can we please not turn every thread you reply to into a long back and forth "debate" about "resolution/diffraction". Despite what you think about the laws of physics the A77 is real and it does have 24mp. So there is no sense in arguing what is and isn't possible beyond 12mp of resolution or at certain f-stops.

If you truly believe Sony is ignoring the laws of physics then PLEASE email them directly. Don't derailing yet another thread with this.

Sony seems to be ignoring rules of physics/optics ...

Diffraction starts at around f5.6 ( just below f6 to be exact ) on a 24 Mp APS-C sensor.
At f8, one is already down to 13 Mp equivalent.

The high end optics Sony has or makes, resolves fantastic at 24mpx so I doubt there is an issue there. For me the dim viewfinder was the issue I had with the a33 and a55, especially because their a900 sports the best 35mm viewfinder on the market hands down... I think sony is smart as they arent trying to convert so many settled photographers as they are trying to suck in people entering photography seriously but not knowledgeable enough to settle on a camera system they like based on ease of use. To say Sony has a small lens system is to say Canon has better video than nikon... It is a much smaller problem that people assume it to be. The only important lenses they're missing are tiltshifts and super teles and a very few primes...

While it will take a while for the alpha system to catch up they aren't doing too bad as canon is very slowly dying (canuts refuse to admit this) in terms of customer base and product quality. Nikon is currently in the limbo but they're bad PR department is what keeps them from gaining an edge.

All in all I think the a77 will be a huge success. I personally know at least 5 serious sony users alone who have been demanding this camera for a while...

The a77 looks pretty promising- I think it's a good idea for Sony to be heading to this direction, as it really makes their products stand out a little more from the usual Canon/Nikon/Pentax alternatives. I felt that the a33 and a55 felt a little too gimmicky to be really useful, but the a77 looks like it will fix that.

Of course, the big issue is the 24MP. Can you really get that much out of any of your lenses? And awhile ago somewhere, someone pointed out a Japanese review showing the effect that removing the mirror has on image quality- aside from the 1/3 stop, fine details tended to sharpen up noticeably on the a55. On the a77, this would be a bigger issue (although I suppose it's comparable to an AA filter).

I wouldn't be disappointed, I'd be ambivalent.

The D300s replacement won't directly affect me- if anything, the highest body I might go would be a D7000 or its replacement.

I wouldn't say disappointed, but not interested. I think I'll get by with the lowly 12MP of my D700 for a year or two. ;-)

So then you'll be disappointed to see a "D400" with this Sony 24 mp sensor PBPM?

By the way, the upcoming Fuji X10, which looks like a black X100, is ready to kick Nikon's P7100's butt too.

Not interested in the Sony at all.

I'm far too invested in Nikon for me to change at all.

I'm still shooting with a 6 mp camera, what makes you think I want pixels? :D

I'm not all the impressed by the A77 to be honest. I'm sure spec whores and tech nerds will go for it, but initial reports say high ISO performance isn't that great (not as good as the 7D or D7000). I guess you could downsample to get better performance, the way some 5D MKII users do. As you said, it looks very Canon like, a lot like the 7D actually. Both the D300s and 7D are up for replacement so it will be interesting to see what Canon and Nikon bring out to compete with the A77. Even the A65 has some high end features that will still the thunder from cameras like the D5100, D7000, T3i and 60D.

I agree that high end EVFs are the future, or at the very least hybrids like the one found in the X100.