jimmya Loc: Phoenix

That's good stuff marcomarks except I don't know if I really trust Sony. Sony has been the bench mark of the broadcast industry in video handling for a long time. I only know because I did a career in television news / sports photography. No matter where you go in the world you're going to see Sony gear for video handling - not cameras so much but editing, broadcasting, etc.

However they've not been in the consumer market all that long so their longevity and quality over time hasn't really been tested. I'm on another forum and have seen problems with Sony dslr equipment - never any write ups about Nikon or Canon and only scant about Sony. The other non camera makers - Panasonic comes to mind, have lots of problems.

So, for that reason, I probably wouldn't buy a Sony.

marcomarks Loc: Ft. Myers, FL

You are SOOOO very wrong on that assessment! Sony PIONEERED the whole digital still camera market back in the late 1980s. The very first digital still camera was the Sony Mavica and I had one. It was big and heavy, was only 768 Kilopixel (less than 1 megapixel), but it was built like a tank. My brother still has it today and it still works fine for eBay product shots. Sony has been known since then as having excellent digital still cameras with excellent glass but they have always leaned toward point & shoot because that's where the biggest market and the biggest profits are.

When they wanted to move into the dSLR market, instead of reinventing the wheel, they bought Minolta, which itself has always had a high reputation in digital still cameras and the lens market. Minolta lenses have consistently been considered some of the world's best and they sold untold hundreds of thousands of lenses to other camera companies for years, stamping those brand names on the lens casings. Minolta cameras were highly touted as well. So you could say that Sony's dSLR history must include the long point & shoot, dSLR, and SLR history of Minolta as part of it.

Sony proceeded to do R&D work after 2006 to bring new technology (actually an old technology refined) like the semi-transluscent mirror thing and new high speed circuitry to allow the industry's fastest rapid fire shooting and extremely high ISO without noise to the Alpha dSLR line.

As I said before, Sony's sensor is being purchased and used by Nikon in the D7000. How long has this relationship with Nikon been going on? Is it possible that Nikon has been buying Sony sensors for decades? I would think if Nikon can trust Sony so Nikon's reputation isn't soiled, we can as well.

I find it unique that you know Sony makes top quality professional video equipment, and it's used and renowned all over the world, but you feel that they somehow can't deal with lower requirement consumer quality. Sony consumer and commercial TVs, video monitors, and projectors are known as the best or one of the two best. Sony computer monitors have been considered the best forever. Sony Vaio computers are known as one of the best. Sony virtually pioneered the Blu-Ray video disk world which requires very strict tolerances to work correctly. And still image sensors that Sony originated are based on video technology that Sony also created and they are the best in the world at it.

So your summarization that Sony wouldn't create a reliable high quality consumer dSLR you would consider surprises me. They use Minolta lenses and Carl Zeiss lenses (think microscopes and telescopes) for their consumer level stuff and we both know their video lenses are beyond reproach. No company has made as many digital still cameras or had as long a history in digital still cameras as Sony.

As for Panasonic digital still cameras, I have not heard of people having problems with them. I have a 8MP Panasonic super-zoom bridge camera that I've had for about 5 1/2 years and it has worked flawlessly with fine quality results. The Leica lens is one of the best I've ever used and it's only a mid-priced camera. My wife has had (3) pocket-sized point & shoot Panasonic Lumix units with Leica lenses - one she sent to her mother overseas, one she uses, and one our baby dropped on the floor several times until it is broke. They've been awesome. My X-wife has a 5MP Panasonic zoom bridge camera with Leica lens similar to mine that works flawlessly as well. I've not heard rumors of any Panasonic model having a consistent failure rate and in reviews they normally have better quality output than competitors, probably because of the superior glass. You likely also know that Panasonic professional video equipment is probably second behind Sony in renowned quality and popularity.

You might want to read about the Sony Alpha 55 and Alpha 77 on the major review sites and reconsider your stance concerning Sony. It's up to you but you might be short-changing yourself by not researching this a bit more. Just another 2 cents worth.

chuchuba1 Loc: Aurora, Colorado

Tried Canon years ago. I just didn't feel right. Moved to Nikon years ago and have stayed there. I shoot D3 and it does everything I want to do and a whole lot more. One is just as good as another and I'm sure you'll be happy with any camera that fits your hand and eye.

jimmya Loc: Phoenix

marcomarks... a sony sales person huh? Just kidding. But the way you go on and on about Sony, my you really have a case for this company.

You make a good case but that doesn't mean I trust their gear any more than I did when you started - sorry. They were fine with video tape in the station's edit bay and they're fine with digital video handling in the same place today... but the consumer side... not for me.

Mickey88 Loc: Central Florida

according to wikipedia
The name "Sony" was chosen for the brand as a mix of two words. One was the Latin word "Sonus", which is the root of sonic and sound, and the other was "Sonny", a familiar term used in 1950s America to call a boy.

filmjock Loc: NC/SC

jimmya
I agree with you - I retired from Disney & Universal affter 25 years - Sony is good with digital video editing equipment - but in the video projection department they come up short - they do not use DLP technology and can't compete with other brands out there - in fact many are pulling Sony and replacing them with DLP equipment. As far as Nikon/Canon using Sony parts - I am betting that Sony may have a few parts in it made by someone else. I don't trust everything Sony makes just because it say's Sony on it either. But heck that is just another opinion.

jimmya Loc: Phoenix

Thanks for the input filmjock. Afterall all we're doing here is expressing our opinions anyway.

I used Sony editing gear in the television news room and after hanging my own shingle many years ago and it was always reliable and accurate - that was in the days of video tape.

Now, although I've never used their digital gear, I've got to assume they have the same reliability and quality as then.
That's, of course, they're professional side.

Consumer gear, I'm not so sure. They may have pioneered digital immaging a long time ago but that doesn't say anything for the mechanics of consumer dslr cameras. Canon and Nikon have a very long history with those mechanics stretching from the early film days to today's digital cameras and have proven their reliability over many years of use now throughout the world.

An opinion yes but it is our individual money that tells us what to invest in. For me it'll remain Canon.

Thanks again. By the way, I'm not familiar with DLP, what is that?

marcomarks Loc: Ft. Myers, FL

Any valid reason why or just a stubborn opinion?

usaellie101 Loc: Spring Hill, Florida

DLP ? LOL Let's see Devoted Love Place
Digitally Lazy Photographer?

marcomarks Loc: Ft. Myers, FL

To be perfectly clear, I also don't trust everything Sony makes just because it says Sony on it... I'm not a brainwashed sheep being led to slaughter. But... I don't MIStrust something Sony makes unless I there is a valid and proven reason and I can make the decision to mistrust Sony on that item based on facts, reviews, the experiences of others with the item, etc.

I have a Samsung LCD TV although Sony was considered best at the time. I have Panasonic and Yamaha home theater systems. I have H-P laptops and Dell desktops although Sony Vaio laptops are supposed to be superior. I have spent a lot of time with Panasonic digital cameras although I also have the Sony Alpha 55 and a Canon A2200 14MP pocket point & shoot. And I'm currently salivating to have a Nikon D7000 but I can't justify it at the moment.

So while I enjoy my Sony Alpha 55, I also know it's not the only dSLR on the market. I'd say there are six or more brands on the same level of complexity and sophistication and they are just as capable.

I'm just defending Sony being in the consumer dSLR market because they make an excellent product in my experience and opinion. It seems unfair to make a blanket statement about Sony not being worthy in the consumer market when they are worthy in the professional market. That's like saying GM can't make a decent economy car for the public because they make excellent White tractor trucks for professional truck drivers. Or that Toyota can't make a decent Corolla-sized car because they make industrial forklifts and off-road construction equipment.

jimmya Loc: Phoenix

Hey marcomarks, don't get all hot and bothered about this... it's just an opinion. This actually looks more like a political discussion - they're too hot to handle.

Besides I'm a Canon guy now with a couple of their Rebel cameras and 4-lenses so I don't think I'll be switching brands any time soon.

bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

How about we enc this discussion and go take some photos.

marcomarks Loc: Ft. Myers, FL

I'm not. If I was, I would make it clear that I was. There's nothing to be hot about. You can ask others around here about when I get hot but I'm all mellow on New Years Eve today. I came very close to being a Canon T3i guy before I got the Sony.

And now that I'm a Sony/Minolta guy, I'm not so far into system investment that I couldn't become a Nikon D7000 guy in the future. I see some very nice output from Nikon D7000s and while some say that it's the photographer and not the camera, there's still truth to the concept that the better the camera and lenses, the less it holds back your creativity and the easier it is to have excellent output and possible exceed what you were hoping to capture.

marcomarks Loc: Ft. Myers, FL

Nah... I need to take my Sony out in the yard and beat it up with a sledge hammer because it's not worthy of being a consumer electronic device according to "some people's" opinion.

:lol:

bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

i gave mine a kiss and told it "they didn't mean it".