Nikon uses a Sony Alpha sensor in the D5100 so since you're a Nikon loyalist that should prove something to you about Sony quality. I have a Sony Alpha 55 and several friends with D5100s. I consistently take indoor and outdoor shots at parties and get togethers that are just as good or better than theirs.

It's mostly dependent on the operator anyway. There are people on UHH who can take better shots with $350 bridge cameras than others with $1500 dSLRs.

There is no factual reason to downplay or criticize Sony in favor of Nikon other than your personal bias because even the Alpha 55 has features and specs exceeding the D5100 and output results that are right on par. The Alpha 77 far exceeds the 55 in every way.

Sony invented and pioneered digital still photography. Sony bought and owns Konica/Minolta so their lenses are Minolta quality and Zeiss in the higher end units. Sony started building dSLRs with decades of Minolta experience behind the products and is putting massive research effort into very high ISO with little or no noise and other technologies such as burst speed and mirrorless that lead the pack in some cases.

Sony Alpha 77 has proven itself to be just as awesome as anything else in its class. Minolta lenses are compatible so there is a large selection of used and new-old-stock available and cheaper than Nikon by far. Image stabilization is in the body so non-VR lenses can be used too. Sony makes flashes and accessories, as well as other manufacturers making compatible TTL flashes. I have two Vivitar 383 flashes for mine.

And... I predict that Sony will fight its way to to dSLR and mirrorless market dominance eventually unless Canon or Nikon comes out with something very outrageous and patented like an all new radical technology.

Your daughter's friend has made a very good choice with apparently unbiased research.

Nikon uses a Sony Alpha sensor in the D5100 so since you're a Nikon loyalist that should prove something to you about Sony quality. I have a Sony Alpha 55 and several friends with D5100s. I consistently take indoor and outdoor shots at parties and get togethers that are just as good or better than theirs.

It's mostly dependent on the operator anyway. There are people on UHH who can take better shots with $350 bridge cameras than others with $1500 dSLRs.

There is no factual reason to downplay or criticize Sony in favor of Nikon other than your personal bias because even the Alpha 55 has features and specs exceeding the D5100 and output results that are right on par. The Alpha 77 far exceeds the 55 in every way.

Sony invented and pioneered digital still photography. Sony bought and owns Konica/Minolta so their lenses are Minolta quality and Zeiss in the higher end units. Sony started building dSLRs with decades of Minolta experience behind the products and is putting massive research effort into very high ISO with little or no noise and other technologies such as burst speed and mirrorless that lead the pack in some cases.

Sony Alpha 77 has proven itself to be just as awesome as anything else in its class. Minolta lenses are compatible so there is a large selection of used and new-old-stock available and cheaper than Nikon by far. Image stabilization is in the body so non-VR lenses can be used too. Sony makes flashes and accessories, as well as other manufacturers making compatible TTL flashes. I have two Vivitar 383 flashes for mine.

And... I predict that Sony will fight its way to to dSLR and mirrorless market dominance eventually unless Canon or Nikon comes out with something very outrageous and patented like an all new radical technology.

Your daughter's friend has made a very good choice with apparently unbiased research.

Hey Doc ..... you obviously never tried a D300s for fast moving action ..... Sony doesn't even come close .....