i think the reason why you are tempted in sony is because 'it's a sony'. *sings to the tune*

honestly, for RM 3300 for the sony alpha plus kit lens, why not the canon 400d? true, sony produce the CCDs for nikon and sony is a huge market and they are using the minolta's technology and they have carl zeiss' lenses and stuff but who cares?

1. their high ISO noise level is a joke. i think the obsolete D100 is better than this camera.

2. nothing againts minolta. they produced brilliant lenses but if would to compare to today's technology, it's slow in term of focusing. you can argue the fact that you don't need fast autofocus but still... once you have tried the USM and AF-S (ferrari), you wouldn't want to drive a kancil no more.

3. carl zeiss' lenses. they are one of the best in the world. but the thing is, can you afford it?

canon's 400D's noise level at higher ISO is good. heck, all canon's are good in my opinion and my favourite is actually the 5D. you should look at the noise level of this camera when it's set to 3200ISO.

this baby accepts all EF and EF-S lenses and there are loads of people trying to sell off their older lenses... i constantly seeing a good 17-40 F4L lens for sale... so there you go... a brilliant lens up for grab. (if you can't even afford this lens second hand, forget about purchasing the carl zeiss lenses for your sony's)

it's true also...
get a 350D new set... and the extra RM 1000 you can either get another lens or belanja all of us tai thong restaurant.

if serious about photography, the lens count... i saw a dude today on monorail using nikon D200 with vertical grip and SB800 flash... all high end stuffs there but using only 18-70 lens.

i would rather have the D70s and get myself a 17-55 f2.8 lens instead.

upgrading the system in the later stage of life is another matter.
we are talking about now.

if sony is going to produce a better camera, i am sure canon and nikon will produce a better camera as well.

what i would like to see is sony to put in more effort into it. yeah, this is their first dslr and stuffs but come on, it's a joke. people are talking about good noise reduction at higher ISO rating... it's no longer high MP count war out there...

and for the metering... i am not so sure... there was a comparision of alpha and nikon d80 that i saw (i think it's lyn or dpreview) and yeah, sony's had a tendency of under exposing the images by one stop, if would to compare to nikon's.

the only reason i will go for the sony is because of their carl zeiss lenses... if not, i am sure my nikon's lenses are as good as if not better than minolta's.

sony sendiri target 10% of the dslr user out there buy their camera. i don't know where they are going to find this 10% from... probably from diehard fans.

for the same price, i would definately go for the canon (400D)... though i am not a canon's fan, except for their 5D...

no...
i am talking about starting new as what the tread starter mention. if he can't afford the carl zeiss lenses, what's the use of starting a sony's system? as i have mentioned it earlier.

carl zeiss' lenses had already surplus the canon's and nikon's in system like hasselblad and rollei but do you see me jumping ship to using hasselblad and phase one? no!

i am talking about practicality. sony will definately improve their system, no doubt about that. but if you are one of those entry level dslr user (you are of course if not you won't consider sony alpha in the first place) you do not see yourself investing RM 7000 for a 70-200 f2.8 lens.

in the future yes but how good is sony's compare to canon's and nikon's? same? marginally better that it's worthy for you to be a some forummers said 'white elephant'?

ermm... i am a nikon user from the moment i started learning photography professionally.

i am not bias in any brands. i am just saying that sony's DSLR seems to be too noob for the time being. and if one would to get the sony DSLR, wait for their next camera...

things i would like to see...

1. noise reduction in higher ISO (piority)
2. more higher quality lenses (F2.8 lenses) (but not the carl zeiss range)
3. and faster focusing lenses
4. i am not sure about the layout of the buttons and functions of this alpha camera. true, it's basically whether one is use to it or not. i tried using my friend's canon 1d mkII and i was cursing like siao when i was using the camera. so can't comment.

well, if one like this camera for no obvious reason besides it's a sony (sings to the tune again) then by all means get it. if not, my advice, go for the canon 400d. nikon? abit expensive... unless you wanna wait for the rumoured D60 (christmas)

nothing is wrong with the alpha camera, i am sure about it. my only problem with this camera is the high noise... besides that, i am sure it's a good camera...

huh?
why lar?
chi sin... ahahaa!
to assist your canon... the 5D is the camera to purchase.