Wanna get myself a dSLR, after doing survey for months, left 2 choices. I went to the shops and ask for quotes ,and this are the pricing...

Sony A100 = dual lens Kit = RM3799

Canon 400d dual Lens Kit = RM3999



can anyone spare some advice...pls...

Go for Canon 400D you will not regret buying it.

why is that?

the Sony Alpha has Image Stabilization feature on the body. same goes to Pentax (i think it's K100D)

the Canon doesn't have this feature. you need to get IS lens just to do that.

the Sony on the other hand, you're limited to a certain extent. like your lens for example, with so few Sony users in Malaysia you can't exactly get used lens offers as frequent as Canon / Nikon users.

and should you some how run out of memory space while shooting blablabla - the reliance of Sony's memory stick means you can only borrow from fellow Sony users.

for Canon, it uses CF (lower ends use SD) - and CF / SD cards are more easily found among users. not to say that you will come by that situation often la but just to mention about the memory type benefits.

for me, my 350D uses CF. and so does my S7000 that uses CF. so both my cameras can use my CFs. no need so many memory types at home.

P&S nowadays use SD. so if you get a D40/D50/K100D then you also can share the usage of those SDs.

if i'm not wrong, sony oso can use CF card.. i mean for its dSLR.... the only concern is the noise.. is it really noisy on ISO 800 up?

Sony uses CF, and normal CF, it does come with a Memory Stick Adapter just in case you purchase a Sony Memory Stick. There is not much noise when shooting at ISO 800, only when in ISO 1600.

Oh....and let me add up to this. Sony Alpha A100 mount is same as Minolta A-type bayonet. All old minolta 7d/5d or even older flim SLR works on it. So...for second hand lenses, you can always go for old minolta lenses or older make from Tamron or Sigma.

What make it more impressive is, older version of minolta flash also works on the alpha

All tested and proven, minolta or sony lenses produce the same picture

This post has been edited by DArkBat: Apr 6 2007, 06:10 PM

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra100/page2.asp

Storage
. Compact Flash Type I/II
. Memory Stick Duo / Pro Duo via CF adapter
. Supports FAT16 / FAT32

ok so you're right. screw that sales person that give me wrong info.

so? sony is a good choice?

Sony limited accessories and noise level higher than Canon.

Image stabaliser just a feature...if your hand shake alot also won't help ....

Go for Canon !!

heard the ergonomics of the sony not too good..

not trying to be biased, but go for canon

wide lens range, yeah, you can find lens ranging from sigma, tamron, tokina if im not wrong. Doesnt mean that you have to always go for canon lens though. But if u have the cash, invest in an L lens, like the 24mm-105mm f/4L

furthermore you can buy a battery grip and the whole cam will be like those 1Ds and the noise level for canon's cmos sensor is lower than the one with sony.

the Canon Guy quote me the 400D for 3300 now, with dual lens . is it worth it?

at that price... very attractive... dual lens wor... get quick..lol

of course it is, I dont see the reason that it isnt.

This post has been edited by R a D ! c 4 L: Apr 7 2007, 02:32 PM

i mean.. will they give me some lousy lens instead? can any one gimme the kit lens model so i can bring to compare during my purchase?


sorry, i'm a noob

Kit lenses will always compare badly against the medium, and high-grade lenses from the same manufacturer. No need to even compare. The fare worser than the more expensive lenses is just about all characteristics, from build quality, to sharpness & contrast, distortions, chromatic abberations, susceptibility to flares, etc.

Question is, if you have no money to get anything other than kit lenses, which manufacturer's kit lenses are better?

Please go to www.photozone.de to look up on the editor's Canon and Nikon lens reviews. They may have also user-ratings for Minolta/Sony lenses too (in a separate database from their official reviews).

yeah kit lens can never top the quality of those mid high grade lens. cjtune stated it really clear. BUT... that doesnt mean that kit lens cant produce great images too... here's some example

http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/51174252/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/49050009/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/49995605/
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/22168510/
^ he only uses kit lens, but still, look at the results. This proves that skill does matter man.

This post has been edited by R a D ! c 4 L: Apr 7 2007, 03:57 PM

c'mon la. guys. kit lens comes with the body comparing to mid/high grade lense that costs 2 - 3k and some even to the price of a kancil. who are we kidding?

point is, kit lens is good enough as it is. i mean what more could you ask something that came together with the camera?

okie, so, just the camera with the kit lens, which is better? sony or canon?

I got my Sony A100 and I never regretted getting it. Loved how it handled. Comfortable with the interface. Guess as beginner's camera, either one will be ok. You won't go wrong with any one of these cameras. I guess the thing you really should look at is how it FEELS in your hand - if you are comfortable taking photos with that camera in your hands.

Hope that helps, in a not too technical way anyway

Sham.