If you ever buy that, be prepared to fork out sh1t loads of premium for their lenses. It's not bad, it's just that Sony's DSLR is like BOSE sound system, it's not worth for what you pay for. I'd rather look at the K10D

very good came atleast better than thing so call D40 

lets put it this way, eventhough it is using Minolta as a base, sony is not one of those established camera makers...i won't fork out that kind of money for a Sony SLR....u look at their marketing strategy is mainly aimed at the yuppie crowd

Who care what brand, as long as it is a good cam with reasonable price, it is a good stuff. And somemore, Sony has a better service coverage as well.

Nowadays technology can be sold off and transferred easily, the money will do the job.

Like Pentax, now Hoya took over, so can we say Hoya is not a camera maker, it only uses Pentax as a base, so we don't buy it?

service charges is not a main factor for u to judge after sales service.

Walk into any shop in Sg. Wang and you will get much better prices than at an official Sony shop. Same original Malaysian stock, same warranty anyway.

I bought an A100 for the anti-shake. Also I can use it with the 50mm F1.4 for really dark conditions.

They have a 500mm F8 reflex lens that AUTOFOCUSES. With Super Steady Shot, you can shoot at 1/50s HANDHELD at F8! There is no other reflex lens that has VR/IS... which means you'd want 1/750s at F8. Where would you get that kind of lighting? (A very long studio room?)

They have Carl Zeiss lenses that AUTOFOCUS.

They have a 135mm F2.8 T4.5 Smooth Transition Focus lens that has very smooth, creamy bokeh (the out-of-focus areas).

Minolta lenses (and their Sony rebadges) were designed to have nice bokeh, which is why they were big with the Japanese.

They also have the excellent Minolta 70-210mm F4 beercan lens, a cheap, solid and lightweight tele lens that is brighter than all the 70-300mm F4-5.6 lenses that are in the market now. I dare say I will stick to this and skip the heavy 70-200mm F2.8.

It's not about the price; if I had a Canon I'd get the 70-200mm F4 IS instead of the F2.8 IS for practical reasons.

Sony has good service, they fixed my Minolta beercan for FREE even though it was 20 years old. How's that for after-warranty servicing? They always have 2-4 days turnaround. I have not paid a single cent to a Sony Service Center.

You won't have cases of high-pitched VR lenses (annoying Nikkor 18-200mm F3.5-5.6!) or deteriorating SWM or dropping your expensive VR/IS lens, losing alignment and thus killing VR/IS on your lens.

"Oh but if you drop your Sony/KM and your AS/SSS dies then all your lenses have no AS/SSS."

Find me someone who has killed Anti-shake on their Konica Minolta/Sony then.

You can also find more rare old lenses in the A-mount and Pentax K-mount. Why? Not much demand. I just picked up a Vivitar Series 1 28-105mm F2.8-3.8 in Bandung. If it was a Canon or Nikon it would not sit there.

Sony unfortunately only retained the higher-spec lenses from the Konica Minolta days. Carl Zeiss IS a great, great brand to pay for. The sharpness and OOF rendition is amazing. Having tried the 135mm F1.8 I am convinced, and am saving up for one.

Waiting is a standard procedure. How long did people wait for Nikon after the products were announced?

Do you buy an SLR, then 2 months later, have ENOUGH money to buy the next big lens? Are you just sitting around itching to buy the next lens?

Pentax is a good system, too. They've been bought by Hoya. So if mergers are a sign, and one day, Hoya Pentax is bought by Microsoft, will you NOT buy one? There is more to a system than just your systemic dislike towards a brand.

I made my choice after comparing A100, D70s and 400D. To be frank the noise level at ISO 800 and above is quiet high, but others than that it has more advantages compared to the other 2, which I still think it was a smart choice 

Forget about 350D or D40 or unless you want to consider D80 or 30D.