Full-frame DSLR at a Real-World Price

[giovanni]

---

sir mike...shift tag sony oi.....hehehehe..

[big myk]

sir mike...shift tag sony oi.....hehehehe..

Take a look at their Carl Zeiss lenses line-up giovs, di sad basta-basta uy!!!

I am not a rich guy, given my current system line-up it would be impractical for me to shift or maintain 2

systems. But if I were just starting out in photography & have the moolah, I would not hesitate to get the

sony A850.

Again, it's simply a full-frame DSLR at a Real-World Price...

[DEMONOCIETY]

Nindota unta oi.. $2,000 full frame na!

Pero Sony lang.

la man siguro problem as long as maayo lang ang moda

[angler]

...di ba nikons use sony sensors?...that talks a lot about sony.

also ang sony nga camera technology dili basta basta. PENTAX na sila. gi buy out sa sony. sony lenses...Karl Zeis. i think they are better than nikkor/canon lenses. a few notches above really. its the bodies that suck. the lenses balance them out.

over all? i'll stick to my nikon fitted with a sony sensor. :P wahahahahha libog di?

[BIG AL]

its the indian not the arrow...

[Motownkid]

la man siguro problem as long as maayo lang ang moda

Oo oi.. im a firm believer of that "indian-pana" stuff..

what i meant was, kasagaran man gud 3rd party & generic accessories kay nihit kaau ang pra Sony.

And that really matters for most of us nga permi lang on a tight budget.

sony? eeeeeeeeewwwww

yuuuuuuuuucks... lol

[angler]

[QUOTE=Motownkid;5436215]Oo oi.. im a firm believer of that "indian-pana" stuff..

what i meant was, kasagaran man gud 3rd party & generic accessories kay nihit kaau ang pra Sony.

And that really matters for most of us nga permi lang on a tight budget.



agree ko ani. most of us cant buy the same brand lens.

for me, if the optical quality is good then ok kaayo. I opted to buy a tamron 17-50 over the nikkor 17-55 (and passed the opprtunity to get an 85mm 1. kay pareho ra (if not mas maayo pa gani ang tamron ug quality).

again, for me lang ha...lenses are the investment, not the body...and if you can find a good deal on a lens that can do the same thing, then ok kaayo...nikons and canons have the largest share in SLR bodies, not sony...so mag lisod kag pangita ug 3rd party na choice.

[mokiloo]

[QUOTE=angler;5437700]

Oo oi.. im a firm believer of that "indian-pana" stuff..

what i meant was, kasagaran man gud 3rd party & generic accessories kay nihit kaau ang pra Sony.

And that really matters for most of us nga permi lang on a tight budget.



agree ko ani. most of us cant buy the same brand lens.

for me, if the optical quality is good then ok kaayo. I opted to buy a tamron 17-50 over the nikkor 17-55 (and passed the opprtunity to get an 85mm 1. kay pareho ra (if not mas maayo pa gani ang tamron ug quality).

again, for me lang ha...lenses are the investment, not the body...and if you can find a good deal on a lens that can do the same thing, then ok kaayo...nikons and canons have the largest share in SLR bodies, not sony...so mag lisod kag pangita ug 3rd party na choice.

bro if mu opt man gani tah ug sony so might as well go for what they are ably equipped on
like the utilization of the carl zeiss lens technology, though mahal pero thats one, if not their only cutting edge advantage or chance of competition over some leading brands. otherwise it well just be another cheap alternative (though still not cheap) and that's it.

[fackerr]

sony?? pweeee

[abortretryfail]

I wouldn't knock sony down. I do shoot with canon but that's
because most of my friends shoot canon so it's easier to swap
lenses and other accessories.

when I started off shooting as a full time professional i was
shooting with a Sony DSC-F717 and these are some of the
published commercial shots I got from that...