Picked up a CanonT3i yesterday...think I am taking it back

[LouSiffer]

Its a nice camera, but, I got my hands on a Sony A57 and its frame rates and video rates kicked the ass of the Canon..... as well as the other features like built in Panorama and 3D Panorama. Picture wise, the Canon may be a bit better, but, the Sony seems to like low light better as well as there is not as much pixel bleeding.

You guys have any thoughts?-Lou

[Hellbat]

My thoughts on digital SLR's is you want to buy based on the lenses. The lenses should last 20-25 years no problem if well kept. The camera body is a disposable item with essentially a 3-4 year lifespan before it gets radically surpassed technologically.

[audiophile]

I 2nd Hellbat. The lenses are the investment, the body is the consumable.

The big issue is the money pit. The best lenses cost a whole family of arms and legs.
But with Nikon/Canon, there are so many choices, either modern/new or vintage that are often compatible and plenty capable.


My dive into DSLRs was a Nikon D90 w/ 18-105mm, 70-300mm, and 35mm prime
Currently hunting a 10.5mm fisheye

[LouSiffer]

I took the Canon back and got the Sony....... REAL SMART MOVE!! Less pixel bleeding, likes low light better, more features, crisp pictures. I dont plan on dumping thousands into lenses. Its just not my thing. I have given myself a limit of $500.00 for a zoom and $300 for a wide angle. With the kit 18-55, it should handle all my needs fine. -Lou

[Hellbat]

Yeah, the Sony isn't a bad decision if you aren't a lens swapping kind of guy and are just looking for an SLR quality point and shoot style device. Hell, they make the image sensors for pretty much everyone including Nikon and I believe Canon uses them in some models as well. ( Nikon and Canon both do their own sensors as well though, particularly on their top models. )

[thebigz]

I have a sony A65, you made an excellent move. You get a lot more for your money with the Sonys. Also, you can use any old Minolta autofocus (AF) lenses with the Sony. You'll hear people say Sony has no lenses, but if you want the ultra high quality, the Zeiss ones have everything covered, day to day to work horses, hit up the Minoltas. I think of the Minolta lenses as 90s J/C, hardly anyone knows how great they are, all MIJ

[LouSiffer]

The Continuous shooting mode absolutely walks all over the T3i........and the T4i. 23 high quality pictures in 2 seconds! Keep in mind, it is only 8MP at 12 FPS ,but, 16MP yields you 10 FPS. Twice as fast as the T4i. I heard that about the Minoltas.-Lou

[emperor_black]

Cool! I got myself a Sony A55 earlier this year on Craigslist. I Love that guy! The A55 + Tamron 18-270 is the best combo IMO. not too heavy but the A55 has lots of features. The T3i felt like a tank and looks so fugly!!

BTW, Sony makes the sensors on the Nikon's. So the A55 has the same sensor as the Nikon D7000.

[xenophobe]

Sony sensors are the best at low iso. That's why Nikon is rated better at low iso over Canon right now. That being said, I own Canon. Their telephotos and selection smokes Nikon. Right now Nikon does the best UWA lens. My favorite lens is probably the 70-300L. My sharpest is probably my 100L macro (which I use a lot for non-macro use) or my 85L (which mostly sits in the bag).