Ehhh... I agree with the comfort thing to a degree. How has the Sony lenses gotten lately? For the average shooter, they truely can't tell the difference from an OK lens to the exceptional lens. However this is not the case for some of the advanced users. I couldn't see myself plopping down thousands for some of the lenses Sony had on their line-up. You have to see at the big picture if you feel your going to be looking to take that next step.

 

I want a DSLR soooo bad...

 

Zeiss with AF. How can you argue with that?

 

Zeiss is great, but how's the rest of their lens line up? When I last looked a few years back it was nothing in comparison to the major two.

 

this site was a great learning tool for me, use it!

http://www.digital-photography-school.com/

 

The people I know that shoot Sony only use Zeiss glass, so I can't speak on the rest of their lineup. I'm sure it's like Canon and Nikon with both good and bad. Still, their bodies are very good and they have great glass. In the end you can't go wrong with any of the three.

 

I can take any SLR and make it take great pics...it's all in the light not the lens or the body at his stage and even in the advanced stages...it's not the tools you have it's how you use them to take the pictures you want...and in order to do that...it takes Composition, Angle of light, Kit (meaning lens and body), and Exposure. Worry more about exposure than what kind of cam your gunna get, but with that being said it IS better to go with the top two companies because of the software "ease of use" and availability. Not everything opens Sony Raw, but Canon and Nikon you will find that most things do.

 

PSE and LR is very cheap.
ACR 6.3 and LR3 support the following Sony camera formats:

Sony
A100
A200
A230
A290
A300
A330
A350
A380
A390
A500
A450
A550
A560
A580
A700
A850
A900
Alpha NEX-3
Alpha NEX-5
DSC-F828
DSC-R1
DSC-V3
SLT-A33
SLT-A55V

 

I think I should rephrase what I said. As harry Potter said, photography at it's basic is about capturing the best light possible. My main issue with Sony (the one that I used anyways) was the ergonomics and layout. It just seemed messy to me. I'm not too familiar with the Sony body lineup but I'd choose the consumer bodies from Nikon and Canon over Sony because of quality and ergonomics alone. Can sony take good pics? Sure! I just don't like them. I'm sure the prosumer and pro Sony's are improved greatly over the consumer but for entry level, I just can't get over the quality.

Zeiss lenses are amazing. I'm planning on picking up a Zeiss 100 ZE within the next 2 years to use on my 5Dii because it's a remarkable piece of glass period (even though there's no AF). This is all personal opinion and my experience with them so anyone who reads it should take it with a grain of salt.

 

My friend has the *** and it's VERY tiny. The translucent technology worked well and 10fps is crazy. I like their grips and find them very ergonomic. Button placement is a bit weird though I didn't shoot with it and only held it for a few minutes. They do have better low ISO performance than Canon which makes their A900 very interesting for studio use.

The 100MP is an amazing piece of glass. I had the C/Y which was a bit warmer and a little more contrast. The stop down metering and 1-stop aperture adjustments made it a bit more difficult to use with strobes, so I traded it for the 100L. The 21 f/2.8 and 50MP are also very good. The 35 f/1.4 looks very interesting, too.

 

I checked with my friend and the one I got my hands on was the A330. that was uncomfortable, cheap and the layout was confusing. I guess I'm a little spoiled with Canon as everything is changed with the click of a button in the back display. I will probably look at the higher end models like the *** at the store just to get a feel for them. I played around with the D700 this weekend. I don't feel the need to switch but if I did, I'd be all over that.

Hugo's shots in the CZ 100 thread on POTN got me on the Zeiss train. The 35 looks really cool too but I needed something with AF for weddings and such so I just picked up the 35L and it should be here by Christmas.

 

I got to play with the A700 and ***.

The 100MP is impressive. What do you plan on shooting with it?

 

That will be a specialty lens. I have the 35L and 135L right now and will have either the 85Lii or Sigma 85 in the next month or so to complete my overall lens requirements and from there on out, it will be specialty lenses that I'm just lusting over like the 45 2.8 TS-E and the 70-200 2.8ii and of course the 100mp. I won't need it but I sure do want it haha.

Side note: I just tracked USPS and my 35L is in Portland and on it's way!

 

Since you do weddings, I'd recommend the 85L and sign up for CPS. And the 200L.

 

Haha as much as I love your shots with the 200L, I just wouldn't put it to good use. The 135L with a 1.4x will do the job on the long end if I need it until I pick up another 70-200L. Your pics do make it tempting though. I'm glad your not local because It'd make it harder to resist if I tried it out

 

200L is VERY VERY tough for weddings...lol..but yes the 70 -200 II is one of thest for weddings...I usually walk around with a 5d Mk II with the 70-200L and the 7D with the 50MM 1.4 and the 85mm 1.8 for creativity when I have time at a wedding...Also the Ab800 studio flash with the Octabox

 

fiance got me a manfrotto tripod and head

Now the pressure's really on to take good pictures!

 

hahaha....you know what...I only own a gorilla pod....lol...I'm eying a CF tripod that's only $200 though....not sure what head to go with....so many options...I like manfrotto, but a bit overpriced...products are great though...enjoy!!!!

 

Congrats on the new tripod! I don't usually use a tripod unless I'm shooting landscapes or cars but I'm going to be using it more as I push my comfort zone in the next year.

 

I use an older version of the Cullman head on the 055CX and its been great. Not cheap, but far more reasonable than most others out there. Give it a look, they are strong and reliable.