Sony A33 - for early adopters?

[deastty]

I love technology, but I am typically NOT an early adopter.
I am interested in purchasing the Sony A33 - but I am concerned because it has not been out for long.
Is there anyone out there that can put my concerns to rest? Why should I invest in this Sony model vs an equivalent Cannon or Nikon model?
Thank you.

[CyberManiaK]

Maybe this thread can help you. My impression of the A33/55 - Dyxum forums - Page 1

[jml79]

Well, there really is no equivelent model from Nikon or Canon. Nothing can shoot as fast for so little money, except of course the A55.

[inkista]

Three things that I would say might be dealbreakers on getting an A33:

• If EVFs drive you nuts, then you'd probably prefer a camera with an optical viewfinder.
• If Sony's lens lineup won't work for you.
• If you don't want to deal with the non-standard Minolta flash hotshoe.

Otherwise, I'd say go for it, if it's the camera you want. The technology in the A33 is actually not that new, it's older technology being used in a new way (pellicle mirrors were used in Canon film SLRs back in the '70s). This is digital equipment--like computers, early adopting is sometimes the only way to get what you want now. If you're thinking of doing digital filmmaking the ability to autofocus while shooting video is a big advantage.

jml79--personally, I've never found a high burst rate to be all that useful. My 5D mark II only does 3 fps, but I love it. Burst frame rate alone is not a feature to get a specific camera body for unless you're a fast action shooter.

[jml79]

Originally Posted by inkista

jml79--personally, I've never found a high burst rate to be all that useful. My 5D mark II only does 3 fps, but I love it. Burst frame rate alone is not a feature to get a specific camera body for unless you're a fast action shooter.

You are right. I moved to an SLR to get that 3FPS and I think 5FPS would be the max I could ever use and only if the AF system can keep up. But if you are looking for the 2 very specific features of the A33/A55 (Super fast FPS and Phase AF in video), nothing else is out there for the price. I have an old Sony A100 and it works great. The lens selection is slowly being filled out by both Sony and 3rd parties but both Canon and Nikon offer more both from each other and 3rd parties. The odd flash shoe is a gotcha but you only need 1 Minolta/Sony flash. Everything off camera doesn't matter. I have used Canon, Vivtar and whatever flash I can get for off camera work. Infact, I would not buy a Minolta/Sony flash unless it will work remotely and hopefully has a PC cable so that it is not a waste if you change later. My next flash (and likely all others after) will be the standard (non-Sony) mount so I can use it with whatever trigger I want.

Honestly, I own a Sony and I am still tossed whether my next camera will be a sony or not. The A700 looks great but I want to see what it's replacement is. They do offer the most for the money but they are the underdog and their line-up is not as full as Canon/Nikon. Why can't we all agree and use one lens/flash mount so that I can just buy the best anything I can afford at the time and use it until it's no longer useful

[deastty]

For your insight and suggestions!