Sony A-350 vs A-700

[Anbesol]

WOW, what a battle. I am debating over which one to get, very tough choice. I am supplementing this to my Maxxum 5/5D system already. The biggest conundrum for me is the 12.2 CMOS vs the 14.4 CCD. How does the CCD compare to this particular CMOS in terms of life expectancy, noise, tonal accuracy and range, and so forth. I am a firm believer in CMOS technology, but with fewer megapixels and a higher price tag, is it really worth it? Thanks in advance!

[r_w]

Just my opinion -

I recently upgraded from a 5D to an A350. Right out of the box I found the A350 to be noisy. I'm sure a better photographer could overcome it. I couldn't seem to take as good a photo as I could with my 5D. I returned it and got the A700, and have been very pleased. I like the features better and don't miss 2Mpx.

Mind you, none of this is scientific, and I had some sponsorship on the cost, so that also swayed my opinion.

FWIW most of my shooting is portrait and window light. This photo is 50mm window light @ F2.8 with the A700.

[Anbesol]

well shoot, I'm really getting it because I need another body, to carry telephoto and wide at the same time without the hassle of switching lens' all the time. I'm now considering just saving some money and getting another 5D, keeps it easy for switching, don't have to adjust to minor camera differences since I'm shooting with the same thing. easier and more functional in the field. The reason I have been looking at the sony series is because I was under the impression that tonal range would be improved, less blown out highlights and crushed shadows. Is this actually something that has been improved with the sony A series? I also would like to make for larger prints, and with 6.1 mp I cant always blow up to larger sizes like 16x20 or 13x19, but if the sony alternatives are noisier, then they wont totally improve this problem either. Hmm.... Thank you for your help

[NoKnees]

Check around a bit on this one. The a350 unfortunately has the flaw with noisier images starting at around 800 and up... Now, to be fair, some people actually don't mind the type of noise, as it's very film like to them... It's still better than what you'd get trying to shoot film in this range. It's also a nice improvement over the a100 for higher ISO, but not as good as the a200, a300, or their best performer the a700... Up to iso 400, it's great. The reason for the noise is the higher density 14mp sensor compared to the 10 and 12mp sensors on the other models...

The decision for the a350 vs a700 should be based on the use of liveview or not... For image quality, the a700 stands apart. Very good high ISO usage when shot correctly. Other improvements include very fast and accurate AF (better in low light), and with their DRO features really set it apart. Very good dynamic range through all ISO's. The 350 has above average range, but is handicapped at higher ISO's due to noise. The optical viewfinder is much better in the a700, as with the a300 and a350 they had to shrink it to make room for the liveview system.

Anyway, get your hands on an a700 and a350 and you'll see they are different creatures designed for different uses. It just sounds like the a700 is a better match for your use... And really, read up on the DRO+ features of the a700... It's really an industry leading implementation of dynamic range optimization, specific for dealing with blown highlights, shadows, etc... It even has DRO bracketing so with a single click, you get 3 versions of the same shot... The tone curves done in camera really out do what you can do in Lightroom or Photoshop. Very impressive...

- Greg

[Anbesol]

Thank you guys for your input. Live-view means diddly-squat to me - the A700 most certainly is the best fit for me, I just was debating over which way to best and most effectively spend the money to improve my system - this definitely looks the way. I just scooped one up! Zeiss lens look to be next on the horizon... DRO bracketing is just the kind of feature I will be using - I am excited to try it out! Thanks again!