Originally posted by: soydios
The A700 applies rather agressive in-camera noise reduction, but other than that is a fine camera. I just have $2k in lenses and accessories for the F-mount.
It's interesting in that we are now in/approaching an era where we are really quibbling over miniscule differences in performance & as much about minor differences in approach.
E.g. a pro that I know & who has used both the A700 & D300 extensively (& it's nice to see that there do appear to be quite a few pros starting to use the A700) says that the Nikon's output looks better for pixel-peeping but that the Sony actually prints better.
It's worth reading at least the conclusions in
http://www.luminous-landscape....meras/Olympus-E3.shtml for imo a level headed view of the current market.
"And this so perfectly mirrors the DSLR scene in general. There is no perfect camera or system. Each has its strengths and weaknesses and you have to evaluate the applicability of any one camera to your work within the larger system view."
btw at least some of the reported issues with the A700 output actually aren't the camera's fault but the way that the processing software handles it - ACR does a terrible job (as it did for the Olympus E-3 until they issued a patch) whereas Bibble is a lot better.