The other two brands have their partisans, but it looks like everyone agrees on one thing–stick with the one you have as long as it suits your needs. As long as the camera-maker doesn’t leave you high and dry.

You don’t have to mess with a new user interface. You can still keep your old lenses.

And by surfing you might learn about some of your camera’s features (like in completely manual mode) you didn’t know you had, or sort of blew past when you first read about them.

I ended up with a D300.

I’m a sony person, and have an A700, I’m very impressed by it, and would recomend it to anyone who (like myself) found that they were getting a little cramped by the A100.

As has been said, all of the cameras are largelly equivelent, however I would note that the D300 does have some more features than the other 2 (live view most notably), as it’s aimed at a slightly higher market, and priced accordingly.

@jeff — the A700 also has a 3″ screen, I believe it’s the same part number. you are right that Sony arn’t primarilly into DSLRs, but they certainly are into “cameras” in a big way — they are the market leader for HDTV, and they manufacture Nikon’s sensors. There is an HDTV camera in the works that takes Alpha lenses, so the 2 markets are being tied together. I understand it’s a theoretical point, but I really don’t see this happening

@satyr — the 18-300 lens is interenting, however a lens with a zoom range that long is going to have compromises in it, I personally would be carfull about anything longer than 4x (ie: 18-70ish or 50ish-300). also the A700 has sensor stabilisation, so some of that edge is lost. However as a holiday lens it would be wonderful.

To stay with the same brand is a very good idea, as you save a considerable amount of money on buying new lenses, but if you find somthing that you really want from another brand, go with it.

The 10-24 should be a very cool lens, it’s the next item on my shopping list, and is going to get bought unless somthing comes out that’s better. I have looked at the sony 11-18 and the sigma 10-20 and 12-24 and found that thier lack of zoom range was a bit frustrating, I’d rather have a prime and crop later.

Then I go to Flickr and look through the (very cool) pinhole camera groups for awhile and think, “uh, what is my objective, again?”

I’m not allowed to get more gear until I stop answering that question with “EVERYTHING!”

Or if you stick with your old Sony, hold out for something like the new Tamron 18-300mm Macro with vibration control, when they get around to making the sony mount. I played with one the other day and wow, talk about the all around only need one lens for the vacation type thing. The VC on it grabbed focus and you had to fight it to get it to lose it. It was better than any IS I’ve seen on the canon lenses or at least on par with them, and for a lens that runs around 600 bucks that ain’t bad. (*it’s probably too slow for concert shooting though)

The nice thing about the Sony is that it can use Minolta mount lenses, so you increase your lens choices without need for weird adapters.

The nice thing about the Nikon is that you can use just about any Nikon lens made since 1958 with that camera, and some of the pre-1958 models with a slight modification to the lens mount ring. Of course, since all of those cameras share the 1.5x crop factor, you’re only going to get the middle 75% of the image.

The nice thing about the Canon is that they made so many different lenses that you can probably find any combination of zoom, fstop, and whatever to meet your needs.

All three have extensive 3rd party lens options.

Yeah, there are evangelists for every brand and while they can probably tell you all of the interesting little tips and tricks and hacks, very few of them are truly creative with their photos. They are in the hobby to measurebate, and if that floats their boat, more power to ‘em.

I’ve had my Nikon D70s for nearly 3 years and it has held up to my hamfisted meathookery with a minimum of maintenance and it turns out excellent images. Friends with Canons have had them perform equally well. I know your Sony has taken some punishment and kept on working, so I don’t think any of the three has any real robustness edge.

My suggestion, save your $ and get the D3 or the 1D Mark III. THOSE cameras have some definite distinctions, don’t have the 1.5x crop factor, allow for live viewing on an SLR, and both contain WiFi bits that allow you to control the camera remotely from a laptop.

But, you have to know what you are doing when you switch brands. I know a number of photographers who don’t care for Sony because its optics just don’t match up to that of Nikon or Canon and I’ve heard some outright worry that because Sony is not primarily a camera company, what happens if they decide it is no longer profitable to support SLR’s, not something Nikon or Canon are going to do.

But, if you like your Sony, there is not doubt you’ll continue to take great photos with another and the savings on lenses is a big deal, I know. Personally, I don’t see much difference between Canon and Nikon myself even if I do jokingly refer to Canon as Nikon-lite to my friends who use Canons.