Trying to decide second body or upgrade the P&S.

[tazdev3225]

I am a Sony person. Right now I have a DSC H-5 (lent to my DD) a DSC H-50 and an HX-1 along with an A300. I have the kit lens, a 50mm and a 75-300. I find myself using the A300 almost exclusively lately unless it's somewhere I'm concerned about messing up the lens. I am taking a LOT of pics at my grandkids ball games and find the shots are so much clearer. This could be due to the fact that I am understanding the camera more but I amaze myself at some of the shots. What I don't like is that I can't always get a shot I want because of the range limits on the lens I am using. I don't want to change lenses at a ball game bacause it gets really dusty.

I have been waiting for the new HX-100 to come out with the 30X optical zoom but I am beginning to think that this won't make me happy. Would I be better off getting a new lower range body and having 2 of them so I don't have to change the lenses? Or possibly the translucent lens camera. I have a little time to decide because Sony was really hurt by the earthquake and tsunami and production won't be up to speed for a couple more months. I have a friend who works for them and she told me they just got water or electricity back at the plant, can't remember which one.

I think I already know the answer to my question just looking for some reassurance.

 

[zackiedawg]

As you've already seen the advantages of a DSLR's superior focus system and low light ability, I doubt a superzoom is going to be the answer to your prayers - the superzoom's lens range is fantastic, but optically it won't match a DSLR sensor, low light won't come close as you raise the ISO, and focus speed and shooting speed won't match either. In good daylight, it can produce good results...but a DSLR remains a superior sensor and better tool for the job.

What you are finding now is that the DSLR is limited by its lens. You have two choices I think that would serve you best - which one to choose is up to you and what you can handle. First off - a new lens. Your zoom lens is average...the lens is often more important than the camera, and investing in a GOOD lens will let even your older camera show off more what it can do. It might be worth it to consider buying a more expensive, good, faster zoom lens like the G-series glass. Pricey...yes - but timeless, and will work just as well if you upgrade the body.

The other choice is upgrading the camera body to a newer one, with superior sensor technology, faster focus systems, faster burst shooting, larger buffers, and better high ISO capability. The 'SLT' cameras with the translucent mirror may fit the bill - do handle them first to make sure you are comfortable with them in hand as they are smaller and lighter than your A300. If you don't like those as much, then you can always go for the excellent A5xx series cameras which are a very nice stepup from your A300 - starting with the A500/550 if you can still find some on closeout prices, or the A560/580 for the newest of the line. These use the same sensor as the A55, but in a larger traditional body similar to your A300. These made very big improvements in many areas compared to the A300 and would be a very nice upgrade.

Eventually, perfection would be to upgrade both - newer body and better lens. But either would be a good start!

 

[MICKEY88]

If I am reading this right, your concern isn't with the quality of your current camera or lens, just the limit of your zoom range without changing lenses..???

a second body would certainly work, another option would be something like one of the superzooms, I have a sigma 28-300 that I sometimes use when I don't want to carry 2 cameras, but want the wide latitude of zoom... there is a definite tradeoff in quality, but the pictures are still good enough for my personal sports stuff..