How to sell photography

Best Ways To Make Money Selling Photography:

Sony A900 DSLR or Canon 5D mark ii?

Well here is whats on my mind. When i get to my tech school i will be in the market for a camera, a good one. I currently am using a canon xt with digi power battery grip, kit lens, 50mm lens and a few others. They are not exactly L series lenses or anything so i wouldnt be losing alot of money by selling them if i went with the sony (not sure if i can even use them on the 5D anyway). Basically i just need to know which one of these cameras is right for me. I like to take pictures of cars, architecture, nightscapes of cities etc. I am a amateur when it comes to photography but see my self getting into much much more. Here is some stats that i found on the cameras. Sony A900 Canon 5D MKII Resolution 24.6 MP 21 MP Frame Rate 5 FPS 3.9 FPS Video Capability NO YES Dust Shake YES YES In-Body Image Stabilization YES NO - selected lenses only Dual Memory Card Slots YES NO ISO Range (including extended) 100 - 6400 50 - 25,600 Bit Depth 12 bit 14 bit My Memory feature NO YES Easy mirror lock-up YES NO Live View NO YES Current B&H Price - Dec, 2008 (See note) $2,999 $2,699

Public Comments

1. The short answer is that they're both very good cameras, and the choice is probably even less clear than it seems to you now. The long answer is that, in broad terms, each camera is better suited to a different task. Sony's Alpha 900 produces cleaner low ISO images than the 5D2. If you don't expect to shoot over ISO 800, it would be the obvious choice. Nothing compares to A900 output at ISO 100 (with the exception Nikon's $7,000 D3x) until you get into medium format digital back territory. It is a serious and a seriously good camera for the money. The 5D2 is a very, very good high ISO performer, the equal of Nikon's D700, and perhaps the best high ISO digital camera ever made. It isn't a slouch at lower ISOs, but it can't compete with the Sony. Apparently it also does video or something. I've owned one for about half a year, and had to make the same decision, then, that you're making now. I'm satisfied with the choice I made, although I doubt that I would have been any less satisfied had I gone the other way. The in-body IS is a big selling point, and since it compensates somewhat for lackluster high ISO performance, probably shouldn't be overlooked. Your investment in Canon glass, however modest, is probably a factor too, as is your familiarity with the brand, which seems to be a real sticking point for some people. My advice would be to pick one, learn how to use it, shoot, and be happy. I think the truth is that there probably isn't a wrong choice to be made here.
2. I prefer Canon EOS 5D Mark II 21.1MP Full Frame CMOS Digital SLR Camera Excellent resolution, Very good High ISO performance, Wide range of ISO settings from 50 to 25600,Finally offers selectable levels of high ISO noise reduction, ISO setting now visible in view finder (finally!), 1080P 30 fps video usable in low light conditions with very good quality,External microphone socket for use with movie recording,Improved large, bright viewfinder (98% coverage)'Large high-resolution LCD screen with anti-glare coating for better contrast and wider viewing angles,Live view functionality http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001G5ZTLS?ie=UTF8&tag=nikond5000dslr-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B001G5ZTLS"
3. Sorry, my answer will be a bit biased, as I own a 5D II. If you already have some Canon gear, and like your XT, I'd stick with Canon! The 3.6 difference in mpx, won't make a bit of difference, nor will the slight edge in fps (if you're not shooting sports), the dual memory card slots, or the easy mirror lock up. The "In-Body Stabilization", might make future lens's a bit less expensive, but from what I've read, it's no match for IS lens's. The ISO range of the 5D II, is superb, almost noiseless at 1600! Obviously, the 5D II, has a better video feature! HD 1080 vs. none! Honestly, the "My Memory" feature has escaped me, I'll have to look that up in the owners manual! LOL, but at least the 5D II has it! Bit depth allows a better color gaumet, live view, whatever, I prefer the view finder!
4. Why don't I show you what D5M2 can do. http://www.flickr.com/photos/little_pooky/3457895767/ 135 mm f 2 http://www.flickr.com/photos/little_pooky/3517527190/ ISO 3,200 http://www.flickr.com/photos/little_pooky/3453338843/ ISO 4,000 http://www.flickr.com/photos/little_pooky/3490717938/ ISO 25,000 http://www.flickr.com/photos/little_pooky/3490713152/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/little_pooky/3416272315/ (panoramaed) Its burst rate is fast enough for me http://www.flickr.com/photos/little_pooky/3454654966/ Popular photography's review for Sony stated that it's quite noisy beyond ISO 1,600 and overall color accurancy is not as good as they were hoping. p.s. I am not sure this is important to you--but Sony has not been making dSLR for that long.
5. Personally I would go with Sony A900.This camera is well built with plenty of buttons to control its functions. It is easy to use and produces stunning picture quality.It come with high reolution with high end lenses.Excellent out of camera JPEG results with superb tonality, dynamic range, color and you can get body for same price as Canon 5D mark ii at amazon. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001FOREK4?ie=UTF8&tag=computer0bd-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B001FOREK4