Sony seriously needs to wake up or it will lose even this little bit of share that it has.
I am desperately looking to upgrade from my A700 (great camera BTW) but Sony is not providing me with options.
My needs is simple: I sell HDR panorama (invisible to untrained eye, used for getting extreme DR)
I do 3 shots HDR, each 2 stops apart. 5 shots times two stops would be even better to get all the highlight and shadows.
I almost left Sony because of lack of -+ 2 stops bracketing options on A700, it finally came with firmware 4.
To do proper focusing for 15+ images, I need manual focus 100% live view.
I don't care for fast live view with autofocus, but I agree it maybe cool for many.
Now that 550 is there with manual live view, there is not +-2stops bracketing!!!
+-.3 or .7 were useful in film time but now they are plain retarded!
What do these sony engineers think??!
Ideally I should get A900/A850 with +-2 x3 but there is no live view? How hard it is to lift the mirror and let the light to the main sensor?
And don't let me even started on MLU. Barry, my credits to you and for all your fights from cooked RAW to MLU. Every camera needs to have an MLU. Period.
Finally video.
Whoever claims that video shouldn't be in Sony DSLRs, is directly working against the future of Sony DSLRs. Sony mount is now the only one that doesn't have the video, and it is so ironic, as video was Sony's best bet, as they are recognized as video company. I could bet that Sony killed 80% of sales of 5xx by not including video.

Giving video to DSLR users is like giving them half of million dollars for the price of their DSLR. That's how capable is video on DSLR (and that accidentally is the price of high-end video production camera that has similar video capabilities). For you that dont' want it - Don't use it! But let ME use it!

And please stop the stories about camcorders being better. It is better the same way the point-and-shoot are better than DSLRs. Better for absolute beginners and non-cretive folks that simply want to capture the event.
NOT better for most of us that are already familiar with Depth of field and other photographic concepts and are ready to extend our vision to this exiting field.
Camcorders better? Please first try 5d MkII or GH1 before making such a claim. Putting 50mm 1.4 on FF DSLR and shoot video is like gift from gods. Not to mention all those low-light situation where camcorders can't even come close!
KM A2 had better video than most camcorders and it was stabilized.
Why cant we have it on Sony, 5 years later?

So why don't I switch?

Actually I did switch, I sold all my Sony gear (6k) and bought 5DmKII with 24-105Lf4 in June 2009.
I lasted few months only. I couldn't live with Canon muted colours, wax-like skin tones (yes I am experienced RAW-only user) and mediocre zooms on the wide side (what I use). Plus focusing on even A700 is more accurate than 5DMKII. My 16-80 is three times better than 24-105. And then imagine CZ24-70. Wow - worth suffering with Sony's cameras.
Sony colour processing and Zeiss lenses are way better than Canon's and a little better than Nikon's and that's why I am staying for now.
I am still hopeful that Sony will wake up and come up with these few minor things to make me (and few million others) a happy user!
So just for me (and few million others):
- 2 (or even 3 like 7D) stops increments, 3 and 5 times.
- MLU
- Live View 100% Magnification
- Video, with full manual control and selectable recording fps (24, 25, 29.97....)
- non cooked RAW
- best possible high ISO performance
- DXO as default software (but keep Sony colour processing engine)

novak


--
http://www.supernovak.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rogic

FED-S (my father's) > Canon AE1 (my brother's) > Minolta Maxxum 3xi (my first precious) > Minolta Dynax 400si (hello Canada) > Minolta Dimage 7i (darling) > Konica Minolta 5D (first DSLR) > Sony Alpha A100 (killer baby) > Sony Alpha A700 (serious tool) > Canon 5DMkII (weird computer with average lenses) > Back to A700 (reassured about the greatness)