like i said in one of my earlier posts

When it all boils down, I don't think there'* much of a difference. It'* just two seperate ways of motorizing the focus ring.

Some (more $$) in-lens AF systems are 'ultrasonic' (USM, Canon) or 'silent save motor' (SWM, Nikon) or 'supersonic motor' (SSM, Sony). They are marketed as being faster and quieter and are built into the lens. It might matter, I don't have any SSM lenses myself.

That said, in all of my film and digital SLR shooting, the Sony/Minolta non-SSM setup has ALWAYS been in-body motor drive. And my AF performance is just about every bit as good as any other setup out there and I do not see the need to invest in the technology. Again, it often depends on what you shoot. At rock concerts I'm not particularly going to care if my focus motor is a little loud, but I will care if the camera has trouble locking focus in super super dark clubs and bars lit only by a couple lights. ISO 6400 AND f/2 as a necessity? You bet it'* happened to me

Cliff'* notes: Is one better? Probably. Would it matter to you? Likely not right now.


We can sit and discuss gear until the cows come home - it'll help you make an informed decision as you are after all plunking down almost a thousand bucks here. But play with the cameras! Work on the photography skills and experience to really take advantage of a DSLR.


ps: Do you currently have a 35mm autofocus film SLR camera body at all? This could potentially influence your chocie of brand if you wish to use the film body still. It'* a great way to learn to THINK through your photography.

I agree you dont need it right now. Start shooting weddings and you'll look for it. Its soo quite at a wedding and you want to be able to focus ASAP because stuff happens fast and you may miss the most important parts like the first kiss

Is there a difference in cost for in-camera vs in-body?

i tend to think that in-body would make the body more expensive, and lenses cheaper, and vice-versa


unfortunately i do not have access to any SLR camera with auto-focus, only an old 35mm Minolta(?) that a friend has that is totally manual

Yeah, old MF Minoltas won't be working on a Sony body

The ONLY DSLR ever produced that doesn't have the in-body focus drive is the D40(x)... all others have it. Generally speaking, other than the supplied kit lens, the better lenses will have it in the lens but they're also more expensive

so, the "kit" lens is manual only?

at best buy it lists an AF-* kit lens? the AF-* and AF-I have the drive motors built in?

The kit lens for the D40/D40x are specifically selected to give AF compatibility. No kit lens will be manual only

that is what i thought, just got a bit confused for a minute...

I've made my choice

Sony A200K. Ships out at the end of January, thanks to repinS for the scoop to the new hot products!

Yeah, the A200 is looking pretty nice as well as the D40x to me at the moment. Unfortunately there are few that interest me under $1000