+++ +++ Image quality
Here I do not want to say much. This is rolled out enough in numerous tests. Generally, both offer excellent image quality, in some test, the Sony is also slightly ahead of Canon.
I was impressed by both cameras. Really serious differences I could not tell. The main distinguishing feature is certainly not in the picture quality.
EDIT: After 5 weeks of testing I am with the picture quality (with Tamron 17-50mm f / 2.8) very satisfied, often amazed.
+++ +++ Haptics
Both cameras are stable and feel great. rubberized grips are available on both sides. The housing is made of plastic on both models, the Sony acts but significantly higher quality. The Canon here has a clear plastic optics.
+++ +++ Features
The main reason for the move was the equipment. Panorama, HDR function, BULB, several scene modes, effects filters, and, and, and .... I would like to now not list everything, but I'm excited. Here, the Canon clearly draws the shorter.
Especially ingenious, I find that, for example, you can show the so-called manual focusing edge enhancement levels. Then, at the edges of the object which has just focused to recognize a white noise. This manual also makes refocus fun.
What I do miss is greatly limiting the ISO Automtik which is automatically limited to 3200. Why Sony has waived is something incomprehensible, even in the cheapest DSLR's there is.
+++ +++ Finder
Of course it is clear that the optical viewfinder of the Canon is more detail and contrast. Nevertheless me the digital viewfinder of the Sony has completely convinced. It sees everything you see on the LCD screen. Changing the shutter speed, aperture, filter effect, manual exposure, ... you can see in the viewfinder immediately. Also can be for example a digital spirit level show, so no picture is wrong. Also you can attach the focal point of an object, which is very useful when moving objects. It is always only the viewfinder or the LCD active. The viewfinder turns on as soon as one approaches the eye. Unfortunately, this is done with a slight delay. In practice, I have but hardly noticed. Still, I would have found it be great if you could activate the viewfinder permanently. While there is a shift of the viewfinder / LCD but you have to anyway with the eye on the viewfinder are so these terms.
But all in all I do not want to miss some of the functions of the digital viewfinder, it's just a completely different way of photographing.
+++ Ergonomics / handling +++
Both cameras all buttons are within easy reach. The Canon menu is structured very well and clearly what is also due to the meager equipment but. The menu of the Sony is by no means overweight and very clear despite more abundant features.
Most important functions can be accessed with two cameras on buttons on the rear and top. More individually assignable buttons would have been nice but are not to be found in other camera in this price range. All other functions, such as metering mode or AF are over are erreichtbar an extra key. Because you do not look up at the Sony specially from the viewfinder, as in the Canon, is all very fast and flowing. All in all I am very satisfied with the service, which is also due to the digital viewfinder. All functions are within easy reach and there is a gervorragender workflow.
EDIT: I recently had another DSLR with classic optical viewfinder in hand. And I've noticed that I have so got used to the electronic viewfinder that seemed to me the handling with optical viewfinder very cumbersome and inconvenient. In the future I'm going to probably buy only cameras with ELV!
+++ Live View and autofocus +++
The Canon was only an additional function that I have hardly used because the auto focus was just too slow for me.
When Sony has virtually always a Live View mode. By the semi-transparent mirror the autofocus works quickly and reliably (even in low light) and even focused on shooting after.
--- --- Negative
(-) The low-light capability of the Alpha 57 is not the best. Above all the noise in dark areas is above ISO 1600 quite striking. The noise reduction intervenes quite strong, so that textures are quite muddy in higher ISO range.
(-) As already mentioned, a major shortcoming the lack of ISO-limit. Sometimes I'd like to limit the ISO value a little more without setting it manually. Especially this is annoying when one considers the previous point. The camera safely engages with the high ISO values, before they ever thinks of times the shutter to open something.
(-) Some functions on the mode dial are quite unnecessary in my opinion. Firstly, the 3D panorama, which will probably need the least and what you can accommodate with the normal panorama mode would. Apparently Sony wanted his new exclusive technology more present to the outside. And for the second mode for the Intelligent Auto (no flash), because you can turn the flash off well in the Intelligent Auto. Here room for anything else would have been, for example, a user preset as the Alpha 77th
(-) The placement of the LCD joint is of course visible unfavorable. Who knows what Sony has been thinking? Maybe they wanted to yes apart from the competition. For me, however, it has only the function of the display protection. On my tripod it is completely useless in any case. Come to think of permanently installed and scratchproof rather would have been. But surely a matter of opinion.
(-) The panorama mode provides enough configuration options! With panoramas one wants a high depth of field generally, but unfortunately it can not itself set the aperture. As is also not nachfokusert during shooting (what the camera actually can), it can happen that parts of the panorama are blurry because they were simply not focused. For really good panoramic images are more single shots, then, must it were composed.
The move I have never regretted nor at any time. Remember you should of course, that the choice of lenses in the Canon is clearly better, but there are still good lenses for the Sony.
Also, be sure to buy only the body of the Sony Alpha 57 and still a good lens to as the Tamron 17-50 f / 2.8. With the kit lens you can not bring the full power of the camera by far.
+++ +++ CONCLUSION
As you can perfect a camera for himself designate only when one no longer longs for some functions and hopes that the next firmware update this brings, which is very unwahscheinlich. Unfortunately, I do that sometimes, I still miss some configuration and settings in some areas. Yet here Sony offers the best overall package of all cameras in this price range and I am absolutely satisfied with my new DSLR ... um I mean, of course DSLT;) Therefore I forgive full 5 stars.
EDIT: A little more closely compared with Canon!
Before I sell my Canon 550D I once more try around a bit and compared both cameras. On both cameras I had the Tamron 17-50 f / 2.8, with the Sony without image stabilization, the Canon.
For that I have photographed my bookshelf with the same aperture, shutter speed and different ISO values. When noise, I have found only minor differences, here both looked really good. Only at ISO 6400 has slightly better I like the Sony. The Sony looked at the sharpness of clearly better and shone with more natural color reproduction. The difference was even greater than expected, so I could see this already at first sight (without magnification).
Since the Sony only 70% of the incident light reaches the image sensor, I have read many times that the picture is dark or the camera must previously have recourse to higher ISO values. I can not confirm! With the same aperture, shutter speed and ISO setting, the images have become almost exactly the same light in both cameras.
The Sony presents the images just generally a bit darker. What is with Canon on the exposure compensation scale a +/- 0 is at the Sony halt a +1.2.
However, I have noticed a difference when you can regulate all values automatically (P / Auto mode).
The Canon tried the ISO value to minimize attacks and early on the widest aperture back with me 2.8. The Sony, however, still used a diaphragm of 4.0, even if the ISO speed is already at 3200. Only when the light conditions are even worse used the Sony a wider aperture.
So the Canon increases until the stop before it turns on the ISO value, while Sony only the ISO speed to max. 3200 increases before it enlarges the aperture.
The Sony displayed here probably somewhat more sharpness extract as at maximum aperture. Personally I like very well, but you should of course make sure that in low light noise is not too strong and possibly set the aperture or ISO value manually. Here again one misses the ISO limit. Too Bad. At my vote this course does not change.
