So, here is a 2007 DSLR from Sony, strongly inspired by the last Minolta DSLR: the 7D. When I opened the box and grabbed it, I didn't really notice the cute Sony alpha logo: I was just grabbing a Minolta. And that was a good feeling because the 7D is still my favorite camera ever.
It looks like a Minolta, feels like a Minolta, handles like a Minolta, but doesn't really quite shoot like a Minolta and the RAWs are very different.
I will spare you all the specs: it's basically an improved 7D with kinda "doubled" specs:
- 12MP CMOS sensor upgrade from 6MP CCD,
- 2 more AF point (11) but basically only the center is useful,
- 5FPS instead of from 3,
- 1/8000 max shutter speed instead of 1\/4000,
- 6400 max ISo instead of 3200,
- bigger LCD screen with more pixels,
- weather sealing,
- new battery,
- better stabilisation.

The A700 lacks the super practical exposure and flash compensation knob and adds some useless crappy modes like portraits and landscapes. It also gives up on the magnesium body in favor of some plastic. Anything else is or feels quite the same and they can use the same lenses.
It's just a pretty standard camera with the specs of the time.  To me, the only special thing about it is the Minolta DNA.
There have been (lots) of reports of wheel issues with speed/aperture values jumping all over the place. Seems that could be fixed with some cleaning. I don't have that problem (yet?). There were also some reports of exposure inconsistencies that I already actually experienced. More on that later.
There were people complaining of hi ISO noise. Honestly ISO noise is not an issue anymore on ANY camera that shoots RAW, thanks to Topaz denoise and DXO deep prime. And there were also people complaining of back/front focus. My A700 is tack sharp with all of my compatible lenses.
Controls, handling, AF: it's working pretty well. It really handles like my beloved 7D except for exposure compensation as stated before.
The viewfinder feels the same when it comes to brightness and size, but I don't like the way Sony displays the shooting information with green letters over some greyish background. It is less contrasted and less sharp than the bright green over black background of the 7D. Same with the AF points illumination, it's not bright enough for me.
The images are sharp, the noise is definitely not an issue, DR is good enough if it wasn't for that weird overexposure thing.
Color rendering and contrast are not on par with the 7D (when the photo is actually correctly exposed). 
The RAWS from the alpha 700 needed more work than any of the raws from my 7D.  Still, the color rendering is clearly different. It's a matter of taste, but I definitely prefer the 7D colors.
Overexposure in Lightroom
For some reason, LR tends to display a massively overexposed image. Photolab doesn't.
Some think it could be linked to the Sony firmware update 4. I don't know. It just sucks. On average, Lightroom default processing shows a 2 Fstops overexposure. It's very inconsistent, sometimes it's quite OK, sometimes it's 3 Fstops, sometimes 1. Quite weird but not complicated to fix.
My first impression is good: I really like the Minolta DNA, but I'm -for now- not a big fan of the colors rendering. Overall, considering the 80 bucks I paid for this, I'd say it could be one of the best DSLR you can buy in that price range if you have some A-mount glass.

You may also like

Shooting the Sony Alpha 77 mk II in 2022
I wrote about the A77. But what about the noticeably more expensive used A77m2? You’ll have to pay $600 to $800 to buy a used one in good condition. Is it worth it? The A77m2 came a few years after the A77. in my opinion, the improvements are mostly marketing stunts. Despite a lot more AF sensors, a so-called new AF system, better video and a bigger buffer, I keep thinking the A77m2 used isn’t a very good deal.
Can you take any photo with an outdated crappy camera?
A short essay I wrote back in 2019.
Shooting the Nikon D2Xs in 2022
During summer 2005, after a very long wait, the Nikon D2X was released. At the time my go to camera was the Minolta 7D that replaced my Nikon film cameras for my digital needs. I also shot the Nikon D70 but I prefered the Minolta. Both cameras were quite slow, and 6MP only. I wasn't really convinced by the Nikon D1/x/h/d2h. Soon after buying the D70, the D2X was announced, making me question that early GAS compulsive buy.
Nikkor Plastic 70-300 F/4-5.6 AF-D ED
This Nikkor 70-300 has been one of the most poorly reviewed Nikkor lens ever.
Olympus OM-D E-M5
August 2018 I bought that little camera for $150. Definitely a bargain considering it was sold boxed, in a not too bad condition, with less than 6.000 clicks, and included two batteries and charger, a 12-50mm F/3.5-6.3 zoom lens, a 45mm F/1.8 prime lens, the tiny Olympus flash, a couple filters (ND1000 and CPL) and a (slow) 64GB SD card that I just trew away and replaced with a Sandisk Extreme Pro.
Shooting the Sony A77 in 2022
If you have some A-mount lenses and want an APSC DSLR that can take them natively, you don’t have many options. Especially if you can’t / don’t want to spend a lot of money.
Improving cheap flatbed scans
I still shoot film from time to time, not enough to invest in am excellent neg scanner or bother trying to shoot my negs with a camera. I tried that, don't like it. I love the scanning - editing process.
Shooting the Olympus OM-D E-M1 in 2023, 2024 and later.
One month ago, I was fed up with travelling with camera gear. Air travel became a miserable experience: arguing with check-in people, Unpack all that expensive shit at security, having gear damaged in the plane when frantic fellow passengers trow their hard cases in the overhead bins. I want to travel light: then a classified caught my eye: EM1, grip, charger, 2 batteries and 45-150 for 300.
Sony alpha A200: a Nikon D80 with IBIS
After Sony bought the Minolta photography department, they released the A100 in mid 2006, the A700 in mid 2007, and the A200/A300/A350 in early 2008. Two years after the Nikon D80, we find the same SONY ICX493AQA CCD sensor (wich is basically a slower ICX483AQA that was in the Nikon D200 released 3 years earlier) in what is basically a Minolta body with Sony branding imitating a Nikon D80..
Sony RX100 m3: all you need from 24 to 70mm
I got this little camera for $200 a couple years ago and didn't write about it yet.
Back to Top