Which dslr camera to buy?

The Sony SLT A55 has two features lacking on the A35 - a tilt/swivel screen and built-in GPS. If those are features you think important than the A55 is worth the extra money.

Every time someone asks about buying a Sony DSLR there is unfounded criticism of Sony's lens selection. I say unfounded simply because of Sony's use of the legacy Minolta Maxxum "A" lens mount that was introduced in 1985. What this means is that any of the previously owned Maxxum AF lenses available can be used on a Sony DSLR and will auto focus as they should. Another feature seldom (if ever) mentioned is that Sony has their version of Image Stabilization in the camera body so any lens used becomes, in effect, an IS lens.

One of the Maxxum lenses most sought-after by Sony DSLR users is the Maxxum AF 70-210mm f4 zoom known as the "Beercan". One in excellent condition can easily be found for well under $200.00. In comparison, a Canon 70-200mm f4L IS USM zoom will cost you around $1,200.00 new and close to that used. The non-IS model (not recommended) is about 1/2 the cost. Currently, Nikon doesn't even offer a 70-200mm f4 zoom although one is rumored. Unless you are made of money don't even bother pricing a Nikon or Canon 70-200mm f2.8 zoom.

Also, don't forget that the Sony A35 and A55 both feature continuous full-time phase-detect auto focus whether you're shooting still pictures or full 1080p video.

Since the mirror in the A35 and A55 never moves there are fewer moving parts to wear and cause problems. Plus, you don't have to worry about mirror shake when using a slow shutter speed.

Nikon, canon you can't go wrong with either, it's usually small personal preferences that lead people to one or the other. However if there's a photography club, local camera rental shop, or college with a lens stock you can rent/borrow from and they only have one of those brands, it might be worth choosing the brand they use.

Basically if you are serious (and planning on eventually spending not insignificant sums of money on equipment) bodies are cheap, and frankly the quality differences between bodies in the 600-$1000 are minimal. Your lenses, glass is the expensive and most important part.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/736704-REG/N...

is a decent starter kit

For fast fps Sonys' SLTs are great but one thing u should not forget, it's only fast shooting in JPEGS not RAW, u'll be limited to less then 4fps in RAW with slow buffer time. Also for good sports photography u need equally good fast lens for sports and which Sony doesn't have. Well, if sports shooting is ur main priority and u only have budget for $800 than go with Sony, although there are still other alternatives.

Suggestion:

Get Canon 40D or 50D 6.5fps and solid built quality.

I don't know much about the Sony cameras but I heard they're very good for video and action. Check out the Pentax kr too its got 6fps and very good low light capabilities (good for indoor basketball games)

I only recommend what I own and therefore know - Canon. For your budget you could get one of my cameras, the t1i - excellent for stills and video or perhaps the t2i, the same applies, excellent.