Throughout the 90's I used an old Minolta X-300 that I could not fault at all - absolutely loved it.

At the start of the 00's the X-300 developed a leak and as I couldn't afford a DSLR (and the quality wasn't that great at that point) and I didn't want another film camera, I went for a fuji compact digital for several years.

In 2009 I decided that DSLR's were affordable enough and the tech was good enough to be a viable purchase so I plunged for a Sony Alpha 200 (thinking that it would be the closest thing to a Minolta that I could get).

I've struggled with it really.......I found the Minolta much easier to use and I could figure out why.
I can get similar results, but the Sony takes a lot more effort.

After reading around, its dawned on me that big difference is the lens......50mm prime f1.8 on the X-300 and an 18-70mm f5.3 on the Sony.........so my problem has always been getting enough light into the Sony to achieve the same results as the Minolta.

So, given that the Sony is now 3 years old and a 50mm f1.4 lens is around 300.........should I get a lens or a new camera?

I guess the camera is ok, no video (but i've got an iphone), 10.2M - so the quality is still good - I guess the only issue is that, If I get a lens, I tie myself into Sony........

Its a big purchase for me - and for an old camera.......I just want to make sure i'm doing the right thing??