MF lens dilemma (follow up)

[goinggreynow]

Late last month I started a thread about possible options for mounting an old Minolta 70-210 MD which I am very reluctant to get rid of before I've even used it properly. At that time, I was thinking that M4/3 was they way to go and received a number of very helpful comments.
I briefly acquired a used G3, mounted the lens and took some decent pics but felt the combo was unbalanced - weight wise. So I'm now back to the drawing board (but M4/3 is still very much at the top of my list).
However, just wondering if any of the Sony Alpha bodies with their ("Super steady shot") might also fit the bill. Any thoughts would be most welcome.
In an ideal situation, I want to be able (at least once) to take the Minolta to a Silverstone race day and be able to hand hold it (panning) down to around 1/30sec!
I suspect I may not be realistic in hoping for a solution with out spending silly money. As before the "safest" option is probably for me to sell on the Minolta but I'm not ready to do that just yet!
Thanks again.

 

[Durbs]

Tricky, as the Alpha range is pretty board, and includes the A7's, A6000's and A99's - which are very different cameras; Full Frame Mirrorless, m4/3 mirrorless, FF DSLR (and two different mounts!).

Budget is probably a large factor - but there's a lot of love for the A7 series, the '2' versions even more so, but they ain't cheap. Full Frame is great for legacy lenses too IMO - plus IBIS as well for (I think) 2-stops of stabilisation.
If you can grab a second hand A7, it shouldn't break the bank, though I think (not sure) the mk1's don't have IBIS...