Is it worth it?

[ardnirun]

Hi Sony users,
been researching alot about cameras and trying out many kinds of dslrs for the past couple of months...

This weekend been reading up on the Sony Alpha series

well..can say am a noob in this...but have been doing my research on DSLRs...relationship of aperture size..light...shutter speed and what nots..

so far my requirements..
1. a camera i can easily learn on without being intimidated..
2. Expandable..
3. Easy to get accesories..

I've tried many models..would even look at 2nd hand ones..so far have tried the D70s..d60...E520...K100d..k200d...never did try a canon though...i think probably not uh..so ex sia the lens.. but i understand 1 thing...there is no perfect DSLR..all got pros and cons..

today i tried the A200...
i dont see a need for live view..so the a200 would be enuff..
1 thing I noticed was that it was damn comfy to hold....There was alot of "meat" to grab...it rocked bcos it was downright comfortable to hold....is it easy to get 3rd party accesories like lenses and flash for the a200?

i'm not really a picky person but value is tops on my list...What made you guys buy a Sony Alpha??other than having lots of legacy minolta lenses?

[GENO]

Just wondering that are you new to using a DSLR? the feel is pretty much diff if u are changing from a point and shoot to this.

All the brands of DSLR are the same to me.. they all will give you lots of settings to play around, its not that hard after a few try and error.

For sony models, u can still use back the old minotla mounts..but not the MD type which you need to get a convertor if you want. for flash, there is the 3rd party sigma which is not bad but a 2rd hand minolta would be a better choice. Lenses wise, u can find them selling in the Buy and Sell link in this forum. Just get the lenses u need, but learn to handle the camera will prove to be more important and owning great lenses.

[Rashkae]

Originally Posted by ardnirun 1 thing I noticed was that it was damn comfy to hold....There was alot of "meat" to grab...it rocked bcos it was downright comfortable to hold....is it easy to get 3rd party accesories like lenses and flash for the a200?

That was my main reason for going with Sony as well. Superb ergonomics and built-in IS.

It's a bit harder to get 3rd-party stuff than it is for C and N, but that's changing now. And many of us find stuff in the CS marketplace section, as well as just order from the states.

However, in most cases, the Sony lenses and flashes are far far far superior to the 3rd-party ones.

And we have good relationships with the local camera stores for discounts.

[tank0085]

Originally Posted by ardnirun i dont see a need for live view..so the a200 would be enuff.. 1 thing I noticed was that it was damn comfy to hold....There was alot of "meat" to grab...it rocked bcos it was downright comfortable to hold....is it easy to get 3rd party accesories like lenses and flash for the a200? i'm not really a picky person but value is tops on my list...What made you guys buy a Sony Alpha??other than having lots of legacy minolta lenses?

I am using an a200, loved it a lot. In terms of lens choices, sony can't win canon or nikon. They have far too many lens. As for 3rd party lenses, from what i know is that usually companies like tamron and sigma will introduce their new lens for canon and nikon mount first before having a sony mount. Dun worry, sony is catching up fast!

[Rashkae]

Originally Posted by tank0085 I am using an a200, loved it a lot. In terms of lens choices, sony can't win canon or nikon. They have far too many lens. As for 3rd party lenses, from what i know is that usually companies like tamron and sigma will introduce their new lens for canon and nikon mount first before having a sony mount. Dun worry, sony is catching up fast!

Well, "many" does not necessarily equate to good. Sony has lenses that cover all needs except extreme telephoto. And the Sony lenses are fantastic, many of them beating the "other" lenses hands-down.

[ardnirun]

Originally Posted by Rashkae Well, "many" does not necessarily equate to good. Sony has lenses that cover all needs except extreme telephoto. And the Sony lenses are fantastic, many of them beating the "other" lenses hands-down.

i see...i'm looking at the DT's now...not yet willing to splurge on the CZs and the G series of lenses..just wanna learn first....how does the DT's compare with the nikon dx range...and the olympus Zuiko range?

[Rashkae]

Originally Posted by ardnirun i see...i'm looking at the DT's now...not yet willing to splurge on the CZs and the G series of lenses..just wanna learn first....how does the DT's compare with the nikon dx range...and the olympus Zuiko range?

DT's just means crop-sensor lenses, since most of the sony lenses are full-frame. You can check for reviews on dyxum.com, but I can tell you straight away that it will be extremely hard to find a general purpose, walkabout lens that can beat the CZ16-80. The Tamron 17-50 comes close, but you lose some tele range.

[DiGdUb]

having used nikon(d40x), oly(e510 and e3) before and now sony (a700), i'd say i like sony best. the grip is very ergonomic, the menu is easy to use, good features such as inbody IS which means i do not have to worry if a lens has IS or not. the IQ is also good since some of sony's sensors are also found in nikon dslrs.

[ardnirun]

Originally Posted by Rashkae DT's just means crop-sensor lenses, since most of the sony lenses are full-frame. You can check for reviews on dyxum.com, but I can tell you straight away that it will be extremely hard to find a general purpose, walkabout lens that can beat the CZ16-80. The Tamron 17-50 comes close, but you lose some tele range.

reading dyxum now...How would you rate the DT lens compared to Nikons and Canons and the zuikos?i know that the CZs are top of the line lenses for Sony's..how would their DTs fair?

[gymak90]

Yup sony dslr has great ergonomics. Even their entry-level cams have a solid-build.
If you don't require a small top lcd, and don't really mind dwelling through the menu for settings, then a200 should be good enough.
Or else, you can consider a300/350.

Sony lenses cover much of the focal range. Although it can be abit expensive sometimes and there is a bit of shortage on fast primes and telephoto lenses, you can use 3rd party lenses. So this isn't much of a problem. Oh yes, you can also use minolta lenses.

[Galdor]

Originally Posted by ardnirun reading dyxum now...How would you rate the DT lens compared to Nikons and Canons and the zuikos?i know that the CZs are top of the line lenses for Sony's..how would their DTs fair?

Maybe you can specifically tell us which lens instead. 11-18mm? 18-70mm? 16-80mm? 55-200mm? 18-200mm? 18-250mm?

The other brands may have a different focal length lens, so better to tell us which lens you're comparing between. (eg. Canon 18-55mm vs Sony 18-70mm)

[Getz10]

Originally Posted by gymak90 Yup sony dslr has great ergonomics. Even their entry-level cams have a solid-build. If you don't require a small top lcd, and don't really mind dwelling through the menu for settings, then a200 should be good enough. Or else, you can consider a300/350. Sony lenses cover much of the focal range. Although it can be abit expensive sometimes and there is a bit of shortage on fast primes and telephoto lenses, you can use 3rd party lenses. So this isn't much of a problem. Oh yes, you can also use minolta lenses.

Fast primes....
hmmm let me see, we got 35/50/85 at F1.4, 135 at F1.8 and a lot more at F2 & F2.8........
Tele-lenses is the area we r really lacking in but tat apply to Sony lenses only.....Minolta's monster are still around for u to grab

[gymak90]

Originally Posted by Getz10 Fast primes.... hmmm let me see, we got 35/50/85 at F1.4, 135 at F1.8 and a lot more at F2 & F2.8........ Tele-lenses is the area we r really lacking in but tat apply to Sony lenses only.....Minolta's monster are still around for u to grab

Correct. But it's quite a pity that there isn't a cheap 50 F1.8. I'm not saying it's neccesary, but somehow the industry has made that lens a very affordable and useful lens.

There are of course more costly options, with CZ or G lenses. I'm personally waiting for 70-400G.

[ardnirun]

Originally Posted by Galdor Maybe you can specifically tell us which lens instead. 11-18mm? 18-70mm? 16-80mm? 55-200mm? 18-200mm? 18-250mm? The other brands may have a different focal length lens, so better to tell us which lens you're comparing between. (eg. Canon 18-55mm vs Sony 18-70mm)

well..am looking at the a200 2 lens kit..i understand it comes with the 70-300 and the 18-70...and am eyeing on a 35mm prime lens....

[tank0085]

Originally Posted by Rashkae DT's just means crop-sensor lenses, since most of the sony lenses are full-frame. You can check for reviews on dyxum.com, but I can tell you straight away that it will be extremely hard to find a general purpose, walkabout lens that can beat the CZ16-80. The Tamron 17-50 comes close, but you lose some tele range.

Let's not forget about the new Sony's 16-105mm. Excellent range from wide to zoom. Well built except for the focusing ring. Think i will prefer sony's 16-105mm to CZ16-80.

[Rashkae]

Originally Posted by ardnirun well..am looking at the a200 2 lens kit..i understand it comes with the 70-300 and the 18-70...and am eyeing on a 35mm prime lens....

You mean 75-300. The 75-300 is a full frame lens, and is ok... But better never test the 70-300 SSM G or you'll be poisoned!

The 18-70 is a DT lens (DT just means it's designed for crop sensors) and is generally rated as one of the best kit lenses (compared to the kit lenses of the other manufacturers).

For 35mm prime, there's some options from sigma and older Minolta lenses, but I'd suggest getting a 50mm f/1.4 or 1.7 instead.

[koolbeep]

Why Sony A200?

Built in Image Stabilizer which means ALL A-MOUNT lens old/new has IS feature already, 9 Auto Focus Points, Best Ergonomics, up to ISO 3200, AF eye start (not everyone like it but I love it), Can do trigger flash wireless, Anti Dust Protection...

the fact that this is an entry level camera then compare it to others league what else you can ask for.... hmm if you say live view then a300/a350 is for you ... sony realease 3 different version of entry level camera just to suit what you really need then other just followed.

do i speak like a sony rep ...

[Shin Howard]

I'll suggest getting the A200 kit for beginners. (Cheap & reliable)
It's really easy to operate & the design is really good. (More comfortable grip than most beginner DSLR)
Well when you are able to spend more on Lens & accessoires.
Get the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, Sony 50mm f/1.4 & the external flash HVL-F42AM.

[yannh]

Originally Posted by gymak90 Correct. But it's quite a pity that there isn't a cheap 50 F1.8. I'm not saying it's neccesary, but somehow the industry has made that lens a very affordable and useful lens. There are of course more costly options, with CZ or G lenses. I'm personally waiting for 70-400G.

Isn't there's plenty of Minolta 50mm f/1.7 around? That's the cheapest prime yet with superb value/price ratio.

Yes, now Sony has covered beginner/intermediate/advance range. A200/A700/A900. All have good build and features.

[ardnirun]

ahhh...will be waiting for the day I will choose...narrowed down to the following models..

Pentax k200d
Olympus E520
Sony Alpha 200

will just base the decision on how it feels in my hands....