Now some of you may have owned/used a Sony Alpha A200 for a while... Opinions?

Dinomania

Dinomania

Dinomania

Soldato
Joined
21 Apr 2003
Posts
4,328
As subject!

It'd be a stretch but it'd make a good Christmas present to myself (if I managed to sell my underused EEE).

The price is amazing, and I'm not going to notice small sharpness differences between the big SLRs. I'm after creativity and a chance to play with all the manual setting and lovely DOFs (I got some of this out of my old Fuji Finepix S5500 but at 4MP, no hotshoe and a lens I can't change, it's not quite versatile enough).

So how is it?
 
Just to be annoying and throw a spanner into the works...

You can get the Nikon D40x for a similar price or the Canon 350D maybe even the 400D, if you don't mind going second hand then you could easily get the Nikon D80, Canon 400D etc. for the £300 mark.

Obviously that's totally up to how you want to buy and which you feel most comfortable using. On that note, I was determined to get the Canon 350D or 400D until I had a proper play with them. I didn't like the way the Canons felt in my hand, tried the D40x and loved the way it felt so went for it and have no regrets. :)

As for the Sony, I don't have any experience with them.
 
Oh, you are, aren't you :P

However, I have heard good things about the A200 kit lens, and tbh if I go for anything, it'll be this or nothing at all. I just want to know people's experience with the camera I have asked about.

Cheers!
 
You sound the ideal person not to be swayed by the usual "You must get a Canon or Nikon because that £4K 600mm F4 prime lens is not available on the Sony, yet" comments, which are usually thrown up whenever anyone mentions Sony, or any other brand. All entry level DLSR's are virtually identical in what they can do, i.e. produce quality photographs. I very much doubt you would be dissapointed in a Sony, or any other make. The decision ultimately comes down to how its feels in your hand and how much it costs, so try in a shop is the usual reccomendation. If you go along to the Talk Photography forums you may get a more rounded view as there is a fairly vocal band of Sony users on there, but I think a couple of people have bought an A200 in here recently. I had the A100 myself, for which the A200 is the replacement. As I understand the A200 is virtually the same only slightly better at high ISO. I found the A100 to be an excellent camera. I would still have it now and it would still do me but I wanted to give it to me girlfriend, who strangely is also called Sara, so I could get an A700.
 
Bubo said:
I think a couple of people have bought an A200 in here recently. I had the A100 myself, for which the A200 is the replacement. As I understand the A200 is virtually the same only slightly better at high ISO. I found the A100 to be an excellent camera. I would still have it now and it would still do me but I wanted to give it to me girlfriend, who strangely is also called Sara, so I could get an A700.
Click to expand...
Haha!

Hey, thanks, that was closer to the sort of information I was after :)

I have a mate at the other end of the country who recently acquired an A200 himself, and he took it to a party the other day but LEFT IT ON AUTO!!! Damn the man, he took some wonderful portraits but they could just as easily have come out of a compact. Sigh.
 
As you say, in reality, you aren't going to be seeing any major differences in image quality between any of the manufacturers nowadays - at this end of the market, anyway. The Sony alpha cameras certainly get good reviews. The only issue that is generally brought up is the 'upgradability' of cameras outside the Canon and Nikon lines, but more and more lenses and accessories are coming out for other manufacturers, so it's increasingly less of an issue.

I don't see why you are so set on the Sony. What I would say is go and try them out in a shop first. If you like the Sony, then get it, but if you prefer the grip or UI of either a Canon or a Nikon (or whatever) then get that instead.
 
A.N.Other said:
I don't see why you are so set on the Sony. What I would say is go and try them out in a shop first. If you like the Sony, then get it, but if you prefer the grip or UI of either a Canon or a Nikon (or whatever) then get that instead.
Click to expand...
Price and size, mainly. Also the kit lens is 18-70 as opposed to the usual 18-55.

And maaayyybe because Pc Pro have got it in their A List. That thing's my wish list.
 
A.N.Other said:
That's fair. You seem to have put some proper thought into it :)
Click to expand...

That's what I was thinking, some proper though which is good to see.

I see what you mean about the lens, my Nikon came with an 18-55 and a 55-200. the 18-55 is too short really so 18-70 would be brilliant...having said that, lately I've stuck to using only the short lens.

I'm guessing you have played with the A200 in a store to see what it's like? If not, as has been said, try it and others, just to get the feel if nothing else. :)

Also as has been said, they are all very capable and closely matched at this end of the market.
 
The difference between 50 and 70mm is pretty small, in the grand scheme of things. Even if you had a 18-70 lens you would likely upgrade to somethinglike a 17-50mm anyway
One of the Nikon kit lenses is 18-70mm if that is your real concern.



Just go to a shop and try out all the different DSLRs, see which fits best in your hands (this is normally not the smallest but the biggest) and then see if the lens selection for that camera make suits you needs. A DSLR will make up about 1/5th of the price of a balanced SLR camera system , so it is worth putting much more time into deciding what kind of camera system you want rather than what camera. All of the entry level cameras are much the same and you will be merely limited by your abilities.

IF you intend to use the kit lens alone for long then you should buy a Bridge camera instead.
 
Last edited:
I bought one recently. You seem to have done your research so I'm not sure what I can add to help your decision! The extra reach of the kit lens is certainly useful and I find myself using it a lot, it's a bit soft in the corners at full reach but I only notice it when pixel peeping.

Having a DSLR has helped me produce much better photos than my compact ever did, equipment might not be everything that makes a good photographer but it certainly helps.

The UI is nice and simple and easy to navigate. Not sure what else to say really, I'm definitely happy with my purchase considering the price and would recommend it to others.

The battery life is also incredible, I read in reviews that it was impressive but I didn't realise by how much. I've been outside shooting for 2 afternoons now, probably taken about 750 shots and left the camera on most of the time and the display is telling me I've still got over 60% battery life left (obviously this is with flash off though). My compact would have needed charging by now. I also like how it gives a % and not just a symbol like other manufacturers do so you can judge it more accurately.

Image stabilisation in the body is useful and another advantage over other entry level DSLRs, it seems to work well with me but I haven't done any shot to shot comparisons to see how much I'm benefiting from it.

Any questions fire away :)
 
InvaderGIR said:
That's what I was thinking, some proper though which is good to see.

[...]

I'm guessing you have played with the A200 in a store to see what it's like? If not, as has been said, try it and others, just to get the feel if nothing else. :)
Click to expand...
Oh, you flatter me ;)

No, not felt one up yet. Because if I do I'll only go and buy it there and then, so just sending the feelers out before doing so!

I've just had my birthday party and was really rather jealous of the pictures taken by my friend Corin who turned up with his SLR beast - I used to take some nice ones with the Fuji S5500 as said but in the end it started to frustrate me as I wanted to make it do more than it was able. So I've tended to carry around a little compact lately for the snaps, but starting to miss the control...
 
D.P. said:
IF you intend to use the kit lens alone for long then you should buy a Bridge camera instead.
Click to expand...
Thanks, but as mentioned I have owned a 'bridge' camera for some time already. I'm hungry for more but want to ease myself in gently at a comfortable price. The A200 seems to fit in there.
 
Matthew.M said:
Hurrah, someone who actually owns one!
Click to expand...
Cheers Matthew, sounds promising.

Aye owning a 'prosumer' fakey-SLR for a while means I generally know what I'm talking about and what I'm after - I just like to know if people are happy with their purchases, or if they come back with "Well yeah it's pretty good /but/..."
 
D.P. said:
The difference between 50 and 70mm is pretty small, in the grand scheme of things. Even if you had a 18-70 lens you would likely upgrade to somethinglike a 17-50mm anyway
One of the Nikon kit lenses is 18-70mm if that is your real concern.
Click to expand...

Aye, I want to get something like 18-70 and a 70-300 but don't have the cash, so the current kit lenses are fine...plus I may as well improve my skills before I drop loads of cash on the gear as it's fine as-is. :)

sara said:
Oh, you flatter me ;)

No, not felt one up yet. Because if I do I'll only go and buy it there and then, so just sending the feelers out before doing so!
Click to expand...

Oh yes? ;) :p

sara said:
I've just had my birthday party and was really rather jealous of the pictures taken by my friend Corin who turned up with his SLR beast - I used to take some nice ones with the Fuji S5500 as said but in the end it started to frustrate me as I wanted to make it do more than it was able. So I've tended to carry around a little compact lately for the snaps, but starting to miss the control...
Click to expand...

That's fair enough, I've used compacts a bit and also some bridge cameras and didn't like any of them, the DSLR is what I felt most comfortable with. I do suggest you check out before you buy, have some self control and go in store. Then buy online as it's cheaper. :p
 
Last edited:
sara said:
Thanks, but as mentioned I have owned a 'bridge' camera for some time already. I'm hungry for more but want to ease myself in gently at a comfortable price. The A200 seems to fit in there.
Click to expand...



uSing the kit lens along will not rally gain you anything beyond a good Bridge camera. The entire idea of an SLR is that the lenses can be swapped. Therefore you will want to buy new lenses, and you need to budget this.
The lenses used will be more important than the camera at the early stage, so have a look at what lenses you will want to buy.

Look at Nikon, Canon, Sony etc, look at what lenses are available and what they would cost. Make yourself an upgrade plan for the next 3 years, marking down lenses you intend to buy.

No Camera system is prefect, you need to find one that will best match your photography needs. E.g., LAndscape work is best with Nikon lenses, while Canon is good for wildlife with affordable telephoto options. Other manufactures have less options so you need to make sure that those available match your needs -- otherwise you will just waste money in the long run.
 
D.P. said:
The lenses used will be more important than the camera at the early stage, so have a look at what lenses you will want to buy.
Click to expand...
Umm, well actually I'm sure I'll be fine buying what I want when I want, this is a hobby, not a job..!

I'm after a DSLR over a bridge camera mainly for the size of the sensor - as what I really want to be able to do is get good portraits with shallow DOF and creamy backgrounds - so at most I'll be looking for a ~50mm "normal" lens. I gather these don't cost the Earth.

Trying to get the same effect from my bridge required the highest aperture possible and then 1) Making sure my subject wasn't too close to the background, or a wall, whatever, and 2) running away from him or her so that I could zoom back in again and sortof fake the DOF into looking even more shallow.
 
sara said:
Umm, well actually I'm sure I'll be fine buying what I want when I want, this is a hobby, not a job..!

I'm after a DSLR over a bridge camera mainly for the size of the sensor - as what I really want to be able to do is get good portraits with shallow DOF and creamy backgrounds - so at most I'll be looking for a ~50mm "normal" lens. I gather these don't cost the Earth.

Trying to get the same effect from my bridge required the highest aperture possible and then 1) Making sure my subject wasn't too close to the background, or a wall, whatever, and 2) running away from him or her so that I could zoom back in again and sortof fake the DOF into looking even more shallow.
Click to expand...


There are Minolta 50mm prime lenses available (F1.7 is the most common I think, with 1.4 and 1.8 also available), the Sony equivalent of the nifty fifty. They tend to go for reasonable money on a well known auction site. This sounds suitable for what you want to do!

If you do look them up be aware there's an autofocus and manual focus version, the autofocus sells for a bit more obviously.
 
Guys, please, I didn't come here expecting to having to almost argue the reasons why I want what I want.

Can we get back OT and let those who own the specified camera just let us know what they think of it?
 
Matthew.M said:
There are Minolta 50mm prime lenses available (F1.7 is the most common I think, with 1.4 and 1.8 also available), the Sony equivalent of the nifty fifty. They tend to go for reasonable money on a well known auction site. This sounds suitable for what you want to do!

If you do look them up be aware there's an autofocus and manual focus version, the autofocus sells for a bit more obviously.
Click to expand...
Sweet, makes sense.

Nifty fifty, I like :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom