Sony Alpha Cameras

sorry for diverting the topic slightly but...

are there any decent sony alpha based forums around?

I have an A100. My main reason for buying it was the fact that i could use my old minolta lenses once more. I really like the camera and find it a good size in my rather large hands. Im still learning to hone my skills but so far i am pleased with it.
 
wonder lander, please visit a shop & see how important liveview is to you (& specifically Sony's implementation as it's different from CaNikon & in some ways it's better & in others worse).
For me & my usage I could do without it but it may be just what you want.

There is an A200 twin lens kit with the 18-70mm & 75-300mm which you can get for £500 if you look.
Now these are typical kit lenses in that they are adequate rather than brilliant - however, your budget doesn't atm stretch to doing everything well but these would give you a good coverage as I would think that you need 300mm for motorsport.
Or you could buy the body & kit 18-70 (~£340) & choose another tele zoom (either new or sh) from someone like Sigma or Tamron with the rest.
Also allow for things like a bag, cleaning kit & some compact flash plus a tripod & flash if you think that you need them right away.

With the A350 there seems to be a kit with the 18-70mm & the 55-200mm which can come in under £700.
Now that doesn't give you as much reach as the 75-300mm but the 55-200mm performs above it's price level in image quality.
& at least 1 retailer does the A350 with the 18-250mm for under £700 - it's a very good walkaround lens (much better than the older 18-200mm, don't buy that) but does so at it's price level by not being a "fast" lens in terms of max. aperture.


In the consumer marketplace there are more than enough available lenses to satisfy enthusiasts let alone the average person.
Yes, there are areas where there are gaps (also true of Canikon albeit not so much) but Sony are adding at a rapid rate (something like another 5 lenses expected this year) as are both Sigma & Tamron.
The 2 weak areas atm are in things like T&S/PC & ultra tele primes but those are for professionals or very well heeled individuals (& I would stake money on the old Minolta ultra tele primes being reintroduced or replaced in improved form with SSM).

Great feedback thank you very much. Will go and take a look at both and as you say see how the live view works etc.
 
One thing that is rubbish about the cheaper sony lenses is when the f stops come in. For example the 75-300 reaches f5.6 by 120mm and the 18-70 hits f5.6 by about 35mm. Call me old fashioned, but that's reason enough to buy a proper Canon or Nikon camera as their kit lenses keep a wide aperture for longer.
 
very few kit lenses are great & even fewer would be great wide open ...
Got any specific info for where e.g. the Canon kit lens aperture changes happen as it's something that rarely appears in reviews?
 
One thing that is rubbish about the cheaper sony lenses is when the f stops come in.

They may be a kit lens aperture difference in favour of Canon/Nikon but people using kit lenses generally aren't too concerned, if they are, then they are using better lenses.

Also, most Sony DSLR owners are using third party lenses anyway.

The advantage Canon and Nikon have is their own range of lenses are very good and available for a reasonable price. They also have a much wider of gear and accessories - Macro flashes, tilt and shift lenses, remote shutter triggers, wireless modules, flash units etc etc,
 
Also, most Sony DSLR owners are using third party lenses anyway.
I would disagree with that - yes, they may have some 3rd party lenses but so do most CaNikon users.
I mostly have Minolta & Sony lenses with a couple of Sigmas.

The advantage Canon and Nikon have is their own range of lenses are very good and available for a reasonable price. They also have a much wider of gear and accessories - Macro flashes, tilt and shift lenses, remote shutter triggers, wireless modules, flash units etc etc,
Sony have some excellent lenses that stand comparison with anything from anybody. Admittedly some are dearer than equiv. CaNikon but that's partly cost of production as they don't have the volume to yet achieve the same economies of scale & partly marketing decisions (particularly in the UK, in the US Sony prices are a lot closer to CaNikon). It's not necessarily good for we photographers short term but it's good for Sony which means more investment> better for us in the long run.

Other than for real pros with specific needs there isn't that big a gap really.
Sony have Macro flashes (although for some reason they dropped the excellent Minolta Ring flash), T&S/PC I give you but it's not really a big sector except at the top end, remote shutter triggers we've got - you even get a wireless 1 in the box with the A700, every Minolta/Sony DSLR has built-in wireless flash - certainly not true of Canon, flashes we've got (in fact they are just in the process of updating them).
It's undeniable that CaNikon both have bigger ranges but the question is what % of the market needs all the extras? & as that % is largely made up of pros what use is having it without a truly pro body?
This too shall come to pass ... ;)
 
They may be a kit lens aperture difference in favour of Canon/Nikon but people using kit lenses generally aren't too concerned, if they are, then they are using better lenses.

I dunno, that seems a bit blanket to me. Some of us get given half decent lenses in our kits, so we don't feel the need to upgrade so quickly :p
 
I have ordered the A350 with standard kit lens following some recommendations on the Dyxum forums.

I shall be going over to America in October to scatter my mums ashes and we are off to vegas so I'm looking forward to getting some good savings on other lenses and accessories once I get out there.

Will post back with my initial thoughts as a DSLR newbie once I've received the kit.
 
ive not got time to read through all the replies, but people saying that the quality of the sony lenses is a problem need to do a tiiiiiiiiiiny bit more research before spouting **** like that, and that's coming from a devout canon fan!

Sony are very committed to the dslr market atm, investing an insane amount of money into it. Some of the new lenses and lens technology they're bringing out is extremely good, with the likes of brand new carl zeiss T* lenses (like the 85mm f1.4) etc.

I was talking to some chaps from sony at a trade show the other day and playing with some of the new lenses, including the new 300mm f2.8 and it seemed every bit as good as the canon option. They are launching a full frame 24mp camera shortly too, so people saying they dont have the range are way out as well...

All i can say is watch this space, as i can see sony overtaking nikon as 2nd best selling SLRs within the next 2-4 years!

Tom.
 
OK just picked up 2 x 4GB compact flash cards, have received my "Understanding Exposure" book and have got a wanted add posted for Minolta 50mm/1.7 AF lens as it's highly recommended on the alpha forums!

I'm like a kid at christmas!
 
Nice one. Look out for a 70-210mm F4 beercan off ebay too if you can. Its a very competant cheap zoom lens for the Sony to get you started. I'm currently thinking of aquiring the Carl Zeiss 16-80mm lens to replace the kit lens I gave away, supposed to be one of the sharpest lenses available.
 
ive not got time to read through all the replies, but people saying that the quality of the sony lenses is a problem need to do a tiiiiiiiiiiny bit more research before spouting **** like that, and that's coming from a devout canon fan!
Agreed, Minolta always had a good reputation for the quality of their lenses & that is essentially where Sony DSLRs are coming from.
There are a couple of new lenses known to be due out shortly (16-35 Zeiss, 24-105 G & possibly a 70-400 G as well) which are expected to be very good & no one would be surprised to see revamped versions of the 400mm f4.5 & 600mm f4.0 appear, nor a reengineered for cheaper production 300mm f2.8.
The days of people being able to criticise Sony for lack of lens options are not long for this world (& remember that they only need 1/2 as many lenses as CaNikon as they don't have to do IS & non-IS versions).

I'm not sure that they'll take 2nd place in 2-4 years (tbh I'm not sure that it is their intent to overhaul Nikon as Nikon & Sony seem to have a pretty close relationship) & it may well be that Canon drops to the no. 2 DSLR seller.
 
Got an A300 an love it, with the addtion of the Minolta HS3600 flash and getting the Tamron 55-200mm for £25 with the camera I can't complain. The Extreme 3 4GB card also works really well.

I bought Gary Freidmans book which is brilliant and am starting to get more into using the camera.

Off to Woburn Safari park tomorrow so hopefully get a chance to have a play.
 
Agreed, Minolta always had a good reputation for the quality of their lenses & that is essentially where Sony DSLRs are coming from.
There are a couple of new lenses known to be due out shortly (16-35 Zeiss, 24-105 G & possibly a 70-400 G as well) which are expected to be very good & no one would be surprised to see revamped versions of the 400mm f4.5 & 600mm f4.0 appear, nor a reengineered for cheaper production 300mm f2.8.
The days of people being able to criticise Sony for lack of lens options are not long for this world (& remember that they only need 1/2 as many lenses as CaNikon as they don't have to do IS & non-IS versions).

I'm not sure that they'll take 2nd place in 2-4 years (tbh I'm not sure that it is their intent to overhaul Nikon as Nikon & Sony seem to have a pretty close relationship) & it may well be that Canon drops to the no. 2 DSLR seller.



I work in camera retail, and was speaking to some of the UK guys including the head of uk sales, and he expressly said that sony intended to have a #2 market share within the next 2-4 years, regardless of if that's above nikon or canon he didnt really care, but with my view on it I think it'll be above nikon with regards to how current sales are.

Sony and Nikon USED to have a close relationship with them making sensors for nikon in the d200 era etc, but now sony seem to have cut them off and are focusing on getting their kit out there :)
 
Sony and Nikon USED to have a close relationship with them making sensors for nikon in the d200 era etc, but now sony seem to have cut them off and are focusing on getting their kit out there :)

They still do, the D300 sensor is from Sony.

Is the D300 sensor the Sony IMX021?
Two possible answers: (1) yes, or (2) a slightly modified version. Given Nikon's historical relationship with Sony's sensor division and the slightly modified specifications, I'd have to say #2 is the correct answer. Also, note that like previous Sony APS sensors, the sequence has remained the same: (a) Sony announces sensor samples; (b) Nikon announces a camera using a variant of that sensor; and (c) Sony and/or other companies announce cameras using the sensor Sony announced in step a (that step hasn't happened yet, but will shortly).


Saying that im impressed by the Sony kit. Sticking with my D80, but could be tempted to move to sony in a couple of years time, unless i go down the D2xs route.
 
Back
Top Bottom