Anyone Used The Sony DSLR-A100?

[BrknFngrs]

I was looking at reviews on dpreview and handled a few of the cameras today. The sony felt really comfortable to hold and on a side by side review (to the xti) they seem comparable. Does anyone on here use the sony or can you point out anything that seems good/bad about it?

This is a link to the side by side comp to the xti:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/comp...ra100&show=all

[Hash_man]

Ergonomically I really like the a100... It's a nice camera in that sense. And image quality is pretty comparable to the XTi, however I find it has higher noise levels.

I have a friend with one though, and he has had a hard time finding lenses that are pretty good, and not rediculous dollars like most Zeiss lenses are. In that sense the canon is much better for lenses and accessories

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Remeber that you're buying a system, not just a camera. Look at lenses, flashes, the whole works, and decide what works for you. Personally, I find Nikon or Canon are usually the way to go, but other brands do have their benefits.

[BrknFngrs]

Originally posted by Hash_man
Ergonomically I really like the a100... It's a nice camera in that sense. And image quality is pretty comparable to the XTi, however I find it has higher noise levels.

What exactly do you mean by higher noise levels? Is that a setting I would have to adjust or something that just happens with this specific camera?

Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat
Remeber that you're buying a system, not just a camera. Look at lenses, flashes, the whole works, and decide what works for you. Personally, I find Nikon or Canon are usually the way to go, but other brands do have their benefits.

So by looking at a brand like Sony I would be limiting my ability to find compatible accessories? A few reviews I've read of the xti suggest that the kit lens isn't particularly good. For a complete amateur is this going to be a problem?

[muse017]

Originally posted by BrknFngrs


What exactly do you mean by higher noise levels? Is that a setting I would have to adjust or something that just happens with this specific camera?



So by looking at a brand like Sony I would be limiting my ability to find compatible accessories? A few reviews I've read of the xti suggest that the kit lens isn't particularly good. For a complete amateur is this going to be a problem?

Higher noise at the same ISO setting

For example

Canon 30D ISO 800 Vs SONY A100 ISO 800

You will see more visible noises(grainy) on A100' sample than 30D's.


If you are going to use a kit lens only, then any DSLR should be fine then again, in that case, I wouldn't recommand to buy DSLR to start with. Expendibility is very important factor in DSLR and that's why you need look at a whole system not just a camera.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by BrknFngrs


So by looking at a brand like Sony I would be limiting my ability to find compatible accessories? A few reviews I've read of the xti suggest that the kit lens isn't particularly good. For a complete amateur is this going to be a problem?

Keep in mind that no third-party lens manufacturers make Sony-compatible lenses, so if you want to buy a lens you've got only once choice, and Zeiss lenses aren't cheap. If you're on a budget, third-party glass can be a godsend.

If you really don't want an 18-55 kit lens, perhaps the 18-135 bundled with the D80 is more up your alley.

[muse017]

Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat


Keep in mind that no third-party lens manufacturers make Sony-compatible lenses, so if you want to buy a lens you've got only once choice, and Zeiss lenses aren't cheap. If you're on a budget, third-party glass can be a godsend.

If you really don't want an 18-55 kit lens, perhaps the 18-135 bundled with the D80 is more up your alley.

Can't agree with you about third-party support.

Sigma has full line up of Alpha mount(Minlota/Sony). Check their website.

Tokina has some alpha mount lenses.(19-35,24-200, etc..)

Sony(Minolta) has some lenses manufactured by Tamron(OEM). Bacically Tamron 11-18 = Sony 11-18, Tamron 28-75/2.8 = Minolta 28-75/2.8.

and Zeiss

Plus You can use all of the previous minolta lenses.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by muse017



Can't agree with you about third-party support.

Sigma has full line up of Alpha mount(Minlota/Sony). Check their website.

Tokina has some alpha mount lenses.(19-35,24-200, etc..)

Sony(Minolta) has some lenses manufactured by Tamron(OEM). Bacically Tamron 11-18 = Sony 11-18, Tamron 28-75/2.8 = Minolta 28-75/2.8.

and Zeiss

Plus You can use all of the previous minolta lenses.

Compared to the main brands, Sigma third-party support for Sony is hugely limited.
Want a 70-200 f/2.8 Sigma? Sorry, nope.
80-400 OS? Nope.
120-300 f/2.8? Nope.
18-50 f2.8 HSM ? Nope.
50-150 f/2.8? Nope.
New 4.5mm or 10mm fisheyes? Nope.

So, if you want bargain fast glass from Sigma (really the main reason for even considering third-party), you're pretty much hosed, short of the 30mm f/1.4 and the dedicated macros.

Tokina doesn't even bother making anything for the Sony mount anymore, the 19-35 and 24-200 are comparatively ancient. The 19-35's apparently not all that bad, but a bit slow aperture-wise.

So, we're left with Tamron, my least favorite of the third-party companies. They've got a few good lenses, but as you said, they're the same as the Sony ones. Also, the 11-18 is probably the most underperforming ultrawide on the market, so really the only two lenses I'd consider from them would be the 17-50 and 28-75.

[BrknFngrs]

Thanks for the information guys, I'm going to try and check out the D80 as well and see how it feels. I'm not looking to ever do photography at anything more than an amateur level, more just looking for something to play with.

[dr_jared88]

Originally posted by BrknFngrs
Thanks for the information guys, I'm going to try and check out the D80 as well and see how it feels. I'm not looking to ever do photography at anything more than an amateur level, more just looking for something to play with.

I was in the same situation as you a couple weeks ago. I was looking at the XTI and the Sony. I quickly decided against the Sony because of lack of accessories. I was then close to buying the XTI but decided to look into the D80 a little bit. Yes it is a fair bit more expensive but the kit lens and extra features really made it more appealing then the XTI for me. Again that is just my opinion. Go with what feels right for you. You won't regret it.

[BrknFngrs]

Originally posted by dr_jared88


I was in the same situation as you a couple weeks ago. I was looking at the XTI and the Sony. I quickly decided against the Sony because of lack of accessories. I was then close to buying the XTI but decided to look into the D80 a little bit. Yes it is a fair bit more expensive but the kit lens and extra features really made it more appealing then the XTI for me. Again that is just my opinion. Go with what feels right for you. You won't regret it.

Thanks for the input, when you say the D80 is a fair bit more expensive can that be quantified at all? Are we talking to 10% more, or more like 35% more?

What specific features really set the D80 above the xti for you?

[canadianx]

Originally posted by dr_jared88


I was in the same situation as you a couple weeks ago. I was looking at the XTI and the Sony. I quickly decided against the Sony because of lack of accessories. I was then close to buying the XTI but decided to look into the D80 a little bit. Yes it is a fair bit more expensive but the kit lens and extra features really made it more appealing then the XTI for me. Again that is just my opinion. Go with what feels right for you. You won't regret it.

But comparing the D80 with the XTi isn't comparing apples to apples is it? My understanding is that the XTi is entry level for Canon and the D80 is the second level for Nikon. Comparing like cameras would show Canon 30D (body only) @ $899.00 and the Nikon D80 (body only) @ $929.95.

BrknFngrs check out Vistek at: http://www.vistek.ca/
and the Camera Store at: http://www.thecamerastore.com/
For prices and selection of accessories for each of the camera brands you are comparing.

[muse017]

yeah I would also recommend to take a look at Canon 30D,
$899.00 for 30D = Best bang for the money!!!

[mr_ballroom]

I would just stick to the big 2, Nikon and Canon and mabye Pentax as the 3rd option.

[muse017]

Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat


Compared to the main brands, Sigma third-party support for Sony is hugely limited.
Want a 70-200 f/2.8 Sigma? Sorry, nope.
80-400 OS? Nope.
120-300 f/2.8? Nope.
18-50 f2.8 HSM ? Nope.
50-150 f/2.8? Nope.
New 4.5mm or 10mm fisheyes? Nope.

So, if you want bargain fast glass from Sigma (really the main reason for even considering third-party), you're pretty much hosed, short of the 30mm f/1.4 and the dedicated macros.

Tokina doesn't even bother making anything for the Sony mount anymore, the 19-35 and 24-200 are comparatively ancient. The 19-35's apparently not all that bad, but a bit slow aperture-wise.

So, we're left with Tamron, my least favorite of the third-party companies. They've got a few good lenses, but as you said, they're the same as the Sony ones. Also, the 11-18 is probably the most underperforming ultrawide on the market, so really the only two lenses I'd consider from them would be the 17-50 and 28-75.

What you're saying is very true at this moment. However if there are enough demands for certain mount type(PK or Alpha, whatever)..Sigma will produce it. It's not that hard to change the mount since optical structures are the same.

Ex)
30mm f/1.4 --> originally didn't come with Four-third mount but there were significant demands for fast prime lenses so they just change the mount and released it.


Also Tamron is coming out with new alpha mount 70-200mm f/2.8 so I believe that Sigma will be doing pretty much the same thing later.

I mean I really didn't like SONY but so far SONY is doing great job breaking into the DSLR market. With their brand power and Minolta's background it'll be interesting to see what's going to happen.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by muse017



What you're saying is very true at this moment. However if there are enough demands for certain mount type(PK or Alpha, whatever)..Sigma will produce it. It's not that hard to change the mount since optical structures are the same.

Sigma's had 4 versions of the 70-200 f/2.8 EX and none of them have ever been for Minolta or Sony. Nobody should buy a system on the hopes that somebody might build lenses for it someday. Add in the fact that Sony/Minolta flashes are hideously expensive ($550 for a flash with FEWER features than the best Nikon unit and NO wireless capability whatsoever, and $350 for a flash that doesn't even have a swivel head - only $50 cheaper than the best Nikon) and you've got a system with some serious flaws. Want an f/2.8 wideangle? Sorry, but Sony will sell you a 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 for $900. That's the same aperture and less zoom range than a Nikon 18-135 kit lens. Sure, it's got a Zeiss name slapped on it, that's probably half the price right there. Want a first-party 70-200 f/2.8 for sports? You get to pay $700 MORE than the Nikon and Canon equivalents for a lens without IS/VR. Sure, the body's got SSS, but it's not as effective as the in-lens variant.

So, really, we end up with a system that has a cheap base model SLR, hideously expensive first-party glass and accessories, and a limited selection of third-party glass and almost no third-party accessories. Not a system I'd buy into.

[ex1z7]

Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat

So, really, we end up with a system that has a cheap base model SLR, hideously expensive first-party glass and accessories, and a limited selection of third-party glass and almost no third-party accessories. Not a system I'd buy into.

Nikon / Canon FTW in that respect. That's why I went Nikon over Pentax, I never seriously considered Canon - personal preference on that one.

Nikon : Flashes, lenses, er.. EVERYTHING.. Filters ? 52mm, can be bought EVERYWHERE.. Konica lenses? 49mm half the time.. hard filter to find nowadays..

Pentax has the bonus of having in-body sensor stabilisation, so using old lenses (k-mount hasn't changed since what, 1957?) is a fantastic option, but some other accessories to Pentax just make the cost of the system too expensive for my liking.

I went Nikon and never looked back, I'm well over a third of what I make a year invested into this system and don't regret ... well most of it haha.. I could spend the same amount of money and have 1 body with 1 good lens and a flash if I went Sony..

That and Sony Alpha's suck at high ISO, so getting fast glass is even MORE important, which is even MORE brutally expensive compared to Nikon for the same optical quality..