Ive been to Jessops

S

Suvvey

Suspended / Banned
Messages
85
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
OK i was in Jessops this morning and was looking at the Canon 600d and Sony a55. I was surprised to say that i found the a55 better to grip (maybe slightly small but i like how it is discreet) and a lot more features at my disposal.

I was convinced i was going to get the Canon but now i am leaning towards the Sony. Do any of you guys use the a55? Anything i should know? Can i get lenses at decent prices or is that where they become expensive? How does the image quality for stills compare?

Any knowlege and opinions on which is better would be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance. :thumbs:


Also is there a newer model in the pipeline for the a55?
 
Last edited:
I am not really sure of much as I haven't had a Sony but given that the sensor inside the Sony is the same as in the D7000 I would assume the Sony has some good ISO handling and picture quality. Also Sony's EVF is really good - played with an A55 at a store for a few minutes - and I don't particularly like EVFs in general.

The A55 is very new indeed so I wouldn't expect to be replaced soon but there is a higher up model that is expected soon the A77.
 
I'm surprised the Sony felt better to hold than the Canon. Canons and Nikons always feel better built and nicer to hold, to me.

Regarding lenses, new Sony lenses are mostly as expensive as Canon and Nikon counterparts, though there are several budget models. But one big advantage of the Sony system is the compatibility of all the old Minolta A-Mount lenses, which can be picked up second hand for reasonable sums. And all will potentially benefit from the image stabilisation built in to the Sony body. Canon and Nikon try to get you to spend a fortune on their newer lenses because the IS is in the lens, not the body.

Consider the Sony A580 also - which is the model with the conventional SLR system, i.e. no translucent mirror. But I think it's a bit more bulky than the A55. The A55 is still quite new, so unlikely to be replaced for a while, but there's an eagerly-awaited replacement for the Sony A700 due later in the year. That will be significantly more expensive.
 
One simple reason to get Canon = normal hot shoe. Sony for some odd reason uses completely different type of hot shoe (maybe its better but who knows, nobody else uses it). To use things like pocket wizards, hot shoe bubble level etc. you need to spend money on adapter. Might not be an issue for some, but its definitely reason to stay away from Sony for me. :)
 
If you are going to be doing any professional work I would stick with Canon or Nikon, other companys like sony are relativly new to the DSLR market compared to canon and nikon. Personally I'd stick with the big dogs.
 
kokakaste2 said:
One simple reason to get Canon = normal hot shoe. Sony for some odd reason uses completely different type of hot shoe (maybe its better but who knows, nobody else uses it). To use things like pocket wizards, hot shoe bubble level etc. you need to spend money on adapter. Might not be an issue for some, but its definitely reason to stay away from Sony for me. :)
Click to expand...

You can get Bubble levels for the Sony mount for a similar price to the ISO mount (Canon, etc), just have to look a little harder to find them.

A hot shoe adaptor costs less than £10 if you need to use pocket wizards (but Sony cameras have wireless flash control via their pop-up flash unit, so many Sony shooters do not bother with 3rd party solutions for wireless flash).

So not particularly compelling...
 
If you like the grip and features of the sony, go for it.

Canon and nikon have more current lens choice, but sony will have the main bases covered (and even has some exclusive lenses of it's own like the 135 f/1.8).

There's easily scope for upgrading within the sony line. And the flash shoe shouldn't be a problem unless you do studio work with multiple flashes.

As many sony users on here will tell you, it'll take pictures just as well as the canon.
 
The sony suffers with regards to battery which can be a real issue unless you buy more batteries for it going buy the model in our work. The canon last many times longer regardless of what sony say you'll get per charge out of it.
 
I've no idea why anyone who was serious about photography would buy a Sony, when there are so many better cameras out there. :shrug:
 
Well you now understand why advice to new buyers is always go and try one.

A the price point your looking at a Sony is just as good as any other manufacture.
Sony have a 30+ lens line up, so there should be something in there to suit your needs. Sony supply all Nikon sensors so that's not going to be a problem.

If your happy with the feel and price of a Sony, then I'm sure it will take just as good images as a Canon or Nikon.

I say all the above being a Canon user myself.
 
So basically the a55 will take just as good photos and has more features, however, a lot of people still choose the equivalent Canon or Nikon just for the name?
 
Jackwow said:
I've no idea why anyone who was serious about photography would buy a Sony, when there are so many better cameras out there. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Methinks you haven't been reading recent reviews... or past ones either, or seen the shots some people have been getting with full frame Sony's.

Methinks you could just have to eat your words...

And of course Sony have in body IS, and I think I'd just about kill for that.
 
Suvvey said:
So basically the a55 will take just as good photos and has more features, however, a lot of people still choose the equivalent Canon or Nikon just for the name?
Click to expand...

No it's down to what people feel comfortable with. Whether its the way it feels in their hands, the like menu layout, perhaps a friend or relative has one or because they've previously owned the brand before.

It's like cars. Some buy a Ford Focus, others a Vauxhall Astray and others a Honda Civic. They all do the same thing but different people have different tastes.

If you're buying for the name (like an Audio owner) then you buy a Leica! (Runs and hides before world war 3 breaks out)

Sent from my HTC HD2 using TP Forums
 
Suvvey said:
So basically the a55 will take just as good photos and has more features, however, a lot of people still choose the equivalent Canon or Nikon just for the name?
Click to expand...

Sony's low end offerings on their conventional lineup is not as well regarded as the Canon/Nikon/Pentax ones.

However their new Axx models are quite different both in that they bring some innovation in the table, they are well priced and have an extremely good sensor. It is just that people don't yet associate Sony's name with higher end cameras.

If I didn't have an irrational dislike for EVF I'd be seriously considering the A55 or looking forward to the A77
 
Suvvey said:
So basically the a55 will take just as good photos and has more features, however, a lot of people still choose the equivalent Canon or Nikon just for the name?
Click to expand...

And their superior lens line-ups.

You have to look beyond the camera body to truly understand why people purchase a particular brand.
 
Sony a700 with the 24-70 Zeiss, the 70-200 2.8 G, and the Minolta 50 1.7 .. perfectly happy thanks.
You don't need to have a range of lenses as long as your arm to find what you need.

Some people forget where the Sony DSLR emerged from, with Minolta once upon a time very highly respected.

At the end of the day, the most important thing to consider when buying a camera is how comfortable you feel with it .. if you're going to be carrying it around and using it, it has to feel right, put brand snobbery to one side
 
the_womble said:
Saying that ^^^, the a55 would be better if bigger, didn't have EVF (hate with a passion), and didn't have a tendency to freeze when shooting multi-burst
Click to expand...

EVF doesnt bother me that much.

How do you mean it freezes? For a split second or a turn off and on jobby? :thinking:
 
Sorry guys but what is the differences between the a55 and a580?

-apart from the EVF/OVF and 10/7 fps
 
given that the sensor inside the Sony is the same as in the D7000 I would assume the Sony has some good ISO handling and picture quality.

Is only it were that simple. Nikon has always managed to get its Sony manufactured sensord to perform significantly better then Sony.

Don't just focus on the body - also look at the selection of lenses available to you. Nikon and Canon have a vastly larger range of lenses than Sony. Pros all shoot Canon and Nikon for a reason, and that's the reason.
 
Well with this new technology do you think Sony take the camera market and produce more lenses?
 
Suvvey said:
EVF doesnt bother me that much.

How do you mean it freezes? For a split second or a turn off and on jobby? :thinking:
Click to expand...

once its gone 4 or 5 shots it has a tendancy to go blank for a couple of seconds and stop shooting .. tested this a few times and although it doesn't happen every time, it's enough to put me off.
i expect a firmware release will sort it at some point.

what Nikon manage to get from the Sony sensor is amazing .. it's not just a case of 'here's the sensor, it does the same' .. what Nikon can do with high ISO, Sony can't touch YET.
 
Last edited:
Canon or Nikon would get my vote too. Looked at Sony myself and after a lot of research decided to go with Canon. Glad i did but would still consider Nikon at the right price!
 
Seems to be a few brand snobs about :D
One of the best reasons for buying a particular camera is how it feels in your hands, I'd go as far to say that most current dslrs are very capable of outperforming most photographers.
If the Sony feels right go for it, there's a lot of great Minolta glass to be had out there and don't forget you can also get some great af carl zeiss lenses :D
I used to use Nikon before changing to Sony but only because I fell out with them, nip over to Dyxum and check out the lens database and samples.
 
Again, many people don't just choose Canon or Nikon because of the brand but also because they do indeed feel perfect in the hand etc.
 
the_womble said:
Saying that ^^^, the a55 would be better if bigger, didn't have EVF (hate with a passion), and didn't have a tendency to freeze when shooting multi-burst
Click to expand...

Indeed, the EVF alone is enough for me to avoid the a55 and like setups for ever and a day!! Absolutely horrid viewfinder.
 
Suvvey said:
EVF doesnt bother me that much.

How do you mean it freezes? For a split second or a turn off and on jobby? :thinking:
Click to expand...

Have you used the EVF on the a55?
 
Yes i tried it briefly at Jessops. I guess i should have another look before i make my purchase though. Maybe i missed something :)
 
Dont get me wrong, its a great camera, I just hate EVF's with a passion so that ruins the whole thing.

They should have gone for a hybrid viewfinder like the Fuji x100 (another like leaf shutter system), that system is very nice!
 
Well see when Kai was taking photos of the ladies it seems they are all out of focus. Is that because is half-arsing the photos? or is the camera not very good for manual focus? i guess he has it on auto though? lol
 
The 55 was given a Gold Award by DP Review, if you want to check it out the link is below
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyslta55/
They finished by saying,,,,,
The Sony SLT-A55 is an excellent all-rounder with a comprehensive feature set. The translucent mirror technology gives it an innovative touch and the best live view AF on the market. Continuous shooting performance is the best in its class - just don't plan on shooting the Olympics with it.


I've got a 33 for sale atm (sales forum) but it's only for sale because my wife prefers the A700 and it's to small for my ape like hands lol
 
Last edited:
SussexBlue said:
The 55 was given a Gold Award by DP Review, if you want to check it out the link is below
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyslta55/
They finished by saying,,,,,
The Sony SLT-A55 is an excellent all-rounder with a comprehensive feature set. The translucent mirror technology gives it an innovative touch and the best live view AF on the market. Continuous shooting performance is the best in its class - just don't plan on shooting the Olympics with it.


I've got a 33 for sale atm (sales forum) but it's only for sale because my wife prefers the A700 and it's to small for my ape like hands lol
Click to expand...

Its just as well it has the best Live View as a few users I've spoken to dont use the EVF out of frustration and default to Live View which is much better. But thats not the best way to shoot, especially sports where the 10fps would be used...

A bit of a waste of a good camera IMO.
 
SussexBlue said:
The 55 was given a Gold Award by DP Review, if you want to check it out the link is below
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyslta55/
They finished by saying,,,,,
The Sony SLT-A55 is an excellent all-rounder with a comprehensive feature set. The translucent mirror technology gives it an innovative touch and the best live view AF on the market. Continuous shooting performance is the best in its class - just don't plan on shooting the Olympics with it.


I've got a 33 for sale atm (sales forum) but it's only for sale because my wife prefers the A700 and it's to small for my ape like hands lol
Click to expand...

Thanks very much for the link its a great review. They seem to be very harsh with the overall scoring and this one still seems to be in the top bracket for its class. I think i will go with the a55 assuming i dont change my mind about the EVF.

Thanks for the offer with the a33 however i know the manager in my local Jessops so im looking forward to a decent discount. (and a free HD Recorder that they have on offer just now. I plan to attach it to the outside of my car, if it falls off it doesnt matter as it was free lol)

Also thanks for the other brands that you suggested earlier for lenses. Im sure i can find a nice lens for the Sony :)


odd jim said:
Its just as well it has the best Live View as a few users I've spoken to dont use the EVF out of frustration and default to Live View which is much better. But thats not the best way to shoot, especially sports where the 10fps would be used...

A bit of a waste of a good camera IMO.
Click to expand...

Your comments have been more than helpful. :thumbs:
 
SLRist said:
Don't just focus on the body - also look at the selection of lenses available to you. Nikon and Canon have a vastly larger range of lenses than Sony. Pros all shoot Canon and Nikon for a reason, and that's the reason.
Click to expand...

All is something of an overstatement, there are many professional photographers using Sony.
There are significantly more using Canon and Nikon, but given they have ~70% market share between them this is hardly surprising.

There are also significantly more lenses available for Canon or Nikon - but some of these are simply multiple versions of the same type of lens (EG 70-200), which gives a choice over price point, but not having them is hardly a show stopper.
Where Sony are lacking (currently) is long telephotos (500mm+, though a 500 f/4 is due out later this year) and tilt / shift lenses. A check on the prices of these suggests cost, rather than availability, is a more realistic restriction for the majority of photographers.

For an amateur, even a keen and reasonably well off one, there is sufficient choice in any of the major brands that your available cash will almost certainly be the limiting factor on what you buy for any given brand.

Chose the one that you feel comfortable with and enjoy taking photos :)
 
Suvvey said:
Thanks very much for the link its a great review. They seem to be very harsh with the overall scoring and this one still seems to be in the top bracket for its class. I think i will go with the a55 assuming i dont change my mind about the EVF.

Thanks for the offer with the a33 however i know the manager in my local Jessops so im looking forward to a decent discount. (and a free HD Recorder that they have on offer just now. I plan to attach it to the outside of my car, if it falls off it doesnt matter as it was free lol)

Also thanks for the other brands that you suggested earlier for lenses. Im sure i can find a nice lens for the Sony :)

Your comments have been more than helpful. :thumbs:
Click to expand...

No problem!

As long as you can get on with the evf you'll enjoy the a55, everything else about it is very good!
 
SLRist said:
Is only it were that simple. Nikon has always managed to get its Sony manufactured sensord to perform significantly better then Sony.
Click to expand...

Not true. The a580 uses the same sensor as the D7000 and Pentax K-5 and they all perform about the same. The reason the a55 is not as good at high ISO as the others is because of the different mirror technology.
 
the_womble said:
size of camera, a55 has better video, a55 has panoramic mode .. not a lot else really
Click to expand...

the A580 also has panoramic sweep mode as well.

Also, the battery life of the A55 is much worse when compared to the A580. That was a big factor when I got my A580 over the A55.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top