why sony?

I got the a200 because it came out top in all the mags in the budget camera tests.

Paul
 
+1 on the reviews. Check out the functions the a200 has included compared to other entry level D-slr's, very impressive considering the cost. If i had to give a downside to the alpha range it would be the cost of the Sony lenses - mental prices. I'm after a 50mm and the Sony one is £219, it's gonna have to be a minlota 50mm instead for about £100. Oh, and it's got a daft hotshoe mount thats seems to be compatible with nothing anywhere near a reasonable cost! Other than that i'm very pleased with mine.
 
*** STRONG LANGUAGE WARNING ***

Have you seen the video news item on theonion.com regarding the new Sony...?

*** STRONG LANGUAGE WARNING ***
 
That link was great!

I gotta say.. A problem with Sony is that you need to boy Sony specific Flashes.

The guy in my Studio Photography class was buggered when he couldn't use the lighting system because he couldn't connect the PC cord/hotshoe mount onto his Sony DSLR!
 
mastertrinity said:
i think they should personally ditch the konica minolta hot shoe and stick to the modern standard ones.
Click to expand...

Agreed, however you can buy a little device that slips on the hotshoe and allows other branded flashes to be used and the pc cord.
 
No i totally agreee, i've felt that i've been a bit ripped off with the sony system. It's ok if you just use the standard lens and dont buy anythign else but as soon as you do you realise that it is really really expensive.
Rumour has it that Sony are releasing 4 new lenses in the summer! Could one of these be a cheaper 50mm?
 
Sarin said:
No i totally agreee, i've felt that i've been a bit ripped off with the sony system. It's ok if you just use the standard lens and dont buy anythign else but as soon as you do you realise that it is really really expensive.
Rumour has it that Sony are releasing 4 new lenses in the summer! Could one of these be a cheaper 50mm?
Click to expand...

you will find it the same with the likes of canon,nikon,olympus etc....once you start to get "fast glass",it gets very expensive,no matter what make you invest in....for example...

sony 24-70 F/2.8....

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1025375

canon 24-70 F/2.8..

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=12835

nikon 24-70 F/2.8

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1023051

not that much difference is there....
 
stan the man said:
you will find it the same with the likes of canon,nikon,olympus etc....once you start to get "fast glass",it gets very expensive,no matter what make you invest in....for example...

sony 24-70 F/2.8....

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1025375

canon 24-70 F/2.8..

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=12835

nikon 24-70 F/2.8

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1023051

not that much difference is there....
Click to expand...

Indeed Stan. I don't think Sony lenses are more expensive than the others in general. The others have a wider and more established range of lenses, but Sony are catching up quite quickly.
 
fabs said:
Indeed Stan. I don't think Sony lenses are more expensive than the others in general. The others have a wider and more established range of lenses, but Sony are catching up quite quickly.
Click to expand...

i agree marc...sony aren't doing to badly considering their short time in the DSLR market...anyway,for anyone wanting a cheaper alternative,there's always the 3rd party offerings from the likes of sigma,tamron etc..not to mention the many KM lens out there at reasonable prices...
 
stan the man said:
i agree marc...sony aren't doing to badly considering their short time in the DSLR market...anyway,for anyone wanting a cheaper alternative,there's always the 3rd party offerings from the likes of sigma,tamron etc..not to mention the many KM lens out there at reasonable prices...
Click to expand...

Exactly. Apart from the Sony 70-200 G, I have never spent more than £300 on a lens.
 
mastertrinity said:
i think they should personally ditch the konica minolta hot shoe and stick to the modern standard ones.
Click to expand...

mmm, it's not KM specific it's an open DIN standard & it's an improvement on the original, older DIN standard. On the other hand you get wireless flash for free in every Sony DSLR (except A900) where most CaNikon users have to pay over £100 ...
 
I went for the fact that when I was after my first DSLR, the Sony A100 was the one with the most MP for the money I had at the time. It also came in a kit with two lenses and a fairly good shoulder bag.

If I had more money at the time, would I have still gone with Sony - who knows.
 
same with me i wanted canon 450d but saw it was too expensive and i could still afford it and i thought i would take a different photographic route instead of the obvious systems.
 
i was looking for a low budget dslr so was comparing the Sony a200 and Nikon d40. Both same price, Nikon maybe had the reputation which first swerved me in that direction, but then i looked at their specs side by side and swerved towards the sony... it had 4 more mp, built in image stability (so i wouldn't always need to buy the VR lenses) and the kit lens had a longer focal length (18-70mm compared to nikon's 18-55).
I also posted a thread here and heard great things about sony, and the fact i could buy 2nd hand (but great!!) minolta lenses quite cheaply.
Then someone offered me a great deal on their sony a100 (the a200s predecessor) and i was taken :)
I don't regret my decision, it's an awesome little camera!
 
I think the three things that settled me on the Sony a200 were
A-Price, with the twin lens kit the value for money is great
B-In body stabilisation, buy it once in the camera rather than every time you need a new lens
C-Great reviews, an easy to learn, well laid out entry level DSLR
 
In body IS and a usable Live-view swung it for me. The lack of a cheap 50mm is the only downside so far.
 
I have a sony A100 as a everyday camera (Via Minolta 35mm and 7D so had the glass)

But use Nikon/Fuji stuff as a work camera. Main reason was because the mass market for the Nikon stuff. Sony big plan to take on Canon within 5 years I read somewhere.
I like the Sony though.
 
i remember my mate going into jacobs and he was looking at sony but the staff kept saying that he needs a "professional" brand and kept making my mate try and choose nikon and canon. i was disgusted at the salesman, he was even trying to get my mate to tbuy the D80 and 40D considering he had a £500 budget and he only just upgraded from a fujifilm s5700. i shown my mate my a300 and he loved it and so decided to buy one.
 
heidfirst said:
On the other hand you get wireless flash for free in every Sony DSLR (except A900) where most CaNikon users have to pay over £100 ...
Click to expand...

err.. don't you get wireless flash for free with all the "middle" nikon's? D70 up to the D700 all do wireless flash through the popup flash. The D3 and D3X don't have a popup flash and the D40-60 don't have it presumably due to budget (or product differentiation) issues.

of course, I have a nikon D50 without wireless flash and I'd like to have it...

dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top