Sony DSLR A200k ...

[Pfy]

Looking for a nice cheap entry level DSLR. I quite like this one, Sony A200 18-70mm Kit - Buy cheap Sony Digital SLR Cameras at PC World.. Don't really want to spend anything over £300 as it's just for me to fluff about with. Anyway, just wondering what people thought of this camera for a total novice.

 

[DaGaffer]

I looked at this when I was buying last year; didn't review that well; the higher end Sonys seem to be fairly well regarded, but for entry level all the advice pointed to Nikon or Canon.

 

[old.user4556]

What sort of things are you wanting to photograph? Are you looking to just get a foothold into photography and see where it goes from there?

One thing to be concious of is that when you buy into a brand, you're buying into their lenses and equipment too of which some manufacturers are better than others. That's not so much of a problem these days as third party lenses, particularly Sigma, are just as good and as popular as the Canon/Nikon/Sony/Pentax but for less money. Usually the Sigma lenses are made for all brand mounts. Canon makes some of the best and sharpest lenses available, but those lenses can cost fortunes and are out of reach of most enthusiast photographers. You'll hear Canon owners l0rding about Canon lenses all the time, without any of them actually owning them.

There is a review of the A200 on DPreview here:

Sony Alpha DSLR-A200 Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

I see the same complaint of this model as I do of the higher range Sony's - the high ISO noise isn't as good as the results obtained from Canon and Nikon, but you could argue that they apply more noise reduction. High ISO noise may not be important to you, but as I said before, you buy into Sony and you have the same problem if you upgrade the body down the line. The higher range Sony's however are very good cameras, the A700 looks very good indeed and the A900 full frame with nigh on 25 Megapixels looks a stormer and a fraction of the price of the Canon / Nikon equivalent.

Another option to think of would be the Canon 1000D + kit lens:

Canon EOS 1000D - Digital SLR Cameras - Cameras - Warehouse Express

The only big let down (and to me, it's a biggy) is there is no image stabilisation built into the Canon 1000D unlike the Sony. Canon and Nikon build IS into their lenses, which makes them a) more costly b) heavier/bigger c) more complex. You can put whatever Sony/Zeiss/Minolta lens onto that Sony A200 and you would have image stabilisation. I would really miss IS on my camera, it really does help, particularly at longer focal lengths.

Personally, I'd have neither, but my needs far outstrip what either of these cameras offer .

 

[old.user4556]

Interestingly, I looked this up on DXO:

Compare cameras

If you ignore the ISO performance (which is only a problem once it gets above 400 ISO according to the review), the dynamic range is better on the Sony sensor than the Canon, with the Nikon pulling away from both. The margins are small, but either of these cameras would be great to start with.

Your other option would be the Pentax KM which scores between the Nikon and the Sony.

Compare cameras

My parting advice is this: it's well worth holding each of the camera bodies to see how the ergonomics are. Some people love one brand over another, and this is something that may sway your purchase.

 

[Pfy]

What sort of things are you wanting to photograph? Are you looking to just get a foothold into photography and see where it goes from there?

One thing to be concious of is that when you buy into a brand, you're buying into their lenses and equipment too of which some manufacturers are better than others. That's not so much of a problem these days as third party lenses, particularly Sigma, are just as good and as popular as the Canon/Nikon/Sony/Pentax but for less money. Usually the Sigma lenses are made for all brand mounts. Canon makes some of the best and sharpest lenses available, but those lenses can cost fortunes and are out of reach of most enthusiast photographers. You'll hear Canon owners l0rding about Canon lenses all the time, without any of them actually owning them.

There is a review of the A200 on DPreview here:

Sony Alpha DSLR-A200 Review: 1. Introduction: Digital Photography Review

I see the same complaint of this model as I do of the higher range Sony's - the high ISO noise isn't as good as the results obtained from Canon and Nikon, but you could argue that they apply more noise reduction. High ISO noise may not be important to you, but as I said before, you buy into Sony and you have the same problem if you upgrade the body down the line. The higher range Sony's however are very good cameras, the A700 looks very good indeed and the A900 full frame with nigh on 25 Megapixels looks a stormer and a fraction of the price of the Canon / Nikon equivalent.

Another option to think of would be the Canon 1000D + kit lens:

Canon EOS 1000D - Digital SLR Cameras - Cameras - Warehouse Express

The only big let down (and to me, it's a biggy) is there is no image stabilisation built into the Canon 1000D unlike the Sony. Canon and Nikon build IS into their lenses, which makes them a) more costly b) heavier/bigger c) more complex. You can put whatever Sony/Zeiss/Minolta lens onto that Sony A200 and you would have image stabilisation. I would really miss IS on my camera, it really does help, particularly at longer focal lengths.

Personally, I'd have neither, but my needs far outstrip what either of these cameras offer .

Cool, thanks for the info you 2. Much appreciated. My main thing was that the Sony seems pretty alright and I can get it for £300 all in. I'm just beginning and when I feel like I need an upgrade I'll give that one to the kids to faff about with.

Thanks gain guys. Really just wanted to make sure it wasn't a total lemon. Oh and on a slightly diff note. I'm not really sure what the different ISOs mean :/ lol.

 

[old.user4556]

Ah well you're fine then, the Sony will do you just fine .

Always remember; the photographer takes the picture, not the camera.