SONY A200 DIGITAL SLR. THE CAMERA FOR ME?

Location : clacton on sea Spotter Watch Member : no

Not being very up on digital photography i was wondering if someone could give me some advice. I'm considering buying a Sony A200 Digital SLR. It has an 18-70mm lens, 10.2 pixels and iso range between 100 and 3200. The fastest shutter speed is 1/400 and the slowest is 30. Does anyone out there have one of these and if so is it the camera i want to be going for. My main intention is to use it for mostly action shots but i would use it for static stuff at airshows etc.

Location : N E Jockistan Spotter Watch Member : No

Sony is a good and well known make of digital cameras having been involved in the market for many years, however they are relative newcomers to the field of DSLRs and would not be my choice.

I have to admit to being a Canon fan having used their cameras/lenses for over thirty years, and my other choice would be Nikon with very little to choose between these two makes.

I'm sure Sony would serve you well, but there just isn't the range of lenses and accessories from either Sony or independent manufacturers as there is for the likes of Nikon and Canon either of which would be my choice.

Location : Waltham, NE Lincs Spotter Watch Member : Yes

I would say a shutter speed of 1/400'' is nowhere near as fast enough as you're gong to need for action shots. Shooting fast jets can easily take speeds of 1/1000'' at times. prop blur 1/250'' downwards. It really does depend on what you want to shoot. The 18-70mm isnt going to be of much help for inflight stuff either.
There's plenty of secondhand Nikons/canons about with used lenses being plentiful. Take your time and do a bit of research and decide what you want to get shooting. ;)
Oh and Merry Christmas!!

Kev.

Location : clacton on sea Spotter Watch Member : no

thanks for your responses gents. i will certainly shop around after what you have both said. thanks again and merry xmas. rob.

Subject: Re: SONY A200 DIGITAL SLR. THE CAMERA FOR ME? 2008-12-26, 02:05

Hi Justnat1

I bought a second hand Canon 350D from a friend for £150, cleaned the sensor myself, so I did not have to change lenses all the time. I use the 350D for static shots and musuem stuff and I find it a cracking camera. My friend Dave used it for many years for flying shots and gained some great results from it. Alot of these cameras are coming on the second hand market as people upgrade to the Canon 400 and 450D but I noticed a brand new Canon 450D from 7dayshop cost £319 with the £50 cash back offer at the moment. If you are interested I know I guy who may be selling his 350D if Santa brought him a new 40D for christmas just PM me if you are interested. Should of mentioned I only bought the body as I already had lenses. Depending on budget the Canon 75-300 USM f4-5.6 III is a great starter lens and should cover you for all airshow/airfield photography but will be no good for static shots. Anyway good luck hunting and I look forward to seeing your shots posted.

APC Cheers

Location : Henlow, Beds

No sure where you read those specs for the A200 from but they are wrong in respect to the max shutter speed which is actually 1/4000th sec - which is more than adequate (see Sony A200) ).

Sony cameras have come on leaps and bounds in the last few years and the big "plus" with there bodies is the in built image stabaliser (Canon and Nikon build that into the lenes rather than the body). I have seen some excellent fighter shoots with Sony bodies.

That said I'd still stick to either a Canon or Nikon because of the huge variaty of lenes available (both new, secondhand and if your nice from the bloke standing next too you to "try" on the flight line). I started with a Canon 400D and its a great starter camera and at the moment a bargin price. I'd still probably take it over the 450D on that basis although that camera does have a couple of nice improvements.

Location : Middlesbrough Spotter Watch Member : no

Ive been reading on the net for months about which camera to get and in the end i was bamboozled with specs and one camera having something another one didnt..in the end i bought a Sony a200.
I looked at all the usual cameras..Nikon and Canon and i think they rip you off for what you get compaired to the Sony..i know i know i'll get shot down in flames(no pun intended!) for saying this and each to their own but, if your just starting out on the DSLR road, the Sony's take some beating and from what i've seen they take some great pics. I know guys on here who have Sonys and love them, but one piece of advice i'd give is..once you make the choice its hard to change.
Regards

Location : Henlow, Beds

Not from me you won't, you are correct a camera is a personal choice - my advice is always go to Jessups (or whoever) and try the ones in your budget, see which one you get on with best. At the starter DSLR level they are all much the same quality wise etc.

Sony's DSLR business is based around the Minolta cameras that they brought (they still use the same lens mount) and there is no doubt there sensors are good (the Nikon D3 uses basically the same Sony sensor as the A900). Feature wise they are right up there. As I said before the main issue I have with them are the availability of lens, esp. long zooms / primes that are what 'we' mainly use. I've no doubt that if the Alpha range takes off, that will improve. Bench mark test wise for image quality they still lag behind Nikon and Canon but in real life I doubt its that much really (I'm more then capable of screwing a shot up far more than the camera is :geek: )

Anyway, enjoy your new purchase, get out there and practice, practice, practice and then post some results here :D

Location : Cleveland Spotter Watch Member : No

the_edge wrote:: Ive been reading on the net for months about which camera to get and in the end i was bamboozled with specs and one camera having something another one didnt..in the end i bought a Sony a200.
I looked at all the usual cameras..Nikon and Canon and i think they rip you off for what you get compaired to the Sony..i know i know i'll get shot down in flames(no pun intended!) for saying this and each to their own but, if your just starting out on the DSLR road, the Sony's take some beating and from what i've seen they take some great pics. I know guys on here who have Sonys and love them, but one piece of advice i'd give is..once you make the choice its hard to change.
Regards

Now you've took the plunge Gary I'll expect to see some shots posted in next years CAS November Photo competition. Laughing

.

Col

Subject: Re: SONY A200 DIGITAL SLR. THE CAMERA FOR ME? 2008-12-28, 06:27

the_edge wrote:: I know guys on here who have Sonys and love them, but one piece of advice i'd give is..once you make the choice its hard to change.

I bought the A100 and it was a great camera to learn on. Unfortunately the weak point was the two Sigma lenses I bought - a 70-300 and the Bigma. First the gears on the Bigma stripped, it was repaired (under waranty) and they promptly stripped again days after the temporary waranty ran out. In between times the 70-300 gears stripped :evil: :evil: :evil:

There is a known problem between Sony cameras and Sigma lenses but I found the A100 a cracking camera when it was working. Changing to another system was easy but expensive... Shocked

Al

Location : worcestershire Spotter Watch Member : Yes !!!!

I agree totally with Al on this one. It was seeing Al's super pics with the Alpha 100 that I bought one, and I think it's great. Unfortunately, like Al, I've just had to return my 130/400 lens to sigma for the same reason as Al. Having said that I've had no problems at all with the sony 18/200 lens. there is also a 300 available and also if it's not on the market yet it will be very soon. a 100/ 400 (I think it's 100) that's had some good write ups. Plus they do a 500 and the smaller lens's, plus all the minolta range on the s/h market, so there's plenty to go at, it depends really on how deep your pocket is and what you really want from a camera that counts. The best of luck with whatever you choose...Kindest..Jim.. :D ....

Location : Glasgow

Viper28 wrote:: As I said before the main issue I have with them are the availability of lens, esp. long zooms / primes that are what 'we' mainly use. I've no doubt that if the Alpha range takes off, that will improve. Bench mark test wise for image quality they still lag behind Nikon and Canon but in real life I doubt its that much really (I'm more then capable of screwing a shot up far more than the camera is :geek: )

there are actually more lenses available for Sony Alphas than for Nikon D40/40X/D60 i.e. Nikon's entry level bodies & Sony has several class leading optics available. In January they are due to have the new 70-400mm G SSM in retail which will do for that system what the 100-400mm L does for Canon (except have a bit wider range & hopefully a bit better IQ given that it's a considerably newer design).

& the Alpha range has taken off with over 20% market share in Europe over the last year & no. 3 in the market by a clear head & shoulders - 18 months ago market share would have been in single figures & on a par with Olympus & Pentax. IQ wise there is really nothing between any equivalent DSLR these days if used with equivalent glass & also resulting files processed equivalently. That's not to say that they are all the same for they do all have their strengths & weaknesses but for normal use IQ isn't 1 of the main ones.

Location : clacton on sea Spotter Watch Member : no

wow. didnt think my post would bring so much debate Shocked

. Thanks guy's for your help. Viper 28 i realised after id posted my message that id got the spec wrong,i missed a 0 on the shutter speed Roll Eyes

. If i get a new camera i will certainly post my results to get some feedback. Thanks again and a happy new year to you all. Rob.

Location : East Anglia Spotter Watch Member : No

the_edge wrote:: Ive been reading on the net for months about which camera to get and in the end i was bamboozled with specs and one camera having something another one didnt..in the end i bought a Sony a200.
I looked at all the usual cameras..Nikon and Canon and i think they rip you off for what you get compaired to the Sony..i know i know i'll get shot down in flames(no pun intended!) for saying this and each to their own but, if your just starting out on the DSLR road, the Sony's take some beating and from what i've seen they take some great pics.

`

It was interesting, reading Heidfirst's post, remarking on a 20% share & how the Sony Alpha range have (quite literally) taken-off, sales wise.

For sometime now, I've been intending to replace my old 'wet-film' 35mm set-up with it's various lenses (the largest being a 75-300mm Sigma-lens, used in conjunction with my old OM-20/OM-40 bodies).

A point & snap digital bought me into this arena, until now, when I've got enough dosh to spend on a £ 500-£600 set-up.

I DID (initially) toy with the idea of buying a Nikon D.60, or, a Canon 450-D

But, having (literally) 'trawled' thru the internet & scanning various Digi'-cam magazines, my (far & away) No.1 chioce (front-runner), is the Sony Alpha A.350

Curry's are currently selling it with the Sony Zoom-lens (75-300mm, IIRC ?), for around £ 510, which sounds like an absolute steal, to me...... (it was £ 489 just for the body & the expected 18-70mm standard lens, just before Xmas)

The "Live" view sounds great - but my only reservation is about the "tilting-screen"

Sounds like over-kill & a potential "weak-spot" (if I end up getting one, It'll stay 'flush' against the body, as knowing my luck......!)

I'd agree with "the_edge" that although the Nikon & Canon names are akin to Mercedes & B.M.W. ( or, using Guitars as a yardstick; Gibson & Fender) in terms of prestige & brand-fame, the Sony appears (to me, at least), to be aggressively marketed in both functions & price, against the similarly ranged Nikon's & Cannon's.

The few results that I HAVE seen with the A.350 (of a/c pix, displayed on other 'fora' (forums) are certainly impressive

My main reason for the A.350 being 'front-runner', is cause the Image-Stabilisation within the body itself, negates the need for the EXPENSIVE additional lenses req'd by the Nikon & Cannon equiv't cameras within that price bracket.

Whilst I've got the 'dosh', I'm still holding back, to see if there will be further price cuts, given the fierce reccession we're currently going thru... & also, I'm bearing in mind that the A.350 hasn't been on the market for (even) one-year, yet !!!!!!!!!!!!

To "the_edge" ; how've you found any test results (so far), with your A.200

Any minor niggles, etc ?

Subject: Re: SONY A200 DIGITAL SLR. THE CAMERA FOR ME? 2009-01-10, 03:26

have you looked at buying a used body? you could easily get a nikon d60/70s/80 and nikons 70-300 af-s vr for around you price budget, something imho that will wipe the floor with the sony.

Location : St Ives, Cambs

I started my DSLR life with a Sony Alpha 100 and as has already been stated, I had 2 Sigma Lens and the gears got ripped to shreds soon after I started using them. I got a Tamron 200-500 and not had a problem.

I took the plunge and up-graded to a 350 when they came out, purely for the live view and tilting screen because of the low down and high up shots that I tend to do. The tilt screen has proved to be pretty robust. Wouldn't change make for anything else.

These were taken with the 350 and a bog standard 75-300mm lens and some of the rear views are heavy crops which with 14.2MP you can get away with

Despite what the Canon and Nikon users say, there are more lens available for the Sony range than there are for the other two :D .

Brian

Location : Glasgow

Hornchurch wrote:: Whilst I've got the 'dosh', I'm still holding back, to see if there will be further price cuts, given the fierce reccession we're currently going thru.

unfortunately the £s slide (~30-40% in a year) on the foreign exchange market is actually likely to see prices here rise. This will inevitably have an effect on the volume of sales but it's better as a manufacturer to sell fewer at a profit than a larger no. at a loss.

Location : Peterborough Spotter Watch Member : Yep

You might also want to look at the A300.

Only available at Jessops.

It falls between the 200 and 350, is identical to the 350 but has 10 instead of 14 megapixels. It does have live view and the tilting screen.

I bought one Friday for £292 after cashback.

I'm loving it so far... :D

Prices are starting to creep up, the low exchange rate to blame I believe.

Location : East Anglia Spotter Watch Member : No

Pen Pusher wrote:: I took the plunge and up-graded to a 350 when they came out, purely for the live view and tilting screen because of the low down and high up shots that I tend to do. The tilt screen has proved to be pretty robust. Wouldn't change make for anything else.

These were taken with the 350 and a bog standard 75-300mm lens and some of the rear views are heavy crops which with 14.2MP you can get away with

Despite what the Canon and Nikon users say, there are more lens available for the Sony range than there are for the other two :D .

Brian

Cheers Guys - I really appreciate the comments & advice

TBH, I'd rather NOT go down the 2nd-Hand route (snob !) as I'm NOT angling to get a 'professional' camera

Hell, If I could get shots (only) 1/2 as decent as the one's that Brain ('Pen-Pusher') has shown (via the link), I'd be more than grateful

Those were (generally) the kind of angles I was getting thru the '80's & '90's with my old OM-40/OM-20/Sigma 75-300mm set-up, when 'wet' film was still in vogue

Sadly, we're not spoiled for choice like we used to be (a/c wise), so, no more hanging around crash-gates at Wattisham to film 56 & 74's F.4 Phantoms, Coltishall's Jag's & Bentwater's A.10's (sigh)

Marham is my nearest base; & I'd hardly say I'm "ecstatic" about one Grey Tornado, after another.......(yeah, I'm a miserable ol' Git !!!!!!!!!!!)

Brian, I'm SO GLAD you'd mentioned that you'd packed your '200-500mm' "Bazooka-Tube" away, so 'mere-mortals' (Like me !) can see EXACTLY what kinda range/possibilities there are, with the standard Sony 75-300mm lens, as THAT'S the package that appeals to me most (currently, along with the supplied 18-70mm as standard).

Till now, I'd only seen the Sony A.350 (shots) with the latter (smaller) Lens.

Must admit, I HAD overlooked the fact that the £ is "tumbling"

Last time I looked, Curry's were selling the A.350/18-70mm & 75-300 lenses all-together for just £ 510 (all-in)

Just hoping it don't "skyrocket" upwards (till at least after I've found time to go & get down there......!)

Also, cheers for the advice on the build-Qual' of the tilting-screen !

Most helpful

(Oh & BTW, Jimbo27.....do you post over on the D.A.F. forum ?)

Location : Peterborough Spotter Watch Member : Yep

(Oh & BTW, Jimbo27.....do you post over on the D.A.F. forum ?)

I do indeed. Small world in'it :D

Location : East Anglia Spotter Watch Member : No

Jimbo27 wrote:: (Oh & BTW, Jimbo27.....do you post over on the D.A.F. forum ?)

I do indeed. Small world in'it :D

Figured I recognised your call-sign

& I remembered you're in P.Boro', about 45 mins from Kings-Lynn.

Do ya visit Marham much ?

Location : Henlow, Beds

Hornchurch wrote:: The "Live" view sounds great - but my only reservation is about the "tilting-screen"

My main reason for the A.350 being 'front-runner', is cause the Image-Stabilisation within the body itself, negates the need for the EXPENSIVE additional lenses req'd by the Nikon & Cannon equiv't cameras within that price bracket

I've got live view on my 40D and, on a tripod, it makes sense but thats the only use of found for it. If it had a tilting screen then I think it would be more useful as you could at least use it on lower tripod settings without having to kneel down or hold it over you head for "over crowd" shoots.

With regard to the in body Image-Stabilisation, by using lens based stabalisation Nikon and Canon stabalise the image before it reaches the camera. Therefore in the viewfinder you see the stabalised image which helps with checking focus etc. I suspect but don't know that its more efficent as well as the stabalisation can be tuned to each lens - down side is cost!

Location : Binbrook Lincolnshire Spotter Watch Member : No

Hi. Last year I bought the A100 and not happy with the lens quality and unable to afford the Sony prices I went for the old Minolta lenses most of which fit the Sony camera range. I picked up various focal length lenses, but the one I use for a/c is the 75-300 f4.5/5.6 I got from America for £90 in unused cond, if I need to I use a Kenko Pro 300 1.4 telephoto in combo, together with a good monopod I get exellent results.

You can view what lenses are available as well as view reviews and photographs at this site http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/index.asp

This is one for sale on ebay at present, worth a watch
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Minolta-75-300-AF-zoom-lens_W0QQitemZ120361256555QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CamerasPhoto_CameraAccessories_CameraLensesFilters_JN?hash=item120361256555&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1300%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318

Hope this is useful to you. Many lenses are for sale on Ebay

Regards Barry

Moderator Location : Between Coventry and Leicester

Think i spotted the SONY ALPHA 350 kit in Asda for just under 300 quid .

dam good spec camera for the money .

Location : East Anglia Spotter Watch Member : No

vulcan558 wrote:: Think i spotted the SONY ALPHA 350 kit in Asda for just under 300 quid .

dam good spec camera for the money .

`

Jeez, 558 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I nearly fell "off me perch"

Perchance, which Asda branch was this ?

You sure T'was the A.350.......& not the A.200 ?

(get's prayer-mat out..... 8) ....)