Sony alpha

aido182

Hi,

I got a flyer from good ole Harvey Normans offering a Sony Alpha SLR for 498 (or something like that). It that a good enough camera for a beginner?

Thanks

run_Forrest_run

As a beginner do you mean it will be your first SLR?
If so then I would think the Alpha would be plenty for the beginner. And the nice thing about the Alpha is that it contains image stabalisation in the camera (unlike Canon & Nikon where you pay for it every time you purchase a IS/VR lens:mad:).

I'm not sure about the quality of the kit lens but there are some Alpha users on board here so they will be able to fill you in on that aspect.

Paulw

run_Forrest_run wrote: »

And the nice thing about the Alpha is that it contains image stabalisation in the camera (unlike Canon & Nikon where you pay for it every time you purchase a IS/VR lens:mad:).

There are very many reasons why IS/VR is better in the lens than in the camera.

No experience of the Sony, but I'm sure it's a very good camera to learn with.

coady

I have been looking at getting this camera ..

cheaper in Dixons and Argos ,.

Its 449 in dixons and 439 in argos,.

run_Forrest_run

Paulw wrote: »

There are very many reasons why IS/VR is better in the lens than in the camera.

I'm drifting a tad off topic but could you tell me some of those reasons briefly? Just out of interest really.

Paulw

run_Forrest_run wrote: »

I'm drifting a tad off topic but could you tell me some of those reasons briefly? Just out of interest really.

Sorry for going off topic, but here are the general reasons -

Lens stabilisation gives you 3-4 stops
In body only gives you 2-3 stops
Lens stabilisation gives you much more stability (hence the greater stops)
In body - the sensor can only move a very small amount
In lens - the stabilisation gives a much more stable view to the sensor
In lens - the image you see in the viewfinder is stable (unlike in-body)
In lens - the performance of stabilisation can be more tuned, per lens

Do a search and you'll find many many articles.

A good video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPdy52mR6Io

nilhg

The major thing about in body stablisation is that all your lenses are stablised, not just the expensive, heavy ones.

Anybody care to bet whether Canon/Nikon will introduce a body with inbody IS within the next 18 months?

Paulw

nilhg wrote: »

The major thing about in body stablisation is that all your lenses are stablised, not just the expensive, heavy ones.

Anybody care to bet whether Canon/Nikon will introduce a body with inbody IS within the next 18 months?

I'd put a lot of money on the fact that they won't, for their SLR ranges.

nilhg

Paulw wrote: »

I'd put a lot of money on the fact that they won't, for their SLR ranges.

Loads of folk said the same about dust reduction and live view, time will tell...


To the OP, since his thread has been brought way OT, I would think that the Sony Alpha system should be a fine system going forward.

Paulw

nilhg wrote: »

Loads of folk said the same about dust reduction and live view, time will tell...

Ah, but Canon/Nikon making an in-body stabilisation will mean their high end lenses would need to be remade without IS/VR. So, they would very much damage their own revenue streams. Where as dust reduction and live-view had no negative impact on their revenue streams.

trishw78

My Dad has the Sony Alpha 100 I think. It's a nice little camera for a beginner. I personally don't like the feel of it the few times I've used it. I also don't like the sound of the shutter it sounds metallic and broken. But the Kit lens is fine and fast.

nilhg

Paulw wrote: »

Ah, but Canon/Nikon making an in-body stabilisation will mean their high end lenses would need to be remade without IS/VR. So, they would very much damage their own revenue streams. Where as dust reduction and live-view had no negative impact on their revenue streams.

True, but most of the new entrants to DSLR's come in at the lower end, and there is a fierce battle for market share going on, on the basis that once folks buy into a system they tend to stick. Many of those folks buy on "paper" features, if the Canon 500D, for example, doesn't tick all the boxes, maybe it will cost them sales, it cant be coincidence that they brought out a IS kit lens just as the opposition started to make strides.

countryjimbo

I have the Alpha 100 and I'd say its an excellent starter camera. The Image Stablisation or SuperSteadyShot (sss) as Sony call it, simply helps take better pictures. At this level in my opinion it makes much more sense to have it camera based as it'll work with every lens. If you're using very large (expensive!) lenses then lens based stablisation is better.

The kit lens is good and is certainly capable of taking very good shots, have a look in my flickr for plenty of examples and judge for yourself.

When I bought this camera I was comparing it to the Canon 400D which was the same price and I choose the alpha as I felt it has easier to handle, otherwise there's very little between them. Last thing I'd add is that if you go Canon then you'll find more lenses available 2nd hand and new. If you check adverts.ie right now there's a lot of canon's there. (some Nikon's too but who'd want them )

Good luck with your purchase

mathias

The new Alpha does not do great on Dpreview , in fact there are major concerns over the drop in picture quality from the old model to the new one.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra350/

Plus the fact that while the liveview is usable in the compact kind of way , the viewfinder is partially blocked by the screen , which for any serious photographer ( and if your not serious why get a DSLR) has to be an issue.

Regarding IS , it is not the be all and end all , I certainly wouldnt buy a camera with IS built into the body as I am of the view that it only works at the expense of sharpness.

I much prefer it in the lens , where it can be turned on or off easily , its only needed on long zoom anyway , as I shoot mostly landscape and portraits with primes , its of no use to me for the majority of shots.

aido182

Thanks for all the replies. I think I might just take the plunge and go for it (or maybe the Canon EOS 400D...:o ) Decisions decisions.....