DSLR : Sony Alpha 300K - Whys & Why Nots

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

-D.Payne-

Galvanizer
You dint have to say that. :D It is actually a Sony Alpha A300k that I'm looking at. The thing with a dSLR is that you end up buying a system and not a single camera, in fact the body comes out as one of the least expensive parts of the sytem. Having said that, the reason am buying the Sony is quite simple. Am starting new, so I'll buy into the KM/Sony range from scratch. The only thing the range is missing is a solid mid-range prime lenses, which I guess I can manage without anyway for my style of shooting.

Why Sony? - Inbuilt IS (huge plus point), very useable liveview, tiltable LCD screen, and the A300 is not that bad on noise.

Still it's not a 40D when it comes to noise management or a Nikon when it comes to lenses and availability...but with my expected range of shooting, it should do just fine. :D

(Am not a Sony fanboy. Though I do respect the darn company for it's amazing engineering and marketing capabilities.) :)

Payne

Mod Edit:

Thread split from http://www.techenclave.com/graphics-and-eyecandy/the-photography-thread-83546.html
 
So I was right ! :clap:

Well the Sony's are great IMHO. But why not the A350 ? Only $100 more for an extra 4 MP ! It has slightly better noise performance than the A300 I believe.

I too love in built IS since you can get IS with any lens available. But Pentax and Sony do not have any fast cheap prime lens.

And with the 40D selling for just 40k with the IS kit lens, so I am saving up to get the Canon straightaway.
 
Nope, you got that wrong there. The extra 4MP is on the same sensor size (APS-C), thus leading to smaller photosites, and more noise. That's a given, since they haven't changed sensor technology (the A350 also has a CCD sensor). The A350 is quite pathetic in terms of noise among the current crop of dSLRs (D40/D60, 450D, E-510/E-420 etc.) but much better in terms of useability and sheer fun. :)

I get all the fun of the A350 with the lower noise profile with a A300. :D So why not. And btw, my planned purchase is coming to nearly 1900$ for the entire body + lenses. :) The 40D will be a waste for me if I can't get the lenses in the budget....I have to replace a range of 25.5mm to 432mm starting at f2.8 with my current Sony H2 and wide-angle adaptor. That takes some doing. :D

Payne

PS: Am looking at 3 lenses: 10-20mm ultra-wide, 24-70 f2.8 or 18-50 f2.8, and one of the 18-200 superzooms. :) Perfect for my use. I can't live with a prime, not right now at least.
 
Wow ! Thats an expensive set of lenses. The lenses alone will cost more than the Canon 40D.

I for one hate to change lenses, so max to max i will get only the kit 18-55mm lens (wish it was at least 18-70mm !) , then the 50mm f1.8 lens (dirt cheap !) and later on ill get a telephoto lens like the 55-250mm IS lens.

What you were saying about the A350 seems to be correct. I saw a couple of user reviews complaining about noise. Then again I saw one which said the noise levels are about the same as the 400D ! (Fanboys !)
 
But but...if you get a 18-55 and then a 55-200, you will be changing the lens on an definite basis when you're out photo-tripping. :)

My basis for these lenses (lens focal lengths in 35mm):

1. 17-50 f2.8 (Tamron) gives 26-75mm at a fast f2.8 throughout. This is enough for all social situations - parties, outings, weekends, indoor shoots, some portraits. The kit lens is too slow at f3.5-5.6 for nearly the same focal length range. Actually this is a killer combo considering a DSLR's high ISO capabilities. There's a 28-70 f2.8 too (42-105mm)...that's a tough call. :)

2. 18-200 f3.5-f6.3 gives 27-300mm. Enough for the usual superzoom functions in daylight and everyday shooting. Perfect replacement for my H2. This particular lens range has gotten better in the past year, especially the Tamrom 18-250 and the Sigma 18-200. Though QC is still an issue.

3. 10-20 f4-f5.6 gives 15-30mm. Excellent ultra-wides for landscapes and places where I'll have time to take out the superzoom or the 1st lens, replace with this lens and set up a tripod. Good 'nuff.

Ok. Enough with the non-photo posting. Sorry. :)
Payne
 
If you wish to spend that much, better get canikon or else it'd be a dead investment which won't grow with your skills. Also the only 18-200 lens worth buying is the nikon 18-200 VR. Every other lens is absolute crap. The tamron 18-50 f/2.8 is an excellent lens and cheap. Again the only ultrawides to get are the canon 10-22, nikon 12-24 and the super value tokina 12-24. Frankly with a 30D body costing a mere 28k (the D80 body is same too), why on earth would you even think of sony :P.
 
^^Which is no way close to being useful compared to In lens IS :P. Just try both once and then decide for yourself.
 
Wow. A new thread started by me which I did not start. :D Heheheh. 'Tis a funny place this.

@Chaos: I know man. But I really don't want to miss the ease-of-use and functionality of my H2. That's why simple LiveView is still a top-priority for me. But what I'd like to do more than anything else is to try out the 40D's LV system first-hand (it's the same one on the 450D right but without contrast detection AF right?). No review can tell u how a camera operates in daily usage, especially evolving technology like a dSLR's Live-view.

As for sensor-shift based IS vs lens. I still have to contend that a fast constant f2.8 based lens with IS would cost nothing short of a bomb in the Canon world. While I can get a decent Tamron 17-50 f2.8 with IS for perfect indoor shooting with the Sony system. :) It's not about the hyperzooms.

Payne
 
Frankly Live View on my 40D is very hard to use sans a tripod. Even the contrast detect AF is a joke. One has to use manual focus to get it right. But yes on a tripod, its just amazing to use cos you know exactly whats in focus since it allows you to zoom right into what the sensor sees.

I'm not sure why you are looking at IS on a wide angle lens. First of all f/2.8 isn't fast enough to shoot in really low light. The only option is a 30mm or a 50mm prime IMHO. Yes the canon 17-55 IS f/2.8 costs around 900$ but then it makes the in body IS of the sonys, olys and pentaxes look like a joke.
 
well did u have a look at the Fujifilm FinePix S100fs,its not a dslr but it will be the closest a non dslr ca get in terms of image quality.retails for $800 comes with a 11mp sensor(huge 2/3 inch sensor vs ur current H2 which is 1/2.5inch)
it also has 28mm wide(F2.8) and upto 14.3x telephoto.
takes 3fps,double image stabiliztion(lens based and digital assisted)
2.5inch tiltable lcd with wide viewing angle.

looks like a M1A1 abraham TANK:ohyeah:

being a owner of h1 and h5 i am looking for H50 or this fuji camera.
also my other option will be the casio new 60fps camera:O and it takes video at 300fps and also records video at 1920x1080 ,it has everything including IS.
 
Hmm, I heard the never sensor shift of the Pentax K20D and K200D have bridged the gap between the sensor shift IS and lens IS. Pentax claims 4 stops and the one review I saw says it is good for about 3 stops in real world photographs.

So it matches the claimed 3 stops advantage of the Canon 17-55mm f2.8 IS lens.

But I don't know if the Sony IS is better. They claim 2.5 - 3.5 stops, but I have not seen any reviews so I can't say if they are as good.

@Adder - Yeah I read about that somewhere. But the 2/3 sensor is still not big enough compared to the APS-C sensor on most DSLRs and the awesome speed at which a DSLR can click snaps. Also a super zoom like that will in all probability suffer a lot of distortions. Something some photographers loathe in their pictures. A short zoom lens on a DSLR will have far less distortion and if it is an expensive lens none at all.
 
@adder: No man, if you think about it...the Fuji won't in anyway dramtically change the creative process of taking photographs as compared to any other superzoom. :) Trust me, the 11mp on the 2/3rds sensor won't be very different to the 6MP on my H2 in terms of noise characteristics, and I already have wide-angle of 26mm on my H2 thanks to the 0.7x WA adaptor.

The DSLR on the other hand,opens up a whole new world of opportunity and tweaking.

@Chaos: f2.8 is not really that slow when you come to think of the fact that I've done a solid analysis of all the photographs I've ever taken. There's a neat app called ExposurePlot which gives you stats on your entire photograph collection in terms of Shutter speed, Focal lengths, ISO, Aperture. That is very veryyy useful.

Of course, you don't need stats to tell you you need fast lenses when you're used to seeing the values of "1/10 f2.8" regularly on your camera. :) What ExposurePlot tells me is that the majority of my snaps (indoors) are taken at shutter speeds between 1/3 to 1/20, apertures of f2.8 to f3.5, ISO of 200 or 400, and no flash. Which I think is quite common.

Am looking at either a 17-50 f2.8 Tamron, or a 24-70 f2.8 Tamron/Sigma. Not so much for the wide-angle but for the perfect indoors ranges of 36-105 (typical 3x zoom range on a compact P&S) but without flash (I hate unnatural lighting).

...and, a f1.4 or f1.8 lens is a DOF nightmare isn't it on a dSLR fully open? :) This is just a thought, unless you can show me pics otherwise. Please to tell...I need education on the SLR front.

Payne
 
Just a question, but won't the 17-70mm Sigma give you a better zoom range and still be as sharp ?
 
d_payne said:
@adder: No man, if you think about it...the Fuji won't in anyway dramtically change the creative process of taking photographs as compared to any other superzoom. :) Trust me, the 11mp on the 2/3rds sensor won't be very different to the 6MP on my H2 in terms of noise characteristics, and I already have wide-angle of 26mm on my H2 thanks to the 0.7x WA adaptor.

The DSLR on the other hand,opens up a whole new world of opportunity and tweaking.

Payne
Click to expand...
well agreed a DSLR is a DSLR,but sometimes u do wont shoot videos too like me;) ,that where ultra zoom cameras fill the gap.one thing is the fuji sensors are amazing in here they have compared a normal P & S fuji camera with a nikon D50
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Review: 15. Compared to...: Digital Photography Review

just look how well the fuji is doing.
 
^^Dude. I know all about the Fuji SuperCCD-based cams. :) If you look around, I advise every n00b looking for a simple P&S digicam to look at the Fuji F30/40/50 series before moving on to a run-of-the-mill Canon/Sony cam. :)

My needs are from the view of someone who has reached the very limits of an ultrazoom - technology wise. It's time to try something new to take my skills (whatever little I have) further. :D And no, that doesn't include video. A simple P&S will do for that purpose, even a Panasonic TZ or a Fuji F.

BF1983 said:
Just a question, but won't the 17-70mm Sigma give you a better zoom range and still be as sharp ?
Click to expand...

Constant f2.8 brotha. It's abt a fast lens. :)

Also, here's something interesting: Speculating on Sony: A third professional contender?
Payne
 
I've used the inbody IS in a A300 and its frankly very average IMHO. Infact the IS on the el cheapo 55-250 got me a sharper shot handheld at 1/5.

If your into very serious low light, it simply HAS to be a prime and no, DoF is not necessarily a nightmare with the wider 28/30mm primes.

Besides, the Auto ISO on my 40D shoots almost everything after 5PM at ISO800 so I doubt low light is gonna be much of an issue.

Besides, when more than 95% of the pros use either Nikon or Canon, it does mean something.

Besides, I'm not too sure how good Sony's lenses are, I used the A300 (albeit very briefly for 5 mins) on a Sigma 18-200 which was pretty yuck.
 
Y dnt u get a D40 and a Tamaron lens from ebay?Wudn't it be cheaper?

Also keep in mind about the chore of carryng all lenses, 18-55,55-200,macro etc etc.But DSLR is a league apart from PS.But hard to carry around.

Btw Sony Alpha is very heavy compared to D40.
My 2 cts.
 
@Rambo - Well people who love photography, don't mind carrying around a tripod, lots of lenses and a nice heavy cam.

But the Sony is lighter than the 40D. The A300 weighs in at 582g, while the 40D weighs in at a hefty 732g. Both without battery)

@Anish - He is mostly buying Sigma lens (18-50 f2.8, Sigma 10 - 20mm, Sigma 18-200mm etc).

Of the three the 18-50mm f2.8 is a very capable lens and the Sigma 10-20mm is nothing to sneeze about. It has good CA control and doesn't have a lot of barrel distortion either.

Only the Sigma 18-200mm is not a great lens, but even Canon does not have a comparable lens ATM.

Though if he will choose a Nikon body, he could get the nice 18-200mm VR, But that is more than double of the Sigma's cost.

But yeah I feel if he plans on spending so much money on a camera system, he might as well go for a Nikon or Canon body. Especially considering the resale value of his camera body and lenses.

But then again, he might sell the Sony system cheap to me when he wants to migrate .....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom