why you do not buy sony alpha?

[sonyalpha]

pity. there are only 3 threads under this category, some more this is a combined section of few "underdog" brands and 3rd party lenses:P ..

ok, so as one of the "underdog", i started this thread with asking the above mentined question, let's talk about it openly, no hurt feeling and necessary brand war should be allowed, as long as its make sense..

back to the question : if you are buying an entry DSLR now, will you consider sony alpha? yes or no, and why?

Thank you
Sony Alpha 100:D

[Gojira]

I might if I was sure that I'd only stick to a few lenses and accessories.

Honestly, I didn't like the build quality and interface. The kit lens on that particular body also felt very rough, but that may have just been a sample variation.

High ISO noise not too great too. But for someone who just wants a DSLR for non-critical use, I think it's great value. However, I think the A100 has since been overshadowed by Pentax's offerings....

[sonyalpha]

I might if I was sure that I'd only stick to a few lenses and accessories.

Honestly, I didn't like the build quality and interface. The kit lens on that particular body also felt very rough, but that may have just been a sample variation.

High ISO noise not too great too. But for someone who just wants a DSLR for non-critical use, I think it's great value. However, I think the A100 has since been overshadowed by Pentax's offerings....

1. Agreed, at least for now where only few new Sony lenses are available and generally they are more expensive, the second hand KM lenses are relatively less compare to Canon and Nikon. I am just crossing my fingers that with the introduction of new 2 bodies end of this year or next year and hopefully with more lenses, especially Carl zeiss lenses, Sony is able to capture more market share and bring down the price abit. However, Sony stuff is generally more expensive. FYI, Sony is the third seller of DSLR for last year with just 1 entry level Alpha 100 introduced in July 2007. No doubt the Sony is good in selling!

2. Kit lens is not a good choice, and Sony knows that too, therefore they introduced a Carl zeiss 16-80, which focus length is very similar to the kit lens. Alpha 100 is an entry level DSLR, I think that is the best they can offer with the built and design, very similar to Canon 400.

3. High ISO noise issue is the biggest problem of Alpha 100. Actually we are hoping Sony to release a new firmware to improve it, Nikon D200 is using the same CCD, we believe the root of the noise is due to the firmware not the sensor. However, I do not think Sony will release the new firmware, but probably will make it better in their next body, and make us to upgrade. This is a very common marketing tactic...

[astroboy]

sonyalpha...are u george? hehe! :)

[sonyalpha]

sonyalpha...are u george? hehe! :)

george? who is he? of course i am not. i am just an alpha user... and don know why i so bother to promote the sony alpha?:?

[noruazumi]

if i'm new dSLR user, i'll not buy SONY ALPHA.
why?
as a newbie, i might get Nikon or Canon because so many people using it. it shows that Nikon/Canon is reliable brand.
if u are a newbie, u might want something that secure.
i think SONY ALPHA is for those who enjoy being different and testing out new gear.

[sonyalpha]

if i'm new dSLR user, i'll not buy SONY ALPHA.
why?
as a newbie, i might get Nikon or Canon because so many people using it. it shows that Nikon/Canon is reliable brand.
if u are a newbie, u might want something that secure.
i think SONY ALPHA is for those who enjoy being different and testing out new gear.

I agree Canon and Nikon are more popular and established. generally you wont go wrong with them. but i think as a newbie, the most important thing is not to follow other, but to choose the most suitable system for yourself.

We are producing picture afterall with camera, therefore I am talking about the output (picture), the color , the sharpness and the overall mood. From my observation, Canon system is tend to produce softer and less saturated picture, but perfectly color tone for skin. Nikon is famous with their sharpness and saturation. and other system produce their own style of picture. therefor we should pick one we prefer. PP is another story here.

[ShaolinTiger]

I tried the Sony Alpha system at launch, I find the camera very plasticy and creaky feeling like it's about to fall apart.

I hope the new 'pro' series has some more solid build quality.

The controls are quite un-intuitive too, picture wise it's ok, nothing amazing, but nothing that can't be fixed with PP.

As for the super steady shot, it's good, but nothing Pentax doesn't have, if I were to choose I'd definitely take the K10D or K100 over the Sony Alpha.

Also using a legacy Konica Minolta system, which doesn't have much support in Asia, there isn't such a happening second hand market for lenses and the new Sony lenses are frankly priced quite ridiculously, close to 10k for the 70-200 f/2.8. Insane.

The kit lens is also pretty weak, as with anything you are buying into a pretty immature system, even though it's based on old technology, so there is a lot of pitfalls.

I'd give Sony SLR's at least 5 years before considering them seriously.

[sonyalpha]

I tried the Sony Alpha system at launch, I find the camera very plasticy and creaky feeling like it's about to fall apart.

I hope the new 'pro' series has some more solid build quality.

The controls are quite un-intuitive too, picture wise it's ok, nothing amazing, but nothing that can't be fixed with PP.

As for the super steady shot, it's good, but nothing Pentax doesn't have, if I were to choose I'd definitely take the K10D or K100 over the Sony Alpha.

Also using a legacy Konica Minolta system, which doesn't have much support in Asia, there isn't such a happening second hand market for lenses and the new Sony lenses are frankly priced quite ridiculously, close to 10k for the 70-200 f/2.8. Insane.

The kit lens is also pretty weak, as with anything you are buying into a pretty immature system, even though it's based on old technology, so there is a lot of pitfalls.

I'd give Sony SLR's at least 5 years before considering them seriously.

it's plasticy becoz it's made of plastic.:D ..
you are very generous to give them 5 years, especially for digital stuff, if sony cant make it within 2-3 years, they are gone.

blueray VS hdvd... another battle they are flighting and we should see the winner in 2-3 years.

[ShaolinTiger]

Nikon D70s is also plastic, but feels like a rock, same for D50 it doesn't creak and feel like it's about to break open like a kinder egg toy.

Yah that's why la, if they are still making SLR in 5 years, they will be ok.

[noruazumi]

I agree Canon and Nikon are more popular and established. generally you wont go wrong with them. but i think as a newbie, the most important thing is not to follow other, but to choose the most suitable system for yourself.

We are producing picture afterall with camera, therefore I am talking about the output (picture), the color , the sharpness and the overall mood. From my observation, Canon system is tend to produce softer and less saturated picture, but perfectly color tone for skin. Nikon is famous with their sharpness and saturation. and other system produce their own style of picture. therefor we should pick one we prefer. PP is another story here.

you are right about not to follow others.
but i did tried Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus and other brand before i bought my Nikon.
I just felt Nikon is better.
and FYI, my PnS is Sony.
that would actually give some influences when i bought my D50.
in the end, Nikon won my heart.

[g88]

Perhaps due to my limited know about Sony A100...what i know they have limited lens ...i mean lens from Sony not Tarmon/Sigma

[sonyalpha]

you are right about not to follow others.
but i did tried Nikon, Canon, Sony, Olympus and other brand before i bought my Nikon.
I just felt Nikon is better.
and FYI, my PnS is Sony.
that would actually give some influences when i bought my D50.
in the end, Nikon won my heart.

that's right way to make choice, and i believe you have made the best choice for yourself. :D

Perhaps due to my limited know about Sony A100...what i know they have limited lens ...i mean lens from Sony not Tarmon/Sigma


you are right. there are only about 18 or 19 new sony lenses and for your info, they are generally more expensive compare to similar lenses from Canon and Nikon.

And for 3rd party lenses, not all are made for sony alpha mount and they skip the SWM (for sigma) for sony alpha mount...;)

[Gojira]

We shall see how Sony does with a supposed new "pro" range of cameras. IMHO, the A100 was a repackaged KM 5D and used by Sony to "test the waters". As long as their engineers don't get run over by their marketing people, Sony may do well in the future.

But then again, they have made some pretty silly decisions in the past.

[ckii96]

If I were a newbie, I won't choose Sony DSLR cos it's a new player in a niche market. I would go for the more established brand names to be safe. A lot of people have said: "It's the man behind the camera that is important." So why not choose a reliable camera and let the man behind the camera to make it different from others, rather than trying to show the difference in camera brands? :D

[mobbes]

the shutter slap is rather annoying :)

[Boonster]

I'm in the market for a DSLR (soon, I think, finger crossed), and I'll most likely to stick with a Nikon/Canon.

But if I really have to go with an alternative other than those from the big two, I'll choose a Pentax over the Sony. Why? Sony has the history of making thing proprietary and expensive (memorystik and etc), and the Pentax's offering is a better deal, for my uninformed eyes and brain at least:)

Boon
Just my dua sens

[noordin]

I didn't buy the Sony Alpha because I ran out of money. I spent it all on my Nikon equipments! :redface:

A very pertinent question, why does Sony get into the DSLR market? Why not stick to their field of expertise, video cam, TV, audio video, etc. The trouble with Sony is that their marketing is driving their product. That's why they are slowly losing in the ares where they are strong like the TV. They have a make or break situation on that because they invested heavily on LCD BUT they priced themselves so high that they're being kicked in the ass by the other Japanese manufacturers like Sharp and by Korean manufacturers like LG and Samsung.

They were the best games console and video game producers BUT now they are losing very heavily to Nintendo. Those 2 areas are their main profit centres and they are doing badly. Could it be that they're spreading themselves into too many areas? And not focussed?

So now they're in DSLR and they'll be beaten and badly. Why? Because they'll try to make products that will appeal to everyone, the same strategy as Kodak. And look what happened to them!

Sony should just stick to their core business.

[mac]

tell sony to change the flash hotshoe to the 'standard one' 1st

[g88]

anyway i think lense availability is one thing...as long they have full range covering from macro, wide angle, telephoto to super telephoto i think would be find...

Again skill is more important...:rasta:

[clemong888]

i would buy a pentax first over the sony. sony is not a full fledged camera maker unlike the rest and rd in the dslr lineup is questionable in my opinion...

[Alan]

Most of the technology in the A100 may be traced back to legacy Minolta, some of which dates back to the mid 1980s.

Minolta, I would say, tried to be different in the guise of being technologically advance. Most of their innovations are well thought of. Some of them worked so well that other makers copied their strategies (completely abandoning their lens mount for a totally new one, for instance) while others received luke warm responses. I for one, liked their Eye-Start and hot shoe (sorry mac!) and am disappointed that they didn't receive better adoption.

The value added by Sony is nothing but a merely repackaging of what's available on the shelf and its marketing expertise. From the onset, I thought the A100 is pretty well packaged and has the potential to break the Nikon-Canon dominance. But then again, many a Minoltas had the same potential but was never able to do so. And I think the main reason for the failure to break the dominance is the lack of depth in the system.

[sonyalpha]

thank you everyone for the reply. but why all negative feedbacks :mad:, sony alpha really that bad? :(

but actually I am happy to see a very open and healthy input that you all have pump into this thread, and in fact, I agree with all the weaknesses that pointed out. Belive me, I got nothing to do with Sony Corp. but just an alpha user and I will not defense it blindly and hopefully someone from Sony can see this and really do something if they are really serious about this business.

Sony is new in DSLR, but the technology is old from KM. They actually have more advantages over other maker, e.g they make CCD, battery, LCD, they are strong in electronic and partner with carl zeiss. If they really do their homework seriously, I believe they can produce a good DSLR system, and probably challenge the Nikon and Canon. and at that time, my investment into their system now is really worth, crossing fingers for that...:D. It's Sony..haaaaa

[Freaky]

Actually, I was seriously looking into the alpha when i was searching for a DSLR late last yr...

It was a flip between 400D, Alpha or D80... The reason I chose canon was FF is my future goal, so 400D was a good start for me. I read heavily into the alpha also (as i was looking at this more than nikon due to the fact that the sensors are from sony) and found most reports found it similar to the D80 in terms of image quality... Being cheaper it was one step ahead of nikon.

Apart from FF, i didn't buy the alpha because
1) it's a rebadged Minolta 5D,
2) Lens range was low
3) reports of the "quality" lenses were really highly priced
4) Sony has made many business mistakes recently and scared they may not be able to be there in the long term.
5) Sony battery and sensor problems/recalls was still fresh in my mind
6) i had a 717 prior to moving to DSLR and it "broke down" after 2.5yrs but got repaired for RM150, which i think was for labour as I later searched the net and found that my "breakdown" was a common thing with that model due to defective part in which Sony kept quiet.

So all these things slided me to canon...

[clemong888]

Actually, I was seriously looking into the alpha when i was searching for a DSLR late last yr...

It was a flip between 400D, Alpha or D80... The reason I chose canon was FF is my future goal, so 400D was a good start for me. I read heavily into the alpha also (as i was looking at this more than nikon due to the fact that the sensors are from sony) and found most reports found it similar to the D80 in terms of image quality... Being cheaper it was one step ahead of nikon.

Apart from FF, i didn't buy the alpha because
1) it's a rebadged Minolta 5D,
2) Lens range was low
3) reports of the "quality" lenses were really high
4) Sony has made many business mistakes recently and scared they may not be able to be there in the long term.
5) Sony battery and sensor problems/recalls was still fresh in my mind
6) i had a 717 prior to moving to DSLR and it "broke down" after 2.5yrs but got repaired for RM150, which i think was for labour as I later searched the net and found that my "breakdown" was a common thing with that model due to defective part in which Sony kept quiet.

So all these things slided me to canon...

the alpha a step ahead of d80? the sensor does not make a camera...

[siew]

I am stuck with my current system :D . I find their lenses overpriced and the current body too plasticky. It's kinda premature to switch system at the moment until Sony rolls out more advance bodies. With CZ and Minolta's expertise, I have no doubt Sony will one day become a major contender to Canon and Nikon.

[Freaky]

the alpha a step ahead of d80? the sensor does not make a camera...

Yeah i know that... now:donow: , but at the time i was interested in image quality, and reviews i read pitched the alpha close to the D80. I would have to say that the Sony Marketing Machine worked as when the Alpha came out, it peaked my interests into upgrading my prosumer to a DSLR... unfortunately for Sony, I went another direction...;)

[reds]

sony's electronics, minolta's camera and CZ glass sounds like a threesome marriage made in heaven. i never tried the alpha but I would not put my money on the first model of a new system, even if it is from sony. let the others be the guinea pigs and i will learn from them. i do not fancy big names ( i ride a suzuki, use an AMD and shoot with an oly) but choices must be made with proper judgement, not emotionally. there is nothing technically impressive about the A100 to justify its high price whereas it's still a new kid on the rough block.

[twsttl]

Sony a100 have better noise control than 'others'(even semi pro body) which using the same sensor.:redface::redface::redface:
And then, most pns, prosumer and dSLR cams in the market are 'Sony Inside'- using Sony CCDs.:D:D:partyon::partyon::rasta::rasta:

Btw, heard the infos of up- coming body from a fren who's working in Sony(previous KM) factory:-

7D replacement.
12.8mp CMOS or CCD 1.5X crop.
5fps.
ISO up to 6400.(but may reduce to 3200 if the noise issue is too heavy.)
Built-in-body VG.

Prototype already on their hand and doing some test shoots, but not yet finalized the spec and firmware for production- still under R&D.

[noruazumi]

i can't afford SONY! :(

[twsttl]

Yup, Sony's dSLR accessories/ lenses cost like crazy,:?:?:?
that's the 1 of the reason I jumped ship.:redface::redface::redface:

[moshpit21]

i had actually feel the same feeling as Freaky had, it was a flipped between 400D and alpha, it was my friend who had finally decided to go to dslr way,
but i was there the whole time with him, did research for him.

from many articles that i've found and read, it shows that always alpha or D80 be the winner by very few points, so i assumed that actually 400D is always be the winner since most comparison tested with the kit lens, as we know the canon 18-55 actually "restricted" the image quality of 400D to reach its optimum capability (some articles on net talked about it) if u get what i mean.

but when i tested both of the camera(in hand and used it), the alpha felt lot better than the 400D, IMHO. And surprisingly my friend agreed and chose the alpha.

But if i were to choose, i'd go for 400D, for me its about the image quality that the camera can produce,IMHO. And about the rest of it, example;

-the camera feeling in ur hand=we can always adapt when we are used to something.

-the body material=i'm not a war photographer, or a hardcore photographer who would jump in to the mangrove forest like Thomas Marent. Even my old 350D still look like new even tho i used it "hard".

Apart from that all, i have one silly reason to go for an alpha tho :redface:

Sony Alpha is a part of history, the first time of a big company; SONY, made its first DSLR. So if i have a grandchild whose gonna inherit my hobby in photography, i could tell him/her, "grandpa owned the first DSLR made by Sony, ok here some pocket money for u to buy the latest L series lense" :P

:drunk:

don't mind me, i can't sleep till this time, so this what happened :?:redface:

-peace-

[derickuan]

So if i have a grandchild whose gonna inherit my hobby in photography, i could tell him/her, "grandpa owned the first DSLR made by Sony, ok here some pocket money for u to buy the latest L series lense" :P



I wish I had a grandpa like this........:shrug:

[reds]

can you be my grandpa? godfather at least? i can be a cute grandson.

[moshpit21]

I wish I had a grandpa like this........:shrug:

can you be my grandpa? godfather at least? i can be a cute grandson.

:?:? :D

-peace-

[bobtahar]

I nearly bought Sony Alpha but went for Nikon D70s... and I made a correct decision. Why?

Because alot people using it and I have the opportunities to learn the camera. Eventhough Sony do offer free course for it but learning from others personal experience is better. I can exchange lenses and accessories.

The best off all '2nd hand market'!... if I'm using Sony... I would stay with the same lens all this long.

[jmaguireokm]

i used to be a Sony Alpha A100 user before. Why i bought A100 ? bcoz they offer Rm600 rebate with old camera and i go buy it bcoz of this deal.

after i bought it, i feel very excited and bringing the gear out to shoot watever things i think i wan to shoot .......

i would said for outdoor shooting, the quality is just perfect just using the kit lens itself but indoor, i would said sucks b'coz the objects everything look damn harsh using the internal flash (bcoz i doesnt have an external flashgun and it's costly to get one)

What i like about Sony Alpha is bcoz they offer many workshop and seminar which is FOC !!!! where Nikon and Canon doesnt have and also the A100 with SSS (Super Stedy Shoot) on it body itself.


end up, i have to let go A100 bcoz of their damn expensive lenses. try to imagine a G lens 70-200mm f2.8 they selling cheapest at Rm8,888 whereas Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS L only at Rm 6500 !!!

if i would get another gear, i definately will think of Canon and Nikon unless Sony thinking to reduce their lens pricing and reproduce the 50mm f1.7 at a reasonable price. i know they going to launch another 2 new model somewhere Aug or Sept .......

hope my words here not offence any of the Sony user, if i do, i would apologies on that ........

Cheers ........

[twsttl]

I nearly bought Sony Alpha but went for Nikon D70s... and I made a correct decision. Why?

Because alot people using it and I have the opportunities to learn the camera. Eventhough Sony do offer free course for it but learning from others personal experience is better. I can exchange lenses and accessories.

The best off all '2nd hand market'!... if I'm using Sony... I would stay with the same lens all this long.

I sold all my KM/ Sony A mount stuffs(8 lenses + many accessories)
and switched to EF mount within 2 days without losses a single cent.
Why?? because I got all the hot items for KM/ Sony's dSLR.:redface::redface::redface:

Ps:- I switched camp because of life is too short for waiting and then I don't like to play guessing and waiting game.
After all, I'm still like very much of the a100 performance/ image output.:rasta::rasta:

i used to be a Sony Alpha A100 user before. Why i bought A100 ? bcoz they offer Rm600 rebate with old camera and i go buy it bcoz of this deal.

after i bought it, i feel very excited and bringing the gear out to shoot watever things i think i wan to shoot .......

i would said for outdoor shooting, the quality is just perfect just using the kit lens itself but indoor, i would said sucks b'coz the objects everything look damn harsh using the internal flash (bcoz i doesnt have an external flashgun and it's costly to get one)

What i like about Sony Alpha is bcoz they offer many workshop and seminar which is FOC !!!! where Nikon and Canon doesnt have and also the A100 with SSS (Super Stedy Shoot) on it body itself.


end up, i have to let go A100 bcoz of their damn expensive lenses. try to imagine a G lens 70-200mm f2.8 they selling cheapest at Rm8,888 whereas Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS L only at Rm 6500 !!!

if i would get another gear, i definately will think of Canon and Nikon unless Sony thinking to reduce their lens pricing and reproduce the 50mm f1.7 at a reasonable price. i know they going to launch another 2 new model somewhere Aug or Sept .......

hope my words here not offence any of the Sony user, if i do, i would apologies on that ........

Cheers ........
1 of the reason to made me jump ship because of their crazy price of A mount accessories and lenses.:soapbox::soapbox:

[seansabado]

Sony Alpha will release 5 new bodies this year (total of 6 including the A100)
Sony will go strong this year 2008 and will earn RESPECT on the next year 2009.

Lens price expensive because performance is superb compared to other makers.

I love my sony alpha system.

[bobtahar]

Sony Alpha will release 5 new bodies this year (total of 6 including the A100)
Sony will go strong this year 2008 and will earn RESPECT on the next year 2009.

Lens price expensive because performance is superb compared to other makers.

I love my sony alpha system.

I want to laugh... but felt like crying :(

[jmaguireokm]

I want to laugh... but felt like crying :(

errr .......... :?:?

[duke916]

You do not buy a camera, you buy a system. So compare the NIKON, CANON and SONY system and the answer is abvious .......

[siew]

When I bought my 1st dSLR, there were no Sony's. :D

[duke916]

Sony Alpha will release 5 new bodies this year (total of 6 including the A100)
Sony will go strong this year 2008 and will earn RESPECT on the next year 2009.

Lens price expensive because performance is superb compared to other makers.

I love my sony alpha system.


I laughed, nothing about SONY, CANON or NIKON, but bout your statement. My only question is, can you come out with something to substantiate your RESPECT theory (Until you prove it, then I will switch from theory to fact).

[Falcone]

5 cameras in one year is a huge undertaking, even with canon's five model range is hard enuf for them to update all of them in one year. Not to look down on Sony but what you are saying is they are going to release 3 new range in one year, (also note that A700 was release last year :tongue_roll: wouldn't that make it 4 new range?) presumably FF... personally I would be happy with just one FF range.

And in regards to your theory....:run_away::run_away::run_away:

[DEviLsiGN]

im waiting for the A300:P:P

[liewwk]

i am happy with my alpha200 so far...no problem at all .... pictures took so far so good :D

[Falcone]

From what I understand from my friend who got A350, Sony Malaysia is not bringing A300 any time soon as they are too closely matched (A200-A300-A350).

Dunno how true is that.

[liewwk]

From what I understand from my friend who got A350, Sony Malaysia is not bringing A300 any time soon as they are too closely matched (A200-A300-A350).

Dunno how true is that.

tried A350 live view .. it is really great... almost as good as my previous S5 :D
really consider to upgrade...but all money went into lenssss

[strangerz]

a 350 still got High ISO noise ?

[jayhan]

i was totally shocked when my radio triggers cant even go into the alpha's hotshoe!
it can be used on both Nikon and Canon's bodies with no problems.
this alone is a major turn off.... so... i would buy a sony PNS if its on sale, but not a DSLR.

[Jamaloogy]

i was totally shocked when my radio triggers cant even go into the alpha's hotshoe!
it can be used on both Nikon and Canon's bodies with no problems.
this alone is a major turn off.... so... i would buy a sony PNS if its on sale, but not a DSLR.

You need an adapter to do that.. Sony/Minolta to ISO hot shoe..

[Jamaloogy]

Sony Alpha will release 5 new bodies this year (total of 6 including the A100)
Sony will go strong this year 2008 and will earn RESPECT on the next year 2009.

Lens price expensive because performance is superb compared to other makers.

I love my sony alpha system.

I'm no fan of any system (previously I own Canon and now I want to have Sony)
but this remarks sound too far for me.. :mad:

[AdrianLoke]

I didn't like the brand name, cheap feel, squarish design and expensive lenses. Actually I was aiming for a D300 but body and system much more expensive than canon's.:(

[nfariz8]

I didn't like the brand name, cheap feel, squarish design and expensive lenses. Actually I was aiming for a D300 but body and system much more expensive than canon's.:(

you don't like the name.. fine..
cheap feel because you compare with entry level model..
you cannot compare alpha200 with a 40D / D300
define squarish design.. like box?
and in terms lenses i don't know.. i think L lenses are also expensive.. so if you can afford mean you can afford and if you can't means you can't..
And about your D300 aim.. the body yes it is more expensive than canon's 40D but how is the system more expensive than canon?

[AdrianLoke]

I was comparing the A200 with the 400D lah, I thought the nikon lens more expensive??:?

[ShaolinTiger]

you don't like the name.. fine..
cheap feel because you compare with entry level model..
you cannot compare alpha200 with a 40D / D300
define squarish design.. like box?
and in terms lenses i don't know.. i think L lenses are also expensive.. so if you can afford mean you can afford and if you can't means you can't..

A700 also feels cheap compared to D200 or D200, and the lenses are expensive.

Both main brands 70-200mm f/2.8 with IS/VR are around RM6000, the Sony equivalent with no IS (because of SSS in body) is closer to RM10k.

Technology wise they make good camera, the DRO feature is great. The ISO noise is getting under control too.

They still have quite a way to go in body quality, ergonomics and menu design.

[kiankheong]

Judging from recent Sony announcements and offerings, I say that this company has potential to make it big.

Sony has the expertise in sensor technology and software tweaking. Even Nikon is collaborating with Sony in sensor R&D. I think Sony is quite generous in partnering with whichever company to further their progress and know-how.

Just a little improvement in their lens line-up (and price-wise) and ergonomics, I say Sony is the company to watch out for.

:)

[jayhan]

You need an adapter to do that.. Sony/Minolta to ISO hot shoe..

Lol no thanks mate.

[ebernie]

I agree about the cheap feel for even the Alpha 700. It feels more like a D80-class camera rather than the D200/300 weather-sealed full-metal bodies.

Be wary about Sony, they might have expertise but they are very market driven. There's no guarantee they'll do a 180 degree turn and close the DSLR department. That's what exactly happened to their Symbian smartphone line up as well as their Palm (Clie) PDAs.

[duke916]

Judging from recent Sony announcements and offerings, I say that this company has potential to make it big.

Sony has the expertise in sensor technology and software tweaking. Even Nikon is collaborating with Sony in sensor R&D. I think Sony is quite generous in partnering with whichever company to further their progress and know-how.

Just a little improvement in their lens line-up (and price-wise) and ergonomics, I say Sony is the company to watch out for.

:)


That's good news, competition heats up, consumer stand to gain .....

[bcteh]

I previously owned Nikon D50, now got a A200.

Well ...I'm happy with A200 actually ..much better than D50.. muahaha.

Of coz no match to Nikon D200 or D300.

[marushin]

hi'all,

I dunno some of us complaining Sony is too plasticy?Will it be better or got same standard with Nikon and Canon if it is made from hard steel?Imagine the weight.

I went to PC fair today and looked several dslr from Nikon and Sony. 1 of the reason that I could make a conclusion why both of them have low price in lenses as i was holding the camera and saw on the lense-Made In China. I'm saying here not becos of the lenses are from China but like Sony, they more prefer to operates and produce their product in their own country. I'm sure soon near future, Sony will produce their lens in other country that provide cheap manufacturing costs. Maybe in Malaysia, who knows?

[bcteh]

hi'all,

I dunno some of us complaining Sony is too plasticy?Will it be better or got same standard with Nikon and Canon if it is made from hard steel?Imagine the weight.

I went to PC fair today and looked several dslr from Nikon and Sony. 1 of the reason that I could make a conclusion why both of them have low price in lenses as i was holding the camera and saw on the lense-Made In China. I'm saying here not becos of the lenses are from China but like Sony, they more prefer to operates and produce their product in their own country. I'm sure soon near future, Sony will produce their lens in other country that provide cheap manufacturing costs. Maybe in Malaysia, who knows?


I thought the Sony lense make in Japan ...body for sure in Japan.

[mitmivec]

refer back to the question

y do i not buy...

simple..

70-200 ssm F2.8 lens is 8k

8k i go to canon or nikon i can get a body plus lens :D

but one day sure sony will match it.. just wait and see, future are sony to come just wait and see :D more competition buyer will gain :cool:

[marushin]

I thought the Sony lense make in Japan ...body for sure in Japan.

hi bcteh

Yes, Sony body and lenses are made in Japan...that's why la mahal:D..but hope 1 day, they can produce more affordable lens:tongue_roll:

[soulx]

sony gonna build their own lense factory soon..
so in the future the lenses price might drop lots..

[mitmivec]

hi bcteh

Yes, Sony body and lenses are made in Japan...that's why la mahal:D..but hope 1 day, they can produce more affordable lens:tongue_roll:

assemble in japan but parts are from malaysia ;) maybe not all but there are

[ShaolinTiger]

Yah Sony body is made in Shah Alam actually.

[qqmeng]

Yah Sony body is made in Shah Alam actually.

sony body made in shah alam?

wonder why there re not many "product tikus" around? :?

[iamyuanwu]

Canon 50mm made in Malaysia, right?
All I know is that my uncle supplies some hot lights and lens cleaning cloth to Canon in Shah Alam.

[DavidZMetal]

A700 also feels cheap compared to D200 or D200, and the lenses are expensive.

Both main brands 70-200mm f/2.8 with IS/VR are around RM6000, the Sony equivalent with no IS (because of SSS in body) is closer to RM10k.

Technology wise they make good camera, the DRO feature is great. The ISO noise is getting under control too.

They still have quite a way to go in body quality, ergonomics and menu design.

just a pointer here ,

someone from lelong can bring in lenses from overseas and warranty by them, the price for the lens is RM7.1k

So its almost near to Canikon .

Also u can opt for Sigma 70-200mm F2.8, its only less than RM3k , and sony mount will be better than canon's mount.

ust 2 cents.

Sony is making it big soon . Sony is such a big company, it wont just bang in this industry without any preparation .

[AdrianLoke]

just a pointer here ,

someone from lelong can bring in lenses from overseas and warranty by them, the price for the lens is RM7.1k

So its almost near to Canikon .

Also u can opt for Sigma 70-200mm F2.8, its only less than RM3k , and sony mount will be better than canon's mount.

ust 2 cents.

Sony is making it big soon . Sony is such a big company, it wont just bang in this industry without any preparation .
But you can get a local warranty canon 70-200mm L IS for around 7K without even bargaining, so how can you compare?;) And why will sony's mount will become better? Is it because it is orange?:?

[easyihzy]

just a pointer here ,

someone from lelong can bring in lenses from overseas and warranty by them, the price for the lens is RM7.1k

So its almost near to Canikon .

Also u can opt for Sigma 70-200mm F2.8, its only less than RM3k , and sony mount will be better than canon's mount.


care to eloborate on why the sony mount is better than canon's mount . thanks for replying.

[DavidZMetal]

care to eloborate on why the sony mount is better than canon's mount . thanks for replying.

just my 2 cents

actually i was mentioning about tamron 70-200mm F2.8 , not sigma , typo errors ;P

quoted from LYN

Some have said that this lens focuses slowly for the Canon mount. Tamron puts a motor inside the Canon version. However, the Sony Alpha mount version will be screw-driven (since Tamron hasn't figured out SSM) so it MAY focus faster (and even faster if future bodies have stronger focus screw drives.)

Oh, and Super SteadyShot will help.

[DavidZMetal]

But you can get a local warranty canon 70-200mm L IS for around 7K without even bargaining, so how can you compare?;) And why will sony's mount will become better? Is it because it is orange?:?


i'm not some alpha pro here , just wanna voice out my views on Sony .

Yes, if u buy Canon and Nikon , the lenses are cheaper , thats the hard cold fact everyone must admit .

But right now , we're talking about Sony lenses , if a Sony lens at RM7.1k compare to Canon legendary L lens at around RM7k , the price is not much of difference , and in the end u get the lens and warranty also.

Canon L lens at Rm7k is local warranty, thats the plus point , kudos to Canon to be able to make it here.

But since Sony local lens is like RM9k , there will be ways for us to get cheaper. If u want cheaper, u have to take the risk , if u dont want risk , take the expensive one.

Comparison to Canon and Nikon is just a fallacy, its different system diffferent ship different brand at different price and different company and manufacturers.

Just like when u buy a Toyota Camry and BMW 3 series ( Sony vs Canikon )

price u pay is the same, around RM250k- RM300k ( lets say RM3k for A350 and D80 )

but the spareparts are more expensive. ( Canikon cheaper , sony more expensive )

Function , to bring u from point A to B ( Canikon and sony, to snap pics )

Performance wise, toyota camry and BMW 3 series are both powerful cars ( Sony vs Canikon , both get fairly good qualiy photographs )

I hope u guys get what i really mean . No hard feelings and i'm fanboy to no one. i dont even have a camera yet -_-

[AdrianLoke]

i'm not some alpha pro here , just wanna voice out my views on Sony .

Yes, if u buy Canon and Nikon , the lenses are cheaper , thats the hard cold fact everyone must admit .

But right now , we're talking about Sony lenses , if a Sony lens at RM7.1k compare to Canon legendary L lens at around RM7k , the price is not much of difference , and in the end u get the lens and warranty also.

Canon L lens at Rm7k is local warranty, thats the plus point , kudos to Canon to be able to make it here.

But since Sony local lens is like RM9k , there will be ways for us to get cheaper. If u want cheaper, u have to take the risk , if u dont want risk , take the expensive one.

Comparison to Canon and Nikon is just a fallacy, its different system diffferent ship different brand at different price and different company and manufacturers.

Just like when u buy a Toyota Camry and BMW 3 series ( Sony vs Canikon )

price u pay is the same, around RM250k- RM300k ( lets say RM3k for A350 and D80 )

but the spareparts are more expensive. ( Canikon cheaper , sony more expensive )

Function , to bring u from point A to B ( Canikon and sony, to snap pics )

Performance wise, toyota camry and BMW 3 series are both powerful cars ( Sony vs Canikon , both get fairly good qualiy photographs )

I hope u guys get what i really mean . No hard feelings and i'm fanboy to no one. i dont even have a camera yet -_-
Note that the camry is only RM150K and I can get a 70-200 L for 5K.;)

[liewwk]

I think we shud stop argue this ..no one can tell which is better or worst ? and why use camry and bmw to compare?

in some country bmw is their preference but other could be camry.....so it is just product.. important who drive the car or who use the camera........

later..let me start thread why u buy sony..

[DavidZMetal]

Note that the camry is only RM150K and I can get a 70-200 L for 5K.;)

looks like u failed to get my point . It is not the BMW or Camry that matters , my point is that comparing them is not relevant and is a waste of time .

@Liewwk : I'm not argueing , i posted in peace .

[bobtahar]

I'm comfortable with company that originally a camera maker... Sony may put some shine on the camera but still not convincing... its what happen to thier PS3 as compare to Nintendo Wii... never in my wildest mind think that nintendo can outsell any PS variant (in US 6 to 1, Japan 4 to1)...

Sony can boast whatever shine and tech in PS3 but company that originally a game maker got it right... at the end its all about the fun of playing games not the 'out of this world' impressive graphic.

[PLa5teRz]

I'm newbie in DSLR, first brand that i can see is Nikon, then Canon. only that..after buy the 400D, baru tahu sony ader DSLR :P , actually all of my fren promote nikon and canon maybe that's why i not Pandang yg lain.:P:D

[creepydslr]

im thinking to get a DSLR SONY ALPHA A300 or A200. the kitlens that sony give is better than Canon 400D..the 400D kitlens is suck..furthermore, i have the 'beercan' which belong to my dad who own a minolta slr and also yashica slr..anyone interested to buy the 'beercan'??hehe....of course i dont wanna sell it because i wanna get an ALPHA..

[liewwk]

alpha.... alpha...............

I like Alpha .. because it is something in my memory COMPAQ Alpha servers.... where I support it for few years back

[Rico]

How about alpha 200?? the new offer in the market : one kit lens plus another zoom lens not more than rm2300.00 ..:tongue_roll:

[gr2k]

well for me, the first i used was a film Nikon...when i went to DSLR, i chose Nikon as it has the most buttons on the body (basically you can do a whole lot without searching through the Menu)..

Nikon's interface is extremely convenient to use..the Alpha didn't feel as solid and it had a weird design..didn't feel very comfy in hands :)

so that's my story.

[kysham]

Hmm... interesting. I actually love the A700 to bits. The eye-start + handgrip sensor almost guarantees that the camera focusses before my eyes can focus inside the viewfinder. And a lot of the times, the focus is damn accurate. I get a lot of "hits" with this camera. And the AF is just fast, plain and simple. Oh, and the Auto WB on the A700 is quite accurate. Saves me quite a lot of PP time (which I don't really enjoy much - I prefer to go out and shoot).

[headshot]

well i get my a-200 coz of the price - 2k, and it offers decent quality too at its price range, well i tried my friend's Olympus e-510 in my society's event (indoor and outdoor) err.... maybe i am a serious noob, once i finish zooming and focusing, the actions is over... duh.... well not to deny i am a photo sniping newbie...

Still, i was able to snipe many priceless moment and action with my a-200, even my friend want to switch his e510 with me for an event :? well his is around 2.8k with 2 lense while mine was 2k, so i thought, it serves what i need (as a beginner) and at a temping price offering decent entry level specs. so its a green light for me.

my first glance to a-200 is "wtf is this toy? sure can perform like DSLR? why all so many automatic? full of those PnS feel... d@mn..." but once I try longer, i was "hey, it was not bad after all" especially the eye activated focus function, makes zooming faster, allow me to snipe a lot priceless moments...

at the camera shop, i was totally awed by D3's shutter speed and quality, its like machine gun bursting shot hahaha

i did tried on canon, nikon, olympus, and sony all of these have their own +s & -s but im just a newbie who tired of those PnS and rather go for DSLR than semi pro (some decent semi-pro's price was near to a-200 too), so that's why i buy a-200, im satisfied with it, for now.:redface:

so till i get enough budget....D3.....

[orionmystery]

I wanted to buy Sony A100 when i first came out...after all, I really loved my Minolta 700si. But it all changed when i held her (A100) in my hands...aiyoh..so plasticky and also felt flimsy...

[ckchowov]

The only thing I dun like sony is their lenses. Overpriced.

[zybisko14]

carl zeiss! gotta love 'em!

[soulfly]

The only thing I dun like sony is their lenses. Overpriced.in reality, it's not totally true. not all sony lenses are overpriced ;)

[wasabi]

in reality, it's not totally true. not all sony lenses are overpriced ;)

but his wishlist lens all overpriced... :party1::Poke:

[ckchowov]

but his wishlist lens all overpriced... :party1::Poke:

*Hugs wasabi* only u understand me:worship:

[gr2k]

haha i think price factor isn't the problem..all brands have cheap/exp lenses..

however if you're going for 3rd party, you'll realise quite a number of lenses aren't made for Alpha mount..

mostly Nikon D or EOS..at the most Pentax

just my 2 cents

actually i was mentioning about tamron 70-200mm F2.8 , not sigma , typo errors ;P

quoted from LYN

Some have said that this lens focuses slowly for the Canon mount. Tamron puts a motor inside the Canon version. However, the Sony Alpha mount version will be screw-driven (since Tamron hasn't figured out SSM) so it MAY focus faster (and even faster if future bodies have stronger focus screw drives.)

Oh, and Super SteadyShot will help.

i didn't know Tamron made a 70-200mm f/2.8 for Alpha mount already :P

and why would't the Sony variant have a built-in motor? they've already made one with a built-in motor for Nikon (sometimes i'd rather they didn't)

[funkiller]

haha i think price factor isn't the problem..all brands have cheap/exp lenses..

however if you're going for 3rd party, you'll realise quite a number of lenses aren't made for Alpha mount..

mostly Nikon D or EOS..at the most Pentax



i didn't know Tamron made a 70-200mm f/2.8 for Alpha mount already :P

and why would't the Sony variant have a built-in motor? they've already made one with a built-in motor for Nikon (sometimes i'd rather they didn't)

Not true. More and more a-mount lenses are coming out. Browse through Yamiya, I'm surprise to see they have quite a complete sigma lenses for a-mount as well.

Still, so far I see, A200 + kit + F42am is the cheapest strobist TTL set up I can see so far. :/

Well, this is just a camera, nothing more than a camera. Happy ? Keep it. Not happy ? Throw it out ! :D

[gr2k]

really? what about tamron/tokina/voigtlander?

[funkiller]

Sigma lens for sony : http://www.yamiya.com.my/store/search.php?mode=search&page=1 from Yamiya

Tamron lens for sony : http://www.yamiya.com.my/store/search.php?mode=search&page=1 from Yamiya

Tokina is a bit difficult to find locally.... but Mr E-Bay do have some lenses on sale : http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?sofocus=bs&sbrftog=1&dfsp=1&catref=C6&from=R40&satitle=tokina+sony&sacat=-1%26catref%3DC6&sargn=-1%26saslc%3D2&sadis=200&fpos=ZIP%2FPostal&sabfmts=1&saobfmts=insif&ftrt=1&ftrv=1&saprclo=&saprchi=&fsop=1%26fsoo%3D1&fgtp=
This Tokina 80-200 F2.8 look delicious.... http://cgi.ebay.com/Tokina-AT-X-Pro-80-200mm-f2-8-sony-minolta_W0QQitemZ160254153167QQihZ006QQcategoryZ10 6876QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

I admit I can't find a Voigtlander lens for A-mount. But there is another option by mounting a M42 adaptor, we can have access to huge M42 lenses out there.

Yamiya need to pay me for the advertisement fee liao. :D:D

[Darren-Francis]

Hi, 2 of my friends have the Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 125mm f/2.5 SL macro for alpha mount.

The amount of negative comments for this system here is quite shocking to me. I'm a Sony Alpha user and I'm loving it.

Here are some of my pics:

http://www.darren-francis.com/img/v1/p653555322-4.jpg

http://www.darren-francis.com/img/v0/p589846116-4.jpg

http://www.darren-francis.com/img/v2/p268173253-4.jpg

http://www.darren-francis.com/img/v2/p246736392-4.jpg

To view more of my pics, feel free to visit my website at http://www.darren-francis.com

[liewwk]

Hi, 2 of my friends have the Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 125mm f/2.5 SL macro for alpha mount.

The amount of negative comments for this system here is quite shocking to me. I'm a Sony Alpha user and I'm loving it.

Here are some of my pics:

To view more of my pics, feel free to visit my website at http://www.darren-francis.com


nice pictures to share... agree with u not sure why ppl start this thread :

where to ur friend get theor "Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 125mm f/2.5"? are them from MAlaysia ?

[Darren-Francis]

Thanks.

Both the guys are personal friends from Singapore. I believe they ordered it from overseas. Based on feedback, I heard its one crazy lens with superb sharpness. One of the guys who bought it sold it after his first portrait shoot using it. He said it was too sharp. Fine details on the face like pores and blackheads could be seen in the photos resulting in too much post processing. :0 I really hope he was exaggerating the facts.

[ShaolinTiger]

Thanks.

Both the guys are personal friends from Singapore. I believe they ordered it from overseas. Based on feedback, I heard its one crazy lens with superb sharpness. One of the guys who bought it sold it after his first portrait shoot using it. He said it was too sharp. Fine details on the face like pores and blackheads could be seen in the photos resulting in too much post processing. :0 I really hope he was exaggerating the facts.

It's a macro lens - it's supposed to be like that! I had the same problem with Tamron SP90 for portraits..it's too sharp, too much detail...creates too much extra PP.

[twsttl]

This Tokina 80-200 F2.8 look delicious.... http://cgi.ebay.com/Tokina-AT-X-Pro-80-200mm-f2-8-sony-minolta_W0QQitemZ160254153167QQihZ006QQcategoryZ10 6876QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem



Funkiller, forget about this lens.
It's produced horrible CAs.
I did used 1 before and I bought it around 1.4k only in Malaysia; I sold it after few shootings.:cool::cool:

[gr2k]

Funkiller, forget about this lens.
It's produced horrible CAs.
I did used 1 before and I bought it around 1.4k only in Malaysia; I sold it after few shootings.:cool::cool:

go for the tokina/sigma 50-135 (150 for sigma) f/2.8

the tokina and sigma are quite similar in many aspects...