Calling all Sony Alpha users! (Part 5)

Wilksy288 said:
Hi all, just needing some advice on the Sony SLT range of cameras.

I'm a complete beginner in photography but have done some research on the cameras that i like and have narrowed it down to the Canon 550D or the Sony A35.

My worry with the SLT range of cameras is (please correct me if I'm wrong :shrug:) that they seem to be quite a new technology within the camera world and what would happen if this technology dies out (a bit like Blu-ray vs HD DVD)?? Or have they become quite popular meaning they will not stop making lenses for the SLT cameras anytime soon?

I understand about the 'when you buy a camera you buy into the system' philosophy i.e. lenses, but I'm just worried that if i purchase the A35 and buy lenses/accessories for this type of camera, when i come too upgrading in the next few years, is there a chance they could have stopped making this type of camera due to not taking off? If that makes sense :LOL:

I am only asking as if there is a chance Sony will stop making SLT cameras i may as well choose the Canon as they are firmly set as a big camera manufacturer!!

Sorry for the long post i just want to make sure i have covered everything before spending my hard earned cash!! :LOL:

Thanks
Scott
Click to expand...
I have had two Sony's the first a dslr and now an SLT. I find the live view on Sony's really useful especially with the articulating screen. With Canon the live view is a much slower system. The SLT can auto focus properly during video recording.
You may see reports that Sony use a different hot shoe for their flashguns and it is a limiting factor in the availability of flashguns but this is not so just because you can fit a Nikon branded flashgun on a Canon it doesn't mean it will work so the point is irrelevant also all the independent flashgun makers make a Sony version.
You may also see negative comments about Sony's lack of lenses compared to Canon. Most people will have enough choice From Sony and the independent lens manufacturers. Plus why would these independent lens manufacturers bother making their lenses in a Canon mount if Canon make so many lenses. Canon users also use independent branded lenses for the same reasons Sony owner do.
The EVF isn't perfect but it has its plus point such as the information overlaid as you are taking the picture and being able to see the photo you've just taken with out having to look at the rear screen. Using the 10 fps mode is fine you just learn to adapt your picture taking style.
Overall the Sony is well worth looking at don't be put off by other peoples ignorance most of whom seem to be put off by the idea Sony's SLT and many of its functions without ever using one.
 
pugbug said:
I have had two Sony's the first a dslr and now an SLT. I find the live view on Sony's really useful especially with the articulating screen. With Canon the live view is a much slower system. The SLT can auto focus properly during video recording.
You may see reports that Sony use a different hot shoe for their flashguns and it is a limiting factor in the availability of flashguns but this is not so just because you can fit a Nikon branded flashgun on a Canon it doesn't mean it will work so the point is irrelevant also all the independent flashgun makers make a Sony version.
You may also see negative comments about Sony's lack of lenses compared to Canon. Most people will have enough choice From Sony and the independent lens manufacturers. Plus why would these independent lens manufacturers bother making their lenses in a Canon mount if Canon make so many lenses. Canon users also use independent branded lenses for the same reasons Sony owner do.
The EVF isn't perfect but it has its plus point such as the information overlaid as you are taking the picture and being able to see the photo you've just taken with out having to look at the rear screen. Using the 10 fps mode is fine you just learn to adapt your picture taking style.
Overall the Sony is well worth looking at don't be put off by other peoples ignorance most of whom seem to be put off by the idea Sony's SLT and many of its functions without ever using one.
Click to expand...

Hi pugbug thanks for replying (y). Im not put off by the SLT infact the opposite is true. I dont have any other type of camera to compare it to so thats not really an issue! I was mainly just worrying over nothing tbh :wacky: :LOL:.

Thanks
Scott
 
Hi Scott, I'm on my 2nd and 3rd Sony DSLR and that followed the Minolta 5D and 7d, which I still have.

The advantage with Sony is that all the old Minolta lenses work with in body image stabilisation, that is a massive advantage over Canikon; look at the prices of their IS lenses. As with any decision, take time, compare the handling and use the cameras. As you're in Essex give Camera World a visit, and compare the available cameras, and just remember camera bodies come and go but a good lens is not just for Christmas!

Rob
 
Wilksy288 said:
Regarding Sony lenses, are they quite good quality compared to Canon/Nikon? I know they dont have IS in the lenses as the system is in the body so does this mean that the lenses are a little cheaper then Canon/Nikon?
Click to expand...

Sony doesn't have as many lenses in total as Canon or Nikon but there are a couple of reasons for this:
Canon & Nikon do have some "exotic" lenses that Sony don't have but these are only relevant for a very small % of people, expensive & if you need these you generally know it, choose your lens first & that dictates the body. Plus I do expect this gap to narrow (e.g. when the Sony 500/4 launches).
Massive duplication - they have both IS & non-IS versions at different quality levels. e.g. Canon has something like 5 ~70-300 lenses where Sony has 2 (a "kit" level one & a good one). I think that you will find that as a system Sony offers more options for stabilised than either Canon or Nikon because every lens becomes stabilised.

Plus we also have the benefit that where there are a few lenses in Alpha mount that offer in-lens stabilisation we then have the choice of choosing whether we want to use either in-lens or in-body stabilisation.

As for quality each system has lenses that are marginally better than the competitors (generally because it was the latest design & they skip over each other as they update) but overall they are at the same level.
We have reached the point where there is little difference in image quality between brands & there are enough lens options for the vast majority of users so it's things like ergonomics that still differ.
Unless you have a specialist need that 1 system handles much better than the others then get the 1 that feels most natural to you.
 
Last edited:
I have a sony A700 and I'm looking for a backup body. Do you think another A700 would do or are there any cheaper/newer alternatives?
 
adymace said:
I have a sony A700 and I'm looking for a backup body. Do you think another A700 would do or are there any cheaper/newer alternatives?
Click to expand...

plenty of new alternatives (particular if you're interested in a liveview model) but with the release of the A77/65 it seems prices of the A700 have really tumbled and can be had for £350ish
 
godsakes said:
plenty of new alternatives (particular if you're interested in a liveview model) but with the release of the A77/65 it seems prices of the A700 have really tumbled and can be had for £350ish
Click to expand...

Thanks. Yeah, thinking another A700 due to budget :)
 
Apologies if this has been asked before either here or on Dyxum but this is a discussion forum so thought I'd post anyway.

For information I've been a long-time Canon shooter and still have lots of great Canon gear. I'm not though overwhelmed with the iso performanvce of the 7D for wildlife, and for other reasons, I thought I'd have a dabble with some Sony/Minolta gear.

So far, my experience of alpha mount gear has been VERY positive. Also the alpha community seems very friendly which weirdly is a plus !

I have an a700, Sony 16-80, Minolta 100f2.8 and 200f2.8 with dedicated x2TC. I think the a700 is pretty much on a par with the 60D I have and the aforementioned lenses are the equal of any Canon L glass, IMHO. The 200f2.8 with TC is just insanely sharp and is miniscule ! This, with the 16-80 is just SUCH a good walkabout kit it is unbelievable.

I'm not keen on screw drive versus the USM in Canon lenses I might add although I am waiting for a sunny day to try everything out !

Anyway, I may well run dual systems but was wondering whether those here who have experience of both a700 and a77 would recommend the upgrade.

I would like: faster focussing (do I need SSM lenses instead ?) and better iso performance (dare anyone use an a77 above iso 800 ?). Will a77 give me this ? What other advantages will it offer in real life shooting (more MP is a given) rather than looking at the spec. sheet ?

I do the odd wedding and gig so these things are important.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Best wishes to all here.

Gary
 
Last edited:
Congrats on the 200/2.8 - it's 1 of Minolta's best lenses imo but rarely comes into discussions these days with relatively cheap zooms etc.

Now, I don't own either A77 or Canon 7D (I have a KM 7D :p) but have tried both.

AF -the A77 will focus a lot better than the A700 but I think that once you have got used to the 7D & dialled in it's options it's probably a bit better again for sports, BIF etc.

screw drive - Sigmas apart you'll rarely see a complaint about screw-drive failing & the only real downside is it's noisier. Minolta probably developed scre-drive further than any other manufacturer & something like an HS APO G will go end to end as fast or faster than SSM/USM etc. but SSM/USM is probably better for minor corrections

ISO - looking on Dyxum, DPReview (dare you go there!) it looks perfectly usable to me certainly upto 1600 & 3200 if you downsize to say 16MP from 24. I don't think that there's too much difference overall between the 2, is your output for print or screen?
(out of interest if you set your Sony & Canon to the same ISO & shutter or aperture do you get the same indicated corresponding aperture or shutter? My past experience says that they will come up with noticeably different settings)

& why should it be weird that a friendly community is a plus? :shrug:

edit: 1 advantage of the A77 is that in dim light the EVF will gain up & whilst it will be grainier it may well be easier to see things than through an APS-C (even 100%) OVF.
the electronic first curtain & no mirror slapping up & down should make it quieter if that's a consideration?

btw have you considered an A580?
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the info. above, lots of wisdom there.

OOI, I both print (up to A3) and people use my images for publicity etc on screen.

I've put the Minolta 200 (a700) up against the Canon 70-200f2.8ISL mkII (60d) and the latter combo definitely goes end-to-end faster. The Minolta 200 is plenty sharp enough though so is worth persevering with.

I'll get back to you with an answer on the corresponding settings question; what is noticeable though is the Canon (tried this with 7D, 60d and 1DSIII bodies) gives a "colder" picture wheras the Minolta is noticeably "warmer" with similar settings in terms of white balance. Not sure if that is glass or body but I suspect is a function of the body.

I will not elaborate upon the "community" comment for fear of upsetting friends in the Canon camp.

Thanks again.

Gary
 
gary43 said:
I've put the Minolta 200 (a700) up against the Canon 70-200f2.8ISL mkII (60d) and the latter combo definitely goes end-to-end faster.
Click to expand...
but yours isn't an HS (the HS stands for High Speed).
An HS would have given you focus hold button as well.
 
Last edited:
You live and learn...as mentioned I'm a noob in Alphaland so thanks again for the info.
 
Got my Sony A700 and Sony 35mm 1.8 lens up for sale in the classifieds if anyone is interested?
 
Well looks like I'm joining the Full Frame crew..ordered myself the Sony A850 from ebay.:D
 
Advise plse.

I have a Minolta 70-210 f4 beercan and want something with a bit more reach.

I have my beady eye on a 75-300 f4.5-5.6 big beercan

Or I get a 1.4 tc

The reason for the tc option is the 70-210 will be f5 (-1 f stop) at full zoom, which is better that the 5.6 of the 75-300

If i get a tc what would you recomend?

Cheers
 
Last edited:
live and learn thank you for that.

Best to go for the big beercan then.

Anyone tried one of these on their sony?
 
simon44 said:
Anyone tried one of these on their sony?
Click to expand...

It's an old manual focus MD mount lens. Won't work on a Sony DSLR.

The adapter he speaks of will have an extra lens in it which will degrade the quality. The results are better than a 70-300G? That's known as fibbing!

I can't believe someone has offered £260 for it.
 
I messaged the guy and he sounded quite knowledgeable. I'm a gullible kind of guy, that why i asked for confirmation. Many thanks :)

I've just received my A55, updated the firmware (brrrr). I have a Minolta 18mm f2.8 (lovely bokeh) which so far is proving to be very nice in low light. The 10 fps fires off no probs with just the kitchen lights on.

I like the evf as well. I plan on doing some starry kind of shots and viewing your images via this is a lot better in the dark i feel. Also checking out your images to save on the battery during the day is an advantage as well.

It has a good weighty feel as well. So far I like it :)
 
Thanks for the suggestions.

I'm interested in the older style Minolta lenses. From what I have been reading and viewing, they produce stunning results and are excellent value. The 18mm cost me £85 and the beercan cost me £80, where a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 for a Canon cost me £220 on the classifieds here. That is why I've chosen the Sony. I will try them out tomorrow. If I get some good results I will post for your critique :)


I would rather buy a s/h Minolta beercan than the Tamron for £100+. Obviously I can't compare but I suspect the beercan will have better quality images.

I've just borrowed a 2x converter from a friend, which will be cool to try.
 
Last edited:
simon44 said:
I would rather buy a s/h Minolta beercan than the Tamron for £100+. Obviously I can't compare but I suspect the beercan will have better quality images.
Click to expand...
if you are comparing a Minolta "Big Beercan" & the Tamron SP 70-300 VSD the Tamron will be better.
 
heidfirst said:
if you are comparing a Minolta "Big Beercan" & the Tamron SP 70-300 VSD the Tamron will be better.
Click to expand...


No i was talking about the Tamron 70-300mm F4/5.6 DI LD Macro.

I would like to do a side by side comparison with the VSD version though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top