Sony A200 vs Sony A350

H

hollow_crown

Messages
2
Edit My Images
No
Hi Guys,

Long time lurker on this forum and just starting up photography now. I was wondering which camera would prove better, or is better after people who have used both can inform me. I have a budget of only £400, and have always been keen on Sony equipment. Having browsing numerous sites, it seems the a350's images aren't to the same quality as the a200, and the a200 seems to be rated a lot higher than the a350 - despite the huge price difference.

I will primarily be using the camera for portrait photography, and live photos of poker tournaments etc. If there are better cameras in that price range, then feel free to inform me!

Thanks in advance!

hollow_crown
 
hollow_crown said:
Hi Guys,

Long time lurker on this forum and just starting up photography now. I was wondering which camera would prove better, or is better after people who have used both can inform me. I have a budget of only £400, and have always been keen on Sony equipment. Having browsing numerous sites, it seems the a350's images aren't to the same quality as the a200, and the a200 seems to be rated a lot higher than the a350 - despite the huge price difference.

I will primarily be using the camera for portrait photography, and live photos of poker tournaments etc. If there are better cameras in that price range, then feel free to inform me!

Thanks in advance!

hollow_crown
Click to expand...

hi hollow_crown..

first off,the main differences between the A200 and the A350 are;

1/A200 is a 10.2mp camera,whereas the A350 is a 14.2mp camera

2/A350 has live view/tilting screen,whereas the A200 doesn't.

at normal ISO's,there's not a lot to choose between them IQ wise(although i've no experience of the A200,it's what is documented on the forums),but as you increase ISO's the A350's images are a little noisier due to the pixel density,but we are talking about ISO's 800 and over.as regards to live view/tilting screen,only you will know wether or not you will need or use it...i occasionally use it on my A350 for macro work,and shooting from the hip/shooting overhead,which is when it comes into it's own.

another plus point of the sony range is the in body image stabilisation (super steady shot),so any sony minolta lens you use will get the benefit,whereas with canon/nikon you need to buy the lens with it built in,thus making those particular lens expensive..

hope this helps (y)
 
This might not help but I recently bought the A300 which sits in between the A200 and A350. It's identical to the A350 apart from the pixel count (10.2 same as A200). I haven't used either of the other 2 but can assure you the A300 takes good pictures (in the right hands!)

The A300 used to be exclusive to Jessops so I'm not sure if it's still available having had the the newer models released.
 
The A350's sensor is reckoned to be excellent at low ISOs with very good detail & high dynamic range. The trade off for those is that it's noisier at higher ISOs.
You'll also need good glass to see it at it's best.
Also because it's handling larger file sizes it is slower in continuous mode (iirc 2.5fps v3fps).
 
I use the Sony-A200 and it is a good entry camera. As a few have mentioned, when you get to ISO800, it gets rather noisy.

Not to put you off Sony, I'd keep in mind the price of the lenses too. They can be rather expensive in comparison to others. This is something I didn't really look into and wish I had.
 
happy a300 owner here

however coming from a nikon d40 there are a few things i miss from it

but i now have a system with sony of lenses and with liveview ;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top