Thank you for a great review! I have been researching for about two months for an entry level DSLR and have found most reviewers get hung up on how a camera compares to top PRO models.I am impressed that you did not fall into that trap.I purchesed an a200 two days ago and your review reasures me I made the right choice! THANK YOU!!

Just wanted to say nice website...and review of the a200. I currently have a 5d and don't know whether the a350 will fill the bill or just splurge for the a700. I think the a200 will be a great camera...My only question is wth the LV implementation on the a350, is there anything that it DOESN'T do as well as the a200 because of this? FPS aside, that is... Most of what I do is play with landscapes and macro, however low light indoors may be in the future with a 17-50/2.8 Tamron lens. I'm sure the a700 would AF better with the extra sensor at the 2.8 level.

greetings, thanks for visiting and thanks for the compliments.

fyi, I have the 17-50 and actually mostly photograph landscape. I'll be updating the review at some point with a few samples from it most likely - just in case that's of interest of you.

thanks again

First of all thank you :).

Secondly, the A200 does price and fps and OVF (A little) better. That seems to be about it, although our A350 is on the way for the next review to really determine the answer to that question.

Overall though, it is a bit simpler, and should attract someone who wants the least complication possible with a DSLR. There are people out there very much intimidated by the site of a "complicated, nice BIG camera". I think this camera is meant for that crowd, but I found it can be more. With the great Auto mode, AF, and excellent image quality, it should help instill some confidence to new users of a DSLR afraid to make the jump initially.

Hope that helps answer your question, now go get an A700 if you can afford it ;) (I only say that because you already have a 5D)

Carl

Those comments just made all the work that went into this project worth every ounce of sweat and 2-3 hour nights of sleep :).

Can't wait so see some image samples from you!

Carl

I'm the one you answered the questions on and yes I will get the A700...My mind is made up.

Regarding the 17-50/2.8 Tamron, I already have the Tamron 18-250 DiII and the Tamron 70-300 Di that you just had in the review is on the way (steal I think for $160). Also have the 50/1.7 and both kit minolta lens (18-70 and 75-300). Given that and the a700, do you think (considering low light) and 2.8 (extra sensor on a700) that the 17-50 Tamron would be a better alternative to the 16-80 CZ(which can't use the additonal 2.8 sensor)? Would use it indoors flash and no flash and for landscapes. The 18-250 I think is already at f/5 by 50mm if memory serves me correctly.

I think that you have shown that the A200 is quite the capable camera for someone looking to step into the Alpha world.
The one problem I see for a new user is that you have coupled the camera with a lens that costs the same. I would like to see what pictures a "kit" lens would produce. The shots you have now are great, but come from a $1000+ combo. Let the readers see what $600 will provide.

Regards,
Royston

Hi Carl, nice review! Could do with some more tests maybe, but all in all pretty impressive and well commented.
How woud you say ISO1600/3200 from the A200 would compare to the same from the A700? Big difference or is the A200 sensor up to it?

Bye Robert.

We did post some high ISO samples of the A200 in the first article here if you are interested but not a side by side comparison as you seem to desire.

Cheers,

Carl

A newbee finds a web page and receives the data needed to make an educated & researched marketing decision. Let's face it their are literally shelf loads of cameras out there. Making a smart decision about entering into a new DSLR system and all the future purchasers associated with growing as your knowledge and skills grow needs a good reliable resource. Carl and the folks here enjoy their passion for the photography world and the selected tools we work with almost daily. I'm certain that you brought a huge smile to Eric and Carl when they read your post.

Enjoy that new camera and post some image here. . .

Well done team!
Paul

Many years ago I had a Practica BC1 slr, but then life got in the way and photography stopped. Recently however I became fed up of my lazy approach to using a mobile phone to capture images, so, I decided a DSLR was for me.

So, like most people, I stared to research, mainly the internet, as most magazines just scream at people to buy the latest and expensive piece of kit. Magazines however are great for technique and how to use the thing. Not being in any way knowledgeable of the digital scene I had to learn some basics.

Reading many reviews and specifications it is all too easy to get caught up in minutiae of detail and to become convinced you need every little feature. I also knew that I wanted a camera that would allow me to develop my technical skill slowly, at my own pace, whilst still allowing great photos out of the box, that all the family could use. I also set a budget of £400

I ended up with a shortlist of five cameras – the Pentax K10D, the Cannon 400D, the Olympus E510, the Sony a200 and lastly the Nikon 40dx. So, reviews and marketing read it was off to the shop to compare and evaluate them.

The Nikon was discounted owing to it having no dust removal system. The Olympus went next owing to small size and lack of features that I might need in future use. The Cannon went for three reasons. First it had a CMOS sensor and low ISO, and rightly or wrongly, I deemed it unsuitable for night photography or astronomical photos via my telescope. The second reason was, for me anyway, its poor ergonomics. Lastly, it was about to be replaced with a newer version, so its technology was a little old, although its well proven in taking great pictures.

That left the Pentax and Sony. Again the Pentax is about to be replaced, but I liked the fact of the weather proof seals. However it was heavier than the rest which may have been a problem for others in the family. Also it was feature rich – too many for me – I felt it would have taken an age for me to understand and use to its full capacity. It is I feel a camera for the knowledgeable enthusiast.

That then left the Sony. Knowing it had Minolta pedigree helped convince me it was a serious contender with the other brands. I also suppose it helped that I am not a brand snob. I immediately liked the ergonomics – larger than all but Pentax, all family liked the comfortable and light way it fitted in the hands. The feature set was wide and I deemed enough to develop with my skills. Ease of use was for me, way ahead of the others, and the resulting pictures on the LCD screen, to my eye, appeared a lot crisper than the others. My biggest grip since purchasing the camera? Why oh why, does Sony produce such a poor manual – all the marketing they do, they spoil by such a poor instruction booklet, anyone know of a better guide?

Mairtin

Carl
I dont know how to get my photos to your web site? Just call me senile.

Clatu

hi Clatu, sorry that wasn't clear

If you just paste a link to your image in a forum post it should display when posted.

If your images do not display some hosts such as PBase require you use special links http://www.pbase.com/help/faq&id=5 or similar, to show images offsite. Links with unusual special characters or that are extremely long, will likewise not display.

thanks
Eric

The new Sony a200 seems to be a pretty good entry level DSLR and I'm enjoying it thus far. The whiners on various photography forums think the lack of mirror lock up, and a depth of field preview button is a travesty that will doom the entire Sony Corporation, but I wouldn't know a MLU or DoF-P if I got bit by one. I keep repeating "Entry Level, Entry Level" to myself and everything seems all better. Some of the things I like are the fast auto focus, bright view finder, intuitive menu system, small size, light weight, good ergonomics, big view screen and (I know this is silly, but...) the noise it make when the shutter is snapped. In my mind though, the in-body anti-shake system is the biggest plus.

I could have spent a few extra $$'s and got the a300 or a350 body, with Live View but it not only would have cost an extra $100 but would have compromised the size of the view finder and I didn't think I'd use the Live View feature enough to justify the constant inconvenience of a smaller VF. Maybe in a couple of years the LV technology (or VF technology) will have improved and my next body might have that feature, but not this time.

I just put a brand new Tamron 18-250mm lens on the a200 body and all that extra glass and weight have slowed the once super quick AF down some, but not enough to annoy me. Not yet anyway.

Thanks for posting them.

Just got the A350 in my hands, taking it out for a spin.

Live view is very interesting in a dslr.

Carl

My first camera cira 1960.http://picasaweb.comPersilty/34200802

Thanks a lot, very nice review indeed, just bought A-200, feels great and nice photos!

I saw the manual but couldn't tell for sure from the wording, if it really works in raw+jpeg or only jpeg.

thank you!

Jpegs are affected by DRO in all modes, but raw files have to be manually adjusted in IDC.

Sony didn't state that regular DRO wasn't affecting raw files, only DR+, but it is what it is.

Raw files are not affected in camera.

Carl

aha I got it! Jpeg quality of a200 seems really so clean, thanks for good review

what happen if i use a hs 5600 flash with it? what feature will i be missing?

I can tell you! :)

For those who have the 5600, please share your experiences with us.

Thank you,

Carl

I agree with you. I just bought the Sony Alpha A200 this Saturday at Best Buy - This camera is really "The Best Buy" entry level camera!!! This is an amazing camera. I never ever used the Depth of Field Preview or Mirror Lock-up. The following day,yesterday, I used it with our friend's wedding and delivered excellent results. I used my old Minolta Maxxum 28-70 f2.8 G lens. It it an excellent camera !!!!!!!!

Hey,
I just bought the A200 (with the 18-70 lens kit and the Sony 75-300 lens.) after reading almost every review of the entry level dSLRs available.
At first I had my mind set on the A300 or A350, but as someone mentioned earlier, all the advertising and magazines scream 'Buy the latest! Buy the latest!'
After much thought I opted for the A200. I realized that since this was my first dSLR I shouldn't jump to the top of the pile and blow all my cash. In a couple months or a year, I can always sell the A200 after I have developed my 'dSLR skills' and go for the A700 or whatever is available at the time.
Another reason for choosing the Sony brand as opposed to Canon and the other popular ones was my experience with the Sony F717 and F828. Both of these cameras produced excellent quality images.

One thing to note, however, when choosing a dSLR - Since dSLR lenses are inter-changeable you are not just buying a camera as your did with P&S before. You are investing in a dSLR line. Once you buy a dSLR you will most likely buy multiple lenses (lens lust I think they call it) so you would more than likely be sticking with the line later on - so choose wisely.

I read your review of the A200. One thing to be careful of in a review are user impressions and opinions as the differ widely from person to person. I own the A100 and recently tried out the A200. I disagree with you in several areas.

"I find the Sony A200 to be very handsome, in some ways even more so than the A700 in its simplicity, and much more so than the A100."

I disagree. I find the A100's more "purposeful" appearance more appealing.

"Build Quality, Ergonomics and Handling- Build quality on the Sony A200 is a step above the Sony A100 (not to suggest the A100 wasn't well built).

Actually my impression is that the A100 "feels" more rugged and better built. The A200 has, IMO, a somewhat "cheap" feel to it.

"Ergonomically the A200 has a very pleasant textured surface over most of the body that the feels a lot like ultra fine sandpaper, soft and smooth (too smooth on the backpanel perhaps) but overall feels much "tighter" and more organic than the A100."

Once again I disagree. The A100 feels "tighter" to me at least as I define it. My A100 was purchased in OCT 2007. Maybe yours is old and a little warn out compared to new.

I like reviews to be free from user opinions and impressions.

The lack of mirror lockup on the A200 is a big deal for people like myself who have a 1200mm (1800mm equiv) lens. I also would miss the Fn wheel which I use often.
The improvement in noise at higher iso's, while there, is not that great to me, maybe 1/2 stop.

Overall if both cameras were available to me at the same price I would buy the A100.

Tom,

Thanx for your positive feelings and impressions of your A100. I always appreciate someone who is willing to discuss their own personal impressions and their own personal feelings, (e.g. "... appealing", "my impression...", "A100 feels...", "... would miss the ..." "to me...").

Regarding Carl's review, his review is about as balanced between subjective / objective as any other hands-on review for any other camera or any other brand. All hands-on reviewers have to describe their perceptions, otherwise they would have nothing to say: "It looks ..." , "it sounds ..." , "it feels ..."

As you know, one way or another, someone has to use one of their own senses for a hands-on review. To accurately describe those sensory perceptions, they would appropriately use the words like "feels", "looks", etc. If I ever read a hands-on review where someone said something like, "it is more rugged" (v. "it feels more rugged" ), then I would want to know the measurements they used to make that determination. (Unless, it is obvious they are talking about their perceptions). I'm sure you feel the same.

So, like me, you probably appreciate the extra amount of accuracy that Carl has in his review.

And thank you for your comments!

I believe in people to be adults and fully capable of making their own judgments and that they will anyways, my reviews or not. I'll stand by my opinions as you will stand by yours, after all, they are just opinions :).

Also I did mention the lack of MLU to be a negative as well, unless you are agreeing with that part of my review?

On the high ISO performance, I think there is a greater advantage with the A200 than a half stop however.

Cheers, and welcome to the site Tom!

Carl

I agree ..... lol
But,
Sometimes, opinions are very welcome.
To Carl, i always look forward to your test's. So Tom, some people like to read it, with opinions.
Carl's testing is the main reason i got a A700 in the first place. I liked the way he (Carl) wrote about Sony's in other forums and i could find myself in his arguments and advices he gave to other people.
And yes, other test, other outcomes i read them also....

Hubert

I guess I find myself in between. In my opinion the A100 did feel sturdier and better built than the A200, but not by much. On the other hand, there is no contest when it comes to control of noise. The A100 should have had noise control that good, but it didn't. I don't know how they compare on overall image quality, though I would gander that the A200 and its newer sensor would win that battle.

I wish Sony would have incorporated more of the A100's feature set in the A200. They only left out little things that wouldn't have raised the price by much. It's very confusing to me.

I think Carl mentioned that the DOF preview button was excluded in the A200.

What exactly is the DOF preview? Is there is actual preview in the VF?
This is my first dSLR so I cam trying to acquaint myself with the terminology.