Entry-level DSLR shootout

[tegan]

dpreview gave the A350 - "Recommended" status and NOT the "Highly Recommended" one .... below is the review

A350's conclusion page

Frankly I find that Popular Photography does more objective reviewing than dpreview. It was more a personal characterization of the Sony by someone with a strong bias for another brand.

Popular Photography said that the switch for live view was faster than the mode select from a menu and there were none of the problems such as the need for manual focus etc. present in another system. DPreview has "philosophical" issues with a practical fast approach to Live View????

Lag time between shooting and seeing the image??? Any faster and I would miss seeing it appear and then disappear automatically. As to shooting speed
I certainly cannot remember any situation where I ever needed or used (even when I did have it) 5 frames per second or more.

As to IQ, I don't have or use kit lenses, so he is talking about low end glass and/or lack of care or attention to the autofocus system.

I think reviews should be practical. When they get philosophical it usually means they are putting a negative spin on what they see.

Tegan

[Gatepc]

the a300 and a350 are pretty much the same as the a200 ( which i plan to buy

[tegan]

the a300 and a350 are pretty much the same as the a200 ( which i plan to buy

Not really! The A350 has the tilt screen, live view and more megapixels.

Tegan

[mindforge]

Not really! The A350 has the tilt screen, live view and more megapixels.

Tegan

The tilt screen is probably pretty useful (with live view) but the others are not really that useful, at least to me. The megapixels don't bother me that much at this level.

Does the 350 have DOF preview?

[tegan]

The tilt screen is probably pretty useful (with live view) but the others are not really that useful, at least to me. The megapixels don't bother me that much at this level.

Does the 350 have DOF preview?

The tilt screen and live view are the reasons I bought it. The tilt screen is perfect for street shooting without having the camera at eye level. I have also raised the camera above the heads of a crowd to shoot using the tilt screen and live view. I even braced the camera against the ceiling of a mine shaft to take a shot, using the tilt screen to frame the shot.

The megapixels are extremely useful if you back it up with quality glass in both lenses and filters. When using a telephoto, every megapixel improves the resolution and detail. Noise reduction either in the camera or in post tends to reduce resolution, so the more you have to begin with (in megapixels) the better the resulting photo.

No DOF preview but with the distances on the lenses, I find it easy to set manually but I don't find myself doing it very often at all.

Tegan

[ret]

I have checked the Sonys out when I was looking for my first DSLR and below are some of the differences in the models [from the top of my head]

- A200 ----> 10 mp, no LV
- A350 ----> 14mp, LV w/ tilt screen

and then they have the A300 which has 10mp in the body of A350, along with LV with tilt screen

I have heard that the Sony kit lenses are no up to the mark so you may have to get a better lens like the Carl Zeiss lenses like 16-80 Zeiss


If I had to recommend 2 entry-level DSLRs with LV without taking "getting into a system' concept into account then they would be:

- Olympus E520: I have used it and it's pretty useful entry-level camera. It has all the features that you would need and the 14-42 & 40-150 Zuiko ED kit lenses are pretty decent [gives you a range of 28-300 in 35mm format]. The cameras are solidly built and come with in-body image stabilization

- Canon XSi: again a pretty decent camera with LV and tons of features

When I was upgrading from P&S, LV was one of the features that I was looking for because I was used to shooting with it but after using the DSLRs, I have gotten used to the excellent viewfinders and hardly use the LV. LV is probably more useful if you are doing videos but except for the Nikon D90 and the upcoming pro-level Canon 5D, no other SLRs have video so I don't think you would be using LV over the VF that much once you get into the DSLR

if LV is not that paramount then you can also consider Pentax K200D, which is solidly built with weather seals and has in-body stabilization too. The drawback of this model, IMO, is that it doesn't come with Lithium battery but for some that may not be the case

[tegan]

Actually Sony kit lenses have a reputation as an in-between lens. They are not as poor as the Canon kit lenses but not as good as the Sony G lenses or some of the Minolta lenses.

The problem I find with Olympus is the unique 4 by 3 format and smaller chip. That produces a lighter smaller camera with smaller lenses but there seems to be no system direction to a full frame and even if there were, your current lenses would be useless.

At least with Sony, Nikon and Canon, you can move to full frame.

Live view extends the viewfinder capability and the camera angles at which you can shoot. It is extremely convenient for a lot of shooting. In the winter instead of fogging up the viewfinder, you can shoot from the waist.
When shooting kids playing, it is no longer necessary to be crawling around on the ground and in general shooting my knee ends up much cleaner too.

Tegan

[mindforge]

I have gotten pretty good at aiming blind with my camera above my head or shooting at knee level. The tilt screen would be nice though.

[ret]

why should one think about upgrading to a full-frame when just starting out?

even if you go full-frame, I don't know how useful the entry-level kit lenses will be as most probably when you upgrade you will invest in quality lenses that cost as much as the entry-level DSLR with kit lenses .... I don't know how someone getting a Sony A350 or anything with that kind of sensor would use whatever kit lens it comes with and use that lens for a full-frame [unless buying expensive lenses with full frame in mind but then that beats the purpose of 'entry-level'] .... the point is that if/when you upgrade to a full-frame, you will probably need to get new stuff anyways

IIRC, futureshop has a deal going on Olympus E-510 with the two kit lenses [14-42 and 40-150] for less than $600. You can't go wrong with that

[tegan]

why should one think about upgrading to a full-frame when just starting out?

even if you go full-frame, I don't know how useful the entry-level kit lenses will be as most probably when you upgrade you will invest in quality lenses that cost as much as the entry-level DSLR with kit lenses .... I don't know how someone getting a Sony A350 or anything with that kind of sensor would use whatever kit lens it comes with and use that lens for a full-frame [unless buying expensive lenses with full frame in mind but then that beats the purpose of 'entry-level'] .... the point is that if/when you upgrade to a full-frame, you will probably need to get new stuff anyways

IIRC, futureshop has a deal going on Olympus E-510 with the two kit lenses [14-42 and 40-150] for less than $600. You can't go wrong with that

First the Sony A350 does NOT come with a kit lens, so you can put whatever you want on it. Second the Sony kit lenses are FULL FRAME compatible.

The Sony A350 at 14.2 megapixels can make good advantage of quality glass and of course you never lose by buying fast glass either since it gives you more flexibility with wider fstops and blurring background.

Anyone involved in photography knows that the camera will be obsolete long before the lenses, so it pays to invest in good glass and have an eye for possible upgrade paths.

Tegan