my mind is set..... sort of

Martron

I am interested in photography.

and have had plenty of compacts.

anyway i am looking to get a digital slr.

cheap and cheerful as i dont want to put too much on my first camera

anyway i read the charter and i know you dont recommend anything.

but i was thinking of getting a sony Alpha a-200

anyone have any objections?

Martron

Martron wrote: »

I am interested in photography.

and have had plenty of compacts.

anyway i am looking to get a digital slr.

cheap and cheerful as i dont want to put too much on my first camera

anyway i read the charter and i know you dont recommend anything.

but i was thinking of getting a sony Alpha a-200

anyone have any objections?

I object!! Because we can't answer that question unless you say what you plan to be doing with it, how much you want to spend etc.

But there are some really good links in the stickies.

Martron

ha ha ok.

went through all the links.

i want to do mainly action shots. cars mainly.

want to play around also with hdr and so other lowlight long exposure effects.

basically a good starter.

Martron

Martron wrote: »

ha ha ok.

went through all the links.

i want to do mainly action shots. cars mainly.

want to play around also with hdr and so other lowlight long exposure effects.

basically a good starter.

Honestly, I've no idea.

But most other people here would have a better qualified opinion then me.

Martron

i appreciate you honesty. after going more through this forum i want to enter the photo challenge.... looks like great fun

honerbright

I have an A200 (my first DSLR), which I love to bits and would recommend to anyone who was moving up from a point-and-shoot camera.

want to play around also with hdr and so other lowlight long exposure effects.

The only thing about the A200 is the bracketed exposure burst mode isnt too great (-/+ 0.7) and usually with HDR you want higher exposure differences e.g -/+ 2.0 (the most possible on the a200). But this can be corrected by either taking a single RAW shot (for action shots etc) or if you're photographing a landscape or something else that is not moving by using a tripod and manually changing the exposure for 3 (or more or less.. depending on what you want) photos.
..Not even sure if that makes any sense or is much help to you at all but I thought I would mention it anyhow :pac:


Anyhow, apart from that it's a great learners camera over all

Martron

thats exactly what i wanted to hear. looking through here and really excited about getting it.

anyway i am sure i will learn all about it soon enough.

so basically is the shutter speed to quick for long exposure?

Ricky91t

Sony eww,

Go for a canon or a nikon if I were you

honerbright

so basically is the shutter speed to quick for long exposure?

Definitely not.
Just had a look at my camera- In the shutter speed priority mode the longest exposure you can select is 30 seconds, and the shortest is 1/4000 of a second.
If you go through manual mode to take a photo you can put the shutter speed onto BULB which means the shutter will stay open as long as you want .

Martron

Ricky91t wrote: »

Sony eww,

Go for a canon or a nikon if I were you

nikon d60 out of price range really.

whats the reason for your hatred?

Ricky91t

Martron wrote: »

nikon d60 out of price range really.

whats the reason for your hatred?

Well i have no issues with the brand,It's more,They've only been in the SLR market for a few years,and the amount of used lenses is lacking,Meaning you have to pay the price for new equipment compared to used(can be a huge difference)Nikon or Canon have been round for ages,and if you even need to upgrade you could buy a pro canon body,with 8fps(albeit only 4mp) for €500 so you've always got opportunities like that if you ever want to get some professional gear,Especially as you like action 8fs compared to 5fps maximum in the sony range is quite a difference..

Just my views though

duffarama

There's also the Olympus E420 and E520, they will alow a decent burst of images with a range of programmable exposure differences for HDR.

The E420 is available for very little money at the moment as it's being discontinued.

The A-200 is a very good and very capable camera though.

Martron

thanks for the advice keep it coming. fps = frames per second

i think i can get a good deal on the sony thats why i prefered it and seemed pretty middle of the road.

so there is no major downfalls with it?

Mycroft H

Ricky91t wrote: »

Well i have no issues with the brand,It's more,They've only been in the SLR market for a few years,and the amount of used lenses is lacking,Meaning you have to pay the price for new equipment compared to used(can be a huge difference)Nikon or Canon have been round for ages,and if you even need to upgrade you could buy a pro canon body,with 8fps(albeit only 4mp) for €500 so you've always got opportunities like that if you ever want to get some professional gear,Especially as you like action 8fs compared to 5fps maximum in the sony range is quite a difference..

Just my views though

Which camera make did sony buy out??

Minolta, thats who. And who deveolped the first Auto focus SLR? Minolta in 1985.

So the age old excuse that there is more used gear for canikons is pure waffle. There is plenty used minolta stuff on ebay or in the big shops like conns cameras or in the larger english shops! I have had no problem getting used gear off ebay at all.

Op the A200 is a fine camera, easy peasy to do HDR shots in manual mode and its slightly faster at focusing then a Nikon D60, plus the in body Image stabilisation which is really handy!

Ghost Train

Heres an interesting comparison, and decent reviews, i say the order everybody would have a different view on, so I'd ignore the order
http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/equipment/advice/341229/top-5-credit-crunch-busting-entry-level-dslr-cameras.html

For me any of the budget dslrs these days looks great, have had a nikon dslr, have a pentax at the moment. If buying today would like a camera with some sort of dust removal, live view might be nice too, so would be tempted by the olympus. Definitely more nikon and canon gear/lenses available second hand. Very happy with the old pentax dslr I use at the moment, so K-m looks nice to me, like the small size of the olympus though

You might have a look at the new models coming out as well

Mycroft H

Ghost Train wrote: »

Heres an interesting comparison, and decent reviews, i say the order everybody would have a different view on, so I'd ignore the order
http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/equipment/advice/341229/top-5-credit-crunch-busting-entry-level-dslr-cameras.html

For me any of the budget dslrs these days looks great, have had a nikon dslr, have a pentax at the moment. If buying today would like a camera with some sort of dust removal, live view might be nice too, so would be tempted by the olympus. Definitely more nikon and canon gear/lenses available second hand. Very happy with the old pentax dslr I use at the moment, so K-m looks nice to me, like the small size of the olympus though

You might have a look at the new models coming out as well

Excellent Link.

that pentax k-m looks like a pretty nice camera

Ghost Train

landyman wrote: »

Excellent Link.

that pentax k-m looks like a pretty nice camera

Heres another link of comparing the same range of cameras

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Digital-SLR-Camera,review-1314.html

AnCatDubh

At the level you are joining the land of DSLR, the sony Alpha a-200 is a mighty good camera (and I don't shoot Sony). Many peeps from these parts shoot sony's of varying models and they are well capable of producing mad good images. You'll get a lot of gear love around photographers.

The reality of the entry level is that manufacturer doesn't really matter overly much except that you will probably fall madly in love with the procured inanimate object so much so that you may be hooked for life - that's for the majority of photographers. And, indeed it is *love* which is why lots of people get very passionate about the gear debate.

Again in reality the nikons and canons will probably take you further up the photography ladder than many of the other brands. For most of us, we won't really notice the difference and maybe never need it or would afford it. And by that stage you might have gone back to film :eek: probably with your brand that you've bought into digitally.

Its interesting looking at it purely as a business. Sony as a corporate entity (all the consumer stuff included) are probably bigger than all of the other companies put together and I've read in recent times that if Sony want to change the photographic world then they just will. Simple as that. They have the might as a corporate entity.

So, basically what i'm saying is have no fear entering into the land of the Sony DSLR in terms of being able to produce excellent images. I recently recommended to someone and i'll suggest the same to you. After you buy your first DSLR and before you decide to buy any one additional piece of kit for it, take time to decide if the range offering will bring you to where you want to go - that is serious amateur or ambitious professional.

It is a fact that more professionals will use Canon or Nikon but the kind of gear that such users will use will most likely bear little resemblance to the littler siblings. All round - tis all great gear really

Rb

AnCatDubh wrote: »

I've read in recent times that if Sony want to change the photographic world then they just will. Simple as that. They have the might as a corporate entity.

So they're just being awkward designing DSLRs to use those Pro Duo cards instead of cf/sd?

Ricky91t

landyman wrote: »

Which camera make did sony buy out??

Minolta, thats who. And who deveolped the first Auto focus SLR? Minolta in 1985.

So the age old excuse that there is more used gear for canikons is pure waffle. There is plenty used minolta stuff on ebay or in the big shops like conns cameras or in the larger english shops! I have had no problem getting used gear off ebay at all.

Op the A200 is a fine camera, easy peasy to do HDR shots in manual mode and its slightly faster at focusing then a Nikon D60, plus the in body Image stabilisation which is really handy!

:rolleyes:

Can you link me to an 8fps sony camera for under €800 please?

If the OP is anything like me he'll find the 3fps of entry level DSLR's restrictive for motorsport possibly even 5fps,If you can link me to a Sony camera that shoots that many frames and for that price then yes I think he should go with sony as they are equal,If not,he's buying into a dead end brand

If he wants to progress in the motor sport area he won't have the gear there to meet his needs,No old Minolta film will meet that and even if it will who wants to be shooting motor sports with a film camera?

Martron wrote: »

I want to do mainly action shots. cars mainly.

want to play around also with hdr and so other lowlight long exposure effects.

basically a good starter.

We all know that once you get into photography you want to constantly expand your horizons,I started off shooting dogs running up a road and a year later I was laying on a ditch shooting bikes passing me doing 180mph.

Action as he mentioned being a vital part and although 3fps could cut it,It's stupid not to get something better the more FPS means you'll capture that vital moment

-Chris-

Buying a Canon or Nikon because the pros use it is like buying a Toyota because the F1 car is fast. They don't bear that much resemblance.

AnCatDubh is right, if you're only looking to be a "fun" photographer or if you're expecting to get as far as "well-equipped, serious amateur" then any of Sony, Nikon or Canon would be fine.
If you're looking go all the way to photographing supermodels then you'll probably still be OK with Sony, Nikon or Canon.

I bought an A200 and I love it, but I've no interest in photography beyond having a little fun, exploring my creative side and sinking several grand into another hobby .
I bought it based on reviews, spec and price

I was also at a Sony talk in the Dublin Camera Club recently (I think a few more boardsies there too) and it made me realise how deep the heritage for Sony is, and how much equipment already exists in the second hand market that will work with the Sony system.


I'm not pimping Sony, OP, I'm just saying you shouldn't be afraid of it either!

-Chris-

Rb wrote: »

So they're just being awkward designing DSLRs to use those Pro Duo cards instead of cf/sd?

My A200 uses CompactFlash afaik...

AnCatDubh

Ach, isn't there nothing better than an ole my gear is better than yours debate

OP - be sure to sift through what may be written in passion rather than rationale when reviewing the thread (/mod hat on/at least before someone pushes it over the edge and it all becomes locked up/mod hat off/)

Rb wrote: »

So they're just being awkward designing DSLRs to use those Pro Duo cards instead of cf/sd?

Hmnnn....... Isn't the A200 cf based?

But I agree them cf's are a pesky nuisance, - sd's ftw

-Chris-

AnCatDubh wrote: »

Ach, isn't there nothing better than an ole my gear is better than yours debate

I've only owned one camera of note, and I'm a zealot already! The system works...

AnCatDubh wrote: »

OP - be sure to sift through what may be written in passion rather than rationale when reviewing the thread (/mod hat on/at least before someone pushes it over the edge and it all becomes locked up/mod hat off/)

Yeah, lock it. Sony ftw! :D

Ricky91t

But how many people set out with photography as a career choice?I can list a few off the top of my head who have got into it and are know on the verge of going pro..

I'm not going to post in here again(unless i'm replied to) but i'd rather start photography safe in the knowledge you're covered for all aspects of photography,I know it won't affect your photos or anything but it's always good..

And -chris- what are you on about?!?

Cars and cameras have nothing in common,I'd love to meat someone who buys a toyota and then get a newer model and bring the old stereo and engine parts with them,they don't!Where you upgrade a car your old car has nothing to do with it,It has no input,

Where as buying a camera and then upgrading you'll bring lenses,Memory cards etc etc,It's reasuring to know there's a camera there that the pros use.

Normally most photographer's will end up with a fairly top end camera,Whatever they do they'll usually get someone recommending them for wedding's,Or taking snaps of their kids playing sports etc etc,And usually an upgrade is needed to make sure as much detail is captured and the camera is right for the job

-Chris-

Ricky91t wrote: »

Sony eww

Ricky91t wrote: »

Well i have no issues with the brand

"Eww" = no issues, really?

Ricky91t wrote: »

It's more,They've only been in the SLR market for a few years,and the amount of used lenses is lacking

This is quite obviously incorrect. The Konica Minolta heritage guarantees an abundance of used lenses. Also, because the anti-shake is in-built into the body the lens doesn't need to have that function either.




Cars and cameras...

Ricky91t wrote: »

And -chris- what are you on about?!?

Cars and cameras have nothing in common

-Chris- wrote: »

Buying a Canon or Nikon because the pros use it is like buying a Toyota because the F1 car is fast. They don't bear that much resemblance.

The car reference was in reference to this:

AnCatDubh wrote: »

The reality of the entry level is that manufacturer doesn't really matter overly much...
...take time to decide if the range offering will bring you to where you want to go - that is serious amateur or ambitious professional.
...It is a fact that more professionals will use Canon or Nikon but the kind of gear that such users will use will most likely bear little resemblance to the littler siblings.

I'm alluding to the difference between prosumer and proper Pro models.

Ricky91t wrote: »

but i'd rather start photography safe in the knowledge you're covered for all aspects of photography

Ricky91t wrote: »

I'd love to meat someone who buys a toyota and then get a newer model and bring the old stereo and engine parts with them,they don't!Where you upgrade a car your old car has nothing to do with it,It has no input

Again, loads of stuff available s/h, and the Sony model range is expanding rapidly.

Ricky91t wrote: »

Normally most photographer's will end up with a fairly top end camera

Most photographers end up with a fairly top end camera? Really?

Ricky91t wrote: »

Whatever they do they'll usually get someone recommending them for wedding's

Most photographers will get recommended to shoot weddings? Really?

Ricky91t wrote: »

I'm not going to post in here again(unless i'm replied to)

And I probably shouldn't have risen to the bait. Sorry AnCatDubh if I'm taking it OT.
I'm not a Sony fanboy, but I don't see the point in brand-bashing either - especially when all the facts aren't being made available...

AnCatDubh

OP - I'm going to tide this one over until morning.

Folks - were getting a little off topic here, but have a sleep on it overnight and back to the recommendations / rationale in the morning.

Normal service will resume then.

Thank you.

AnCatDubh

ok, off ya go again.

Keep it back on topic people in order to keep the thread open.

Thank you.

Ricky91t

-Chris- wrote: »

Most photographers end up with a fairly top end camera? Really?



Most photographers will get recommended to shoot weddings? Really?

It's a shame you seem to be unable to read the whole sentence

I'd class a 40D,30D etc as a fairly top end,So yes,A 400D or 1000D are entry level,A huge number of users here have D200's,50D's etc etc

And the second point,You're just taking out a tiny bit from the sentence

Me wrote:

Whatever they do they'll usually get someone recommending them for wedding's,Or taking snaps of their kids playing sports etc etc,

Now you'll see I've increased the size of the vital words that join this sentence and therefore means they don't just get recommended for wedding,I don't know are you visually impaired but hopefully the underline,Bold and size increase will help you to see them

You'll see loads of threads popping up here
I was asked to shoot relations wedding,Or my wife recommended me to shoot something or other,Or taking pics of a friends car,His pet etc etc

Once most people get an SLR and get themselves out there family members will recommend them to others or ask them to shoot things,It's just how things happen(or it just happens to me and a few other photographers i know)

@ACD Sorry,As he seems to not be able to read the whole sentence he's made me look like an idiot,Saying most photographers get recommended for wedding,Where as he missed the vital OR so I've just had to clear things up as he struggles to read the whole sentence

If you want to clear this up or ban be go ahead,But don't lock it for the OP's sake

CabanSail

I was quite impressed with the talk at DCC that we got from Sony recently. I organised it & was looking to get a talk from both Canon & Nikon about their systems but as Sony was definitely in third place I invited them along too. The sales figures they had showed that they are really taking a big part of the market very fast. I was impressed with a lot of their technology & the way they have done things.

At the moment they are really going after the entry level market, as they know that when you start in a system it is very difficult & expensive to change. However a lot of people do look at the whole system to see where they can progress to in the future & Sony are developing a quite impressive Pro range. It is limited now but growing & their top level lenses are make by Carl Zeiss & are second to none in quality.

Now I shoot Nikon & am not about to swap, but was very impressed with the Sony line up.

I used to shoot some Motor Sport when I was younger. Back then the fps was determined by how fast I could cycle the film advance lever as my gear was ALL manual. I was just doing it as a hobby while I was also a Flag Marshall at the races. The Pro Photographers had Motor Drives on their cameras as well as Auto (Aperture Priority) but I think the film motor drives would have been lucky to get 3fps. They still used to get some stunning shots. My budget was ussually one or two rolls of film per meeting, so I had to make each shout count, so a Motor Drive would have blown that. I think that getting 3 fps will be fine for you at entry level.

duffarama

Technique will always allow you to get some decent shots with any DSLR on the market.

As for Sony, I've no interest in FF myself but if I was to ever venture that direction I think it would be a Sony camera and a couple of the Zeiss lenses. From all I've read it's the best quality/cost option around at the moment

sineadw

:rolleyes:

Back on topic: I'm sure I remember Cabansail telling me Sony are really starting to push for the pro market? They have a range of lenses made by Zeiss that apparently leave Canikon well behind (and I've been reading that Canon at least really needs to up their game in lens quality to match the precision and image quality of the newest bodies).

I'm sure Tony can clear that one up better than me - I need a whole new set of memory cells..

Edit : He already did

Anyway, - I think what a lot of people are getting at is that at the moment, when you look at pro photogs the vast majority of them are using either a Canon or a Nikon. So if you do end up falling in love and wanting to do it for a living then *at the moment* sony wouldn't be a wise choice. That's all subject to change though, and since you're buying an entry level then I'd say go to a shop, try them out and buy whichever one you feel is right for you and fits your budget. If you then want to buy extra equipment somewhere down the line you can look into other brands if you feel you need to - the sonys are very saleable on places like adverts.ie anyway.

-Chris-

Ricky91t wrote: »

Now you'll see I've increased the size of the vital words that join this sentence and therefore means they don't just get recommended for wedding,I don't know are you visually impaired but hopefully the underline,Bold and size increase will help you to see them

Maybe it was a misunderstanding on my behalf then Ricky - I understood the intent of your post(s) to be "don't buy a Sony as you'll inevitably need to buy pro-level/high-quality stuff, and Sony can't cater for this".

If I misunderstood, then let's move on.

Ricky91t wrote: »

@ACD Sorry,As he seems to not be able to read the whole sentence he's made me look like an idiot,Saying most photographers get recommended for wedding,Where as he missed the vital OR so I've just had to clear things up as he struggles to read the whole sentence

If you want to clear this up or ban be go ahead,But don't lock it for the OP's sake

Don't lock, don't ban, let's get back on-topic.

CabanSail

I forgot to add to my previous post that something I did not like about the Sony Range was that they seem to be quite menu driven. Making changes means hunting through menus. This is somewhat similar to the EOS cameras I have seen too. Having said that the menus did seem to be quite logical & well laid out. I guess I am more used to & prefer the Nikons which have more dedicated buttons & switches etc. It may also account for Sony taking sales away from Canon much more than Nikon lately.

Anyway .... Go in & have a play with some cameras & see what feels right for you.

AnCatDubh

CabanSail wrote: »

The Pro Photographers had Motor Drives on their cameras as well as Auto (Aperture Priority) but I think the film motor drives would have been lucky to get 3fps.

Ah yes, but didn't they just sound so wonderful

-Chris-

CabanSail wrote: »

I forgot to add to my previous post that something I did not like about the Sony Range was that they seem to be quite menu driven. Making changes means hunting through menus. This is somewhat similar to the EOS cameras I have seen too. Having said that the menus did seem to be quite logical & well laid out.

Yeah, my dad's Nikon has an LCD on top so you can check settings whereas I have to drill down through the menu system.
I don't find it an issue as it's all I know, but life may be easier with a dedicated LCD and buttons.

DaireQuinlan

CabanSail wrote: »

... It is limited now but growing & their top level lenses are make by Carl Zeiss & are second to none in quality.

sineadw wrote: »

:rolleyes:

Back on topic: I'm sure I remember Cabansail telling me Sony are really starting to push for the pro market? They have a range of lenses made by Zeiss that apparently leave Canikon well behind (and I've been reading that Canon at least really needs to up their game in lens quality to match the precision and image quality of the newest bodies).

Those Sony reps blagging about their Carl Zeiss lenses probably would have blustered and changed the subject had you asked them who actually constructs the lenses and where they're made :rolleyes: The CZ moniker is just branding, the lenses themselves are made by the ever ubiquitous Cosina. The high profile primes are at least made in Japan , the consumer level stuff is made in China, probably in the same factories that everyone elses consumer zooms are made.

AnCatDubh

CabanSail wrote: »

Making changes means hunting through menus.

That point is really interesting.

I know that when you get used to something you don't like change but I really don't like how much *stuff* is being thrown behind the menu systems of the modern DSLR's and this appears to be especially apparent in the entry level market. I don't mind configuration and settings stuff but more core stuff and settings that you would use actively while shooting.

Personally speaking my preference is to have buttons and thumb wheels at the finger tips that can change while the camera is to my eye if needs be without taking down, loading the menu system, hitting the four way controller and setting a new value.

sineadw

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Those Sony reps blagging about their Carl Zeiss lenses probably would have blustered and changed the subject had you asked them who actually constructs the lenses and where they're made :rolleyes: The CZ moniker is just branding, the lenses themselves are made by the ever ubiquitous Cosina. The high profile primes are at least made in Japan , the consumer level stuff is made in China, probably in the same factories that everyone elses consumer zooms are made.

Don't be dissing Cosina now - I still love my Cosina camera. That's a pity though. You sure its the slr lenses and not just the ones for compacts?

DaireQuinlan

sineadw wrote: »

Don't be dissing Cosina now - I still love my Cosina camera. That's a pity though. You sure its the slr lenses and not just the ones for compacts?

Yep. Nothing wrong with Cosina's stuff, I still plan on getting one of their Voigtlander Bessa rangefinders at some point (Voigtlander is another Cosina brand, they own this one entirely) and their Voigtlander and Carl Zeiss branded MF primes they've been releasing for the various different mounts over the last few years are quite well regarded. They're probably no better or no worse than the other japanese manufacturers.

CabanSail

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Those Sony reps blagging about their Carl Zeiss lenses probably would have blustered and changed the subject had you asked them who actually constructs the lenses and where they're made :rolleyes: The CZ moniker is just branding, the lenses themselves are made by the ever ubiquitous Cosina. The high profile primes are at least made in Japan , the consumer level stuff is made in China, probably in the same factories that everyone elses consumer zooms are made.

Unless we were being mislead, they said that the CZ lenses were made in Europe & are individually calibrated with a signed certificate included with each lens. The quality is supposed to be exceptional, mind you they are not cheap.

DaireQuinlan

CabanSail wrote: »

Unless we were being mislead, they said that the CZ lenses were made in Europe & are individually calibrated with a signed certificate included with each lens. The quality is supposed to be exceptional, mind you they are not cheap.

Really ? Maybe I was mistaken with regard to their Sony line up. I'm trying to track down at the moment where I read it. References to the other MF lenses are easy enough to find (although CZ carefully avoids mentioning the fact on their website )

Fajitas!

Meeeeeeeow.

OP, some unbiased advice (I swear :pac: ). At this stage, nearly every DSLR is going to be the same to you - you'll have a bit of learning ahead, and you'll get a bit of craic out of your camera. Try your best not to get bogged down by brands, best lenses, manufacturing factories and serial numbers. Go into the nearest camera shop to you, and play with the cameras. They'll usually let you take a few photos and have a look at them. Use all the different settings you can find, see how it fits in your hand.

You can pretty much decide with what's most comfortable in your hand, and feels most natural to you. You can learn the rest. Tech specs... Tbh, most cameras entry level cameras are around and about the same. Some have different quirks, but if you like it, then all the quirks in the world won't matter to you.

There's nothing wrong with the Sony's. I've played with a few of them and they're grand little cameras.


Now, do any of your friends have a DSLR? I'd consider this a deciding factor, more than how many megapixels your camera has :pac:

If they do, try find out what brand it is. Give it a go. You'll be able to play with it that bit longer, and try get some real life results out of it. If you like the brand, fantastic. You can share lenses, flashes, etc. They'll also know the system and be able to give advice.

CabanSail

After you have done that ..... forget about the Camera & concentrate on the Pictures.

DaireQuinlan

CabanSail wrote: »

After you have done that ..... forget about the Camera & concentrate on the Pictures.

Amen to that I think we're prone to getting sidetracked here occasionally.

Martron

a friend of mine has a nikon d40.

it was him that got me into the idea of photograpohy and seeing what he could do.

i never thought of getting the same brand as him. in faact i was thinkin of getting a different camera althougher to slightly compete with him to see what different cameras would produce.

i think i will still get the sony as i reckon i might be able to get good deal on t but if the d60 is not too out of price range i could be tempted. very tempted

CabanSail

The difference between the two will not be the camera, more how you use it .

Martron

well thats what i was thinking. was tryin to get friendly rivalry going between us.

we are thinkin of entering into your challengesss and stuff so we will see how it goes. thanks

for all the advice.

i believe i will be regulare poster........plenty of stupid questions to follow

Mycroft H

CabanSail wrote: »

Unless we were being mislead, they said that the CZ lenses were made in Europe & are individually calibrated with a signed certificate included with each lens. The quality is supposed to be exceptional, mind you they are not cheap.

I was under the impression from several other sony forums that the Zeiss 24-70 f2.8, 135mm f1.8 and 85 f1.4 are zeiss designed and manufactured.

The 16-80 f4-5.6 aps zoom is cosina one.

The are of exceptional quality though, very sharp and well made. And they do come with the indevidual cert of calibration

Crispin

landyman wrote: »

I was under the impression from several other sony forums that the Zeiss 24-70 f2.8, 135mm f1.8 and 85 f1.4 are zeiss designed and manufactured.

The 16-80 f4-5.6 aps zoom is cosina one.

I think you're right, their price tags and image quality suggest as much :eek:. Oh how I wish I had an A900 and those 3 lenses :rolleyes:

@ the OP The A200 is a very capable camera for a learner, I use one and I like it. incase you didn't know it has been replaced by the A230 so you could get the new version or get a good deal on the old one!!

Mycroft H

Crispin wrote: »

I think you're right, their price tags and image quality suggest as much :eek:. Oh how I wish I had an A900 and those 3 lenses :rolleyes:

I also forgot about the 16-35, which is even more expensive then the 24-70. :pac: