Sony alpha a200 w/ Kit lens for $450 new. Good deal?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by mattcube64, Aug 7, 2009.

  1. mattcube64 macrumors 65816

    mattcube64

    Joined:
    May 21, 2006
    Location:
    Missouri
    #1
    It's at Sony store on sale. Good deal for beginner? Movie is about to start, will post more later :p
     
  2. Grasher macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2009
    #2
    I have an A200 and am pretty happy with it. I will say, however, that I'm still at a beginner level so others may be able to provide more in depth reviews.

    The only thing that, with hindsight, I would take into account more is the availability of lenses and accessories. Although there is a fair amount of sony/minolta stuff out there there seems to be a lot more for canon/nikon which I wasn't fully aware of at first. If you plan to buy a lot of extra lenses etc down the line you may be better off paying a little more at first for a canon/nikon. My decision on the sony was largely based on the fact that it was a lot cheaper initially than the equivalent canon/nikons - I didn't take into acount the fact that I'm now paying a little more for extra lenses.
     
  3. Macrovertigo macrumors member

    Macrovertigo

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2008
    Location:
    Vermont/España/etc.
    #3
    I am not a professional photographer, but I have enjoyed the hell out of my Sony a100 for a couple of years now.
     
  4. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #4
    Grasher pretty much hit the nail on the head- if you're just going to take snapshots, or if you'll stick with the kit lens, then it really doesn't make a bunch of difference which camera you purchase- there are slight advantages and disadvantages to all of them- but overall you can take good pictures with any of them.

    It's only if you're going past that where the value in a single body is often offset by the value of a system. Once you've spent hundreds or thousands on lenses and flashes, the economics of changing systems becomes more difficult.

    The problem with a first camera is that you often don't know how far you're going to go- so you have to balance out what you may potentially do with what you can afford, and what you want- nobody else can make that call for you. You can't take pictures with a camera you don't have- so analysis paralysis will mean fewer images, and so will saving up if you decide you want a different camera- again you have to make that call.

    I'd check EX prices at KEH.com if they have any in stock- anything around that's generally a good deal and then you have to decide what the warranty on a new camera is worth...
     
  5. NightGeometry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    #5
    I had an A200 for a year and a half, and thought it was a lovely camera.

    Cannon and Nikon have more lenses, but most of the ones you'd likely need are available in Alpha mount.

    I moved to another Sony Alpha (the 700), there aren't any lenses I'm likely to want that aren't available in Alpha mount. I didn't know that until after spending a year with the A200. Of course if there were I'd have switched at that point, and it really wouldn't have cost me any more (I have a small collection of lenses, but most of those I could probably sell on for not that much of a loss).

    If you don't go Sony, definitely consider Nikon - their on camera flash control is wonderful.
     
  6. jampat macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2008
    #6
    Sony's cameras are perfectly acceptable and many people like them, however I have talk to two people recently that sold all their sony gear and switched to nikon/canon for a number of reasons. I have never heard of anyone selling their nikon/canon gear to switch to Sony. Just something to keep in mind.

    Personally, I think Sony tried to do some great things (in body image stabilization for instance) but failed huge on the execution (their 70-200 2.8 lens that does not have in lens stabilization (as it's in the body) costs roughly the same as the stabilized Nikon or Canon, it really should be ~700 cheaper as Sony doesn't have all that expensive stabilization stuff in their lens).

    Personally I would pick up a used Nikon/Canon (or Olympus if you want something smaller). Many people buy DSLR's then sell them in a year or two because they realize they are not what they expected/wanted/needed. If you buy used, you lose very little money if you decide your needs are different in a few months.
     
  7. a350 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    #7
    I shoot with sony and have no complaints.
    my 28mm has image stabilization as well as my 500mm reflex, and everything in between.
    and the 500mm is autofucos, can't find that with canon or nikon. yes i have got some very sharp pictures hand held with the lens.
    not sure if you can find image stabilization on 28mm prime on canon or nikon either?

    currently have the a350 and the a700, will soon add a full frame to it either the a850, if it's real or the a900 replacement, a950?

    sony, nikon, canon they all make great cameras and a good photographer will be able to get a great image using any camera from any of these manufactures, go try out the cameras if you can to see which fits you best.

    sony has plenty of lenses and can also use most auto focus minolta lenses since 1985.
     
  8. Techguy172 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Location:
    Ontario Canada
    #8
    I have the a200, it's pretty good. One thing I will say is with any brand you want to get a better lens than the cheap kit lens that comes with it. The Camera is easy to use and very comfortable to shoot with, however if you plan to buy a lot lenses then your best off going Canon or Nikon.
     
  9. slieu92 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2008
    Location:
    California
  10. gkarris macrumors 604

    gkarris

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Location:
    "No escape from Reality..."
    #10

Share This Page