Sony Alpha 200

[biker_dennis]

Hi there everyone! im a newbie, just bought a new sony alpha 200, im very enthusiatic to learn this new hobby. i hope i didnt make a mistake on the brand and model although i know very little about photography and equipment

[carusowi]

Hi there everyone! im a newbie, just bought a new sony alpha 200, im very enthusiatic to learn this new hobby. i hope i didnt make a mistake on the brand and model although i know very little about photography and equipment

Ok, so, what do you think of your camera choice, now? As I check the date of your message, you should have about a month's experience with it.
FWIW, I don't believe you can make too many mistakes in purchasing DSLR's these days. It's hard to purchase a truly bad product. There is always a compromise to be made, either dollars vs features or features vs size, weight, convenience, a body that takes you into a new system or one that allows you to use components from your present film based system, stuff like that.

When I purchased my Maxxum 9000 (many years back) it was considered one of the most advanced SLR bodies ever offered. Having "the best" makes my knees jerk to always go for the best, but, when DSLR's first arrived on the scene, I didn't think the available quality was worth the cost at the time, so I kept shooting film. Last summer, Sony's "new" offering to the DSLR world finally dropped enough in price that I felt it was time and cost efficient for me to make the switch. Although my A100 is far from today's best, its features still compare very favorably to my old Maxxum 9000, and, of course, all the electronics benefit from advances that may have been very costly as introduced over the years, but have been incorporated into this "entry" level body.

I went with Sony in order to continue using some of my Maxxum stuff, but found out that, in reality, only the original kit lens (Minolta 28-80 or so with "macro") and a more recently purchased Sigma hyperzoom (28-300 mm) work. My old Sigma 70-210 works only in manual focus mode, and the crop factor left me with plenty of reach, but without good wide angle coverage, so I have since purchased a Tamron 11-18 zoom, and my old AF4000 super-duper auto-zooming flash for the 9000 won't even fit on the new body, so I had to purchase a new flash unit (but, boy, is that a good fash system - as good or better than anything else presently offered).

I recently went through a bout of loathing for the A700 (better iso noise handling, faster FPS in continuous mode, and, and. . . oh, so much less of a "toy" feel to it than my A100). I had to make a trip with my camera stuff last week, and, only because I ran out of time did I not go ahead with a deal on the A700. Guess what? My shots with the A100 turned out very well, and, as it has always been, the cam was a pleasure to use.

I believe I'll let my bout of loathing for the A200 run its course - at least, perhaps, until prices of that body come down in anticipation of some new Sony introduction.

From what I hear, the "pro" body that is anticipated will be priced stratospherically, so I don't see anything "socially" equivalent to the Maxxum 9000 in my future. Owning what was considered "the best" was fun while it lasted (maybe a year, if that), and, then, of course, you only have the best if you are willing to keep spending and spending.

That probably makes some sense for a pro who gains an economic edge with the latest improvements on a new camera, and, additionally, he/she can appropriately amortize the cost of those upgrades, so, for a pro, it makes sense. For some non-pro's who can actually use some of the latest/greatest to improve their pictures, it probably makes sense to keep the camera model up to date.

But for folks like me, it really has little effect on my picture taking.

My A100 is vastly more flexible than the Maxxum 9000 primarily owing to its digital underpinning. I take more pictures than I did using film, it's cheaper for me since I don't have to purchase or pay to have film developed, and there is an inherent tolerance to digital that results in shots that, if not perfect on site, can be manipulated into useful images on the computer. Scanning film allows for some correction, but the latitude is not, imo, equivalent to digital.

Sorry for the rant, but, if I had to guess, I'd say that you are, by now, quite happy with your decision to purchase the A200.

Good luck, and let us know how it is going.

Caruso

[carusowi]

Hi there everyone! im a newbie, just bought a new sony alpha 200, im very enthusiatic to learn this new hobby. i hope i didnt make a mistake on the brand and model although i know very little about photography and equipment

Hi there everyone! im a newbie, just bought a new sony alpha 200, im very enthusiatic to learn this new hobby. i hope i didnt make a mistake on the brand and model although i know very little about photography and equipment

Ok, so, what do you think of your camera choice, now? As I check the date of your message, you should have about a month's experience with it.
FWIW, I don't believe you can make too many mistakes in purchasing DSLR's these days. It's hard to purchase a truly bad product. There is always a compromise to be made, either dollars vs features or features vs size, weight, convenience, a body that takes you into a new system or one that allows you to use components from your present film based system, stuff like that.

When I purchased my Maxxum 9000 (many years back) it was considered one of the most advanced SLR bodies ever offered. Having "the best" makes my knees jerk to always go for the best, but, when DSLR's first arrived on the scene, I didn't think the available quality was worth the cost at the time, so I kept shooting film. Last summer, Sony's "new" offering to the DSLR world finally dropped enough in price that I felt it was time and cost efficient for me to make the switch. Although my A100 is far from today's best, its features still compare very favorably to my old Maxxum 9000, and, of course, all the electronics benefit from advances that may have been very costly as introduced over the years, but have been incorporated into this "entry" level body.

I went with Sony in order to continue using some of my Maxxum stuff, but found out that, in reality, only the original kit lens (Minolta 28-80 or so with "macro") and a more recently purchased Sigma hyperzoom (28-300 mm) work. My old Sigma 70-210 works only in manual focus mode, and the crop factor left me with plenty of reach, but without good wide angle coverage, so I have since purchased a Tamron 11-18 zoom, and my old AF4000 super-duper auto-zooming flash for the 9000 won't even fit on the new body, so I had to purchase a new flash unit (but, boy, is that a good fash system - as good or better than anything else presently offered).

I recently went through a bout of loathing for the A700 (better iso noise handling, faster FPS in continuous mode, and, and. . . oh, so much less of a "toy" feel to it than my A100). I had to make a trip with my camera stuff last week, and, only because I ran out of time did I not go ahead with a deal on the A700. Guess what? My shots with the A100 turned out very well, and, as it has always been, the cam was a pleasure to use.

I believe I'll let my bout of loathing for the A200 run its course - at least, perhaps, until prices of that body come down in anticipation of some new Sony introduction.

From what I hear, the "pro" body that is anticipated will be priced stratospherically, so I don't see anything "socially" equivalent to the Maxxum 9000 in my future. Owning what was considered "the best" was fun while it lasted (maybe a year, if that), and, then, of course, you only have the best if you are willing to keep spending and spending.

That probably makes some sense for a pro who gains an economic edge with the latest improvements on a new camera, and, additionally, he/she can appropriately amortize the cost of those upgrades, so, for a pro, it makes sense. For some non-pro's who can actually use some of the latest/greatest to improve their pictures, it probably makes sense to keep the camera model up to date.

But for folks like me, it really has little effect on my picture taking.

My A100 is vastly more flexible than the Maxxum 9000 primarily owing to its digital underpinning. I take more pictures than I did using film, it's cheaper for me since I don't have to purchase or pay to have film developed, and there is an inherent tolerance to digital that results in shots that, if not perfect on site, can be manipulated into useful images on the computer. Scanning film allows for some correction, but the latitude is not, imo, equivalent to digital.

Sorry for the rant, but, if I had to guess, I'd say that you are, by now, quite happy with your decision to purchase the A200.

Good luck, and let us know how it is going.

Caruso