Steve'sDigicams

dp6 · Nov 13, 2006, 11:34 PM

I'm looking to upgrade from my Sony DSC F717. I can't seem to decide between the A100 or the R1. Any suggestions?

meanstreak · Nov 13, 2006, 11:44 PM

dp6 wrote:

Quote:

I'm looking to upgrade from my Sony DSC F717. I can't seem to decide between the A100 or the R1. Any suggestions?

That's quite a choice to make. The R1 is a good camera but it is what it is and if you can live with the limited range of the lens it is a fine piece of equipment. Because of it's large image sensor and its lens quality it will provide DSLR like results but I just can't see paying that much for a fixed lens camera. Granted if you start adding a lot of lenses a DSLR sytem can get expensive but it will become as little or as much as you want it to be. The most you can do with the R1 is add a Telecon or Wide angle adapter, but that is not the answer.

kassandro · Nov 14, 2006, 4:32 AM

The R1 would be a great camera if it would have an image stabiliser. Unfortunately it lacks the IS. Also there seems to be no follow up to the R1, although the R1 was released more than one year ago. It's really a pitty that Sony doesn't continue this line of cameras. Perhaps they now concentrate more on the DSLR business. Thus I clearly would go for the A100.

mtngal · Nov 14, 2006, 9:09 AM

If you are only interested in the zoom range of the R1, then its probably a good choice - you won't have to carry anything else around. I seriously considered it when I was replacing my F717, but didn't get one because I always wanted a bit more range than the F717, so I knew I'd be unhappy with the R1, would want to buy a teleconverter, so if I'm going to carry extra stuff around, why not buy a dSLR? I ended up getting the Pentax DS (and now have a K100D and a long zoom).

I don't think the R1's lack of IS is any big deal at all. With the max focal length of the lens, you wouldn't need it until you get to slower shutter speeds (when you should probably have a tripod for anyway). Its lack of IS would not stop me from buying it, but it all depends on what you intend to use the camera for.

Given your two choices, I'd go for the Alpha and start looking at used KM lenses.

dp6 · Nov 14, 2006, 1:27 PM

Thanks for the information. I would be lying if I said I wouldn't like a bit more range on the lense. That said I am satisfied with the range I currently have on the F717 and the range on the R1would seem to get me 95% of the shots I wantso I'm debating whether itis worth the extra $ to go with the A100. I take a lot of photos but can't really see myself needing too much more than what the R1 offers.

I had the same concern about thelack of image stabilization but it too is not a big concern of mine. It'd be nice to have it but it's not a MUST.

My other concern was the speed of the cameras. It seesm the R1 is fast for a digital camera but not as fast as DSLR's. That being said it doesn't seem that the A100 is too much faster. I must admit that one of my main reasons for looking to upgrade isdue to the slow burst speed on the F717.

Any thoughts?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

Nov 13, 2006, 11:34 PM	#1
dp6 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 2	I'm looking to upgrade from my Sony DSC F717. I can't seem to decide between the A100 or the R1. Any suggestions?

Nov 14, 2006, 4:32 AM	#3
kassandro Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 448	The R1 would be a great camera if it would have an image stabiliser. Unfortunately it lacks the IS. Also there seems to be no follow up to the R1, although the R1 was released more than one year ago. It's really a pitty that Sony doesn't continue this line of cameras. Perhaps they now concentrate more on the DSLR business. Thus I clearly would go for the A100.

Nov 14, 2006, 9:09 AM	#4
mtngal Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Frazier Park, CA Posts: 16,122	If you are only interested in the zoom range of the R1, then its probably a good choice - you won't have to carry anything else around. I seriously considered it when I was replacing my F717, but didn't get one because I always wanted a bit more range than the F717, so I knew I'd be unhappy with the R1, would want to buy a teleconverter, so if I'm going to carry extra stuff around, why not buy a dSLR? I ended up getting the Pentax DS (and now have a K100D and a long zoom). I don't think the R1's lack of IS is any big deal at all. With the max focal length of the lens, you wouldn't need it until you get to slower shutter speeds (when you should probably have a tripod for anyway). Its lack of IS would not stop me from buying it, but it all depends on what you intend to use the camera for. Given your two choices, I'd go for the Alpha and start looking at used KM lenses.

Nov 14, 2006, 1:27 PM	#5
dp6 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 2	Thanks for the information. I would be lying if I said I wouldn't like a bit more range on the lense. That said I am satisfied with the range I currently have on the F717 and the range on the R1would seem to get me 95% of the shots I wantso I'm debating whether itis worth the extra $ to go with the A100. I take a lot of photos but can't really see myself needing too much more than what the R1 offers. I had the same concern about thelack of image stabilization but it too is not a big concern of mine. It'd be nice to have it but it's not a MUST. My other concern was the speed of the cameras. It seesm the R1 is fast for a digital camera but not as fast as DSLR's. That being said it doesn't seem that the A100 is too much faster. I must admit that one of my main reasons for looking to upgrade isdue to the slow burst speed on the F717. Any thoughts?