Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 18, 2008, 12:18 PM   #1
Member
 
Dolce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 46
Default

I'm selling my Samsung GX-1S. I'm upgrading to higher res DSLR. I'm thinking of getting a Sony A100, Canon XT or Nikon D40x. I dunno if I can compare 8MP XT vs the 10MPs, but here's what I've lined out :

- I did try my friend's XT. I quite like it. But I'm looking for an Image Stabilization. So, to get the IS lens, I have to add at least $400 (used). I can get a brand new XT + 18-55mm for about $485. Then sell the 18-55 (for $85), and get the IS 17-85mm IS lens. So, the total is $800. (I'll end up with only 1 lens)

OR

- Get a Sony A100 (used) + 50mm F/1.7 + 18-35mm for $550, and then look on Ebay for the 75-300mm for $200. Total $750 (I'll end up having 3 lenses)

OR

- Nikon D40x + 18-55mm for $550. And then get the 55-200mm VR for $200 more. Total $750 with two lenses.

Is there any different from a VR vs IS vs Sony AntiShake (body)? Which one is greater?

Thanks
Dolce is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 18, 2008, 12:27 PM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Are you in a big hurry? If not, I'd go with this one instead:

Sony DSLR-A200

You can order one now with an 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 Autofocus lens for $700 with delivery on approximately February 29th:

DSLR Listings at sonystyle.com

Then, hit the used market for the rest. You can usually find more Autofocus Lenses in Minolta Maxxum/Alpha/Dynax mount at reputable used vendors like keh.com, bhphotovideo.com, adorama.com compared to most other lens mounts. That's probably going to change as Sony DSLR models become more popular though (since Konica Minolta was the "new kid on the block" in the DSLR market before Sony acquired their Digital Camera related assets, not as many new camera owners were buying lenses in the used market, so supply is still good).

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2008, 12:41 PM   #3
Member
 
Dolce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 46
Default

Not really in a hurry. I know that I can pre-order the A200 from a local store for $649 + tax. Well, the taxes here are just killing (about 13%). I guess it's gonna be in stores in Feb. My Samsung is considered sold, in an hour time or so. Holiday is over, and I'm not using much of my camera now.
Dolce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2008, 12:42 PM   #4
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Yes, I see that it's priced even lower in Canada. sonystyle.ca has it coming in at $649.99 in a kit including the A200 and the 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 AF lens. That's $100 less than the A100 Body only there.

They're also showing an expected arrival of an earlier January 31:

Sony DSLR-A200K at Sonystyle.ca for $649.99

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2008, 12:53 PM   #5
Member
 
Dolce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 46
Default

It's $699 in US? I first saw it in an online local store. It says, pre order, then I googled it, and even 'youtubed', and found the A200. So, is this and upgrade to A100 = better, and more performance, and even cheaper? Is that right?WOW!
Dolce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2008, 1:10 PM   #6
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Dolce wrote:
Quote:
It's $699 in US? I first saw it in an online local store. It says, pre order, then I googled it, and even 'youtubed', and found the A200. So, is this and upgrade to A100 = better, and more performance, and even cheaper? Is that right?WOW!
Yes (including the 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 DT Autofocus Lens), and yes (this is an upgrade to the A100, and it's got better higher ISO speed performance and an available ISO 3200, faster Autofocus with better predictive focus algorithms, better Dynamic Range Optimization features, faster changing of settings thanks to better screen navigation of available features and more.

If I were living in Canada, I'd just preorder the A200 Kit from sonystyle.ca for $649.99 and wait a couple of weeks for delivery.

Disclaimer: I currently shoot with a Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D (that the Sony a100 and newer a200 were mostly based on) as well as the newer Sony DSLR-A700. So, my opinion is biased. ;-)

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2008, 1:30 PM   #7
Member
 
Dolce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 46
Default

Well, it's practical to have a built-in AS too, that's what I thought. Then, in the long run, it's cheaper just to get the normal lenses. But the thing is, it's the built-in AS vs VR lens vs IS lens. Which one is better. One more thing, I'm just an amateur, even a beginner in DSLR. So, nothing fancy!
Dolce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2008, 1:45 PM   #8
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Sony's new stabilization is pretty good from my experience with it. It's been improved from previous models.

For example, here's a hand held snapshot taken at 1/5 second without a flash using the new Alpha 700 wearing a kit lens. You'd normally want shutter speeds of around 1/80 second or faster for this image (1 / "35mm equivalent" focal length) to reduce blur from camera shake (16 times as fast as I used for this photo with no flash).

Sony DSLR-A700 at ISO 800, wearing a Konica Minolta 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 DT Autofocus (kit) Lens at 55mm (same angle of view as you'd have with an 82mm lens on a 35mm camera) with the aperture wide open at f/5.6, taken with a hand held camera using a shutter speed of 1/5 second:




Another benefit to stabilization built into the camera body is that *all* lenses are stabilzed.

You can't get brighter primes that are stabilized yet for competing cameras. For example, my 100mm f/2 is twice as bright as a stablized lens that only has f/2.8 available.

See the ISO 3200 images in this thread, taken at very slow shutter speeds using a hand held Sony Alpha 700 wearing Minolta 100mm f/2 Autofocus Lens in the bar area of a dim restaurant for some examples:

Sony DSLR-A700 photos of live music in very low light using a Minolta 100mm f/2 AF Lens

These are lenses I use on my Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D and Sony Alpha 700: Minolta 28mm f/2, 50mm f/1.7, 100mm f/2, 135mm f/2.8, 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5, 35-70mm f/4 Macro; Konica Minolta 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6; Tamron 20-40mm f/2.7-3.5, Tamron 35-105mm f/2.8; Vivitar 70-210mm f/2.8-4. All Autofocus (and all are stabilized on my Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D and Sony DSLR-A700).

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2008, 2:57 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

I've read lots of arguments about which system is better (in camera vs. in lens). It reminds me of some things I read about stereo equipment long ago - about how some speakers could produce a greater range of sound than some others. I couldn't hear the higher frequencies anyway, so it didn't matter to me which one I bought. I find the in-camera IS works perfectly well for me, so I'm happy to have it in-camera, so I can take low-light, wide angle shots and have them stabilized, too. Out of your list, I'd opt for the Sony.

Is there a reason you've decided not to consider a Pentax K10 or the possible new replacement? It would work with whatever lenses you already have.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2008, 3:12 PM   #10
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

I'd like to add the following to the discussion:

1. I agree, all else being equal it's less expensive and generally just as good anti-shake to have the anti-shake built into th body.

2. Rarely is everything else equal. One important aspect is whether or not the system being considered offers you what you need. First and foremost does it have the lenses you want / need. And, in some cases, how tolerant are you to buying used gear vs. new. In some cases, how tolerant are you to manual focus and potential manual aperture settings?

3. In all honesty I believe anti-shake is one of the most over-rated features for ameteures and enthusiasts. Why? because people use it beyond it's capabilities rather than using the right tool for the job (tripod, flash, higher ISO, faster lens). No disrespect to Jim, but the posted photo is a perfect example. Forget for a second the 'wow factor' associated with 1/5 seconds. If you just look at the photo, it's plain soft. Under the same lighting, ISO 1600 f2.0 would give you 1/80 shutter and you'd have a much sharper result. Or a bounced flash - then you can get sharp results no matter what the lighting. Remember, the goal is to get good photos. Relying on anti-shake often leads to lesser quality photos than using more appropriate tools.

A flash shot in worse lighting:



Heck, here's 1/30 f2.0 1600 (worse lighting than Jim's shot). Just getting exposure up to 1/30 really helps with camera shake vs. relying on anti-shake:



And, of course, what if your subject doesn't hold perfectly still?



And, yes, I happen to own a Canon. But I have 3 IS lenses and especialy for shorter lenses, the usefulness of anti-shake is way over rated. IMO, you often get a lot of shots like this when you could get a better shot with the right tools. I can count on one hand the amount of shots where IS has saved me.

Now, for longer heavier lenses it makes a difference. But those longer heavier lenses cost more in Sony than they do in Canon or Nikon. I have a Canon 70-200 2.8 lens. Cost me $1100. To get a 70-200 2.8 in Sony I'd have to spend $1900. Heck, even if I was more inclined to want IS I can get the canon IS version for $1600. Still less money.

I guess there just haven't been too many real life situations where the right decision was a long shutter speed, BUT STILL SHORT ENOUGH TO RELY ON ANTI-SHAKE.

Now, this is not to say you shouldn't buy Sony. It's just to say, anti-shake is only one feature to consider. And in looking at my own photos and other peoples it's an often over-rated feature that is too often used improperly.


JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:25 PM.