guys. need help. i'm considering getting a dslr. my choices are between 400d n sony a200. did a research on the net both has almost the same features except a200 has IS n its fast af. which one do u guys recommend me to buy. i would like to take pictures of scenery and people. but i always see at events that many people will use canon or nikon. rarely seen a sony. plz suggest me which one...

haha i also tear between A200 and 400D.. lolz.. so guys please suggest which one is more better..

then u want good camera with good bang of ur bucks OR u want follow majority?

Hi guy,

Check this thread as below:
canon EOS 350D / nikon D40, which 1 better?

hot thread now.

We discuss about the Canon, Nikon & Sony entry level range.

---

Added on February 4, 2008, 3:15 pm

Canon lah,

How come u go buy Sony camera?

The lens like Alien, hard to find around KL and the price u give is not the best price .

cause not much ppl using it.

So u cannot compare wit other camera shop.

actually it depends. if people just wan to take good photo and wan to get the best
package, Sony A200 with twin lens is the best.

if u want inferior in terms of feature and built quality product, but intend to upgrade
later, then get Canon for the same price.

if me, I will get A200 for entry level to test my skill and see whether i'm interest to
go far in photography. if yes, i can sell off A200 and upgrade to Canikon or continue
with Alpha.

Unless you're now damn sure you wan to be pro, get Canon without kit lens and buy
lengendary lens. else, Canon with kitlens, u still have to buy new lens next time. no
different with buying A200 now with more feature for your photography needs.

so in conclusion, A200 is the best buy. Do not buy 350D/400D.

Well said except for the last part which i feel is up to the TS to decide.

I had the same dilemma last month and have decided on the A200.

Why? Because the twin lens kit offered just what i needed as a starter to DSLR. I agree that the lenses are a bit pricey (sony), but they are of high quality. Alternatively, there are 2nd hand lenses from Konica/Minolta and third parties.

Also, what's your purpose? Hobbist, casual, going pro? Etc

So ask yourself these questions and follow your heart, as I believe good pictures are made from the photographer and not the camera they have......

A wise consumer doesn't follow trend, only buy what they need.

If you want to buy Canon 350D because many people use Canon, go on. But if you want a camera that has good functionality, Sony A200 is the way to go. It's also fast in focusing, faster than many typical USM lenses Canon has.

Sony and Minolta have good glass to begin with, rich colours and good contrast. Some are very contrasty. Majority of the low end Canon lens tend to give neutral colour, some say lack of oomph... that's why they go for the L lenses which are more expensive.

thanks guys for your input. made up my mind which one to buy. thanks a lot

lol which one you going to buy?

even Ted Adnan uses a200.

my mind is telling me 2 go with the C brand.

Wait for the A300/A350 lah.
Got liveview.

things that A200 has but 400D doesn't
- eyestart focus (implemented in 450D)
- DRO modes (dynamic range optimizer)
- body focus drive motor, which is fast
- ISO3200
- body IS
- spot metering
- more ergonomic body
- 1.5x FOV crop (slightly larger sensor, nicer for portraits due to DOF)
- body wireless flash control

herds mentality actually me too I think. If Canon 40D is RM2000, then I'll get it right away.
400D is too ******. I can't bring myself to buy such a ****** camera when I can get A200

sony A200

400D's 1600 ISO is way better than A200's 1600 ISO (guess that's probably why they need body IS). Even in thumbnail size you can see the difference. Other than that a200 pwned 400D imo just like what soulfly said. If you're a person with low income, A200 twin kit lens could last you a looong time .

I went to try out both camera grip and comfortness, sony is better at that with lots of full packed features, I guess the new A200 should have better noise handling at higher ISO

I love the DRO features! dang!

Do not confuse usefulness of ISO and IS. They are used for different purpose

I was saying with a hint of sarcasm to canon regarding body IS. Sarcasms always failed in lyn.

NasiLemakMan: Where is the 400D better than the A200's ISO1600? Please share the link.

The 400D has weaker ISO performance than the 350D, which was cleanest in 2006 but not compared to the current generation. Don't confuse the A200 noise with A100 noise, Sony has fixed the noise problems with the A200.

The A200 has almost equivalent performance as the A700... which is about the same as the Canon 40D and Nikon D300. I say this because I've done a side-by-side comparison. The CCD also gives a crispier JPG.

The 400D has a lousy grip. No wireless flash control built in. No spot metering (if you shoot concerts you'll get a lot of white people, and indoors you might get some dark people).

The 400D 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens is soft as heck, even stopped down to F8. The Sony 18-70mm F3.5-5.6 DT has more range and is reasonably good.

The 400D viewfinder is smaller and darker than the A200. It's the worst viewfinder on any dSLR.

The A200 battery grip is way better. Why? Try it yourself. It's a lot easier to hold.

I suggest you try both. Do not buy until you've tried both. If you just go for the Canon (since it sounds like you're following your heart) without even trying the Sony then I dunno what to say la.

camera is serious business in LYN.... that's why I dun get theVOIP sarcasm...

on serious note, LYN people really angry over certain thing they believe they are right...
can't even take some differences and sarcasm... that's why i love to see their
reaction when i say something different frm their opinion...

You might wanna look at this

It uses non-production model. Hopefully production model have better NR as what Albnok get with A200

I doubt that. Perhaps you might be too sensitive thinking that others are bashing you when they are just correcting you due to your nature of just listening around and start talking "what other people said and what you heard" without experiencing it yourself. Like I said, do the talking after you've managed to get one DLSR in your hand instead of telling "what-other-people-says" kinda fact.

p/s: Yea, I love to see those people who post funny baseless facts based on their personal assumptions. Not forgetting seeing them getting pawnedcorrected by others and NO, camera ain't serious business here because we get to LOL hard everyday looking at some "ahem" kinda posts.

---

Added on February 6, 2008, 12:29 pm

If you look closely at the NR, the pictures taken with NR degrades a lot.

Actually do you ever notice that you always say something that only good about Canon
and always look down on other camera ?

And by the way, if I want to know about A200, A100, d40, d40x, 40d, 30d, 1dmiii, d300,
I can't go and get them just like that. I'm not rich. And not every seller and anyone will
lend me their camera to check out the picture. So if I dun listen, then how?


firmware can fix that. its just internal processing software.....

---

Added on February 6, 2008, 12:39 pmI notice that people who said that I always listen to others have similar "egoistic" problem which they always support 1 brand and that's the brand they use.

example:

vikingw2k - always support Canon
mac whatever - always support Olympus

I myself, support anything that is too good to be true
fuji, canon, pentax, sony... almost all brand I support.....

Glad that you finally understood that point, yea, you should be listening here instead of start telling others this and that as if you owned one

err, I dunno that LYN support dictatorship

You might wanna brush up a little bit on ya reading skill. You said "So if I dun listen, then how?", and I agreed that you should be listening instead of posting personal assumptions.

I'm not posting personal assumption. I'm posting based on review and forum reading.
And you should brush up comprehension skill. I'm talking about listening to review and
other forum.

Hey, don't get all so work up over camera man. I tot we should enjoy taking photo?

i wanna ask something but dun wan create new thread.

how about d80 and 400D?

gogo2 dude....

just go to sonystyle and fondle the A200, that should poison you quite enough.

most photographer use no more than ISO400 when they want to take a 'beautiful' shot. take note of the word 'most' there... not all.

from the image samples the difference is barely noticeable.

Yea, WeI should be enjoying snapping and you may continue reading only. Don't get me wrong, I'm just correcting you each time you posted funnaay post like "70-200mm f2.8 isn't a good lens".

actually I think my mind is either A200 or 40D. But I always dream of
Canon semi pro dSLR ever since 20D come out. As great man always said,
follow our dream...

20D is great...30D is better....40D is awesome..... at RM4k with kit lens,
I think I can't help it if I have sudden urge to buy it now... LOL....

---

Added on February 6, 2008, 1:03 pm
wah, take 1 thing that I wrongly said and keep on harping on it. dun la. I'm just newbie here... I'll be crying later... uhuk uhuk uhuk...

once u taste sony/minolta wireless flash system you can never turn back

ok, but I'm still newbie. actually i already have opinion on how i wanna use
camera. one of it, i dun wan flash photography at all if can be avoid..
i love taking indoor... i know can use flash bounce etc... but i still kinda
apprehensive in using flash....I scared not natural....that's why, 40D is
my choice for low light...

Like I said, don't be stingy and dreaming to have a 40D @ RM2k. Be realistic save up more money to get your desired body. No crying here please. Do it elsewhere with the kindergarden kids.



1. Difference is quite obvious when it's @ ISO 400 and 800, notice the tree on the left kinda blurred off compared to 400D's picture.
2. To be precise, I would say "most" of the alpha 100 users don't go more than ISO 400 simply because the result = crap.
3. Most photographers will pump their ISO to somewhere 800 when they are shooting events at night. Unless you choose to use only use your camera during day time.

Its not dreaming. That's the problem of u keep on harping on me eventhough I'm correct
SOmeone just bought it at RM4k. Go to 40D thread and u'll know.

vikingw2k, u're too serious man.....cheer up... no one win in forum...

Look, the point here is, you are dreaming of getting a 40D @ RM2k and it's impossible. Wake up man, wake up



Frankly, I'm still LOL-ing looking at your posts.

i tot someone calculate it in 40D thread? Rm4000- rm2000 (kitlens) = RM2000 body....its not impossible. someone did it.


You should thank me for brightening up ur day

most people will downsize images, differences is negligible when those images are downsized.

at least my night photos at iso800 doesn't look noisy at all when printed 4R

Look at yourself, you are making yourself funny again.



In case you missed out what we were discussing earlier on, I'm commenting on this statement.

Albnok : Where is the 400D better than the A200's ISO1600? Please share the link.

My point here is, 400D performs a lot better than A200 @ ISO 1600. From that review, even 400D's picture @ ISO 800 is on par with A200's ISO 1600's picture.

We are not discussing
- what ISO most of them will use
- what size of the picture most of the people would choose to resize to.
- what size of picture you would print to hide the noise.

The 3 points above are pretty subjective to discuss about.

You should thank me then

gogo2, I would sincerely advice you to stop making yourself to look uglier. If you have some good proven facts to share about the 400D VS A200's noise comparison, we welcome you. If you are here to make yourself look like a clown, do it at Kopitiam. They need jokers more than we do.

You know, I'm trying to make this thread more happy tone but you keep on blasting me for no reason.

But what I'm going to say is, eventhough A200 noise is a bit poorer, it is not noticeable if you print small size. Its not really
detrimental in choosing based on this small fact. Also, A200 have more feature than 400D can dream of. Further more, 400D
only have 1600 ISO whereas, A200 have 3200. There I said it. A200 price with twin lens can kick 400D ass anytime.

We don't need jokers to post nonsense to make this thread happy. All the while we are happily discussing facts



Now you are changing the point again, from "dreaming to have a 40D @ RM2k" to A200 have more feature than 400D can dream of.

I do believe A200 might have slightly more features compared to 400D since it's newly launched, however what I was highlighting earlier on was A200's noise control is not as good as Canon's.

as i mention earlier, the difference is negligible... unless you're a pixel fetish person

"Negligible or not" is not the same with "which is better", and it's pretty subjective to talk about as it depends on each individual as some low-requirement-shooters might say that it's fine for them and some professional ones might be very particular about it.

The fact is, 400D's noise control is better than A200.

ok measurebators..

here is your feed : *56K user beware !!

Sony A200 @ ISO1600:



Canon 400D @ ISO 1600:


http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Thanks mindkiller for taking the liberty. I was hesitant to do what you did because my slow net speed. Btw for IQ it's called pixel peepers. Measurebators are for cameras.

It's subjective as what to people like in an image as beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder. Furthermore, with IS maybe some people don't have to go to high ISO as to prevent camera shake. Another thing, I have noticed a200 1600 were little better than a350 1600 from that samples source. But then again it's my pixel peeping.

Nice one there. Here's a 600px X 600px crop sample for you guys to judge.

First Comparison - Look @ the purple flower and black pattern.


Second Comparison - Look @ the white cloth