is it true that sony alpha lenses is much more expensive than other brand on market......
im a noob trying to explore into DSLR world.....
and my friend recommended a sony a200.....bcoz it is much more cheaper pack with lotta stuff....
but in a longer term .................................i dont know.........
plz enlighten meee

Trust me, someone gonna post up say you can always opt for 3rd party lens which is cheaper

OO yea
im a student soooo.................money is a major issues to me
im juzt thinking what DSLR camera suit me best...

Just an example for professional lens between Canon, Sony and Nikon.
You make the decision which is cheaper. Price taken from Shashinki web.

Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS USM L - RM 6,750

Sony 70-200 f2.8 G - RM 8,000 (Not from Shashinki as shashinki didn't sell it. Roughtly around that price.)

Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR - RM 5,950

Of course, you can always opt for 3rd party such as Sigma / Tamron / Tokina and etc. Just the photo quality that matters

For Sony, you can use Minolta lens. soulfly selling some of it. But price of old minolta lens, can opt for new lens for either Canon or Nikon or 3rd party lens. Choice is yours.

No offense to any side either Dark, light or even orange legion

get a nikon or a canon...
lots of choice...and cheap...
if u go the sony way...u might want to have some very deep pocket...for the zeiss lenses!

I think you all wrong la. He is student. So just buy Sony A200 lar. The cheapest.
Next time, just jump ship.

Hump ship ? Then he bought those minolta or Sony mount lens already ?
Think far instead of the current.
Better spend a tit more and save the hussle of jump ship

He is student. No buy lens . Maybe next time, got a lot of Sony lens liao
and become cheaper. You never know.

We can't even think that A200 can be this cheap. But it happen also.

you hear it +add on. you get inbody supersteady shot

CARL ZEISS LENS!!!! If you wan budget entry level dslr....Sony Alpha 200/300/350. Lens wise a bit expensive and choices are less compare nikon and canon.. But you wont know how Sony's strategy and market development in the next few years. They are Sony anyway. Like no others.

or if want to cut cost, Canon 350D + kit lens + 50mm f1.8 (used) + 70-300 (used) comes to around RM 2k.

but seriously, this is going to be another A vs B thread. then C and D will be added on. then suggestions for E + b1 + b2 or whatever combo......

it's going to be a long thread, debating just like how the other threads went.

hooo and i also thought that as Supersteadyshot that imbedded on the body make that no need for lens that equipped with a VR like nikon(for example).

does that make the alpha mount lenses much cheaper????

That statement is just a general statement which is not necessary true all the time. Some Sony lenses are more expensive than others but there are also other brand lenses that is more expensive than Sony lenses.

E.g. Comparing RRP

Sony SAL18250 = Rm2299
Nikkor 18-200mm VR = Rm3188
In this case Nikon lens more expensive

Sony SAL1870 = Rm799
AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED = Rm1328
In this case Nikon lens is more expensive


Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM = Rm6570
Sony SAL2470 Carl Ziess = Not release yet but heard price is comparable

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM = Rm3602
Sony SAL70300G = RM3499
Here Canon is more expensive

Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III = Rm988
Sony SAL75300 = Rm999
Here price is also comparable

But a certain someone is ALWAYS gonna tell everyone that Sony is very expensive based on this one lens's price:

Sony SAL70200G = Rm8999
Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM = Rm8640

All prices quoted is obtained from the respective manufacturer's websites.

You do your own conclusion.

The same price you pay for Nikon or Canon, but Sony at that price can't get like Nikon and Sony Lens


SSS spoil, can't use
VR / IS spoil, body still can use with other lens


Why never compare Nikon 70-300G ? RM 350 only. Beat that. Even that 70-300 VR also around RM 1,700 only.
Still Orange cheaper then dark and light huh ?
Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 VR only RM 5,500 at shop. Retail price can't never be compared la mate

Yes. You don't have to buy VR lens for Sony. Just buy normal lens at cheaper price and its VR already.

Add in some

Minolta old lens 50mm f1.7 = RM 450
Canon brand new 50mm f1.8 = RM 250
Nikon brand new 50mm f1.8 = RM 330

Your call, TS

Added:

Sony 50mm f/1.4 = RM800 (lorry drop)
Canon 50mm f/1.4 = RM1200
Nikon 50mm f/1.4 = RM1200

Again, as I said - read my post carefully. I said some Sony lenses are more expensive and some other brand lenses are more expensive. Why cannot compare RRP? You think Sony lens has no street price ar? I never said anything about you comparing Canon's and Nikon's 70-200mm street price with Sony's RRP.


As for SSS, if it spoils. Just turn if off and you can continue shooting until you want to send it back for repairs.

Ageed with KTCY

Current is student , you will be grown up and work at future also.

Canon offer wide range of lens .

Please dont compare 3rd party lens

hmmmmmm
anyone has an old dslr camera to spare for me??????
let me try meself...heheheh

TS...
i suggest u r better off going to a shop and testing out each camera on ur own and get the one u feel the best...
if u keep asking here...
ultimately this will be another war thread...
i've seen sparks already...juz waiting for a medium to burn...
then voila...war thread again...
again if u really a student...i'd juz get the nikon d40 kit or any other beginner kits out there...and get it over with...

d40? come on. Dun suggest something that you won't buy.

nikon & canon comes with IS?

Think far... hmmm that why i jump to Carl Zeiss

i got a d40 for my first dslr...

Let's say current is student. Future also not photography hobbyist. Just want to have
a dSLR with a lot of featurea at cheapest price. So just buy Sony A200 twin lens lor.

Thats an inaccurate price of the Nikon 50mm because you say your Sony price is "lorry drop" price. A Nikon 50mm f1.4 is RM800++.

Anyway to TS, the Sony Alpha 200 is a good entry-level camera. Because in that price range, its either you get the older Nikon D40/x or the Canon 350D.

Its no point comparing lenses like 70-200mm because... you will never, ever, consider buying taht lens for the A200. By the time you are thinking of those range, you will either be able to jump ship (because you will be selling the body as well), or you will be able to say "I can afford to chalk up the extra for the G lens".

Worse come to worse, go for third party lenses. Its not like they are all bad.

i have try to window shop around kl....name it sungai wang.....low yat.....pertama.....subang.....
and i also encounter these shopgirl that recommend me not to get sony alpha series becoz of its expensive accesories....

Yeah, and you dump it now right?

---

Added on May 14, 2008, 2:24 pm
That's what I try to say to everyone. But they just dun listen.

So, if someone upgrades to an A700 from an A200, and sell his A200, will you say he cannot recommend A200 as a camera to buy?

Someone upgrading and selling his old body doesn't mean the old camera is not good. He just outgrew the functionalities.

The D40 has its limitations but it is no doubt a good camera.

Carl Zeiss has canon mount also.

ok la. It's just that many Nikon user complain about D40. I can't find it a good thing to recommend something
hated by its side...

That's the problem...

Many people know the facts clearly but just dun want to voice out... And you know why? The simple truth will surely piss the orange group. The problem are much more than just this one cheaper or more for valur for money... And when facts pointed out, the blind support resistance will come... and only stupid wars.

I advise you better privately PM whoever member that you trust as well as playing with the stuff by yourselve. This forum is not that open... espcially comparing between brand. And many people are not interested on stupid words flighting, thus knowledable people usually keep quiet only, because they know some party not interested on facts.

And also pointed out your budget and your interested pictures and subjects for members to assist you. Example, if budget has no issue and you love potrait, I will recomment 1D mark III + 35L + 85L + ST-E2 + 2x 580EX II. These 2 lenses should cover most of your needs and the camera image quality is consided sufficient for profesional usage.

Hope you understand...

gogo2, stop being ridiculous here.

your argument isn't even valid.

just because he upgraded that doesn't mean he's dumping it because it's BAD or anything. he faced limitation, he upgrades, this applies to everyone.

and just because you won't buy that doesn't mean you can't recommend, case by case basis. in this case, TS is clearly a newbie. a D40 is still as capable as it is. you get what you paid for.

simple as that.

and the rest - i don't think this thread is worth continuing. simply because we have 101 other threads debating over similar matter.

fact is - no camera is BAD. each comes with a price, each comes with their strengths and weakness. it's just like playing RPG game, you can choose which race and job type you like.



precisely.



side apa? what side this side that?

side this side that. dark side, bright side, orange side.........

see, this is the thing i hate about LYN photography group sometimes.

back to topic - it really depends on who are the ones complaining and whether they're valid source of information. FYI zio is a Nikon user as well. you can find the rest here too - like KTCY and Joseph Hahn, travis_ckf (sorry la JH, i always spell your name wrong).

Hmmm manual focus only rite?

Then buy Pns Camera enough

or the prosumer camera with 15X Optical Zoom
dslr feature doesnt effect picture quality , its lens.
unless you say FF or good noise control like D300.

Ok got it. About the person who complain, people who always follow D40 thread will know. I don't
want to reveal it. It's quite a surprise. As a matter of fact, I think KTCY complain too

Good say!

That's totally wrong. Even kit lens of dSLR can resolve better than PnS.

ler, like as if i also don't know D40's weakness.

when people complain, that's quite often because they find the features are already lacking.

that doesn't mean a newbie can't use it. like you said, if TS is just looking for a camera and not thinking to go on any further with it - i don't see why D40 can't do the job.

I also complained what. I used to own a D40. Because those are the limitations of the D40. Are you saying the A200 is perfect? Its not, there will be complains about it too.

Its just a matter whether you want to live with it or upgrade. I don't suggest a D40 user to jump to an A200 though because I don't see any significant improvement.

Anyway, I agree with goldfries, TUTUP KEDAI! We have had countless war before. Anyway, there is another camera you can consider, the Olympus E-420 I believe.

Based on reviews or rather first looks, it looks pretty good.

you didn't get their hint huh?

---

Added on May 14, 2008, 2:38 pm

beside the Olympus - another good range of DSLR - PENTAX! the KxD series. I was considering them too. comes with onbody IS too, just that their marketing not as aggressive as Sony but a good camera nevertheless. we can go Fuji S5 also if we want.

so guys, get the point yet? it's an endless debate. there's NO CLEAR WINNER on which one you should go for.

for all I know, one could say A200 is da king and all for it's range but when you hold it - if 350D / 400D / D40 / D40x / D60 / K100D / E-420 or whatever else feels nicer to your hands - then how?

Yeah. But the thing is, APS-C sensor is bigger and lens is better than PnS. Its totally
wrong to deny this.

who's denying that? you just don't get what he's hinting you.

you want to argue on that you can pm the fella or else the thread going to stray further.

Pentax marketing is bad. But A200 is just too cheap. If Pentax K200D is RM1700, I believe a lot of people is interested too.

And of course, Sony is a good brand name. And have Minolta fan base.

By the way, Pentax K10D actually have serious problem. Same as Sony A100. Noise is too bad. Price also very expensive.

A200 just hit all the right spot.

And don't forget to check out the prices for Zuiko lenses, ya?

Hai.... TS... in the end it is up to you to make the decision. Expensive or not expensive, only you know your budget and how much you are willing to spend. So, all these saying this is cheaper or that is cheaper ultimately does not really affect you. If you are so in love with one brand, you will stick with it no matter what the price. If you don't like one brand, give you for free also you won't want it.

Like the dialogue in the Matrix movie, quoted from the Oracle:

It's up to you to make up your own dam*ed mind!

Ok... I just want to add something beside the normal branding and war disscusion.

If TS happen to be studying in colleage that love to compare stuff among others... example, whose sport car is better... whose father is richer... I would suggest getting a Nikon D3 + 24-70 f2.8 + 70-200 f2.8 VR. Such camera and lenses will give you an edge when 'comparing' among each other. And yes, these camera can take good pictures

Like I always said, the TS has to stated what he wanted to shoot... If he only interested on potrait, 1D mark III + 35L + 85L should be the best choice... If limited by budget, then swap the mark III with 40D. The result still considerd acceptable.

And if he wanted the cheapest but still care about image quality, then minimum a Canon 450D already...

TheVOIP - typo kah? D300 i suppose.

Don't pull me inside.
I complain doesn't mean I don't like my toy

I'm off from here.

TS, just play around with all 3 brand. Let you hand and mind decide what you like. No doubt A200 is the most value buy currently but I doubt you gonna stay forever with kit lens right ? 3rd party lens is fine, but just not that sharp when come to the respective manufacturer lens. Choice is yours Have a nice day

If you bought a DSLR , use kit lens forever ?

So what if TS a student ? When hes grown up , cant just work and buy a lens ?


Buy A200 and use 3rd party lens + 1 stick of G lens forever ?

Remember , good quality photo come from good lens , not body
learn from voip

Ermmm true. Zuiko lenses are expensive. But they have a recent lens 50-500mm f2.8-3.5 which is like RM3k or so. Not too bad what. Quite ok to me