SONY ALPHA THREAD !

With the coming soon of A700, i think it is time i change it to Sony Alpha Thread.

This post has been edited by tom_k3nt: Oct 30 2007, 02:30 PM

If you ever buy that, be prepared to fork out sh1t loads of premium for their lenses. It's not bad, it's just that Sony's DSLR is like BOSE sound system, it's not worth for what you pay for. I'd rather look at the K10D

Not really, you may find old Minolta lens to use on the A100. If you have done some research, you will know that some of the Minolta lens is really worth, the quality is very good compare to other brands.

If your budget only can afford you to get A100/400D/D40X, A100 is not a bad choice at all.

Not to mention the built in IS.

My friend is happy with his Sony Alpha. Have a look at his gallery http://www.flickr.com/photos/8047528@N05/

very good came atleast better than thing so call D40

firstly, we blame it on their marketing. their kit setup is pretty expensive in my honest opinion. another thing is their lenses. not much to choose from. used market are not much too

this camera is good, i am using the minolta dynax 5d, very similar to the alpha100. built is very good and the camera is responsive.

i do agree that the lenses can be difficult to come by. but the kit lense 18-70 is good enough for starters.

lets put it this way, eventhough it is using Minolta as a base, sony is not one of those established camera makers...i won't fork out that kind of money for a Sony SLR....u look at their marketing strategy is mainly aimed at the yuppie crowd

Who care what brand, as long as it is a good cam with reasonable price, it is a good stuff. And somemore, Sony has a better service coverage as well.

Nowadays technology can be sold off and transferred easily, the money will do the job.

Like Pentax, now Hoya took over, so can we say Hoya is not a camera maker, it only uses Pentax as a base, so we don't buy it?

I prefer BOSE over Sony if you ask me

The D40 and the Alpha is both designed for ONE thing in common : Should you you feel that photography is not your thing after some time, you can still give it up : You didn't spend too much for the D40 and if Sony lenses are too expensive for you to move on. Honestly, being able to use OLD Minolta lenses on your brand new Alpha is a kill-off ... why can't Sony come up with more lenses for their clients to move along with the hobby? How long has this model been in the market already?

The 'yuppie crowd' gives them the most money. Sony wants to make money, not create a global photography standard for professional the professional market like Canon and Nikon

From a common user's point-of-view yes, anything with a reasonable price is a good thing, from cars, to cameras to diapers. Sony have a good service coverage I 100% agree with you but after-sales service is still questionable at times based on my experience with compact digicam users, after-warranty charges are also very high especially when it's quite a percentage from your actual camera price!

Hoya took over Pentax? Wow I didn't know that!

Sony making SLR is similar to Philips making high end equipment, they are better off doing what they do best (sony - makes sensors, philips - makes IC).

Even though Sony's history in making photography equipment is short, if they do what Microsoft did in marketing Xbox, they could probably stand a chance in the slr market. But NO! Sony wants to make quick bucks, they pimp sensor shift IS, which is good as the company could then cut cost in the lenses and passes the savings to consumer, which would then give them a real competitive advantage...but hell NO, some of the lenses have a huge premium on it i.e. 70-200 f2.8 (500-600USD premium over Nikon/Canon/Pentax's offer). So yeah, if you do buy a the A100, you'd probably be stuck with those "crap" lenses, or third party offers, and be Sony's cash cow I think the only thing with a Sony label in my house is a really old headphone and my ps3. OK...and my camera's sensor...

Well Hoya is a big @ss company, it's a good thing that Pentax is acquired by Hoya. But honestly, I'd rather Nikon take over fuji. I've got a feeling that Fuji will sooner or later end up like Kodak/Sigma should they not get assimilated by a bigger company.

No! Canon, stay away!

Then you need to give facts that other brand give better "after sales service" than Sony.

I am not bias to any brand, but when we question something, we should provide some evidence and comparison.

---

Added on June 18, 2007, 2:22 amhmmm... crap lens? How you define crap lens? No doubt the sony lens is over price and could not make sense, they thought their lens is Carl Zeiss? haha... but i have no such a worry, i am not going to spend 30K to buy a lens, then why should worry?

There are so many 3rd part like Sigma or Tamron with a decent quality, most of us also buy 3rd party lens, so are these considered "crap" as well? Then i am also interested how "high end" lens you owned? Who says Sony body must attached with Sony lens?

Next, the sony retail price always scaring people, but actually you could get much cheaper than the retail printed, like the flash F56, sony selling price is RM1650, but you can get it about RM1200 or slightly lower, with this price for a wireless HSS GN56 flash, i will say the price is nice.






This post has been edited by cityfish: Jun 18 2007, 02:22 AM

service charges is not a main factor for u to judge after sales service.

This post has been edited by williamngwl: Jun 18 2007, 04:14 AM

You can figure out yourself which are crap and which are not by yourself, canon makes a bunch of them too

hoya might not be a camera maker but its a lens maker. even before the takeover, partnership was already strong through hoya's subsidary, tokina. not many know this but tokina and pentax lenses are share the same design for some lenses. only the glass is different and some minor tweaks here n there.

@alamaklor

i'm still doubtful over this takeover as hoya is eyeing on pentax's profitable medical equipment division not their cams. only time will tell i guess.

@ts

alpha is a pretty decent cam but k10d should knock its socks off

http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/3574/10mp-...-alpha-100.html

I come to know this Sony has build in image stabilizer when I was reading Popular Photography, and I think this is one of the best feature than Canon or Nikon shall implement in their cameras.

Sony currently has 21 lens in their line. No doubt it's less than Canon or Nikon, but come to think of it, all those lens are having IS indirectly, now how many Canon or Nikon lens has IS?

Come to the price, RM2k plus for a body... I don't understand why someone would call it expensive.

Service charge is not the main factor I am JUDGING after sales service ... that's not my point. The higher you charge for after-warranty servicing and parts, the higher the chance you loose return customers, that's consumer marketing.

Walk into any shop in Sg. Wang and you will get much better prices than at an official Sony shop. Same original Malaysian stock, same warranty anyway.

I bought an A100 for the anti-shake. Also I can use it with the 50mm F1.4 for really dark conditions.

They have a 500mm F8 reflex lens that AUTOFOCUSES. With Super Steady Shot, you can shoot at 1/50s HANDHELD at F8! There is no other reflex lens that has VR/IS... which means you'd want 1/750s at F8. Where would you get that kind of lighting? (A very long studio room?)

They have Carl Zeiss lenses that AUTOFOCUS.

They have a 135mm F2.8 T4.5 Smooth Transition Focus lens that has very smooth, creamy bokeh (the out-of-focus areas).

Minolta lenses (and their Sony rebadges) were designed to have nice bokeh, which is why they were big with the Japanese.

They also have the excellent Minolta 70-210mm F4 beercan lens, a cheap, solid and lightweight tele lens that is brighter than all the 70-300mm F4-5.6 lenses that are in the market now. I dare say I will stick to this and skip the heavy 70-200mm F2.8.

It's not about the price; if I had a Canon I'd get the 70-200mm F4 IS instead of the F2.8 IS for practical reasons.

Sony has good service, they fixed my Minolta beercan for FREE even though it was 20 years old. How's that for after-warranty servicing? They always have 2-4 days turnaround. I have not paid a single cent to a Sony Service Center.

You won't have cases of high-pitched VR lenses (annoying Nikkor 18-200mm F3.5-5.6!) or deteriorating SWM or dropping your expensive VR/IS lens, losing alignment and thus killing VR/IS on your lens.

"Oh but if you drop your Sony/KM and your AS/SSS dies then all your lenses have no AS/SSS."

Find me someone who has killed Anti-shake on their Konica Minolta/Sony then.

You can also find more rare old lenses in the A-mount and Pentax K-mount. Why? Not much demand. I just picked up a Vivitar Series 1 28-105mm F2.8-3.8 in Bandung. If it was a Canon or Nikon it would not sit there.

Sony unfortunately only retained the higher-spec lenses from the Konica Minolta days. Carl Zeiss IS a great, great brand to pay for. The sharpness and OOF rendition is amazing. Having tried the 135mm F1.8 I am convinced, and am saving up for one.

Waiting is a standard procedure. How long did people wait for Nikon after the products were announced?

Do you buy an SLR, then 2 months later, have ENOUGH money to buy the next big lens? Are you just sitting around itching to buy the next lens?

Pentax is a good system, too. They've been bought by Hoya. So if mergers are a sign, and one day, Hoya Pentax is bought by Microsoft, will you NOT buy one? There is more to a system than just your systemic dislike towards a brand.