Sony DSLR Alpha A200

[ali.r]

<p>I am a macro photographer & have a panasonic fz7. I am replacing it with a DSLR camera & want know that is sony A200 great choice in compare with canon 1000D or nikon D60 ?!</p>

[peterblaise]

<p>.</p>

<p>Yes. </p>

<p>Macro success, by the way, is often the product of the lens you choose.</p>

<p>That considered, what difference can a camera body make regarding macro?</p>

<p>Depending on how you plan to accomplish "macro", the Sony Alpha DSLR-A200 has no automatic exposure when using non-electronic lenses, so if you ever want to use odd adaptations of macro lens configurations, such as reversing a lens for increased magnification, the A200 will expect you to set exposure manually. Ouch!</p>

<p>Perhaps the Sony Alpha DSLR-A300/A350 would be the best choice even if a bit more expensive on day one because, aside from auto exposure with non-electronic lenses, these cameras have the most useful, intelligent LIVE VIEW on the back LCD to assist your macro success, especially if you are used to such helpful assistance from your Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ7 experience.</p>

<p>Tell us more about what "macro" means to you -- share some pictures. Let us know what you do.</p>

<p>.</p>

[paul_de_ley]

<p>Hi Ali,</p>

<p>Glad to see you're checking out Sony options as well! I don't have an A200 but reviews (specifically <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra200/page29.asp">this one</a> in dpreview) suggest it does a little worse at high iso than the d60 and the 1000d. I do have an A100, and you might give that a closer look for macro, even though the A200 is supposed to be an improvement over it, because A100s are a real bargain now on feebay etc.</p>

<p>Sony dropped the mirror lockup function and depth of field preview button on the A200, both of which are significant drawbacks for macro compared to the A100 which has both. Also, as Peter mentioned the A200 does not allow you to use non-AF lenses in aperture priority mode, whereas the A100 does.</p>

<p>As I believe come up in your previous thread in the Pentax forum, Sony bodies do not offer the same degree of flexibility in terms of stabilizing the sensor when mounting a non-AF lens. With Pentax you can set the body to the appropriate focal length of the lens and thereby match the sensor shift appropriately, whereas with Sony you need third-party adapters with chips that fool the body into thinking it has an AF lens mounted on it of the appropriate focal length.<br /> That won't be much of an issue now of course if you have no SLR lenses yet, but it does potentially limit effectiveness somewhat compared to Pentax if you would later decide to try out manual focus macro lenses (which are often much cheaper than the AF versions). On the other hand, there are more adapters to fit more lenses in other mounts to Sony's than to Pentax bodies, eg one of my favorite macro lenses is an old FD mount Vivitar 90 f2.8 that cost me all of $65 and for which there is no Pentax adapter AFAIK.</p>

[starvy]

<p>i am with paul on this one. a100 bodies are going cheap on fleabay. i bought mine from a shop at knockdown price last summer. high iso performance with both the a100 and a200 would be inferior to nikon or canon of a similar price but you are getting in body stabilisation which alone often makes up for a bit of noise, as long as you know what to do in photoshop.</p>

[ali.r]

<p>Peter please go to my portfolio & very soon you see my shots in macro world.</p>

[anthonyposton]

<p>I use only Sony cameras, I am not an advocate of any camera in general, but with that in mind. I believe you will be very happy with the a200's performance under most if not all circumstances. In comparision with two of my co-workers who both use a Nikon; mine holds its own quiet well. That is against a D40 and a D300 believe it or not! With macro your lense choice will be your main issue....</p>