SLT-A35 or SLT-A55,

[rahi_ben_misha]

<p>Hi</p>

<p>I'm looking to replace my Nikon D300; 18-105 VR zoom and 35/1.8 AF-S lenses. I'm open to using Sony tech, partially because of the built-in image stabilisation, high-ISO performance as well as well as their video capabilities. I don't have pro-Nikon glass and only a handful of consumer lenses so switching won't be a problem - if that's the path I take. </p>

<p>I mostly shoot street and landscape; plus the occasional outdoor concert that takes place at night or a maybe a local barmitzvah (where video is more in demand than stills; though it would be great if I could select stills from the video). </p>

<p>Locally (I live in Israel) there seem to be very few choices when it comes to Sony SLRs. Budget-wise the SLT-A35 & SLT-A55 are within my reach, but I would need a good general purpose zoom (18-50mm range) and a decent fast prime (30mm and 70mm focal lengths) as well. <br>

<br>

Any thoughts on which body to go with and an appropriate lens would be appreciated!<br>

thanks<br>

<br>

Rachi</p>

 

[james_f6]

<p>The current models are the Sony A37 and A57, the models you listed are older.<br /> You can always buy online from places like Hong Kong and Singapore and should get a cheaper price, where you could even get the Sony A65 or A77.<br /> As for lenses, Sony kit is 18-55 and there are Sony SAM lenses in their prime range which are cheap and also pretty sharp. But out of the two you mention, I would go with A55 if that is all that is available to you.</p>

[rahi_ben_misha]

<p>Thanks James. I just took a look at the available lenses here and prices vary from very cheap to very expensive. I think perhaps it is because the market is so small. <br>

My budget seems to indicate I could buy a body (+kit zoom) and a fast-ish prime and have a little change over. <br /><br />Alternatively, do you know if the Tamron 17-55/2.8 (w/out motor) would work on the Sony cameras or are they built like the Nikons that don't have a screw drive for lenses?</p>

[james_f6]

<p>A Tamron 17-55/2.8 does come with a Sony mount, that will work on a Sony. (If that is what you are asking.)<br /> Sony, Canon, Nikon all have their own mounts, so no matter what lens you buy, you have to buy it for that mount. Sony, Nikon and Canon will not fit on the each other.</p>

[david_smith110]

For me, the main difference between the 35 and 37 is that the

35 doesn't have focus peaking. If you don't manual focus a

lot then this won't really matter. As for lenses, are you aware

that most old Minolta auto focus lenses will work on Sony

cameras? You might find some real bargains on the used

market. Here is a link to a great lens database for all things

Sony and Minolta. I use an old Maxxum 24/2.8 and 50/1.7

and they work just fine with lovely results.

 

http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/index.asp

[rahi_ben_misha]

<p>James, thanks. <br /><br />David; that's a valid point. There look to be a lot of options which is great! </p>

[rahi_ben_misha]

<p>I've never used focus peaking. Admittedly I haven't manual focused a lens since I traded in my Nikon EM and 50/1.8 7 years ago. </p>

[howardstanbury]

<p>It might be worth considering the A58 as this is about to be introduced at a price point below that of the A57 when it was introduced, I believe.</p>

<p>The A37 is also due to be discontinued so the A58 will be the new entry-level SLT camera for Sony. Some regard the A58 as less well-featured than the A57 so you may want to check that the camera still has the features you need. Alternatively the A57 may become a better bargain with end-of-life discounts!</p>

[rahi_ben_misha]

<p>The good news is that I fund a reputable local dealer who has the following kit bundles available:</p>

<ul>

<li>A37K; 18-55 - (most affordable; but comes with a cheap kit zoom. This will leave me money for a fast 35mm or 50mm prime.)</li>

<li>A57K; 18-55 - (This will leave me money for a fast 50mm prime.)</li>

<li>A57M; 18-135 - (is the 18-135 a better lens than the 18-55?)</li>

<li>A65V; 18-55 - (latest camera body with the cheapest zoom?)</li>

</ul>

<p>I'm tempted to pay more for lenses and less for bodies; however as this is my 1st foray into the Sony line I want to make sure I have a camera that has <strong>accurate AF</strong> and <strong>doesn't overheat</strong> if used for more than an half hour (esp as I'm in the middle east with temperatures averaging in the mid to late 30's throughout most of the year.) <br /><br />What do you guys think?</p>

[rahi_ben_misha]

<p>Having read DPReview and Steve Huff photo's reviews I'm inclined to believe the A57 is the best bang for the buck. <br /><br /><a href="http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon_D300-vs-Sony-A65">Snapsort</a>, however, rates the A65 as better than the Nikon D300; while suggesting the D300 trumps the A57. <br>

I would prefer to get input from some real live photographers rather than a computer :) </p>

 

[james_f6]

<p>A57 or A65 will be fine. I have an A65, which is the best of the lot you have listed. Same sensor as in the A77 24mp, also class leading video. Plus it has the best EVF which is the same used in the A77 and A99</p>

[rahi_ben_misha]

<p>James, what are your thoughts on the 18-55 vs 18-135 zooms?</p>

[howardstanbury]

The dyxum.com site has user reviews and assessments of alpha mount lenses - see

http://www.dyxum.com/lenses/index.asp

[paul_de_ley]

<p>The a57 and a65 have very similar AF systems, the a65 has the better viewfinder and the higher mpx sensor but on the other hand the a57 has a more versatile tilt/swivel rear lcd and its 16 mpx sensor actually gets slightly higher ratings for dynamic range and low light sensitivity (see <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/798|0/%28brand%29/Sony/%28appareil2%29/735|0/%28brand2%29/Sony">dxomark website</a>). In practice you'll want to try them out in your hands before you decide though - regardless of brand or model. If your hands don't like using the camera then it won't matter much how stunning the photos look...because you'll probably take far fewer of them!</p>

<p>So my suggestion would be to go visit the local dealer and have him let you handle each of the actual cameras. First impressions can of course deceive, but you'll get a much better idea of the "fit" of each model to your likes and needs as far as actually using them is concerned.</p>

[james_f6]

<p>Well I actually bought the 18-55 on Ebay for $40 to stick on my A700. My A65 has my 28-70 2.8G lens.<br /> The 18-55 is a basic kit lens and well it does the job. 18-135 Zoom I am not sure of, reviews are not crash hot for it. The 18-55 I would go with. Especially as a starter lens.<br /> Another good site I use for lens reviews is<br /> http://kurtmunger.com/lens_reviews_id21.html<br /> 18-55 http://kurtmunger.com/sony_dt_18_55mm_f_3_5_5_6_samid140.html<br /> 18-135 http://kurtmunger.com/sony_dt_18_135mm_f_3_5_5_6_id329.html</p>

[rahi_ben_misha]

<p>Thanks everyone. Paul, agreed. I've never handled Sony cameras before and stuck with Nikon over Canon for years because I preferred their handling. I mostly shoot RAW, and in Manual exposure and with my D300 I have absolutely no problems adjusting Aperture and Shutter Speed in any situation. <br /><br />The reason why I struggled to find any of the newer models is because so few of the brick and mortar stores stock them. <br /><br />I can buy online from Israeli back-room dealers but I only know of three that hold merchandise I can go in and handle and only one has decent prices but i have to call 48hrs before to make sure before I bus in to Tel Aviv on a monthly shopping spree. I live 3.5 hrs drive away!<br /><br />James, Howard, thanks for the links. I see you are using high-IQ glass with your A65; makes sense. That 24MP sensor would likely trash any consumer lens. </p>