Dpreview reviews the Sony Alpha A100

[cyclohexane]

Check it out here: Sony Alpha DSLR-A100 Review, July 2006

I'm still going through the dpreview one, but I do remember that Photonet magazine seemed to have a favorable review/preview thing on the A100- though my Chinese sucks now, so it could have been me misinterpreting the results. LOL

[Latinbob]

The DPR review is very positive, which is good. If this had come out two years ago when I outgrew my 828, I would definitely get one.

[Kevin Barrett]

An impressive showing really. Sony has exceeded my expecations and may carve out a respectable 'chunk' of marketshare with
the A100 and subsequent models. Noteworthy, is the comparable image quality to the D200 for a fraction of the cost.
True, the D200 has some significantly more advanced features ... But, me thinks the majority of shoppers in the sub $1K USD
category will not miss these and most likely will be cross-shopping the 'yet to be announced" D80 anyway.

An added bonus is the relatively econonomical assortment of Minolta lenses... Have to give Sony a nod on this one.

[sean_buerger]

I must say it scored rather well. It seems to be really value for money.

Now we just have to await the Nikon D80 review and see how it scores. From the DPReview it appears, that Sony seems superior in terms of noise over the Olympus and Nikon models. But the BIONZ hasn't quite cracked Canons Digic II.

I wonder (in longer terms) how the competitors respond to Sony's (or Konica Minolta's) concept of image stabilization. Will we see more camera based image stabilization, or will it be a unique feature for Sony?

For the amateur photographer it will be hard to allocate enough cash for image stabilization for each single lens. Sony offers a very strong feature in my opinion.

Next interesting issue is to find out, how good the offered Zeiss glass is? Do I expect it to compete with Canon / Nikon or even Leica? Is the Zeiss glass forbiddingly expensive to be combined with a rather entry level dSLR? Is it a stupid or a smart combination?

Sitting tight. Sean.

[cyclohexane]

The new Pentax K100 also features in-camera stabilization. I saw it at the store, but didn't bother testing it out (I was dropping in for a lens cap and my still-yet-to-arrive lens hood) as my cousin's the Pentax user in the family.

As for in-camera vs. in-lens stabilization, it's been argued that in-lens stabilization is superior for telephotos as it also assists in AF acquisition. It also lets you see the compositional change from the moving element, something the moving sensor will not show you. Then again, I don't intend to remain an amateur, so that would matter to me... LOL

I was really interested in the Zeiss glass myself, but the new battery killed it. If the Sony A100 had taken the standard NP-FM50, I would have considered having a travel bag with a mini DV camcorder plus the A100 and a pair of Zeiss lenses (probably the zoom and the 85).

[Mr. Pickles]

I think the Sony Alpha scored well, and proved its point to some. Some of course wouldn't like it if it was pro-quality, shot 10fps, buffered 4gb worth, all at 16mp. Doesn't have the right name on it or something. Sad but true.

I think more and more you will see the in-camera stabilazation, probably because it is a better marketing deal than competeing with Canon's or Nikon's in-lens design (all our lenses are image stabilized).

As for whether Zeiss lenses are worth it on an entry-level DSLR...Doesn't every stinking Canon user "think" they need L lenses to take pictures?

[Mithras]

After spending way too much time deciding which camera to purchase as my first dslr I decided on the KM 7D. One of the major selling points for me was the AS in the body and the way the camera felt in my hand. A few months after making my purchase the bomb was dropped. No more KM, now it's Sony.

I thought I was buying into a quality company that would be around for awhile. Obviously, I should not tell fortunes. In any case I think I will just sit back and watch for a while before forming any opinion about Sony's attempt to enter the world of still photography.

[Paul Shields]

Yes, a good entry into the DSLR market for Sony. I still wouldn't touch them with a barge pole, but that's entirely my own personal prejudice. If they can grow and add value to the brand, not try and lock the consumer in, and not drop the whole tihng when they get bored then I will be very impressed and it will help remove my doubts about how they often operate. All in all though, a useful alternative to other entry level DSLRs, with more bells and whistles than would normally be expected at that price point.

[Sidebyte]

In reading the latest complete reviews from Steve's and Phil Askey's, I'm not sure they are reviewing the same camera or at least one is totally unobservative.....quote from Steve.* Quote directly from Steve sanders."Lightweight and durable magnesium alloy body"........while Askey displays in three places in his review that the camera is "plastic".* *Due to the fact that many potential purchasers of new cameras watch these reviews religiously to help with their choice of a camera, I sincerely wish they would be a little more accurate in their evaluations.

[Elitephoto9]

Hello again
From what I understand Sony will be bringing out the Minolta D9 or 9D or now the Sony D9 or 9D to go with the new glass. Also I understand that Minolta is making all Sony's cameras in their plants that are now owned by Sony. I was on Minolta's Pro program for 20 years.............I sure do miss the old days and the great people I met. What a great group of Professionals, they deserved better.
Have fun
Roger

[sean_buerger]

Well,

not sure how much magnesium alloy there's supposed to be but I saw cut open models at the launch - those were plastic. Then picture of the half Sony Alpha in HWM magazine, also indicates it being plastic based.

I think however, this is entirely acceptable in this price range. A hobby enthusiast doesn't need to treat his camera that rough (hopefully), so even whent it's made of plastic, it'll last those three years, until it gets replaced with another.

Cheers, Sean.

[Sidebyte]

Au Contrere,

This is a quotation directly from Steve Sanders review.

[cyclohexane]

The Sony A100 contains magnesium alloy- the chassis is magnesium alloy, but the outside of the camera is polycarbonate. Steve's is the only review that lists the camera as being completely magnesium alloy, so I'm assuming it's a faux pas on his end.

[Rokcet Scientist]

The omission of a JPEG Extra Fine setting is a major faux pas, imo.
Can something like that be 'fixed' with a 'firmware update'?

BTW, would anyone dare to hazard a guess as to what the Alpha A200 will bring us?
And when?

[Sidebyte]

Originally Posted by cyclohexane

The Sony A100 contains magnesium alloy- the chassis is magnesium alloy, but the outside of the camera is polycarbonate. Steve's is the only review that lists the camera as being completely magnesium alloy, so I'm assuming it's a faux pas on his end.

Nope!* he doesn't say it's ALL magnesium, only the parts he list in his review, front, bottom and chassis.* The rest is polycarbonate as he states.
But the amount of mag he states that is used should make a fairly substantial body.

[Kevin Barrett]

Originally Posted by Rokcet Scientist

The omission of a JPEG Extra Fine setting is a major faux pas, imo.
Can something like that be 'fixed' with a 'firmware update'?

BTW, would anyone dare to hazard a guess as to what the Alpha A200 will bring us?
And when?

The A200 may bring us the JPEG Extra Fine setting sometime in the future and most
likely one additional SONY proprietary thingy dingy... But this is only a guess on my part.