Looking to spend about £200 on a camera. Initially was thinking “bridge camera” but some of my photo friends reckon a DSLR at the same price range would be better for me. More flexability, lenses, flash guns etc. Makes sense.

Only trouble is I can’t decide. The both have pros and cons and I really need to feel one before buying, just wondered what the rest of the parish think.

nikon-for the lens options 2nd hand and new

Sony A200
Has stabalizer in the body instead of the lens and there are shedloads of old minolta lenses that will fit it but as you said you should before you buy as some people just dont like the feel of some cameras.

I have a gut feeling that the AF on the Nikon is better. Particularly if you get a true AFS lens. Almost all Minolta lenses were srew driver focusing.

So for MTB action I’d get the Nikon

But either will be fine

John

bought the nikon recently and love it, friends have a range of nikons from d50 to d700 and i love the way theyre put together and organised. have a tinker in a shop and see what you get on with

I’ve had the same issues. I ended up getting the D60 with VR lense (£330)

I had a go with the standard d40 and thought the lense you get with it was a bit disappointing.
I am going to be using it for some biking stuff mostly at my local spot which is in the woods at chick sands, ie mostly fast moving in poor light. So thought I’d benefit from the VR lense. i don’t think the d40 or 60 have the stabilizers stuff in the camera like the sony a200. Its in the lens.

If you have to choose i’d go with the Sony a200, like muke says. Or if you can stretch the d60 VR but it is a fair bit more.

Best prices seem to come from http://www.warehouseexpress.com when I was looking. Although I ended up getting mine from john lewis who were very competetive and had stock.

here’s another to throw into the ring……..olympus 420 is a very good camera also. You may find however you’ll ‘grow out’ of these cameras quite soon and need to buy another to suit your needs very quickly, personally i’d recommend either the 450D, D60 or A350 the latter 2 both have cashback on them just now, £30 on the nikon, £50 on the sony.

I went with the Sony A300 when I was looking. Felt better in the hand and has the advantage of the image stabilisation in the body, so extra lenses are cheaper.

Well happy with it.

The sony A300/A350 offers live view, other than that they are very similar to the A200, so it depends if you want live view. I’m sure you’d be more than happy with any DSLR but I’ve got an a200 and here’s why…

The main benefit of the Sony is the body anti-shake which means that you have anti-shake on all lenses including prime (fixed focal length) lenses.

You can get HSM lenses for the Sony, but I can’t say I’ve considered the focus speed of standard lenses an issue.

The a200 is hard to beat as an entry level camera (which is the conclusion of the magazine reviews). The upgrade path is strong too, so you can upgrade the body and use the same lenses on the higher spec sonys all the way up to the full frame a900.

The A200 got the TIPA Best Entry Level DSLR 2008 Award.

I know nowt about cameras but I bought the GF (who knows much more than me) an A200 for her birthday to replace her old Nikon SLR and she loves it…seems very good quality considering the price.

The a200 is hard to beat as an entry level camera (which is the conclusion of the magazine reviews).

I read that the Sony a200 wasn’t as good as the Canon/Nikon ones in terms of image quality alone.

I read that the Sony a200 wasn’t as good as the Canon/Nikon ones in terms of image quality alone.

I read the same thing, although it is marginal (I couldn’t see the difference personally). Obviously the price is a major factor in entry level reviews.

I think the Sony’s are being discounted more on the basis of those reviews – I see a lot of really enticing deals. I saw an a200 with an 80-300mm lens or something daft for £300 ish.

I’d be interested in seeing some image comparisons tho as the Sony had a few features I liked. Like the movable screen, and a very marginal advantage is that we have a Sony TV, PS3, PSP etc and Sony like to make their products inter-operate. I think you can plug the camera into a TV and you can do slideshows using the telly, or something.

Have a look at http://www.dyxum.com for images, you’ll find plenty of a200 images.

It’s worth noting that in magazine tests they’re all using the kit lenses. The lens has more impact on image quality than the camera. Change the lens and you change the test results.

The general consensus on dyxum, at low isos (400 and under) there is no difference between the a100-a700.

There was even a side by side 100% crop ‘competition’ between a100,a700 and a900 using the same lens to see who could tell the difference. Nobody could.

Yeah but what about a200 vs Canon Eos 300D/1000D and Nikon D40/60?

In all honestly, I’d be using the kit lens too, so it’s a factor.

I’d go one up from the D40 as it needs newer lenses that have the autofocus motors in them. With a D60 or D80 you can use any old “prime” lenses from eBay and will have a wider choice of lenses when you choose to add more.

Or maybe a Canon G9/G10?

I don’t think the D60 has it’s own AF motor – D80 & up does though.

Best thing to do it goand try them out. I was trying to decide between the Canon 350D and the Nikon D80 a couple of yrs ago and whether it was worth paying the extra for the D80…..picked up the 350D, put it down again and bought the D80. The Canon felt really cheap.

See how the two models you are interested in handle, whether one suits your hands better and are the buttons/menus intuitive. I have read that the Sony menus are a bit of a handful on their compacts and I do find my brothers Cybershot to be a bit of a pfaff menu-wise. Perhaps the Sony SLR menus are different, but it’s all thing to consider.

I know the D40 only has 3AF points which may be a bit restrictive. Not sure about the A200 in that respect.

Yeah but what about a200 vs Canon Eos 300D/1000D and Nikon D40/60?

I think you’ll find the nikon and canon get the nod on IQ in reviews, but again, look at the photos and see if you can see a difference. This is more kit lens related, but if you can see a difference and plan to use the kit lens then only you can decide if the difference is worth the money. Keep in mind £100 will get you a cracking used lens when weighing up the price difference.

id say at what youre looking at then extra cash is better spent on a lens, theyre all going to have ‘kit lenses’

i would buy a D40 or D40x body second hand or new off ebay and get something like an 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II or the VR version for cheap off ebay as well. I did this for my wife and she loves it (i already had the lens though)

it comes down to the one you feel more comfortable using at the end of the day. at that end of the market there is little more than useability to choose over for the basic user

Well had a feel of an a200 and a d40. d40 felt a bit tougher. both felt quite nice to hold and fairly sturdy overall.

i think with the a200 being 240 on amazon and 30 cash back from sony, i’ll be sorting one of those out.

thanks all for the advice. i’ll post some images for stw critique massif to paw over / pour scorn on.

mark