Pros: Super SteadyShot, exellent ergnomics and handgrip, fine image quality and very high resolution
Cons: Viewfinder not great for glasses wearers, high ISO a bit noisy
The Bottom Line: A great dSLR for any enthusiast who wants to enjoy the benefit of image stabilization with any lens along with high resolution, very natural image quality and excellent ergonomics.
mediageek's Full Review: Sony DSLR-A100 nur Gehäuse Digital Camera
As other reviewers have noted, the Alpha 100 is Sony's first foray into the world of digital SLRs. However, this is not really a first-generation product, since it is actually the result of Sony's acquisition of Konica-Minolta's digital camera business. Thus the A100 is really the next generation version of KM's well-regarded 5D dSLR from a couple of years ago.
Other reviewers and digital photography websites have already done a good job of listing and going over the amny technical details of this camera, so I will not do that in this review. Rather, I will focus on how well this camera performs in the hands of a intermediate-level amateur photographer.
Introduction: The Competition and the Purchase
The A100 is my fourth digital camera, and my first digital SLR. I already own two film SLRs: a Nikon N55, Nikon's most recent entry-level fully-automatic film SLR; and a Nikon EM, a 1980s vintage aperture-priority, manual focus SLR. Neither of my film SLRs is top of the line or pro-level. But I've generally been happy with their performance, and have assembled a decent variety of mostly-used Nikon and Nikon-mount lenses.
Because of this, and the fact that several professional photographers I know swear by their Nikons, I had always assumed that when I stepped up to a dSLR, it would be a Nikon. I had been keeping my eye on models like the Nikon D70 (now D80) and D50, until the Sony came along.
I decided go take the dive with the Sony for two reasons. The first and most important reason is the inclusion of anti-shake in the camera body -- something Sony inherited from Konica-Minolta and improved upon for the A100. The second, believe it or not, is my very positive experience with Sony video cameras.
I greatly prefer shooting pictures by available light over using a flash, especially because my style is candid, street-type photography, rather than studio or posed. To really make the most of available light you need three things: fast, large aperture lenses, high sensitivity and ISO equivalency, and a steady hand.
Now, I have worked hard on having a steady hand, but certainly more experienced photogs are steadier than me. And nearly every photographer I've talked to, and every review I've read about stabilized lenses and cameras says that they're entirely worth it for the two to four stops of effective gain you get by using them.
Of course, you can buy stabilized lenses for Nikon and Canon cameras. And you'll be paying as much or more than what you paid for the camera body itself. If I were making my living at photography, that would probably be worth it for me. But this is a hobby and I'd rather not pay that much.
Thus the introduction of the Sony A100 with anti-shake in the body really got my attention. I was also tempted by the Pentax K100D and the announced (but not yet available) K10D, which both also have anti-shake in the body. However, the K100D is only 6 megapixels to the Sony's 10, and I wasn't sure I wanted to wait around for the K10D, which will have 10 megapixels.
So, when I saw the A100 on sale with a good price at a local store about a month ago, I went for it.
Meaningful Features
Like most digital cameras, the A100 is piled high with feature upon feature, some of which sound cool, but often don't add up to much. But some are definitely worth it.
Meaningful Features: Super SteadyShot
Like I said in the last section, this is the feature that sold me on the camera, and I'm not disappointed. Sony says that you get 2 - 3 more stops of exposure, on average, when hand-holding the camera, and my experience bears that out.
When I say 2 - 3 stops more exposure, what that means in concrete terms is that I can get sharp pictures using slower shutter speeds than you can without SteadyShot. For instance, using the included 18-70mm lens, at full zoom of 70mm you actually have the equivalent focal length of 105mm. Conventional wisdom says that at that focal length you shouldn't use a shutter speed of less than 1/100 sec, and a longer shutter speed will be blurred.
With SteadyShot on, I've been able to get usefully sharp pictures all the way down below 1/30 of a second at 70mm. This is great when you're shooting indoors, close to dawn or dusk, or in low light, and can keep you from having to use a flash in these situations.
What SteadyShot, or any kind of stabilization, won't fix is a moving subject. At 18mm you should be able to get sharp picture of a still object all the way down to about 1/10 sec. But if your subject is moving too fast you'll still get blur.
To get an idea of the value of having the SteadyShot in the camera body, note that the retail price for Sony's 18-200mm zoom lens is $500 new. A similar Nikon lens is over $1500 retail, albeit with a faster maximum aperture.
An even better indicator of the value is seen when you realize that you can pick up used Minolta Maxxum lenses at a steep discount, and they automatically become stabilized lenses when you mount them on the A100. I just picked up a 70 - 210 mm auto-focus Tokina zoom lens for $35. Just try picking up any working used Canon or Nikon anti-shake or vibration-reduction lens for less than ten times that much.
That said, SteadyShot is not a magic bullet, and won't make all your pictures better. But if you know how and when to use it, it's a valuable feature.
Meaningful Features: DRO - Dynamic Range Optimization
Sony makes a big deal about its Bionz image processor and dynamic range optimization. Using the two levels of DRO in the A100 is supposed to help control blown highlights and retain details in shadows.
After using the camera for thousands of images I think the feature is somewhat useful, though I'm not entirely sold. DRO is most useful if you don't plan to work with your images much in Photoshop. A lot of what DRO does can be accomplished with judicious use of curves or shadow/highlight adjustments.
What's great about DRO, is that to some extent, it just works. I have found it useful when shooting in high contrast light -- like at midday. It's ability to resolve shadow detail seems to be better than its ability to deal with highlights. Like with many digital cameras, I find that it's generally better to underexpose a bit than to overexpose. Using that strategy DRO works rather well to retain details without much post-processing.
Meaningful Features: Minolta Maxxum Lens Compatibility
This is a nice feature, though not a killer one compared to other dSLRs. My main complaint is that while there are millions of Minolta Maxxum-mount lenses out there on the used market, there still aren't as many as there are Canon, Nikon and Pentax-mount. Also, manual-focus Minolta lenses won't work without an adapter that's getting more scarce every day.
Just one example of this disparity can be found with buying a basic autofocus "normal" 50mm lens. It's a great lens to have because on the dSLR it acts like a good portrait lens (75mm), but also generally has a fast maximum aperture of f1.7 or f1.8. In my experience so far I've found used Minolta 50mm lenses running $30 - $50 more than equivalent Nikons and Canons. A new Sony 50mm isn't even offered except in a pricier f1.4 version and f2.8 macro for $300 . Meanwhile a new Nikon or Canon f1.8 50mm will only set you back only about $125.
Of course, I do have to keep in mind that once mounted on the A100, that 50mm lens becomes a stabilized 75mm lens that otherwise costs more like $800 - $1000 for a Nikon or Canon.
So, the Minolta lens compatibility is bit of mixed bag, but certainly better than having to rely on a whole new lens mount or having to pull from a more esoteric lens mount. Perhaps once Sony spools up production of lenses of both Minolta and its own design, that situation will change.
One additional note on lenses -- Sony likes to make a big deal about the Carl Zeiss branded lenses that will be released for the A100 (any day now...). I supposed that's a big deal if you're especially concerned about top sharpness and absolute image quality as end in and of itself. But most observers expect these fancy pieces of glass to carry similarly fancy price tags. And if that was what I was after, I would have bitten the bullet and gone with Nikon and the lenses that are already available.
Frankly, I'm more interested in taking good pictures that turn out like want than fussing over statistics and status symbols.
Meaningful Features: Build Quality and Ergonomics
It's true the A100 has a mostly polycarbonate (plastic) shell, but it sure doesn't feel cheap in my hands. In fact, it's comfortably hefty. Not too heavy, not too light. I think the handgrip is great, and possibly the best one I've ever used on any SLR. When I first picked up the demo model in the store, I had no more doubts about whether or not I could hold onto this camera and shoot.
I've only had the camera for a month, and have not gone out of my way to punish it. Therefore I cannot report about how well it stands up to abuse.
The placement of basic controls, like the shutter button and the adjustment dial for aperture/shutter/EV are natural and have a good feel.
The A100 has two main control dials on the top, one for selecting the camera mode, another for selecting different things to adjust, like ISO, DRO, color mode, flash, focus and exposure modes. I find this arrangement to be convenient and useful, if not entirely intuitive.
Some reviewers have criticized the A100 for not having dedicated buttons for changing things like ISO. I only partially agree with the criticism. With a dedicated button changing ISO would mean two or three button presses. On the A100 it means turning the dial to ISO, pushing a button, then changing the setting. In words it sounds like a lot more movements, but in practice it really isn't. In fact, I like the fact that the dial to pick that menu is on top and requires very affirmative actions. It would be very difficult to accidentally change your ISO or metering setting, and yet it still isn't too hard to make changes you want.
The menus on the A100 are all pretty easy to understand if you've ever used a digital camera before. There certainly a heck of a lot easier to navigate than any point-and-shoot or compact digicam I've ever used. In fact, I've only had to crack the manual once to help figure me figure out how to do something -- and that was to crack the meaning of the menu labelled "DEC," which allows you to change color modes.
Over the course of several thousand shots I've found using the A100 to be a delight. Shooting with this camera has already become quite natural for me, even when I have to quickly change ISO or white balance settings.
Performance
Great ergonomics and features don't add up to a hill of beans if the pictures don't turn out well. And on that the A100 hits the mark.
Though, I must say, I don't think there's a current model dSLR out there right now that turns out bad pictures. You can certainly tune into any number of photography message forums or review sites that will endlessly pick apart the minute details of each camera's flaws. But if the picture was good to begin with, and the photographer did a good job capturing it, the camera isn't going to ruin it.
So, really, what I'm looking for is a camera that will get the job done, put into pixels what I'm seeing in my mind's eye, and not screw it up for me. The A100 succeeds at that.
At 10 megapixels I have enough resolution to make the 4x6 and 8x10 prints I most often use. On top of that I have plenty of room to crop without sacrificing print quality. On the web, I have more than enough resolution to play with.
Sharpness is great, provided the lens can provide it. I bought the kit with the included 18-70mm 3.5 - 5.6 lens because I don't already own any Minolta glass and didn't want to have to go hunting right away. I find this lens to be fine, and pretty equivalent to the same offerings by any major camera manufacturer. I only wish it had a faster maximum aperture, but then I know you need to pay big bucks to get that in a zoom, or you need to just buy a good prime lens (like a 50mm).
I bought an SLR so that I could buy new lenses and improve sharpness or get wider or longer as I need, and I can do this with the A100.
Performance: Auto-Focus
The A100 has a feature that engages the auto-focus when you bring your eye to the viewfinder, rather than only when you press the shutter half-way down. I'm not sure how I feel about this feature. Sometimes it's great, giving me a clear focused view without having to think about it. Sometimes it's a pain, setting the lens to focus when I'm not ready to. Right now I have it turned off.
But the auto-focus is quick under most light, and little slow with low light because there is no focus-assist lamp. I don't find the slowness in low light to be much of a liability, especially since manual focus is often a better way to go.
I think the A100's AF is better than the AF in my Nikon N55 film SLR. The A100 seems to just know what I want to focus on and hunts much less. A clear indicator in the viewfinder shows me where it's focusing, and I can change that setting as I want. Even at 200mm at dusk I get very accurate, fast focusing.
Performance: Exposure
Like a lot of dSLRs I think the A100 tens towards overexposure, but not as much as what I've heard and experienced from Canons. I shoot most often in aperture priority mode (A) because I like to control for depth-of-field (DOF). Except under extremely bright or dark light I think the A100 does a very good job at exposing using the basic matrix metering mode. I've only really had blown-out highlights in bright midday sun.
Performance: White Balance
I must say that I find the A100's auto white balance not to be quite up to snuff for me. In artificial light it tends to skew too yellow for me, and too blue in natural light. When shooting with other people's Nikon D70s, I've found the Nikon's auto white balance to be superior to the Sony's.
On the flip side, the presets for full sun, clouds and tungsten are all pretty good. Manual white balance is the way to go if you have the moment to set it. Otherwise the presets work well.
Performance: Speed
The A100 is as fast as I need. I don't really shoot sports or fast-action. More often it's just regular people, some animals and wildlife, and the occasional live music performance. It's sure a heck of a lot faster than any point-and-shoot or compact digicam--including EVFs--that I've ever tried.
I mostly shoot JPEGs, so I can't say if speed is slower than RAW or JPEG RAW.
Performance: Battery Life
So far, battery life is great. The A100 uses Sony's own InfoLithium batteries that perform well, although the A100's batteries are not compatible with the similar batteries used in Sony's camcorders.
I haven't been out shooting for more than a few hundred shots and couple of hours at a time. But for those times the battery hasn't come close to running out. I also appreciate that the battery charges in an external charger, rather than in the camera.
I will probably buy a spare battery soon, but I haven't really needed it yet.
Performance: Noise and Overall Image Quality
Other reviews have commented that the A100's noise at ISOs of 800 and 1600 is on the high side. Reading that before I bought it gave me some pause since I like to work with existing light, and high ISOs are often necessary to keep from having to use a flash.
My experience working at 800 and 1600 shows that the noise isn't all that bad to my eye. When blown up to 100% and compared side-by-side to images from the newest 10mp Nikons and Canons I can see the difference, and the A100 is a little more noisy. But when I view normal sized prints and web photos, the difference is negligible. Certainly the A100's noise at 1600 is better than film at the same sped. The noise also has a fine grain and the camera's noise reduction doesn't blur fine detail too much -- there's always a trade-off between noise and sharpness.
The overall image quality of the A100 is quite good, and I am very satisfied. Because this is the only dSLR I've owned I cannot compare it fairly to other dSLRs. Yet I find the colors to be consistently vibrant, but natural. The A100 really delivers everything I was looking for in a digital SLR.
The Little Things: the Pluses
One of the little things I like about the A100 is that the rear LCD changes orientation with the camera. When you're shooting in portrait, it flips so you can read the data without turning the camera -- a nice touch I never would have thought of, and never would have thought I'd appreciate that much.
There is no LCD on the top of the camera like other modern film and digital SLRs. And, frankly, I don't miss it. The data display in the viewfinder and the back LCD is plenty for me.
I also like the flash. It works pretty well, is made out of sturdy metal, and does not pop up on its own. Some reviewers don't like it because it doesn't pop up automatically when needed. But since I don't like to use flash most of the time, I'm glad that it only works when I've manually popped it up and set the proper flash mode.
And though it's been made nearly obsolete by the fact that you can review your picture immediately after taking it, I still like the inclusion of a depth-of-field preview button on the front of the camera. Sure, I can take a snap and see what it looks like, but sometimes I don't want to take my eye away from the viewfinder to know my DOF -- that's why I'm using an SLR and not a point-and-shoot.
The Little Things: The Minuses
Of course no camera is perfect and the Sony A100 is no exception. I have very few complaints, and my chief complaint is the viewfinder. As a glasses wearer I find it difficult to position my eye so that I can get a full view of the frame. So, for my first shots I definitely framed things too wide, and had to get a feel for the dimensions of the frame.
Other than that, I really have to search to come up with another complaint.
Conclusion: Would I Buy It Again?
The answer is, yes. I am very happy with the Sony Alpha 100 and it lives up to my expectations for a modern 10 megapixel digital SLR.
I can also recommend the camera to any beginner through experienced amateur photographer.
There's a lot of great dSLR cameras out there, and almost none of them is a stinker. Really, I don't think you can go too far wrong, provided you buy something that fits your needs. My recommendation is to think about what you do most, and buy the camera that's best at that thing, whether it's shooting sports, landscapes, long night exposures, or existing light.
I'm an existing light, hand-held guy, so I love the Super SteadyShot and that was the killer feature that made me buy the camera. If you mostly work on a tripod, in bright sunlight, or with a flash, the image stabilization might not be that killer feature for you.
If you already have a lot of money invested in Canon, Nikon or Pentax lenses, then you might want to stay with the same system in order to make the most of your investment. If you already have a lot of Minolta glass, then I can't see a reason not step up to the A100.
Or, you might be like me -- my Nikon lens investment really isn't a lot of money because it's all used, and much of it is third-party (Sigma, Tokina, etc). So while I have to buy a few more (used) lenses, the SteadyShot more than makes up for it.
There will always be a new dSLR out there, and I'm certainly intrigued by the new Pentax K10D which also has image stabilization and 10 megapixels. But one month ago the Sony A100 is the one I could buy for a good price, and I'm glad I did. I don't know which will be better, and I probably wouldn't really care. At the end of the day I want to use a camera where I have a great deal of control to take nice pictures. The Sony A100 has only helped me do that, and hasn't gotten in my way. So I'm happy.
Recommended:
Yes
Amount Paid (US$): 800 This Camera is a Good Choice if You Want Something... Flexible Enough for Enthusiasts
10-megapixel CCD captures enough detail for photo-quality 18 x 24-inch prints 2.5-inch LCD display; in-camera image stabilization and anti-dust vibrat...More at Amazon Marketplace
Epinions.com periodically updates pricing and product information from third-party sources, so some information may be slightly out-of-date. You should confirm all information before relying on it.
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.