Sony A350 DSLR

[GoofyG]

I just purchased a Sony A350 with an 18-200mm F/3.5-6.3xr lens. I'm pretty much a beginner and will slowly wade my way through the book. Does anyone have any tips or recommendations to share with a newbe? I'll mostly be shooting my grandkids, our trips to Disneyworld and fireworks. Any help would be grately appreciated.

[KAT4DISNEY]

Congratulations GoofyG in your new Sony! I'm a newbie to the Sony DSLR's myself. I picked up the a700 two months ago and have been having a great time with it. I also had the 18-200 lens but then ended up finding a very good deal on an 18-250 and decided to go with the little longer reach but I thought the 18-200 lens took great shots. It's such a nice compact lens making it a good walk around with lots of reach as well as being wide. It should be very good for Disney in the daylight and for fireworks too.

You mentioned taking firework pics and though I'm far from being a pro I've done that now both at DL and for July 4th so I thought I'd give a couple of tips from what I've experienced. First, the SuperSteady Shot function is very helpful on the camera for handheld shots but it is recommended to turn it off when ever you have it mounted on a tripod. Also, for myself I have decided that I also like to turn off the DRO when I am shooting fireworks (and probably any night shots - like the moon), otherwise the camera is working to adjust the shadows to the highlights and that isn't what I am looking for at night.

Are you shooting in Raw or jpeg? Anything more specific you're looking for tips on? There are a few other Sony users on the board with more experience than I so hopefully they'll pop in and help out. :goodvibes

There's also a thread on some alpha shots that I'll try and locate and bump up for you to see if you haven't already. :thumbsup2

[NaeNae]

This was my post originally that I posted under my daughters name, GoofyG, but now I have my own login name.

[sherry7]

I recently got my first DSLR, a Sony A350. At the moment, I only have the kit lens, a DT 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6.

I'm coming from a Canon S2, so needless to say, I've been spoiled by the 12x optical zoom that camera has. That's the ONLY thing I don't like about my new camera, is the lack of zoom with the kit lens.

Because of budget issues, I don't plan on investing in a ton of glass. Plus, I have absolutely no desire to carry a bunch of lenses around. What I'd really like to have is a good, all around lens that I can just leave on the camera for the majority of the time.

I take mostly pics of my family, pets, vacation pics, a bit of outdoors stuff, etc. Just general all-around stuff.

Here are some lenses I am considering at the moment:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00067ILI0/ref=ord_cart_shr?_encoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance $349 after rebate (I saw this for $50 cheaper at another website, but I have to find it again.)

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0009XQPK2/ref=ord_cart_shr?_encoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance $306.17

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000EXT5AY/ref=ord_cart_shr?_encoding=UTF8&v=glance $149.95

So please, give me your opinions or suggestions. I freely admit that I'm uneducated about lenses, so please keep it simple. ;) Thanks!

[Code]

28mm isn't very wide for an all-purpose lens, and these are better quality anyway:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_p?url=search-alias%3Dphoto&field-keywords=18-250mm+sony+3.5-6.3&x=0&y=0

The 18-250mm are more money than those you linked but they are very highly rated lenses in terms of superzooms, they would take you wider on the short end than you were used to with your S2, and just about as long on the telephoto end.

Two lenses are almost always better than 1 to cover both wide and tele, but if you are in it for convenience, I would recommend one of these. Sony used Tamron's design so unless you are attached to the brand, the Tamron is just as good.

Also, be weary of any site that is significantly lower price than any of Amazon, B&H, Adorama, Beach Camera, or BuyDig. Amazon is very good at being the cheapest game in town, much lower sets off the bait&switch scam alarm. Always check resellerratings.com.

[KAT4DISNEY]

The lens that came to my mind immediately is what Code recommended. If I had to suddenly give up all my lenses (and I've collected a few since I got my Sony in May ;)) I'm 99% certain that my 18-250 is the lens that I would keep. Considering it is a super zoom I think it provides amazing pictures. If there's anyway you could swing it I would do the Tamron version (since it's a little cheaper and rates very similar to the Sony).

Personally I have found that having the wider 18mm has been important with the APS-C sensor.

Actually - since the lens you have is the 18-70 do you find you're using the 18mm or always zooming in?

[sherry7]

28mm isn't very wide for an all-purpose lens, and these are better quality anyway:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_p?url=search-alias%3Dphoto&field-keywords=18-250mm+sony+3.5-6.3&x=0&y=0

The 18-250mm are more money than those you linked but they are very highly rated lenses in terms of superzooms, they would take you wider on the short end than you were used to with your S2, and just about as long on the telephoto end.

Two lenses are almost always better than 1 to cover both wide and tele, but if you are in it for convenience, I would recommend one of these. Sony used Tamron's design so unless you are attached to the brand, the Tamron is just as good.

Also, be weary of any site that is significantly lower price than any of Amazon, B&H, Adorama, Beach Camera, or BuyDig. Amazon is very good at being the cheapest game in town, much lower sets off the bait&switch scam alarm. Always check resellerratings.com.

Thanks for the advice Code and Kat. :)

I probably should have mentioned that I'm on a budget. $300-$350 is pretty much my max.

[sherry7]

..........Actually - since the lens you have is the 18-70 do you find you're using the 18mm or always zooming in?

I just noticed this question. I very seldom use the lens at the 18mm point. I always seem to be zooming in quite a bit. That's why I was considering the 28-300mm lenses.

[zackiedawg]

I know you've heard it before - but it's as true with lenses as with anything I can think of - you get what you pay for! Don't go too cheap with lenses, because the quality will suffer.

In the case of the Tamron 28-300...it's not a bad lens - best for outdoor use in good light. It will degrade quickly in low light though. It focuses somewhat slow, and has trouble getting autofocus in low light or indoor situations.

These are fairly common problems with the cheaper lenses, by the way. The 18-250 is a much faster focusing lens and surprisingly good in low light, but it costs alot more.

Also, consider used lenses. There are some reputable resellers out there for purchasing used lenses, that have return policies if not up to your standards, and rate lenses based on condition. There are so many older Minolta lenses out there that work with your camera, that you might get a better deal finding a good lens that's used rather than a cheap new one. Minolta's "Big Beercan", the nickname for the AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6, is a very good lens that would serve the long end of your zoom and can be found for $250-350 used - it's of much better build quality and optic quality than some of those cheap megazoom lenses available today. It wouldn't give you anything on the wide end, but would give you as much telephoto range (more, actually) as your Canon S-series did. You could keep the kit lens for wider work.

There is a used lens and camera site called KEH (www.keh.com) which is very well respected which is worth a look - I've bought a used lens from them which was much better condition than what they rated, and only cost me $60...so they are even a bit conservative on their condition estimates. You might be able to find higher quality optics for a little less. You can also check sites like B&H or Adorama for used lenses.

[thomas998]

I think it depends on where you plan on doing most of your shooting... I got a 28-300mm under the thought that I could take it and not bother with any other lenses when I went out... I used it on one trip to Disney... I think I got some decent shots of animals at AK... but the last time I went, I don't think I ever used the lens... its heavy... very heavy and it was easier to carry around two smaller lenses than that 28-300...

And if you shoot alot indoors then you wouldn't use the 28-300 its too slow and not wide enough... I suspect that at the very least you'll be looking at two lenses one you use inside and one outside.... and frankly the wide angle for outside really is more useful than a lot of zoom... aside from trying to get some animals... I tend to think zooms are a little over rated. Its very easy to get caught up in the more zoom is better mindset but when you really look at the best shots you get they are rarely from a zoom.

But if you want the zoom, I think I might suggest that if you want to keep cost down you look at the 70-300.... or look on ebay for a used minolta 70-300mm... I just did a quick search and there is someone selling an old Minolta Maxxum 7000 with a 28-70mm and 70-300mm for $99 buy it now.... you could buy that and then flip the 28-70mm and minolta camera for 30 or 40 bucks and end up with your 70-300mm for close to $50 net.

The one good thing about a Sony Alpha is the vibration reduction is built in to the camera and it used all the old Minolta AF lenses... not to mention some of the older minolta lenses are better quality than the new plastic lenses they sell for sonys today.

[MICKEY88]

Its very easy to get caught up in the more zoom is better mindset but when you really look at the best shots you get they are rarely from a zoom.

.. I just did a quick search and there is someone selling an old Minolta Maxxum 7000 with a 28-70mm and 70-300mm for $99 buy it now.... you could buy that and then flip the 28-70mm and minolta camera for 30 or 40 bucks and end up with your 70-300mm for close to $50 net.

.

I respectfully disagree with the first thought, that may be your personal preference, but quite often the best shots are captured with zooms by eliminating things that aren't essential to the photo..

, if I'm looking at the right camera on ebay , it appears that neither lens is a minolta lens..


It comes with a Samyang AF 28-75mm F3.5-4.5 Zoom and Quantaray 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 zoom

I personally have never heard of samyang lenses.. and the quantary lenses were never known for being the greatest of quality...

[thomas998]

I respectfully disagree with the first thought, that may be your personal preference, but quite often the best shots are captured with zooms by eliminating things that aren't essential to the photo..

, if I'm looking at the right camera on ebay , it appears that neither lens is a minolta lens..


It comes with a Samyang AF 28-75mm F3.5-4.5 Zoom and Quantaray 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 zoom

I personally have never heard of samyang lenses.. and the quantary lenses were never known for being the greatest of quality...

If you read my post, you would know that I said that a zoom comes in handy for animals. For anything else that isn't spooked its just as easy to simply walk closer. I'll take the time to walk closer to what I'm shooting any day over using a zoom.... and usually that's possible except with things like animals.

And yes, I've never heard of a Samyang... but I also simply suggested getting the set and then selling that lens and the camers... while Quantaray lenses aren't top of the line lenses I would put them in the same tier as other third parties like Sigma... The OP is clearly on a budget so going out and getting Zeiss glass isn't a likely option... so if your going to go for off brand why not get reasonably priced off-brand. If they think they like a big zoom they can always make a quality zoom purchase later in life.

[KAT4DISNEY]

There is a used lens and camera site called KEH (www.keh.com) which is very well respected which is worth a look - I've bought a used lens from them which was much better condition than what they rated, and only cost me $60...so they are even a bit conservative on their condition estimates. You might be able to find higher quality optics for a little less. You can also check sites like B&H or Adorama for used lenses.

I bought my Sony 18-250 used as well as a couple other Minolta lenses from KEH and was very pleased - especially for getting my Sony in like new condition. I did see that they have a used Sony 18-200 for $299 which is the lens I had purchased new when I got my camera, although I ended up returning it when I found the used 18-250 for a little less than the other was new.

The 18-200 is also a decently rated lens. It is lighter than the 18-250 b/c it has a plastic mount which is probably part of the lower price. I was pleased with the pictures that it produced though and did not notice much, if any difference in focus speed compared to the 18-250. It would be giving up distance on the long end however, compared to what you are looking at.

KEH does allow returns if you didn't like the lens. I haven't regretted for a second buying good condition used lenses and saving some $$$'s!

[MICKEY88]

If you read my post, you would know that I said that a zoom comes in handy for animals. For anything else that isn't spooked its just as easy to simply walk closer. I'll take the time to walk closer to what I'm shooting any day over using a zoom.... and usually that's possible except with things like animals.

And yes, I've never heard of a Samyang... but I also simply suggested getting the set and then selling that lens and the camers... while Quantaray lenses aren't top of the line lenses I would put them in the same tier as other third parties like Sigma... The OP is clearly on a budget so going out and getting Zeiss glass isn't a likely option... so if your going to go for off brand why not get reasonably priced off-brand. If they think they like a big zoom they can always make a quality zoom purchase later in life.

I did read your post, and I respectfully disagreed, so there really is no need to get defensive.
walking closer works in some cases, but not all, and animals are not the exception...
the minute you walk closer to children, you've lost the moment, walking closer to children on a sports field, not doable..walking closer to floats in the main st parade to get good shots of individual characters..not doable.. walking closer to get good individual shots of characters on stage at WDW not doable..shooting people or models, a good fast zoom gives the best selective focus without getting too close to the subject and making them uncomfortable..

this is what a good zoom allows you to do at wdw..

http://images19.fotki.com/v34/photos/8/86568/368395/008_5-vi.jpg

http://images19.fotki.com/v34/photos/8/86568/368395/010_7-vi.jpg

on this trip I was using 2 bodies, my 35-105, and my 100-300
this combination or my 28-300 gives the versatility to shoot an entire float, then quickly zoom for a head shot..,

my point was and is... that for your type of shooting zooms may be over rated, but for many other people they are a neccessity..
having sold cameras for 3 years, I would never put the quantary lenses on the same level, as other 3rd party lenses even though they were supposedly made by sigma.. the pictures I saw coming thru our lab, just indicated differently.
Zeiss glass was never mentioned, neither were Minolta g lenses, so that is irrelevent..
the other inherent problem with buying a maxxum 7000 package to get a used minolta lens, is that you stand a good chance of getting an original series maxxum lens. the I series and later lenses are much faster autofocusing and quieter..

[DisneyDreamerK]

I just purchased the 70-300mm for my Sony A300.

I want to exchange it for the 18-250mm only because the 70-300 is very large and heavy. I can't imagine it being theme park friendly, I don't want to bring a backpack and I don't want to constantly switch lenses. Plus I am pretty clumsy so I picture myself dropping the lens or the body while swapping. lol

[sherry7]

Thanks everyone for the replies and advice. :)

I seriously considered the Sony 18-200mm and 18-250mm, but in the end, I just couldn't justify the cost. I'm a total beginner with my DSLR, but perhaps as time goes by, I'll think I'm good enough to invest more money in glass. ;)

I ended up "cheaping" out, and got this one on eBay: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160286736718&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fshop.ebay.com%3A80%2F%3F_from%3DR4 0%26_trksid%3Dm38%26_nkw%3D160286736718%26_sacat%3 DSee-All-Categories%26_fvi%3D1

I think the price was okay (from my very limited experience), and if I end up not liking it, I think I can sell it on eBay and recoup most or all of my money spent.

[DizzyV6P]

A good friend just got a new Sony Alpha A350. Can anyone with a Sony Alpha recommend any good forums specific to the Alpha's?

I know all the Nikon and Canon forums, but have no clue on the Alphas.

Thanks!

[MICKEY88]

this one is specifically sony

http://www.dynaxdigital.com/



this one has a sony section

http://photocamel.com

[zackiedawg]

Also, there is a fairly active page for Sony DSLRs on the large dpreview.com forums. It's a huge photo forum broken down by camera brand and model line - Sony DSLR is one of the larger sub-forums.

And lens & other info can be found at dyxum.com which is technically a Minolta site, but since Sony cameras are now the replacement for Minolta and the Minolta lens line is compatible with Sony, many of the forum members there are Sony users now (it's also a convenient place to check out used lens ratings and info for Alpha users).

[BCV2003]

My BF bought me the Sony A350 as a Christmas gift.

Any users out there that have any helpful tips or tricks they'd like to share?

[zackiedawg]

Check out this thread, that has lots of pics from other Sony Alpha users (including the A300/350). It will give you some inspiration for the types of photos taken, as well as some information on lenses and accessories being used and techniques:

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1508616

And of course, feel free to just ask any particular questions you may have in this thread, in that one, or in a new one. Anybody familiar with the A3xx series I'm sure would be willing to pop in and answer any questions that come up.

I use the A300, which is nearly a twin of the A350 - the controls, lens mounts, live view, tilt screen, menus, etc are all identical. So I'd be glad to answer any questions I can for you.

[DisneydaveCT]

My BF bought me the Sony A350 as a Christmas gift.

Any users out there that have any helpful tips or tricks they'd like to share?


Congratulations on your new camera. I saw your reference to it on one of the singles threads, and wondered if you might pop in on the photo board.

I am a Pentax user so I can't give you any pointers about your new Sony.

I hope all is well.

[ABBYSDAD]

Hi fellow Disers. I'm getting ready to purchase a new point and shoot, and am very interested in the Sony panoramic feature, and a good movie capability. I know next to nothing about photography, and I'm not sure if I really need the premium features of the more expensive Sonys. I've had a basic (paid about $100) Casio, and I have a Sony HD cam corder (which I would rather not take on vacation due to size if I can get good movies from a camera).

I've compared the specs between the three models in the thread title, and honestly, I don't really know how important each spec is. I'm willing to pay the extra money for the TX7, but I don't want to just buy the most expensive model without really knowing if I'm going to get an advantage for the money. Can anyone offer opinions of the three models, and suggest whether or not one is really that much better than the others, with the knowledge that the user is a very casual photographer?

I'll use the camera for family photos and movies, vacation photos and movies.

TIA

[zackiedawg]

Of the three you mentioned, the TX7 has some distinct advantages that I would consider worth it over the other two...but I'd also say that there might be other models worth considering too that might be between the prices of those above. First off, the TX7 is a better build quality - the other two you mention are 'bargain' models of better editions. The TX7 includes not only panorama mode, but the very trick Handheld Twilight mode (very very useful for low light and night shooting handheld), HDR mode (fun), and Anti Motion Blur mode (when you absolutely need to freeze the action even if you get a little grainy). It has a nicer LCD screen too - top res...and the top-spec HD video mode.

Now that said, you might also consider the TX5 - it's a slimmer, cheaper relative of the TX7 - it has a more basic HD video, and a less high-res LCD screen, but it has the advantage of being waterproof, shockproof, and dustproof - you can even snorkel underwater with it. I personally find it the better buy between those two. And if you're looking at the H55, I'd say consider spending a bit more (closer to TX7 money) and get the HX5...this model is higher-spec than the H55, with the afformentioned HDR, HHT, and AMB modes like the TX7, as well as built-in GPS. And on the W350, I'd consider spending a bit more for the newly announced and just-hitting-the-shelves WX5, which should have better specifications including the HHT and HDR modes, as well as a faster F2.4 aperture lens for good low light ability.

Just a few to consider. I have good experience with Sony, so I wouldn't tell you to necessarily shop elsewhere - but I'd also encourage you to cross shop a few other brands too - there are some nifty cameras out there (not better or worse than the Sonys...just other good options!) - Panasonic & Canon make some decent competition, and even a few interesting cameras from Fuji and Samsung. But if you like the Sony selection or have a reason to stick with them, that's fine too - I'd suggest checking out the TX5 and HX5 specifically along with the TX7 and WX5.

[BuzzLiteyear]

I have had the HX5 for about a week now. The HD video is unbelievable. Looked great on the computer and just as good on a 42" TV. I took it to a local theme park to test it for WDW, and had mixed results with the pictures. Granted, I'm still learning to use it and I was trying to take pictures under some rather extreme conditions for a p&s. I am certain that it will do what I need it to do. Most of the pics that came out poorly were taken after 9 pm using various settings. Part of my comparisons are based on my DSLR performance, so this camera has a lot to live up to.

[ABBYSDAD]

Thanks for the info and advice Zackiedawg. I've read some reviews on the TX5. Sounds like the only real con most people have is with the touch screen. Some are reporting that the touch screen is not real responsive. Any comments?
Good luck with your new HX5 BuzzLiteyear.

[zackiedawg]

Re: the touchscreen - I will be very honest - I had no interest in one at all, and you could paint me as one of the fiercest anti-touchscreen crusaders there was. You'll find posts in the dpreview forums from last year stating as much when Sony came out with the TX series cams - I had a beloved T100 with buttons and pads instead of a touch screen, and was very disappointed that Sony was headed that direction with the T-series cameras that I loved. I did not actually plan to buy the TX1 I have now...I was happy with my T100, and would have kept it another year or two for sure. But I had a friend who had bought the TX1, and his girlfriend just had a general dislike of Sony for no real reason (as many people do) - so she wanted him to get something else. Being completely whipped, he obliged, and offered to unload his 2 month old TX1 for $100. Despite having no interest in a new camera, or the touch-screen controlled TX1, I couldn't pass up a $300 camera for $100, so I decided maybe I'd have some fun with the low light features...and just put up with the touch screen.

That's a true story. I still hated it when I first got the camera. Then I started using it. And my mind changed immediately. On an ultracompact camera, the touch screen just made sense, and offered some key control advantages over any other ultracompact camera I've ever seen. First, the touch screen sensitivity has not been any problem on mine - it responds quickly to all presses, even when made through a waterproof bag (TX1 isn't waterproof, so an aquapac is needed) or with a glove. The onscreen buttons are well laid out and easy to press accurately. I'm not sure if some folks get bad screens, or just aren't used to them, or have odd hands...but I can't say I've had any problems.

Here's where the real advantage comes in for me: The touch screen is customizable! You have 4 icons down the left side of the LCD for direct access to controls. By default, these are set up with mostly worthless things for me, like face-detection, smile shutter, steadyshot, and scene modes. At the top, the main Menu button is always fixed on the left. But the 4 icons down the left can all be user-set to whatever Menu controls you use most often. The main menu has all the camera's settings in it - focus mode, focus points, metering mode, metering area, white balance, ISO, scene modes, steadyshot, dynamic range optimization, etc. So as a 'photographer', having access to some of those more used features is nice - on almost all compact cameras, there are no direct buttons for most of those controls, so menu diving is needed, and multiple presses to make changes. With the touch screen, you essentially can render key controls as 'direct access buttons' with one-touch access. My main screen has ISO, focus area, White balance, and EV down the left side. One press of any of these, then an on-screen slider or selection to make the change.

Another very nice touch screen advantage - you have completely and infinitely variable spot focus control by touching anywhere on the screen to focus on that precise point. This is a wonderful little feature that gives a surprising amount of control over what is essentially a fully automatic camera. And when entering specialty modes like HHT, AMB, and HDR, most Sony cameras resort to multi-point focus with no way to override (HX1, HX5, WX1, and WX5, for example). When focusing in low light, it can make it very hard to find focus, whereas spot focus could pinpoint on a particular area and gain focus. The TX-series cameras' touch-focus mode remains active in all modes, so you can touch the screen and grab spot focus anywhere, anytime. Also in the specialty modes like HDR, many users of the HX5 have struggled to properly meter the shot (with HDR mode, the first exposure will always be for highlights and the second for shadow, but since the camera can only use wide area metering, you can't spot meter on a specific area to expose directly for the highlights). Half-pressing the shutter on the HX5 will lock focus AND exposure, so you can't focus in one place, then recompose to meter another. With the TX touch-spot focus, you can - tilt up to meter off of the sky or a light, while pressing spot focus at the very bottom of the screen to focus off of a tree or chair...half-press and you've locked focus and metering in two different spots.

Hope that helps a little. Not that the HX5 has anything wrong with it - it has much more zoom range and GPS and excellent reviews, so it may suit your needs much more than the TX series. But the TX series does have some nice advantages for those who want a little control over the exposures and shots, without having to go to a true manual controlled camera with a larger sensor (and the resultant larger body!). And even some folks like me, who couldn't possibly be more against the touch-screen concept, have been won over by the inherent logic and additional user-control and customization, it affords.

[Keebles]

I'm really glad this thread came up...even though I got a new camera last year (my first Sony, a DSC-W290, not a great camera, but completely different from the Kodaks I've always used), I was looking really hard at the TX7. My only complaint with the W290 was the quality of the low light/night shots and I'm not proficient enough to use an SLR (or rich enough to buy one).

You guys have helped me make my decision, so thanks to the OP for the question and thanks for all the reviews!

[NaeNae]

I currently have a Tamron 18-200mm zoom lens that I love. But after DGD6's gymnastics meet yesterday I think I need something with more zoom power. The meet was held in her "home" gym so we were sitting pretty close and I wasn't real happy about the shots I could get. I know that there are lots of meets that we will be further away from the girls and I still want to be able to get good shots! I would love some input on a new lens! TIA

[KAT4DISNEY]

That's kind of a hard one. Usually when shooting indoors you want a fast lens (constant f 2.8) and anything longer than 200mm and fast will be fairly expensive. Do you have a budget in mind? Are you able to crop you photos? Often in sporting events I will do that if I'm further away from the action.

[zackiedawg]

Agree with Kathy - a budget, and what willingness you have regarding lens size, would really be needed to make recommendations. Fast zooms are both pricey and large & heavy. Going the prime lens route will have the same problem in most cases. Sony makes a very nice 80-400 G lens, which is around $1500, and is F4-5.6, so even fully zoomed it will be a little more sensitive and faster than your 18-200. Move into the F2.8 lenses, and the price goes up!

One possible alternative is the newly announced Tamron 70-300 F4-5.6 - still not a super-fast lens, but reasonably compact for the range, a little faster than your current 18-200 with more range, and priced around $500 (note you'll see the older Tamron 70-300 around for $100-150...the new one is said to be significantly better, so make sure if you read reviews, or see prices that you're quoting the new model!!).

[Pugrpooh]

Can't help you with Sony -- I have Olympus -- but DD8 is also in gymnastics and here are some pictures I've taken that have come out ok. I'll post the settings so maybe that could help you with your own camera.

These are straight OOC. The first picture is taken with my 70-300mm.
Settings: 100mm, f4.1, 1/15sec, ISO 400

http://lynn59.smugmug.com/Around-home/October/PS110551/1063316076_EdLkr-L.jpg

This is with my 12-60mm lens. You can also see the type of lighting we have in our gym.
Settings: 60mm, f4.0, 1/50sec, ISO 1000

http://lynn59.smugmug.com/Around-home/October/Gymnastics-096849/1063320767_8pKEh-L.jpg

Also with the 12-60.
Settings: 60mm, f4.0, 1/40sec, ISO 1000

http://lynn59.smugmug.com/Around-home/October/Gymnastics-096824/1063343938_5y8dy-L.jpg

Of course at these shutter speeds there's a lot of motion blur, but I usually set my camera to burst mode and I'll have at least a few keepers. The only thing I think that will help with that is to get close and use a flash to be able to get a faster shutter speed. But we can't ever get close enough for that.

Maybe you can try different settings at her practices before her next meet. My DD has her first meet ever in less than two weeks!