Sony Alpha SLT-A65V ?

[Tropical Wilds]

Hey gang!

Looking to upgrade my camera, a standard point-and-click Sony DSC-W570 16.1mp Zeiss lens to something perhaps a little nicer.

Let's start by saying I have very little knowledge in photography, though I'm trying...

That said, I know that the "go to" cameras are usually Nikon and Cannon, but I'm kind of a fan of Sony... I've used exclusively Sony products and am fairly familiar with the software, functions, etc. I see that they do have some higher end cameras, and I spotted the Sony Alpha SLT-A65V... It has a lot of the features I really like, panorama mode, 24 megapixels... But as far as Sony as a higher-end camera, I know very little in terms of reliability, ease-of-use, quality of product, etc.

I see on both B&H and BB.com the camera is really highly rated, which is encouraging, but I was wondering if anybody here had any thoughts? For the price, is it a good value, or is there maybe something out there that's better?

 

[zackiedawg]

Good news: you don't have to worry about which brand is a bigger seller or more popular - you can get an equally nice and capable DSLR/SLT from Canon, Nikon, Sony, or Pentax...brand is more a matter of features/price/ergonomics/personal preferene, not any one being better than any other.

If you've had good experience with Sony products, no reason not to strongly consider them for your next purchase - I wouldn't let that be the ONLY reason I'm looking at Sony, but it should play a part in your decision, because being happy and comfortable with a camera is a big part of taking great photos with it.

Sony's DSLR and SLT models have been around for 5 years or so, and they actually started with an already established DSLR company by taking over Minolta - the first Sony DSLRs were Minolta DSLRs reworked, and the Sony Alpha mount is still the very same as Minolta's A-mount, which means you have access to lenses going back to 1985 or so that will autofocus and work as normal on your Sony DSLRs and SLT models.

Handle the camera if you can, see how you like it. I've been shooting with Sony DSLRs since my A300 4 years ago, then an A550 and now an A580. Reliability has been stellar - not a glitch on any of them through very heavy semi-pro use. I personally love many of the unique features and abilities of the Sony DSLR and SLT line, which is why I chose it to begin with and have stayed with it so far. They fit me well ergonomically and I have had very good experience with them.

The thing to check out on the A65, to make sure you like it, is the way it works: it's an 'SLT' camera, making it a little different from the typical DSLR - it has a fixed mirror that is semi-transparent, rather than a moving mirror that flips out of the way, uses an electronic viewfinder instead of an optical one, and as with all cameras has some benefits and some compromises. The SLTs are better at video for some folks, because they can focus quickly while shooting video which other DSLRs cannot...and they tend to be fast performers in continuous shooting with focus. The compromises are that the EVF takes up battery life a bit faster than a typical DSLR (still more than your P&S models you're used to though!) and the very highest ISO performance is just a bit less than the same sensor without the translucent mirror design (still leagues above small sensor P&S cameras).

You also might look around for bargain sales on the A580 model, which was Sony's last full DSLR model and an excellent performer...or also consider looking at Sony's NEX mirrorless cameras, which give you a big DSLR sized sensor in a compact body.

Don't worry about the 'MP' number - 16MP in a big-sensor DSLR camera is many many times better than 16MP in a tiny compact P&S camera. The MP count is not as important as the size of the sensor, and all of these cameras utilize an APS-C sized sensor that is more than a dozen times larger than the tiny little sensor in P&S cameras.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

I've been using the Sony DSLR's since 2008 and also have added a mirrorless NEX 5n to my bag and I've always been very pleased with them. All of the big manufacturers have reliable cameras so I wouldn't be concerned about that.

As for ease of use back when I was looking for my first DSLR (which ended up being the Sony A700) the Sony's were the most intuitive for me to use out of all the top brands I looked at. It doesn't mean they will be for you of course but if you are used to Sony products then it's very likely it will be.

I've used the big brother to the A65 - the A77 - and it's a great camera. For the price I think the A65 is an excellent value with lots of features. I know of another person who purchased it as their first DSLR and they've been extremely happy with it.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Thanks guys, all your info has been really helpful. The information about lenses was exactly what I needed... I was worried I wouldn't have a lot to choose from going with a newer Sony.

With macro shots, again forgive me for sounding stupid, but how does that camera do? Am I going to need another lens, or can I get buy with the boxed lens and creative setting adjustment to get a decent picture? What lenses do you think are the "must have" for this style of camera?

 

[1Grumpy9]

I am looking at this camera also, but I have questions about this working in low-light situations. I would like to use it on my next WDW trip (when I get the camera) and I also would use it at concerts. I also go to NASCAR races and some of them are at night, so I would have low light situations that I need to use it in.

What I like about it is it uses the same batteries that my A300 uses, so I can use my same battery.

 

[zackiedawg]

I wouldn't worry too much, Grumpy. Though the camera didn't get the highest ratings with regards to high ISO performance compared with the very best sensors, it still performs drastically better than older sensors - the performance in low light would be a revelation next to your A300 and still among the top APS-C sensors overall. Another thing often not taken into consideration is the 24MP sensor - with all the extra resolution, once resized down to 16MP or 14MP equivalence, the sensor ends up performing about equally in low light to the excellent 16MP Sony sensor - it just 'looks' worse when pixel-peeping at 100% viewable 24MP!

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

I am looking at this camera also, but I have questions about this working in low-light situations. I would like to use it on my next WDW trip (when I get the camera) and I also would use it at concerts. I also go to NASCAR races and some of them are at night, so I would have low light situations that I need to use it in.

What I like about it is it uses the same batteries that my A300 uses, so I can use my same battery.

I'm not going to address the Sony line, because Zackiedawg definitely is the local expert on that! What I will say, because I do shoot Nascar a lot (I'm a staff track photographer at Chicagoland Speedway), shooting night races is always a challenge. You have high speed (motion) with low light. I always recommend using a camera that has a high usable ISO option. If I had an option between a SLT or DSLR camera, I would choose the DSLR. Currently in the Sony line, I would choose the Sony A580. I have the same sensor in my Pentax K-5 and it works really well with low light. Personally if I had my choice, all racing would occur in the daytime!! I thought we had gotten away from night races this year, then I discovered we are having a July Saturday night race! While great for the fans and looks great on TV, they are very hard on the staff. Good luck on your choice.

 

[zackiedawg]

Tropical,

There are different levels of 'macro', so just to clarify how it would work with a DSLR or SLT camera:

You can always do 'closeup' type shooting, even with kit lenses - depending on the minimum focus distance of a given lens, some are better than others...the more 'zoom' or telephoto ability you have, the more you can fill the frame with the subject from farther away. This would be for shooting closeups of flowers, bugs, etc. Technically, this is not true 'macro' photography - most people don't really shoot true macro anyway, that is, a 1:1 ratio. Most people shoot closeup photography, and lump it in the category of macro. The DSLR and SLT with kit or basic lenses will still be able to do this fairly well, but without the ability to stick the lens a few inches from a subject and still focus, like you can with 'macro' modes on some P&S cameras.

For THAT type of photography - true 1:1 ratio macro shooting, or lenses positioned a few inches from a subject and still focusing, you would need to buy a dedicated macro lens. Such lenses will have 'macro' somewhere in the name, so you'll know when buying. You choose the focal length of macro you're looking for, which mostly comes down to how close you actually want to be to the subject you're shooting. There are 30mm and 50mm macro lenses, which would require you to almost be touching the lens to the subject - fine for flowers and such, but maybe closer than you want to be to some bugs! There are 90mm and 100mm midrange macros which can allow you to fill the frame with super closeup detail, but step back a few inches to a foot or more...then there are telephoto macros that can extend to 200mm or 300mm and more, that can allow you to fill the frame from several feet or more away.

New macro lenses can run from reasonable prices in the $150-200 range, to much much more, depending on the focal range. But you can also pick up some used older Minolta macro lenses on the cheap, even under $100, which might be the better solution if you only do occasional macro shooting. Combine these with a 'closeup' filter, and you can increase your distance and shallow the depth of field even more. I picked up a used Tamron 90mm F2.8 macro lens years ago for about $70, and it's excellent for my occasional dabbles with maco:

I like the 90-100mm range better than the 30-50mm range, as it gives me a few extra inches' separation between the subject and me. One of the 70-210mm macro zooms might be a better solution still, since you have more focal range and can get a little farther back.

 

[1Grumpy9]

I'm not going to address the Sony line, because Zackiedawg definitely is the local expert on that! What I will say, because I do shoot Nascar a lot (I'm a staff track photographer at Chicagoland Speedway), shooting night races is always a challenge. You have high speed (motion) with low light. I always recommend using a camera that has a high usable ISO option. If I had an option between a SLT or DSLR camera, I would choose the DSLR. Currently in the Sony line, I would choose the Sony A580. I have the same sensor in my Pentax K-5 and it works really well with low light. Personally if I had my choice, all racing would occur in the daytime!! I thought we had gotten away from night races this year, then I discovered we are having a July Saturday night race! While great for the fans and looks great on TV, they are very hard on the staff. Good luck on your choice.

The only night race that I really go to (as of now) is the All Star Race in Charlotte, but that could change later in the year. I have amazing seats at start/finish line in Charlotte, so I like to take a lot of shots. I might just have to take the Minolta along that night too just to get the night shots (if I don't have my new camera by then).

I will definitely need the new camera by June 4th...I leave for Nashville on the 5th for a week (CMA Music Fest week), but I would like to have it before then.

I have been really toying on which one to get...I want to find a local store that has one so I can look at it and feel it and try it out before buying.

 

[*Dreamin'Dad*]

Just dropping by to say howdy to all and maybe to help a little. Found a gem it appears in a local Sony expert....nice! Prepare for questions Zdawg

Not to stear you in another direction, but from where you are going to what you are suggesting to go to, you may want to look at the Sony H series. I have an H9 which I still carry as a backup camera - now shooting a55.

I think the current model of the H is the Hx100v. You can learn alot using this camera and one of the best things is look at the range it has on it's lense capability - f/2.8 at the 27mm wide-angle setting and f/5.6 at the 810mm full telephoto setting. Hence the Super Zoom name.

Do some math on how much you would have to spend to get a DSLR and the lenses capable of the above.

I have been using my a55 for almost a year and it has been nothing short of spectacular making this semi-novice look good quite often. Only complaint is that is is a little more noisy than a standard DSLR. It is a fast as they claim though.

Good luck on your search and try them all out before you decide. I also have been a Sony user (Minolta too) for many years and stuck with them not only for the easy transitions, but because Sony has always been reliable for me.

SR

 

[zackiedawg]

Any time on the questions, Dad! Just throw them on the Alpha forum, and you'll get not only whatever 'expertise' I may have but some other good Sony knowledge too.

Also, good suggestion on the superzooms. At least when it comes to macro work, still superzoom cameras can be quite competitive with DSLRs, and sometimes more forgiving - you can usually get pretty decently fast apertures, closeup lenses work well with them too, they have massive optical reach which makes getting farther back from the subject a little easier, and they are even a bit more forgiving on depth of field due to the small sensors. They're not as good as the ISO goes up, and my not stand up to DSLRs for ultimate resolution across other types of shooting, but macro is one area where they are quite usable (I used to use a Sony H5 for macro/closeup work).

 

[1Grumpy9]

Just dropping by to say howdy to all and maybe to help a little. Found a gem it appears in a local Sony expert....nice! Prepare for questions Zdawg

Not to stear you in another direction, but from where you are going to what you are suggesting to go to, you may want to look at the Sony H series. I have an H9 which I still carry as a backup camera - now shooting a55.

I think the current model of the H is the Hx100v. You can learn alot using this camera and one of the best things is look at the range it has on it's lense capability - f/2.8 at the 27mm wide-angle setting and f/5.6 at the 810mm full telephoto setting. Hence the Super Zoom name.

Do some math on how much you would have to spend to get a DSLR and the lenses capable of the above.

I have been using my a55 for almost a year and it has been nothing short of spectacular making this semi-novice look good quite often. Only complaint is that is is a little more noisy than a standard DSLR. It is a fast as they claim though.

Good luck on your search and try them all out before you decide. I also have been a Sony user (Minolta too) for many years and stuck with them not only for the easy transitions, but because Sony has always been reliable for me.

SR

I have the previous verson of the Hx100 (can't remember the actuall name) that came out about 2 1/2 yrs (shortly after I bought my A300), so I have that also as a back up, but I still love having the DSLR for other things.