# sony alpha a350 or canon eos 450d?



## lethbridge (Jul 12, 2008)

Hi all,

Looking to upgrade from my sony T9 compact to a DSLR. Currently looking at either the Sony a300 or 350 and the canon EOS 450d. The camera will generally be used for holidays and general family outings / portraits etc. Would like a camera that can have a good lens for all occaisions rather than having to carry multiple lenses. My only other option is a 'bridge' camera but feel this will be too similar to my compact??. Getting fed up with sutter lag and missing capturing those great moments.

Any advice on an entry DSLR would be great, not wanting to spend to much.

Thanks for any help.


----------



## RichieLee (Jun 29, 2008)

I got a refurbed a350 and it's an amazing step up image quality wise from my previous pentax k100d dslr. 

I'd say the Sony is much more suited to casual photography, whereas the canon is a good basis if you want to take dslrs seriously. The reason I say this is that there are a lot more better pro level equipment for the canon, the sony it seems to be more of an amateur-intermediate camera because you cant easily get real pro lenses for the sony range. I'm a beginner myself so forgive me if I'm speaking a load of bs.

I find the sony's flip out live view display an amazing function to use and is ideal for taking those high up shots or really low down shots (the screen pops out and moves on a hinge) and although megapixels dont mean much in the dslr game I have to say there is a very very noticeable difference between the 14.2 of my sony and the 6.1 of my previous Pentax. 

Also as far as standard kit goes I find the 15-70 of the sony lens more useful than the 15-55 of the previous pentax, I think the canon has a 55 jobby too. 

Upgrade lenses for the sony are a hell of a lot cheaper too compared to the canon but I bet the canon jobbies are better quality. However the Sonys are compatible with minolta lens from around 30yrs ago to present day ones so good lenses are availible too if you wanted to go down that route.

I dont regret choosing the A350 at all, it's a great bit of kit is extremely easy to use and as a student i cant afford the pro level stuff for the canon anyway, the sony does all I want it to do and bang for buck wise there's nothing that comes even close. If however you can afford the canon gear then go for it, judging from my brother's 40d, the canons definitely seem better put together but I dont know what the 450d is like I'm afraid. Good luck with your choice.

Rich


----------



## partrir (Mar 31, 2009)

Canon has a better range of accessories and better support network for repairs (if you ever need it).

As for cost of lenses...There are some cheaper Canon lenses about - for example, you would probably pick up a second hand Canon 75-300mm f4-5.6 III zoom for about £100 (new about £190), but you pays your money, you takes your choice. There's nothing "wrong" with that lens, but for comparison, I use a similar focal length lens (100 to 400mm), and I paid over £1K for it, but paying my mortgage relies on me taking high quality pics!!!

Sigma and Tamron make some stonking good pro-am lenses for the Canon too.

A good source for independant reviews of all makes is www.dpreview.com

Hope this helps.


----------



## bretti_kivi (Apr 22, 2008)

First off: 
All Pentax lenses made with a K mount work on ALL Pentax DSLRs. 
All older Minolta lenses work on the Sony Alpha models as far as I know (I have a friend with an A200 who does just this).

The Pentax standard kit lens is an 18-55mm. It's widely reputed (if you read reviews) to be better than either the Canon or Nikon kit lenses. Pentax also has VR in the body, so you can buy old lenses and still have VR as opposed to Canikon where you don't.
Sigma has a rep on other forums of iffy quality control; some lenses are excellent, others less so. Cheap lenses are generally just that. Which is why I like using the ancient Pentax glass....

As far as Megapixels is concerned, if you really think the K100D was "bad", then you weren't using it properly. There are two pictures embedded below: one of these was taken with a K100D, another with a K10D. You tell me, without reading the EXIFs, which one's which? They are both processed RAWs, using the same lens, an M 135/3.5;


















The K10D gave me more shots in a row and as a result more junk. I did three trackdays one week after another, I had the K100d for the first and the K10d for the second and third. Much better it wasn't, especially with a manual lens.

I defy anyone who's not printing in magazines at 300dpi to turn round and say "I can see the grain on that" from 10MP at A2 or 6MP at A3+ (that's around 15" x 12") - I am starting to see grain at A2 with the K10D. 14MP is *not necessary* and, if anything, counterproductive.
You are entering a world where "never mind the width, feel the quality" counts. Do away with your preconception that "more megapixels is better" because it's not true. You have the option to crop more, but I'd rather have a full frame sensor that performs well at high ISO with only 12MP (like the D3) than something which squeezes 24MP onto a smaller sensor and is a hell of a lot noisier as a result.

Which camera? I'll say it again: if you haven't held the camera in your hand, you shouldn't buy it. I refused to go Canon for well documented reasons and Pentax is the only one - as far as I'm aware - who actually does international warranties. Buy a Nikon body in the states and you have no warranty or comeback in the UK. If you can't get on with the logic on the body and it doesn't feel comfortable, you won't use it which is pointless.

Get out there, use it, see what happens.

Bret


----------



## Oliscrim (May 8, 2009)

Might not be of interest to you, but there is a Canon EOS 450D going for £430 (open to offers it says) on CS. Not seller, but thought you might be interested in it!


----------



## RichieLee (Jun 29, 2008)

Calm down now Bretti, I was only posting concerning my own personal experiences with my pentax and now my A350. Yes you have a point, I may well not be using it completely correctly, as I stated I'm completely new to this dslr and photography game, but I never said that the Pentax was in anyway "bad" as you put it.

I was completely satisified with the Pentax until the flash mechanism gave up ghost hence why I got a refund and spent the cash on a sony A350. Now I also stated that pixel count doesn't mean very much in the dslr game but from my _own_ beginner's personal experience with the 2 cameras, judging by photos taken with both cameras there does seem to be a noticeable difference on the camera screen but this may be just due to the screen quality on both cameras differing. This was never intended as a slag off pentax statement as it never typed in that context, it was merely a comparison with what I've experienced.

As for the photos you've included, nice shots! I'm guessing the second is the K10 and the first a K100 as it seems more blurred but like I said I'm a beginner so I have no idea really! I dont even know what an exif is.

OP stated that:

* "The camera will generally be used for holidays and general family outings / portraits etc. Would like a camera that can have a good lens for all occaisions rather than having to carry multiple lenses."*

so in this case, I recommended the Sony from his choices as the flip out screen and longer scope lens is a far more usable (not necessarily better) kit in standard guise, and if need be he could get a bigger uprated lens for a cheaper price than pentax, nikon or canon derivatives or get an awesome quality old minolta lens. Yes you get what you pay for but the guy said he didn't want to spend much and for the price, the sony packs some serious punch in the package it offers for the A350 and dare I say it offers more than my previous Pentax K100d did, but may I stress I got my A350 at an extremely cheap price as it was a refurb ( a little more than K100d at retail price) and I'm not sure how the K100d vs A350 RRP compares.

I'm off to read DSLR for beginners now so I can get to grips with all this terminology.

Rich


----------



## bretti_kivi (Apr 22, 2008)

Sorry, that's how I read it and it made me see red. The post above is one of the better justifications I've read recently; it makes sense, it's got reasoning and acknowledgment that a good deal was had. That's more than most ever bother to do. :thumb:
I think it's very similar in Cameras to Audio and car finishes. You think it's OK until you see or hear or feel something better and you realise just how much you're missing out on. I think that there's very little to choose from in the DSLR world; you either need the reach / lenses Canikon can give or you go a slightly different path with 4/3 (Olympus), Sony or Pentax. Each have their own foibles and I can't emphasise enough the requirement that anyone needs to understand and feel good about their camera otherwise they're simply not going to use it. Too big? Bad. Too heavy? Bad. Awkward to hold? Incomprehensible Menu system? I think you get the idea.

If I was buying something for the wife, it would be a K-m with an 18-250, simply because it's small, light, and she could get 90% of the shots she wants / needs without changing any lenses at all. She needs a camera to take pics, not a camera for ..... I feel pretentious now, but "art" is the right word. She doesn't go out to take pics, I do. That I have the lenses and could steal it any time is a nice side-effect. 

For the OP: I'd actually go a step further and say "try and get a kit in combination with an 18-135" - it makes a pretty good 7 x zoom. It should also be cheaper than a full 18-250, which I'd suggest as the real "always on" solution. There's a refurb Nikon D40 over at SRS for £250; add an 18-250 and it's extremely small, light and capable, for around five hundred quid. 

It's been said before, I'll say it again; go and pick them up and test them.

Bret

EDIT: if you want to know how something works, ask. There are lots of good photographers posting here. EXIF: the camera and shot information is generally saved into the picture. So, the information like "Canon EOS400D" "1/100", "f8", "ISO400" is included. This is nice to have as it means you can begin to see how the shot was taken.


----------



## p1tse (Feb 4, 2007)

i brought the kit and now want to learn

i got the sony a300 and it's a good bit of kit
think the a350 has higher MP, but it uses the same sensor size, so not much improvement made there for the extra cost. 

i went with the a300 like the a350 with liveview option for family members and awkward positions.

i introduced myself to dslr with a nikon d40, and do miss part of the nikon like menu, feel etc. would have liked to upgrade with nikon but too expensive and lenses are pricey too


----------



## siphoto (Apr 20, 2009)

I think the Sony is good for the money although id prefer to use a D90 for that sort of price. I just think the build of the sony is too plasticy and i don't like their menu system. But to be honest if youve not got anything to compare it to then you'd love either.


----------



## RichieLee (Jun 29, 2008)

bretti_kivi said:


> Sorry, that's how I read it and it made me see red. The post above is one of the better justifications I've read recently; it makes sense, it's got reasoning and acknowledgment that a good deal was had. That's more than most ever bother to do. :thumb:
> I think it's very similar in Cameras to Audio and car finishes. You think it's OK until you see or hear or feel something better and you realise just how much you're missing out on. I think that there's very little to choose from in the DSLR world; you either need the reach / lenses Canikon can give or you go a slightly different path with 4/3 (Olympus), Sony or Pentax. Each have their own foibles and I can't emphasise enough the requirement that anyone needs to understand and feel good about their camera otherwise they're simply not going to use it. Too big? Bad. Too heavy? Bad. Awkward to hold? Incomprehensible Menu system? I think you get the idea.
> 
> If I was buying something for the wife, it would be a K-m with an 18-250, simply because it's small, light, and she could get 90% of the shots she wants / needs without changing any lenses at all. She needs a camera to take pics, not a camera for ..... I feel pretentious now, but "art" is the right word. She doesn't go out to take pics, I do. That I have the lenses and could steal it any time is a nice side-effect.
> ...


That's ok, didn't mean imply any kind of slating to the pentax brand if that is what was seemingly implied. And yes like I said before the pentax was a great bit of kit whilst it lasted and it lasted 11months! (bear in mind the camera took a battering the amount of places I went with it bloody students eh?) I also noticed towards the end of its life, on every image I took there was a swirly mark in every picture, like there was dust or hair on the lens or something, even after cleaning it out it was still there so dont know what went wrong with that one! My friend however still has his K100d and it hasn't missed a beat!

I wouldn't say using the camera for aristic purposes is anyway pretentious, as an illustration student myself of course I'd say that but there is a definite difference between pointing and shooting with a compact and fiddling with settings so it evokes that ideal picture at the right moment, there's definitely an art to it :thumb:

So how do you identify the EXIF then? Like you said in the initial post "without looking at the EXIF" is it simply a case of checking the properties of the image? I just tried it and it didn't state anything :s

And yes I managed to pick up my refurb for an extremely good price, and it captures great quality images, still have to get used to the menu system though. A couple of cool little quirks I have noticed is that when you put your eye to the viewfinder the camera detects this and auto focuses ready and also in live view mode the menu recognises when it's tilted sidewards and changes orientation accordingly. gimmicks but very user friendly gimmicks that aids a beginner none the less that weren't apparent in my last camera.

I must admit however, that the sony is more plastic-y and does seem more unwieldy in my hands (small), still comfortable but not as solid feeling or chunky as the pentax unit. Compared to a canon 40d though, the sony isn't anywhere near the same league as far as I've experienced, but again we're talking a much more expensive unit with the 40d I've read that the 450d is also a pretty small unit like the sony.

from your post OP, if it were between the sony and the 450d I'd certainly have a go at some demonstrator models that I'm sure a reputable camera shop would let you hold to get a feel for it. But also you must ultimately consider whether you want a cheaper camera with more gimmicks that makes life easier for someone migrating from point and shoot or going for a good foundation camera that opens up the world of 'proper' lenses so that if you want to take it further in the future you can take it further. I went for the sony because it was an irresistible opportunity and I wanted decent pics but not rely on it for a living 

Rich


----------



## p1tse (Feb 4, 2007)

siphoto said:


> I think the Sony is good for the money although id prefer to use a D90 for that sort of price. I just think the build of the sony is too plasticy and i don't like their menu system. But to be honest if youve not got anything to compare it to then you'd love either.


if i had the cash i would have gone nikon d90

i've now built a system up on the sony.

i also think the lcd display on the nikon was better than my current sony, but then it's used for temporarily checking pics etc. so no biggie

depends on your budget. you might want to get a cheaper body and a better lens


----------



## bretti_kivi (Apr 22, 2008)

EXIF: check out the link: http://www.23hq.com/bretti_kivi/photo/3961999/meta

It will show you the metadata which has been taken from the EXIF. Note that there's no aperture given, because the ancient 135 used does not transmit aperture information back to the camera; I'm pretty sure it's f/8.

Bret


----------



## lethbridge (Jul 12, 2008)

Thanks for all the usefull info, Still pretty confused but plan on making a visit this weekend to try them both out! Have also heard rumors that the new sony models will be announced soon A330, 380 etc. That could throw another spanner into the works.

Also looking at the Sony HX1 bridge camera as another alternative, I understand this is a competely different type of camera so need to check them all out and see which suits my needs the best. Thanks again for your comments.


----------



## entwisi (Apr 21, 2009)

one thing to also consider.

With use of an adaptor the Canon can use all teh 'old' Pentax M42 thread lenses. these are a lot cheaper to buy S/H than fancy new lenses and IMHO there are some absolute stunning pieces of glass. I picked most of mine up from fleabay although a couple came from my local camera shop.

Personally I have the following in my collection

37mm MIR 1-B
44mm Helios
50mm Pentacon f1.8
50mm Carl Zeiss f1.7 Planar
55mm Chinon f1.7
Helios 44M-4
135mm Jupiter 37A f3.5
135mm Porst f2.8
200mm Super Mulicoated Takumar F4
300mm Tair F4.5 Photosniper kit
Extention tubes

Of those notably the 55mm Chinon(£15), the Zeis Planar(£67) the Jupiter 37(£25) and the 200mm SMC Tak(£65) are amazing lenses

some adaptors come with the AF conf chip on so whilst you have to turn it by hand you do get the led blips to confirm when zones are in focus.

Ian


----------



## dionbee93 (Aug 11, 2008)

I'd honestly go for the 450D.
It would sway me over due to the mass of second hand lenses/flash guns and accessories that are available for them - and cheap aswell!

Dion!


----------

