Sony Alpha A200 DSLR review roundup

Although the A200 has been on store shelves for a tick since its US debut at CES, we wouldn't blame you for clutching that $700 / $900 tight until a handful of reviews hit the 'net. Thankfully, that time has come, and here's what we're hearing. Overall, the highly anticipated successor to the A100 was deemed a "solid entry-level DSLR that doesn't really stand out in its very competitive field," but that's not to say it's not worth checking out. When viewed in isolation, most reviewers found the build quality, built-in image stabilization, battery life, dust reduction system and respectable image quality to be above average, but those already slinging an A100 will find very few reasons to upgrade. Still, critics on the whole found more to love than despise about Sony's A200, so be sure and give those eyes a workout on the review links below if you've been fiddling with the idea of picking one up.

Read - PhotographyBLOG (4.5 out of 5; Highly Recommended)
Read - Steve's Digicams ("...a worthy competitor in the entry-level market...")
Read - CNET (7.0 out of 10; Very Good)
Read - Digital Camera Resource Page ("...reminded me a lot of my experiences with the Pentax K10D...")

[sayid @ Mar 27th 2008 11:45AM]

great more cameras.

[tyten @ Mar 27th 2008 12:02PM]

I'll stick with my Nikond d40x, thanks.

[unboring @ Mar 27th 2008 12:52PM]

certainly stick with the d40 you have, its a great camera. I work in a Henry's (camera store) and play with all the cameras, and this camera is a great value and offers significantly more then the d40 at a better price. Sony's Alpha line is really one of best options for beginner/prosumer/family use. Now with the a900 coming out for the professionals who demand full frame and 20 plus megapixels. They are certainly giving Nikon and Canon a run for their money and the competition is great for the industry. Nikon and Canon fanboys bother me when they spout that Sony is making inferior DSLR's. I bet 95% have never even touched an Alpha. Maybe it makes them sleep better at night. Maybe they are just bitter because they bought an HDDVD player.

[Jesse S @ Mar 27th 2008 2:11PM]

The a900 is going to be crappy at the 24.6 megapixels or whatever. Do you know how much noise it is going to generate?

Most pro's don't even shoot their high-end Nikons and Canons at their max megapixelage.

If you want 25 megapixels, get a digital medium format back. Larger sensor = better images.

Not that I really care...I'll stick with film and a scanner, as I do not make money off my photographs so I do not need to shoot hundreds at once and unload them at once.

[Josh Warner @ Mar 27th 2008 2:14PM]

Anybody that is seriously considering moving up in the photography world in equipment as time goes on should not choose Sony.

There is a reason every pro that uses the 35mm format is shooting Nikon or Canon - fantastic lens selection and long running backwards compatibility, not to mention company stability. A Nikon lens I buy now will be mounting and working perfectly on cutting-edge camera bodies 25 years from now.

Given Sony's recent activities (R00tkit scandal, PSP blunders, PS3 disaster, lack of backwards compatibility on new PS3 models), it is clear that they could care less about backwards compatibility, opting instead to try to get you to re-purchase all of your accessories with each new revision. As a photographer, my lenses are my accessories and I have no intention to re-purchase them in this manner.

Only a fool would buy this camera over similar or cheaper offerings from the market leaders, Nikon and Canon. The OP has it right; the d40 is superior to the A200 in the long run.

[Geir E @ Mar 27th 2008 2:29PM]

"Anybody that is seriously considering moving up in the photography world in equipment as time goes on should not choose Sony."

Let me debunk your issues with the brand one by one.,.

"There is a reason every pro that uses the 35mm format is shooting Nikon or Canon - fantastic lens selection and long running backwards compatibility, not to mention company stability."

Pros shoot with what they own or what the company they work for have in their pool. That is not a market Sony have gone after - yet. But the alpha 700 is decent enough to be a pro photographers tool if you would have wanted to use Sony. Just as others use d300 and 40d for pro use.

"A Nikon lens I buy now will be mounting and working perfectly on cutting-edge camera bodies 25 years from now."

Who say you can't do that on a Sony camera? My oldest Minolta auto focus lense still works perfectly on my Sony camera - And that lense is older than any Canon auto focus lense ever made. So the mount have a long history.

"Given Sony's recent activities (R00tkit scandal, PSP blunders, PS3 disaster, lack of backwards compatibility on new PS3 models), it is clear that they could care less about backwards compatibility, opting instead to try to get you to re-purchase all of your accessories with each new revision."

That is why all my lenses, flashes and so forth from the Minolta line work with my Sony alpha? Even the remote I bought in the early 90s works. And that after Sony took over the heritage. Now why on earth do you think bad about Sony when they clearly do promote backwards compability.

"As a photographer, my lenses are my accessories and I have no intention to re-purchase them in this manner."

I guess you are just ignorant.

"Only a fool would buy this camera over similar or cheaper offerings from the market leaders, Nikon and Canon. The OP has it right; the d40 is superior to the A200 in the long run. "

This is quite funny, since you backward compatible wondercamera does not support anything else than AF-S lenses. So the a200 supports older lenses from mid eighties until now, the d40 only supports modern lenses with built in motor. unless you like to focus manually. And god forbid you mount an older manual lense, you don't even get light metring. On the a200 if you do that - with an adapter cause the mount is different - you at least get stop down light metring.

Funny when people are ignorant and think just because the music division of Sony have hired the wrong company for a drm (rootkit scandal) that everything sony is bad.

[Jesse S @ Mar 28th 2008 2:07PM]

Why exactly am I low ranked? It's true, no one actually shoots their D3 at 12 megapixels, or their 1D MKII at 16megapixels. Why? Because the images take up unneeded space and look like crap.

If you need 25 megapixels and up, you use a medium format digital back.

[CosterMonger @ Mar 27th 2008 12:34PM]

can't trust C|NET reviews, there based {biased} on the amount of advertising $$$ the manufacturer does on their site.

[Mehul @ Mar 27th 2008 12:52PM]

I'll wait for the Dpreview analysis on it.
Not that I'm gonna buy one coz I got a Canon 40D

[Shaocaholica @ Mar 27th 2008 1:04PM]

Why do all the camera posts get replies like:

"Won't buy it because I have XXX"

Seriously, thats not a comment. You don't see iPod owners posting in other DAP posts about how they're not going to buy it.

[Mehul @ Mar 27th 2008 1:18PM]

That was not the primary comment. The primary comment was that I'll wait to see what Dpreview has to say about it.

The secondary comment just says that I'm not in the market for it but I still would like to read up on it.

[threefingeredlord @ Mar 27th 2008 1:37PM]

Besides, I personally like seeing what equipment other engadget reader use.

[threefingeredlord @ Mar 27th 2008 1:41PM]

'Readers' plural.

Curse you comment system!

[Hotrod @ Mar 27th 2008 1:30PM]

In torn between the a200 and the Nikon D60. I've had a chance to hold and play with the d60, but no stores around me carry the a200. It seems like it offers better grip, but I need to feel how heavy it is and how it fits in my hands. Also I wonder how good the viewfinder is.

[Josh Warner @ Mar 27th 2008 2:16PM]

I'm reposting this from before so you see it. Buy the D60 and never look back.

Anybody that is seriously considering moving up in the photography world in equipment as time goes on should not choose Sony.

There is a reason every pro that uses the 35mm format is shooting Nikon or Canon - fantastic lens selection and long running backwards compatibility, not to mention company stability. A Nikon lens I buy now will be mounting and working perfectly on cutting-edge camera bodies 25 years from now.

Given Sony's recent activities (R00tkit scandal, PSP blunders, PS3 disaster, lack of backwards compatibility on new PS3 models), it is clear that they could care less about backwards compatibility, opting instead to try to get you to re-purchase all of your accessories with each new revision. As a photographer, my lenses are my accessories and I have no intention to re-purchase them in this manner.

Only a fool would buy this camera over similar or cheaper offerings from the market leaders, Nikon and Canon.

[Geir E @ Mar 27th 2008 2:34PM]

Just try both the cameras out and choose what feels right for you. There are no right or wrongs in the top dslr brands. Canon, Nikon, Sony and Pentax all makes great cameras. Olympus / Panasonic has a smaller sensor which i am not that found of and Sigma really have gone a wrong path with the foveon (good idea, just not better and too limited)

[Toshi @ Mar 27th 2008 5:04PM]

@ Josh Warner You do know that most of the Nikon's apart from the D300 uses sony sensors? Also that the Sony uses the A mount which lenses that date back 20 years and they still work with the alpha cameras.

I would play aroundwith the a200 before buying the D60 if it was me. Also you should check out which lenses you will be using with the camera and compare who offers the best deal.

[Jesse S @ Mar 27th 2008 4:57PM]

...You want a D60?

Just get a D40, and get more/better lenses.

[Chad @ May 23rd 2008 4:20PM]

I Just bought the A200 and I am loving it is my first dslr I was also torn between the Nikon D60 and the A200 in the end I chose the A200 because I have a few Minolta Len's

[pscs @ Mar 27th 2008 2:58PM]

this is a great camera - I play around often with the a200, and I own a a100.

I'm not going to mention the great stuff they have... It's awesome. scroll through the reviews and you'll know.

But some downsides:
- a100 and a200 uses the same CCD sensor, and images can be grainy/noisy when over ISO 800. However there's the steadyshot so images aren't shaky.

- a200's grip is too shallow compared to a100 which I find quite uncomfortable to hold. a100 is nice and grippy.

- a100's flash does not pop up automatically. I find this useful (instead of a200's no flash setting), but sometimes you want the camera to pop the flash automatically.

overall it's nice :) my next DSLR will be a sony somewhere between the a350 and the a700. I hope by then they'll throw in live video recording as well (a few years ago there wasn't even live view!)

[Shaocaholica @ Mar 27th 2008 4:26PM]

"Given Sony's recent activities (R00tkit scandal, PSP blunders, PS3 disaster, lack of backwards compatibility on new PS3 models), it is clear that they could care less about backwards compatibility, opting instead to try to get you to re-purchase all of your accessories with each new revision. As a photographer, my lenses are my accessories and I have no intention to re-purchase them in this manner."

What do those issues have anything to do with Sony's DSLR division? Its not even part of their P&S division as they both have very different philosophies. Clearly if Sony's entire worldwide operation was a shitty as you think, I guess all those TV shows and movie studios should just ditch Sony's pro video and film products too.

Also, Nikon should stop buying Sony sensors if Sony sucks so much. But in the mean time, enjoy using that crappy Sony sensor in your Nikon DSLR.

[Lukasz Stanczyk @ Mar 27th 2008 6:49PM]

I use the Olympus e-410. I'm only a beginner when it comes to photography, but I must say that it makes some pretty impressive photos. Its rather cheaper than the sony, and the kit I purchased even comes with two lenses. Some of my current photos are at http://flickr.com/photos/24648553@N04/ If you are seriously considering an entry level dlsr, I highly recommend it!

[Glen @ Mar 27th 2008 5:45PM]

Yeah, I'm interested in the Sony cameras.

Oh wait. I'm a Nikon guy. I've got a very-loved Nikon film camera. With a great 28-200 superzoom lens.

However, I'm probably buying a Sony because my damn expensive lens isn't right for digital.

No, apparently I need internal motors. Plus, due to the crop factor of the Nikon sensor, I need more like a 17mm lower end.

So, apparently, my "collection of Nikon" lenses are pretty worthless. Even ePray seems to think so.

And, Nikon doesn't have live view. No, I won't need it often - but when I do, it will be nice to have.

[yui @ Mar 28th 2008 3:30AM]

I am new to DSLR, and I just purchased A350. I dont think SONY DSLR are far inferior to any other brands like Canon & Nikon. The noise reduction is better than expected.
I have some Canon Lens, but I can't affort to purchase a 35mm class Canon DSLR.
However the price of A350 and A200 are just very competitive.
Life view is just very suitable for users just switch from compact digital camera to DSLR.

[Jerm @ Mar 30th 2008 5:49PM]

I played with this camera in a shop together with the D60 and Eos450. Not only was this far cheaper but it felt better to use. I find that the others feel to small in my hands. I know that is a personal thing.

Does anyone know whether an old Minolta fit flashgun will be compatible (made by Vivitar). I have a good Miolta Zoom lens and a flash and although I know the lens will fit, it would really sway it for me if the flash did too.