Sony A33 - Any Opinions?

[dougp]

I'm looking to get a DSLR before we go to Ireland next year, so amongst all my research, I've stumbled across the A33. I was looking at the D3100, K-r & T2i - so you know the range I was shooting for. I've had a hard time finding anything negative to say about the A33, and I don't have anything tying me to any brand in particular.

So, any thoughts on this camera? Why should I avoid it? I was heavily leaning towards the K-r due to in body stabilization and AF before I came across the A33.

 

[KH85]

I would also like to know as i currently have a Sony A230 and im looking at the A33 as an 'upgrade'

 

[Sp12]

I think the a55 for ~150$ more is a better choice (ISO, FPS, GPS), but both cameras seem like really strong DSLR competitors.

Sony has a lot of Zeiss/Minolta A mount glass available, so it's not a huge issue. I would definitely pick an a33/a55 over a T2i.

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_EOS_Rebel_T2i-vs-Sony_SLT-A55

 

[twistedlogic]

So, any thoughts on this camera? Why should I avoid it?

One reason alone, battery life. With an EVF simple things like just looking thru the viewfinder eats up batteries. IMO one of the first great things about moving from a P&S to a DSLR is the amount of photos you can take on a single charge.

And from what I hear you cannot remove the exposure data from the Electronic viewfinder overlay, making harder to compose.

 

[twistedlogic]

I would definitely pick an a33/a55 over a T2i.

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_EOS_Rebel_T2i-vs-Sony_SLT-A55

The link you provide says "Snapsort recommends the Canon EOS Rebel T2i." With a score of 100 (T2i) to 74 (a55).

I do love the option of 10 fps, just not sure how often I would use it.

 

[ElFenix]

The link you provide says "Snapsort recommends the Canon EOS Rebel T2i." With a score of 100 (T2i) to 74 (a55).

I do love the option of 10 fps, just not sure how often I would use it.

there's no auto focus at that speed, i'm assuming

 

[Sp12]

The link says that (I meant it more as a feature comparison), but click for the score breakdown. The a55 has better everything (more features, FPS, image quality) except a slightly lower screen resolution (but has articulation), EVF, size, popularity (the primary reason it loses on that overall score). I didn't mean for the link to stand in for my statement in favor of camera or the other, more as a reference between the features/IQ between them.

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_EOS_Rebel_T2i-vs-Sony_SLT-A55/score

there's no auto focus at that speed, i'm assuming

Actually, because there's no mirror that needs moving (the whole slt thing) the autofocus sensor is always exposed/working.

 

[dougp]

One reason alone, battery life. With an EVF simple things like just looking thru the viewfinder eats up batteries. IMO one of the first great things about moving from a P&S to a DSLR is the amount of photos you can take on a single charge.

And from what I hear you cannot remove the exposure data from the Electronic viewfinder overlay, making harder to compose.

Ok, so, call me crazy but ... you think battery life is the ONLY reason to not get the A33? That's not much of a sacrifice, and I say that because I can carry more batteries to compensate. I was speaking more of a performance choice - quality of pictures, etc.

 

[twistedlogic]

Ok, so, call me crazy but ... you think battery life is the ONLY reason to not get the A33?

Nah, just saying its the BIGGEST reason not to.

Sony's implementation of the EVF just doesn't sound all that great, especially being a first generation. The translucent mirror used can produce reflections that will show up in images, it blocks some light from hitting the sensor so high ISO will be slightly worse than the same sensor on a traditional DSLR, and it adds another piece of glass in front of the sensor (more flare, dust, CA, etc).

 

[dougp]

Nah, just saying its the BIGGEST reason not to.

Sony's implementation of the EVF just doesn't sound all that great, especially being a first generation. The translucent mirror used can produce reflections that will show up in images, it blocks some light from hitting the sensor so high ISO will be slightly worse than the same sensor on a traditional DSLR, and it adds another piece of glass in front of the sensor (more flare, dust, CA, etc).

So which DSLR would you recommend then? T2i? K-r? D-3100?

 

[twistedlogic]

So which DSLR would you recommend then? T2i? K-r? D-3100?

Whichever one you like, . Try and visit a brick and motor store and try them in your hand. Any of the three will produce stunning still images but they all may not feel right or have menus that just seam awkward to you.

The biggest difference is probably in the video controls. So if that is more your reason than stills choose the best one that fits your needs.

The Canon and the Nikon use VR/IS lenses that work as you AF, so the effect is seen directly in the viewfinder, while the Pentax and the Sony use sensor shift that only shifts after you hit the shutter. There pretty close in performance with the edge going to lens based image stabilization. Great thing about sensor based IS is that it works with any lens mounted.

 

[AkumaX]

Ok, so, call me crazy but ... you think battery life is the ONLY reason to not get the A33? That's not much of a sacrifice, and I say that because I can carry more batteries to compensate. I was speaking more of a performance choice - quality of pictures, etc.

Don't really thing battery life should be that high of a point for a decision..

Strictly speaking solely on video:
T2i/60D has excellent video quality (1080p @ 30/24p, 720p @ 60p), but has to use contrast detection to autofocus while recording. (check low-light autofocus videos on youtube). A33 and D3100 has continuous autofocus while video recording, but still not perfect in low light (A33 has the edge here). D3100 doesn't have 60p recording (not a deal killer if you don't care about that), and I think A33 records @ 1080i if you use 60fps.

These are tests that I tried out, when I played with the cameras in-store.

 

[Munky]

I would pick the D3100, T2i or the K-r any day over a Sony a33 or a55.

 

[Sp12]

Any particular reason?

I actually shot with both the a33, a55, and T2i (among others) before deciding on the 1Ds Mark II. The Sonys had a slight edge in image quality and more features than the T2i, and I would probably have gone with them if I hadn't gotten such a good deal on the Mark II.

 

[dougp]

I would pick the D3100, T2i or the K-r any day over a Sony a33 or a55.

Either give your reasoning, or don't worry about postin, munky

 

[Munky]

Either give your reasoning, or don't worry about postin, munky

Hm, where do I start? Sony's proprietary hot shoe, their over-aggressive noise reduction, and their aim at the consumer rather than the prosumer all come to mind.

 

[Sp12]

Thought I'd just drop this by.

http://www.popphoto.com/2010/12/camera-year-sony-a55?page=0,0

 

[KH85]

Thought I'd just drop this by.

http://www.popphoto.com/2010/12/camera-year-sony-a55?page=0,0

Thanks :thumbsup:

I have also read the DPReview - http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonyslta55/

 

[ElFenix]

Actually, because there's no mirror that needs moving (the whole slt thing) the autofocus sensor is always exposed/working.

but not in super fps mode

And in Speed Priority, which focuses and meters just the first frame of a burst, the camera will click along at 10 frames per second (JPEGs only)—unmatched in this class.

edit: apparently the comments disagree

Whoever wrote this article got his facts wrong. A55 does AF in 10 fps if the focus is set to AF-C."

this guy is right. You should fix it You mixed something up....

Submitted by Tom on Dec 08, 2010
There is a mistake in the camera description. The A55 will autofocus continuously and adjust exposure while in 10fps mode. I know because I own one.

Submitted by Sensel on Dec 08, 2010

 

[twistedlogic]

edit: apparently the comments disagree

From DPReview:

"On paper, the SLT A55 should be an ideal tool for shooting fast action. It can shoot at 10fps with continuous autofocus. The A55 also has a trick up its sleeve that even the Canon EOS-1D Mark IV cannot match - because its mirror is fixed, the AF sensor can operate full-time, without interruption. This should ensure more accurate continuous AF performance, since the camera is constantly being fed data with which to make the necessary calculations."

But:

"the A55's auto exposure/ISO system (which is set by default and cannot be adjusted in 10fps mode with continuous AF enabled"

and

"We have found that when presented with fast moving subjects (we shot a range of subjects, including cyclists on a track), focus accuracy is far from 100%. In 10fps mode it is clear that the A55's AF system is simply unable to predict subject position accurately when presented with fast-moving subjects at relatively close range, and in a typical sequence of images of cyclists on a track, whilst the zone of focus shifts from frame to frame, it is almost always slightly behind the intended subject."

Here is another nice review of the A55 Photoclubalpha.com

He says that the EVF does take some time to get used to and can have some advantages along with disadvantages. His conclusion is much like mine "I would not want to be left with only the A55 as a working camera", but might be fun to play with.

 

[MercenaryYoureFired]

I was seriously considering an A33/A55 as my first DSLR, but there are a few things about the camera that makes a ti2 a better fit for me.

The main reason for me is probably the viewfinder. It's not a traditional one, instead it's a screen. That means dead pixels could be a problem in the future, and if dead pixels arise, it would be annoying as hell to see them in a tiny viewfinder every time I take a pic. It would also lower resale value and I like the traditional viewfinders better anyway.

There are also the low battery life issues, overheating problems when filming, and this model being an introduction to a new era of technology for Sony.

That said, the Sony's video capabilities are amazing. The auto-focus tech they have is much better than any other DSLR out there, and the video quality is really good (search Youtube for some videos). If you're going to be doing a lot of video, you can't go wrong with these (though I've heard that they overheat easily after about 20mins of filming, depending on temps). I'm also not sure if they support 30fps 1080p video like the ti2 does.

I'm going with the ti2 because the video and photo quality are both amazing. And from what I've heard the ti2 has a lot of technology bunched in an affordable little camera that should priced higher considering what you get.

 

[Roberts Rob]

The Sony A33 is a no-brainer, really.

I have enjoyed this hobby for the past 35 years, although for the past 2 years not with the same involvement - but back into it now.

Most of the cameras in this price range offer great photo quality, bar none. I am a past Canon T1i and Nikon D90 owner (still own the Nikon). I own two cameras simply because I always keep on in my car, safely kept in my truck inside a quality moisture-sealed container, and one in the house. So I am always ready for the unexpected photo-opt.

Sony has come out with simply an amazing new standard for enthusiast cameras. I say enthusiast because, just as with the Canon T21 and Nikon D7000 types, they are not the camera you would use to earn a living with. So we are talking about great, CONSUMER cameras, the ones we use to capture great shots, and most of all, have FUN with.

And this is where the new Sony's come in and leave the equivalent Nikons and Canons behind. I had replaced my T1i with the T2i and had a 30 day refund policy. Over that 30 day period, a friend of mine came over with his Sony A33, and left it with me over the weekend. Holy smokes, this thing is INCREDIBLE. Amazing photo quality, and features not found ANYWHERE regardless of price.

Above all, this Sony took my hobby to a whole new level and made me actually take my camera to more places. Why? Because it is just plain gratifying FUN!

About the ''overheating'' sensor problem. One thing ''Mercenary'' forgot to mention is that VIRTUALLY ALL COMPETING MODELS have short shooting-time cycles, due to overheating of the sensors. For example, the Canon T2i is limited to around 12 minutes. My friend's Nikon D5000 (still sold today) is 5 minutes. Sony provided a press release on this ''overheating'' issue by showing what to expect for each the a33 and a55, something I have not yet seen from Nikon or Canon. In this respect, and if video is important to you (it is for me) the a33 would actually be a better fit than the a55.

http://esupport.sony.com/CA/perl/news-item.pl?news_id=424&mdl=SLTA33

So where does that lead us? The Sony a33 is a no-brainer.

Sweep panorama - This is no toy, it actually makes instantly-breathtaking photos. No more fiddling around with Canon's laborious photo-stitch software that had varying results at best. Next time you go out to a spectacular vacation view, you will be glad you have access to this.

The electronic viewfinder - I did not really like it at first, but now I could not do without it. So much information can be viewed at once, it makes going back and forth (viewfinder to info on camera back or top) a thing of the past. After 3 days, I could operate everything and change settings without taking my eye off the viewfinder. And you know what, this EVF is so sharp there are NO lines whatsoever.

The built-in horizontal and vertical level (both EVF and back LCD on demand). Never take a crooked photo again - not much use for nature photos, but taking urban shots - it is a great help.

Blazing fast focus for the Sonys - photo and movies - Nothing to add really, makes my Canon T1 (and the T2i for that matter) belong to an outdated generation, in my book. The video in every Canon and Nikon on earth is great, but it's auto-focus implementation feels like a toy at best.

Short battery life - This is true and this is one thing I miss from my previous camera. but heck, I just bought a second battery, a small trade-off to enjoy this magic box.

LCD - viewfinder - Stunning, high resolution display and THE ONLY DISPLAY that you can actually use in bright sunlight.

BEST OF ALL - The Sony alpha mounts are compatible with the old Minolta auto-focus lenses out there. These can be had dirt-cheap (but prices have been going up recently) and are EXCELLENT. My old 50mm fixed-lens and 70-210 Maxxum zoom lens are both sharper than the Canon, Nikon and Sony kit lens that come with the camera.

Why am I going trough this time answering this post ? Partly because I am getting a bit tired of reading ''reviews'' by folks who have limited or just no experience with the cameras they are commenting on.

They are all marvelous and take great shots. I just happen to think that the Sony A33 and A55, although not for everyone ( some folks only swear by Canon or Nikon, like I used to do) represent a new benchmark in the price-versus-enjoyment category, topped by great image quality, with no need for hair-splitting here (as I said they are all pretty good).

Very subjective, of course, but do try one out and be amazed yourself.

Cheers!

 

[AkumaX]

^^^ the A33/A55 was pretty tempting to me (really really dig the continuous-AF during video recording), but it would be hard to convince my wife to have me turn around the T2i haha

Also, the T2i's limited to 12 min per recording because that's when it hits 4gb file size (16gb = 48min), not because of overheating

 

[dougp]

I ended up with the A33 - I really like it so far. What do you guys think?

^^ Color is off on this one. ^^

 

[AkumaX]

nice pug! i stare at you!