Help! Sony a200 or Canon EOS XS

[tamtamg]

ok, i finally going to make the plunge and buy a dslr. I've narrowed my choices to the Sony a200 or Canon EOS XS. Do any of you guys own one of these and could offer some thoughts on these cameras? Any recommendations of one over the other? Any advice would be great. Thanks!

[tokenuser]

Either are good.

If you have Minolta AF lenses, then the Sony is the natural way to go.

Why not a Nikon? All good cameras - just curious why you are eliminating it from the list.

[masherscf]

I gotta say, The best new consumer camera of 2008 has been the Canon Digital Rebel XSi. But, it's only marginally better than the Nikon D60 which is only marginally better than the Sony...according to popular photography.

I'm a Nikon owner, but I have no particular bias. However, the Nikon D40 has yet to be matched my Canon or Nikon for sheer value. If you're on a budget, it's a better choice than the Digital Rebel XS. However, I think you may outgrow both of these camera quickly.

What is your budget?

[tamtamg]

budget is around $500. i'm still a poor student, but I really want to get into photography. the xs and the a200 were the only two decent ones in that price range that i found.

[masherscf]

budget is around $500. i'm still a poor student, but I really want to get into photography. the xs and the a200 were the only two decent ones in that price range that i found.

First, you're not going to piece together a Canon Digital Rebel XS kit and everything else you need to get started for $500. The Body alone may cost you that. The Body w/ the kit lens typically runs for $650 from reputable venders.

The Nikon D40 is the best bang for your buck for less than $500. The body and kt lens is between one-fifty and two-hundred less than the Canon. Plus, the D40 has spectacular image quality. http://www.flickr.com/cameras/nikon/d40/

What's you're objection to the Nikon D40? If you say "Mega-Pixels", we have nothing more to talk about.

[tamtamg]

First, you're not going to piece together a Canon Digital Rebel XS kit and everything else you need to get started for $500. The Body alone may cost you that. The Body w/ the kit lens typically runs for $650 from reputable venders.

The Nikon D40 is the best bang for your buck for less than $500. The body and kt lens is between one-fifty and two-hundred less than the Canon. Plus, the D40 has spectacular image quality. http://www.flickr.com/cameras/nikon/d40/

What's you're objection to the Nikon D40? If you say "Mega-Pixels", we have nothing more to talk about.

Wait, are you saying more having more magic pixels is always the better? j/k. The reason I'm leaning towards the XS is that from the reviews I've read, people, more specifically Lori Grunin of cnet, have said it has the best image quality for entry level cameras. However the XS only has iso up to 1600 and no spot meter. Also, I found an XS from amazon for $513 plus a lens.

Also I'm considering splurging on a extra piece of glass. I mostly take scenery or portrait shots, so what should i get? I was think a wide angle lens, but a telephoto lens would be great for sporting events and what not.

[masherscf]

Wait, are you saying more having more magic pixels is always the better? j/k. The reason I'm leaning towards the XS is that from the reviews I've read, people, more specifically Lori Grunin of cnet, have said it has the best image quality for entry level cameras. However the XS only has iso up to 1600 and no spot meter. Also, I found an XS from amazon for $513 plus a lens.

Also I'm considering splurging on a extra piece of glass. I mostly take scenery or portrait shots, so what should i get? I was think a wide angle lens, but a telephoto lens would be great for sporting events and what not.

The only knock I have about the Canon entry level DLSRs is that they strip them of features so they can up-sell you later. However, this is also true of the Nikon D40. However, the XS is a great camera. I think it's too expensive for what you get. I think XSi is a better value if you get afford it. But, you gotta get what you can afford.

Landscapes, you need a shorter focal length, maybe 24-34mm. I betting you kit lens will be good enough for this at first. For portraits you need a normal focal length 50-85mm. If you serious about portraiture, get the 50mm F1.8 or F1.4. That's what I use.

[tamtamg]

The only knock I have about the Canon entry level DLSRs is that they strip them of features so they can up-sell you later. However, this is also true of the Nikon D40. However, the XS is a great camera. I think it's too expensive for what you get. I think XSi is a better value if you get afford it. But, you gotta get what you can afford.

Landscapes, you need a shorter focal length, maybe 24-34mm. I betting you kit lens will be good enough for this at first. For portraits you need a normal focal length 50-85mm. If you serious about portraiture, get the 50mm F1.8 or F1.4. That's what I use.

cool. thanks for the advice. I think i'm gonna go with the XS and play with the lens that comes with it. maybe after a bit i'll try the 50mm.

[masherscf]

cool. thanks for the advice. I think i'm gonna go with the XS and play with the lens that comes with it. maybe after a bit i'll try the 50mm.

The kit zoom mill function through the normal focal lengths. It will be satisfactory for general outside photography. But, your kit will be slow a molasses. And, the depth of focus will be too deep for most informal portraits.

Getting a fast 50mm lens should be the first thing on your agenda after the initial purchase. The Canon 50mm F1.8 is less than 100 bucks and will be the sharpest lens you'll own for awhile.

[tamtamg]

masherscf, i took a look at some of your photos and they're awesome! any general tips for a newbie like me with his first slr?