compatible lenses with sony a200


TPF Noob!
Dec 31, 2008
Reaction score
are the canon lenses compatible with the sony a200? cuz i wana get a cheap camera but i want to get a canon body later so ya?. and how does the sony a200 compare to the canon xti and xs.
well i like canons image quality over nikons. and if ur talking about the sony idk about image quality but the features look very good for the price
I have the Sony a100. I do not care about the features ... never use them.
I care about the image quality, which the Sony is pretty good at lower ISO. I spend most of my time with good optics (which you will find is a common opinion on in this group).
Sony makes some nice G glass ... and Minolta made some really nice lenses also (most were under-rated) ie Minolta Maxxum 28-135mm ... it is an awesome lens.
I'll echo what dxq says about the a100, but will add that the a200 is better at higher ISO than the a100, the a300 is better at higher ISO than the a200, and so on, and so on.

I have the a300 and find I can bump up the ISO to 800 and not notice any noise in the image, but when I go to 1600 it is noticeable, but not too distracting. The other good thing (again, as dxq mentioned) is that you can get Minolta lenses that fit the Alpha series. I have 2 myself (50mm f1.7 and an 85mm f1.4) This means you can get good lenses cheaper.

All this is moot if you want to get a Canon as Sony/Minolta are the only lenses you can swap mounting.
I only shoot at high ISO when I want the grain effect. I used to do this with film.
I never used high ISO film just to obtain higher shutter speeds ... my concern was with the image quality so I only used to shoot film slower than 125 ISO.

But that is just my opinion ... I see that many DSLR users on this board use higher ISO's for other than artistic effects.

FYI: most Camera manufacturer's have good glass. You can get some awesome Manual Focus lenses for the Pentax DSLR's (if you do not care too much for AF). If I had to start over I would seriously consider that.
well if you want a cheap body an xs is just as cheap as a sony a200, and no, you can't use canon lenses on a sony body
ya im prob gonna get the xs. but which is better the xs? or the d60? and is teh xti better then the xs?

also im thinking of getting it off ebay, or craigslist. is that good? cuz ebay i see 400 dollar ones. but if craigslist ill get the xti.
do some research and see which model has the features your looking for.
i have down HOURS of research and the xs seems better with more auto focus points. and better at higher ISO.

but the xti looks the best with more auto focus points. and display off.

1 question is teh digic 3 much btetter then the digic 2? and is the IS make much a a difference? i have used one. and it did but i have not had a lot of experience.

and is the IS lens worth getting teh xs over xti?

and is VR better or worse the IS

and last question the D60 seems to have both of what i want but ive never used a d60? so how is the picture quality with canon vs nikon. and how much more are then lenses from nikon to canon
I've seen some feedback on the net which considers the IS (18-55) to be optically superior to the non-IS predecessor, in addition to its stabilisation
capability. Whether it is better than the VR lens I don't know...

Perhaps there is comparitive test data at
Canon's range of lenses are more expensive generally than Nikon's I think.
Last edited:
ok well i wanna do a lot of street photos. basically signs, people, and stuff. like not formal photography but just me taking pics of random people.

idk but when i see photos like that it interest me. and i wanna do a lot of wild life so idk which camera is better?
all the cameras you are considering are about the same.

none of them are exceptionally better and any one aspect.

go with what fits your budget.

also go to a store and just try them out in your hands to see what 'feels' right.
ok ill try that out but jw is the d lighting, or the auto lighting optimizer any good?

Most reactions