Which would you buy? Sony A500 350$ or Canon t2i 600$?

[S84kam]

Hi guys, I am taking interest in photography, but I have no idea where to start. I've never owned a DSLR, just a normal point and shoot. Can you guys give me some pointers. I did a bit of research and I can tell you guys this, I have no idea about what most of all this means. What I gathered is the Sony A500 is roughly 2 years old technology while the Canon T2i is fairly new. But for the price, would you grab the Sony for taking photos only?

The main reason I wanted to get a camera was to take indoor photos. I have a newborn and I would like to make an album of high res photos. Thank you for your help!

 

[KmH]

For indoor photos using flash is almost unavoidable, unless you get a camera that has superb ISO performance.

Neither Canon nor Sony have been notable for ISO performance in the last few years, but Nikon has been. The T2i was launched 2/26/2010, and was supplanted by the T3i a year later.
Canon produced the T1i, T2i, and T3i in fairly rapid succession because Mikon's much better performing D90 was seriously hurting Canon sales in that segment of the DSLR market

There is an independent lab that tests camera image sensor performance for comparison purposes - DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

While the Nikon D5100 performs noticably better than the other 2, I would venture that you would still need to use flash to make high quality indoor photos worthy of putting in an album.

Doing photography consistantly well entails learning both the technical and artistic aspects of doing photography.

 

[tirediron]

If you're going to 'expand' that is get more and more in to photography, I would go with the Canon. Sony makes a good product, but they are a bit of an orphan child, and if you want a particular acccessory, say a remote release or similar, you can be almost certain that Acme Widgets will make a Canon and Nikon version, but very likely NOT a Sony version. They are also the only company that doesn't use the industry-standard hotshoe, so unlike every other SLR in the world, if you have a Sony, you HAVE to buy Sony flashes. On the plus side, there is a huge range of legacy glass from Minolta, much of which is very good which can be had for a song...

 

[cgipson1]

Have to agree with both posts above! I would choose Nikon first, canon second! No other choices!

 

[TheBiles]

Comparing high ISO performance of entry-level DSLRs is like debating which turd smells best.

 

[cgipson1]

Comparing high ISO performance of entry-level DSLRs is like debating which turd smells best.

Even in entry level, there are differences... there is Good, adequate, and non-existent! I don't care for entry level cameras either.. but comparing them to turd smells is pretty insulting to those that own them!

 

[TheBiles]

Comparing high ISO performance of entry-level DSLRs is like debating which turd smells best.

Even in entry level, there are differences... there is Good, adequate, and non-existent! I don't care for entry level cameras either.. but comparing them to turd smells is pretty insulting to those that own them!

Not insulting anyone. I'm simply pointing out that you shouldn't expect a $500 camera to perform well at high ISO. That's why you've got things like flash and fast glass to offset these weaknesses.

 

[cgipson1]

Comparing high ISO performance of entry-level DSLRs is like debating which turd smells best.

Even in entry level, there are differences... there is Good, adequate, and non-existent! I don't care for entry level cameras either.. but comparing them to turd smells is pretty insulting to those that own them!

Not insulting anyone. I'm simply pointing out that you shouldn't expect a $500 camera to perform well at high ISO. That's why you've got things like flash and fast glass to offset these weaknesses.

No problem.. just some people might have taken it that way!

 

[Mrgiggls]

I loled at the turd comparison.


This being a community of people that are marginally to fanatically serious about photography, you'll find that recommendations for anything but the "big 2" are few and far between. Despite all the technical merits or lack-thereof, resale value should always be in the back of your mind and at least have a small consideration. Digital moves really fast and the latest and greatest models have a short marketable life. Having a Canon or Nikon means that you'll always be able to get at least some money back out of it if it's been well cared for (and provided you don't wait too long before selling). Learning more about photography invariably leads people to understand the shortcomings of entry level gear and thus makes upgraditis a chronic condition of the homo sapiens shutterbugus.

 

[Garbz]

I saw a great quote on the controversies of the other day that may interest you:

"THIS IS SONY!" "For those not familiar with this company, who may ask "But won't they lose money if they take down the games?", let me give you some background. This is a company that would rather pull EVERY game on PSN than to lose even the slightest bit of control over their locked-down system. This is a company that will infect their CD's with viruses to prevent copying, a company that repeatedly kills its own platforms with its insistence on proprietary formats , a company that doesn't care if your old blu-ray player plays the latest blu-rays or not--a company that will remove any feature , cripple any platform , pull any game, destroy any product line--all to maintain control. If Sony were faced tomorrow morning with the choice between risking people copying even one of their movies and bulldozing the entire PSP line into a landfill, they would have that landfill full before the sun went down."

Someone recently argued that the past actions of the company shouldn't necessarily cloud the future, and I agree. Well in the last 2 weeks Sony has decided to remove PSP downloadable titles for the PS Vita, EVEN IF YOU HAVE PAID FOR THEM ALREADY, and they didn't offer a refund. Yesterday they announced they were going to kill off the used game market on the Playstation 4 by charging people who buy used games again to activate them.

This is a company who first tried to tell a friend of mine the warranty on his PS3 was void because it was plugged into a powerboard rather than directly into the wall, and then offered to cover the device under warranty. Then they asked for $125 to ship the device back to him once it was repaired. It took the local consumer watchdog to get involved before he'd got his PS3 back.


I'd happily part with $250 if it means not buying a Sony product, and that's without the added benefits of the Canon being the better camera.

 

[adichiru]

I would go with Nikon!

 

[TheBiles]

Someone recently argued that the past actions of the company shouldn't necessarily cloud the future, and I agree. Well in the last 2 weeks Sony has decided to remove PSP downloadable titles for the PS Vita, EVEN IF YOU HAVE PAID FOR THEM ALREADY, and they didn't offer a refund.

Huh? I just bought MHFU on my Vita yesterday.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus

 

[cgipson1]

I saw a great quote on the controversies of the other day that may interest you:

"THIS IS SONY!" "For those not familiar with this company, who may ask "But won't they lose money if they take down the games?", let me give you some background. This is a company that would rather pull EVERY game on PSN than to lose even the slightest bit of control over their locked-down system. This is a company that will infect their CD's with viruses to prevent copying, a company that repeatedly kills its own platforms with its insistence on proprietary formats , a company that doesn't care if your old blu-ray player plays the latest blu-rays or not--a company that will remove any feature , cripple any platform , pull any game, destroy any product line--all to maintain control. If Sony were faced tomorrow morning with the choice between risking people copying even one of their movies and bulldozing the entire PSP line into a landfill, they would have that landfill full before the sun went down.".

I agree.. this is my main gripe with them! When they won the HD-DVD / Blu-Ray "war", I said "Oh Shyte", because I like to watch movies, and I knew their proprietary crap would get in the way and makes things less than fun (and it has!).

I do NOT buy Sony anything if I can help it.. they suck! They are profit oriented, and don't realize that their anti-customer antics can hurt them.

Just some examples:

Sony Defends Proprietary Vita Memory Cards - PSP News at IGN

Sony's Long List of Format Failure, From Betamax to MemoryStick Micro | Fast Company

Sony BMG copy protection rootkit scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Garbz]

Huh? I just bought MHFU on my Vita yesterday.

That should say removed any PSP title that is usable as an exploit to run homebrew code on the Vita. Because of the implementation this is potentially any PSP title. The Half Byte Loader has already caused several games to be pulled from the market, which is my point. It's Sony saying ****YOU to customers who actually want to do something with a device they bought, and a bit ****YOU too to anyone caught in the crossfire, because god forbid Sony give up a little bit of control over their devices.

I think of photographers as the ultimate hackers. We make all sorts of weird and wonderful gear work together. We put lenses on cameras backwards, we adapt our cameras to trigger flashes wirelessly. We build devices such as intervalometers, custom trigger devices, and heck there's even an iPhone app that can be used to trigger cameras.

When I think of things like the custom firmware CHDK which the community threw together to give access to additional functionality not normally available in Canon cameras, and I think if anyone every tried to do this to Sony they'd invent all sorts of new laws to ruin these people's lives. I mean Sony didn't even want to put an ISO 518 compliant hot shoe on their cameras (yes that's right the hot shoe on most cameras is an international standard design). Admittedly they inherited this from Minolta (the company they bought when they decided "Hey here's a money making opportunity, lets get into DSLRs", but hell they'd be just the kind of company to introduce this if it didn't already exist, and they had their chance to kill it but didn't.