Sony a (alpha) DSLR-A300X with Customized Lens Kit 10.2 Megapixel

I'm giving this camera 5 stars to counteract the guy who gave it only 1 - because he was (justifiably) ticked off at eBay... But the camera really deserves better... at least 4 stars!

This is NOT a "pro" camera, but for the ordinary person - including most real photography "enthusiasts" - it'll do 90% or more of what the $1000 to $9000 pro DSLRs can do, and for half to one-tenth as much money. Rich idiots and poseurs can spend the extra if they like, but as a 30-year+ "pro", I'm not impressed...

The little Sony a300 takes really nice, sharp, colorful pictures with its modest 10 MP sensor, given a decent lens - and that's where I'd suggest buyers go first if they're disappointed with their out-of-the-box results. The kit zoom lens is a bit too "low budget", so take a look at the extensive line of older, used Konica-Minolta glass that's still abundant and now dirt cheap. Try a prime like the Maxxum 50mm f/1.4 and see what you get! Or good zooms like the Minolta f/4 35-70 and 70-210...

Of the complaint about this camera's perceived cheapness - it IS mostly good, thermally stable plastic, presumably over a heavier internal skeleton of some kind - I would point out that digital cameras, unlike the gear of 20-50 years ago, are technically obsolete in 2-3 years. Does it make sense to invest big bucks in a equally soon-to-be-obsolete professional, magnesium bodied camera if you're NOT going to Africa or Antarctica or some war zone?

Put your camera money into the very best lenses you can afford! And put you efforts into using the gear you've bought A LOT... That's how you will develop as a photographer and start to bring home the most stunning pictures.

These Sony's are excellant. For the pro there's a new, tank-like a900 model which shoots full-frame, 24+ MP... and you can buy beautiful pro-grade Zeiss optics if you like. But on the low end, the a200, a300 and a350 all give real value for the money.

Of the lot, I most like the a300: Like the cheaper a200, it gives enough resolution for 11x14 prints - about as big as most amateurs will ever want - and, by virtue of its lower density 10 MP sensor, it avoids most of the noise problems which plague today's higher megapixel sensors... including that in the slightly more expensive a350.

The a300's improvement over the a200 is mostly it's improved dust control and its mechanism for tilting the live view screen on the camera's back. Both can be quite useful at times, although those on really tight budgets will probably be happy enough with the cheaper a200 model.

The real clincher, though, for all these Sony cameras, is the availability of fully automatic A-mount lenses on the used market... of a quality completely equal to anything from the big-name companies. You will lose some status, certainly, with "Minolta" or "Maxxum" on your lens' front... But you will get pictures of color, contrast and resolution that cannot be faulted. And with the A-mount, all of these older auto-focus lenses work exactly like the stuff Sony sells today for these cameras. Only Nikon and Pentax offer anything like this compatibility with older, excellant optics... and neither go so far with their compatibility as Sony does.