Important Note: stands on the Amazon website, the A58 is the successor to the A57. That is wrong. Amazon has fallen into the trap here of something strange Nummerungstrategie Sony. The A58 is likely successor to the A37 (or if you will from both). It is true that the A57 is a "discontinued model" is, however, no "old iron", as shown by the following considerations.
It follows my (of course subjective) rating. To say it first: In the end it is the Sony A57 become.
1. Canon 700D
PRO CANON: The Canon 700D has appealed to me, because I always had Canon devices with compact cameras, because of the large selection of accessories and because Canon is currently the only provider a (also laterally swiveling) provides touchscreen.
NEUTRAL: The Canon has image stabilization in the lenses and a (rather small) optical viewfinder (OVF) with 95% image coverage. The sensor has a resolution of 18 MP.
CONTRA: Various tests (dpreview, DxOMark) for 650D report fairly high noise level (even higher than that by the SLT concept insofar something "gehandycapten" Sony's) of part (especially in LiveView (image control on the monitor) something slow autofocus ( AF), of relatively high battery consumption and slightly poorer image quality in relation to its competitors.
2. Nikon 3200/5200
PRO: The 3200 is an excellent camera that is (in part due to the swivel screen and the external micro-connector) even better (but more expensive) 5200. Nikon offers with Canon the best selection of accessories and in addition to Pentax the best picture quality. Anyway, tell the professional tests of dpreview and DxOMark). I had a look at the test images at DPReview compared to Sony and Pentax and me subjectively have the images of Pentax and Sony liked better. Pentax was breathtaking. Sony was also good. Nikon I found something "soft". Also CHIP found the picture quality of Sony's better.
In terms of picture quality you also have to remember that this is not primarily dependent on the camera body, but from the course objectives. Here Canon and Nikon offer the largest selection. As an amateur photographer I currently ranges next to the kit lens 18-135 a bright fixed focal length (35 mm / F 1.8). These are rather "cheap" lenses and I am aware that you must make certain that compromising on quality. But I do not good enough. Anyone who wants professional quality and want to buy lenses above the 500 or 1000, which I will never do, probably should grab more of a Nikon, because the selection of good lenses (sometimes even in the low range) is much greater than at Sony or Pentax.
NEUTRAL: The Nikon has, like the Canon, the image stabilizer in the lens and an optical viewfinder (OVF) with quite small screen and a 95% image coverage. The sensor offers 24 MP.
CONS: Not liked me - like Canon - even the very small and also only 95% of the later photos covering image of the optical viewfinder. In addition, the use of Nikon - at least for beginners - quite complex. The menus are mE not nearly as intuitive as with competitors.
3. Pentax K-30
PRO: The Pentax K-30 has a fantastic low-light capabilities and ME overall (after the tests and my subjective impression) best picture quality. In addition, the camera offers an extraordinary number of in-camera effects for image editing.
NEUTRAL: The viewfinder is optically, but compared to Canon or Nikon huge and covers different than this 100% of the image from. The image stabilizer is in the camera. The sensor offers 16 MP.
CONTRA: However Pentax cameras are not as common as Canon or Nikon. The video capabilities are rather weakly developed (also no connection for external micro). The LCD screen (like the Nikon 3200) not hinged and (minor matter) the case is in my opinion rather ugly. Overall, the Pentax lacks something of the sex appeal of the competitor.
4. Sony A57, A58 and A65
The Sony's offer after the tests and my subjective impression a very good (subjectively by Pentax even the best) image quality with image quality and noise are particularly well on poor at best and at the A58 (most expensive, but the oldest) A65. The A57 offers 16 MP, the MP A58 20 and A65 24 MP resolution. => WINNER A58
TIP: In a review of the A58 to read, the color fidelity is poor. Blue'll purple reproduced. that's not true. While it may be that the reviewer has caught a defective camera or a defective lens, much more likely, however, that his monitor depicting the colors plain wrong. My PC monitor is blues in photos from digital cameras (Sony, like Canon) sometimes purple. When I look at the same pictures on the built-in screen of the camera, slide the SD card in my Panasonic TV or print out the images , blues are blue but just like in real life.
"My" other reasons for Sony:
- Large electronic viewfinder with 100% coverage
- Folding screen
- Image stabilization in the housing
- Superior video properties
- Many other nice gimmicks (eg panoramic photos and 3D panoramic).
The viewfinder is electronic (EVF). That was one reason per Sony for me. This can of course look different. Professionals prefer to secure an optical viewfinder (I also found impressive at Pentax, Nikon and Canon my viewfinder was too puny; it is effective only half as large as that of the A57 and covers only 95% down).
For amateurs like me is an EVF is a real advantage because it will not only all kinds of useful additional information is displayed (eg also edge sharpness as an aid to focus manually), but it is "what you see is what you get": The picture is much the same way shows how the finished photo will be (color, brightness, white balance, etc.). One sees immediately, rather than during the follow-up, if something is wrong. In addition, the camera is always in the "Live View" mode and the autofocus is very fast. Finally, one can (helpful in bright sun) also look at video recordings through the viewfinder. This is by design of the competitors do not see that on this, the mirror is folded away in the video recording and the viewfinder dark.
When comparing the SONY has respect. Of the seeker the A57 made the race for me. The viewfinder images in all three cameras compared to Canon or Nikon large (A57 and A65 huge, A58 significantly smaller), and cover 100% of the image from. The technology is LCD in A57 and A65 and A58 in OLED. In all tests, we read that OLED is better. I have taken the trouble to test all three cameras and live - to my surprise - found that the best way to find the LCD screen of the A57. OLED is high contrast and "colorful" than LCD. That to me is more of a disadvantage, because while the colors (even if the image was a little pale) were of course displayed in the A57, A58 and A65 when they were "more beautiful than the reality" (unnaturally colorful). Außerden Grieseln all electronic viewfinder in bad light. That too was at the A57 (due to the lower contrast) significantly less => WINNER A57
All three Sony a folding screen (at A57 and A65 also rotate and rotate to protect the screen to the camera back, with A 58 only upwards and tilts down), at A57 and A65 is the size of 3 inches, at A58 only 2.7 inch with about half as high resolution as with the sisters. The folding screen is a real advantage over Nikon 3200 and Pentax K-30th I do not want to miss the (in particular to accommodate sometimes out of hand photos or videos). Folding displays the Nikon 5200 and the Canon 700D are even better because they can get out to the side flaps (good for self-portraits and a tripod), while the joint at Sony nonsensically sits down => WINNER A57 and A65.
The image stabilizer in the housing. This offers the advantage that even shots with lenses without stabilizer are verwackelungssicher and is also advantageous in video recordings disadvantage is stabilized only during recording and not even at the preview. This is the same for all Sony.
The video features Sony stands out for AVCHD and MP4 formats and the already described the advantages in the viewfinder LiveView focusing. The In-Camera Image Stabilizer stabilized here also in unregulated lenses. Competitors usually draw on even the outdated AVI format. All Sony cameras offer "Full HD". The A57 and A65 in "50P" (50 frames), while the A58 only in "50i" creates (50 fields). => WINNER A57 and A65.
Cute further SPIELEREIEN include
- The extremely fast continuous shooting mode (A57 up to 12 fps, A65 to 10 fps, the A58 falls to 5 fps with significantly from)
- The face and smile with automatic object tracking (at A58 for about improved)
- The panorama function (vertical and horizontal panoramic images, which are automatically assembled, at A57 and A65 also in 3D)
- The tilt sensor / water balance (in A57 and A65, not with A58)
- The GPS module (only for A65, but I miss not very, because I know usually where I have the pictures taken)
- The infrared remote control capability (only for A57 and A65; indeed is optional (RMT-DSLR1), but Amazon is available for a few euros a fully compatible third-FB for release and playback control when connected to the TV; see PS).
Although these "gimmicks" are not really needed, give these and many more features the Sony cameras exactly the "sex appeal" and fun factor that has me in the superior in image quality Pentax particularly lacking (next to the folding screen).
Just a few differences:
- The bayonet is in A57 and A65 of metal, at A58 plastic (but certainly holds);
- The A58 has a new kit lens (only 18-55, advantage lt Sony "no ghosting and reflections more"; the kit lens 55-200 is the same for everybody.);
- The different resolution: Here ultimately wins the A58, which has a higher resolution than the A57 (20 MP instead of 16 MP) and still less noise returns as A57 and A65, while the A65, the higher resolution of 24 MP with (compared too expensive) must be paid to the two little sisters) significantly higher noise (Me. 16 MP means you can make loose A3 Vergößerungen. That to me is more than enough;
- The A58 is as the A99 an ISO flash shoe. The A57 and A65 have the old, the end of 2012 discontinued by Sony proprietary Sony / Minolta hot shoe on which, unfortunately, do not let flashes always attach quite firmly fitting (my Nissin Di622 II does not wobble). The thing with the ISO hot shoe has still light and shadow: The A58 is the extent of future-proof, but there are only two Sony flashes - the more simple HVL-F20M and the HVL-F60M, which is more expensive than the camera itself - which fit directly.
The bottom line wins with me overlooking properties, features and image quality, the Sony A57, which even at DPReview got the highest award (Gold Award) and is seen at eye level of the Nikon D5200 (Silver Award).
The A65 does have a bit more equipment and a higher resolution, but has a poorer image quality at higher price than A57 and A58.
The A58 is missing in comparison but some features that I could not live without (above), especially since I got the A57 for only 100 euros more than the A58.
If you can live with the slightly slimmed functions, is very well served with the A58 and even gets a slightly better image quality than the A57. Therefore, also 5 stars.
All in all, does not surprise me that the A57 has long been sovereign the chip leaderboard results (just ahead of A58 and A65 and all other cameras described here). I know - professionals smile at the chip tester as amateurs - but I am also a photo-amateur and find probably exactly why that CHIP is right.
PS: See also my review for SAL 18-135 (with comparison to the SAL SAL 18-55 and 18-250) => Result: I would recommend this kit with the 18-135 buy (what I ultimately did). Unfortunately, this kit does not appear on the same side as the other sets. Tip: Simply enter A57M in the Amazon search. The kit costs only 50 euros more than that with 18-55 and 55-200.
PPS: A few tips accessories:
Medium bag (space for camera with lens, extra lens, external flash, charger, replacement battery and accessories):
PSC = 1
Small bag (space for camera with lens, spare battery and possibly a couple of Filter - I bought in addition to medium-sized, on the go, if no external flash nor interchangeable lenses are used and the other pocket is too large to me):
PSC = 1
Powerful fixed focal length (35 mm / 1.8):
; Ie = UTF8 & qid = 1369221123 & sr = 1-1 & keywords = 35F18
Telephoto zoom (55 - 300 mm for those representing the range 135 - 300 need (unlike me)):
; Ie = UTF8 & qid = 1369221043 & sr = 1-5 & keywords = 55300
Remote (third-party reproduction):
PSC = 1
Cheaper and good lightning (half the price of the Sony original flash, see my local meeting.):
; Qid = 1369752773 & sr = 8-1 & keywords = Nissin Di622 + + Mark + II + Sony
An external flash is worthwhile just for Portraits: When pulling out the diffuser and flash to the ceiling, there are no shadows and harsh contrasts, there is no red-eye effect and the colors are much better because the room is evenly illuminated. The Nissin I got for around 115 euros and the difference from the built-in flash is really immense. The flash can also be set up separately from the camera and then "Remote detonate" in WL-flash mode.
Case:
PSC = 1
Powerful fixed focal length (35 mm / 1.8):
; Ie = UTF8 & qid = 1369221123 & sr = 1-1 & keywords = 35F18
Telephoto zoom (55 - 300 mm if you do not already the 55 - has 200 mm kit lens or a different telephoto zoom):
; Ie = UTF8 & qid = 1369221043 & sr = 1-5 & keywords = 55300
Remote (third-party reproduction):
PSC = 1
Cheaper and good lightning (half the price of the Sony original flash, see my local meeting.):
; Qid = 1369752773 & sr = 8-1 & keywords = Nissin Di622 + + Mark + II + Sony
An external flash is worthwhile just for Portraits: When pulling out the diffuser and flash to the ceiling, there are no shadows and harsh contrasts, there is no red-eye effect and the colors are much better because the room is evenly illuminated. The Nissin I got for around 115 euros and the difference from the built-in flash is really immense. The flash can also be set up separately from the camera and then "Remote detonate" in WL-Blitzmodusv.
