Sony Alpha A350
- 5.0 out of 5
- 5.0 out of 5
| 14th | of 23 | in Sony | (#1 is Sony Alpha A850) |
| 22nd | of 36 | in SLR/Professional | (#1 is Canon EOS-1D Mark IV) |
| 24th | of 29 | in 14 Megapixels | (#1 is Samsung CL80) |
| Shop for A350 accessories. | ||
| Loading… |
Research the Sony Alpha A350
Editors' Comments
The Alpha A350 is Sony's next step forward into the consumer digital SLR market, and it marches right alongside its brother Alpha A300. The A350 offers a 14.2-megapixel sensor in contrast to the A300's 10.2, but otherwise the cameras are nearly identical. The big news here is the implementation of a Quick AF Live View system, which allows users to frame shots using the tilting 2.7-inch LCD screen. Otherwise the camera is pretty much par for the course when it comes to consumer dSLRs, offering now-standard features like a dust-shake system and in-body image stabilization. The body accepts all Sony and Minolta A-type bayonet mount lenses, and so is a great first dSLR for someone who has access to an older Minolta film camera.
Specifications
- 14.2 Megapixels
- Sony/Minolta bayonet lens mount
- 18-70mm f3.5-5.6 lens included with kit
- Quick AF Live View system
- JPEG, RAW file formats
- In-body Image Stabilization
- Auto and manual focus
- Auto and manual exposure
- ISO 100-3200
- 2.7-inch tilting LCD display
- CompactFlash memory storage
- Proprietary Lithium-ion battery
Comments on the Sony A350
Store Ratings and Offer Details for the Sony Alpha A350
| Store Rating | Store Name | Price | Visit Store |
|---|---|---|---|
| Loading… | |||
|
|||
Sony Alpha A350 Reviews
- 4.49095744680851 out of 5
Sony Alpha A350 Reviews by Digital Camera-HQ Users
- 1.0 out of 5
- 1.0 out of 5
I paid over $730 for this camera, used it infrequently and treated it with kid gloves (there is not a mark on it). The memory card interface has failed and now Sony is requiring $288 plus freight to get it repaired. I'm sorry but that is just not right. This is an internal product failure which I had nothing to do with and I should not have to be dealing with this problem never mind paying for it! My last SLR last over 20 years without a single problem!! Sony your product SUCKS!!! I'm going to buy a Canon which is what I should have done in the first place.
- 5.0 out of 5
This camera was great! I took pictures of my daughter at her birthday party. She looked amazing in her cute pink dress and the lighting was perfect! it bounced off her and made her look very bright and beautiful! And the scenery was beautiful! The camera caught everything just right. Every picture was sharp and very precise down to the last detail. From her beautiful pink dress to the growing trees in the background! It was wonderful! And the pictures turned out great!
- 1.0 out of 5
At this point I will never buy another Sony product ever again. After only 4 months my camera(Sony A350) stopped focusing properly.
I took the camera to the nearest Sony store to see if their proclaimed "camera-guru" would be able to ascertain if it was human or machine error. When I saw he was taking shots in the store at 1/800 @f8 with no flash, I was horrified. This guy had NO CLUE WHAT HE WAS DOING! I was further irritated when he asked why the image playback was flashing the blackouts and blowouts. Why should I have to explain to a Sony employee how their product works?
When I called customer service, I was informed that I had to ship it to their repair center (at MY cost even though the camera is in warranty and the problem in question was "something common"). When I informed them that I professional photographer who needs the camera by a certain date, I was told they could not guarantee that I would have my camera back by said date (understandable). When I asked if there was a possibility I could get a loaner, he said "I'll talk to my boss and do all that I can to see if that's possible." only to come back with, "I'm sorry, there really is no loaner program for consumer-level product. Not unless you want to buy our pro-sumer equipment. Yeah you know you spend the bazillion dollars and then you get it..." Then I was then kept on the phone for 2 HOURS while the CSO waited for the screen to come up that would get me a work-order number. Instead of offering to call me back, he just left me hanging there saying every few minutes "I just don't know why it's so slow." After he did get me a work-order number, there was no added courtesy for the wait such as, "I understand your urgency and need for the camera so I will do all that I can to see that this issue is expedited." or "Let me check on that loaner again, perhaps there is something I can do."
I shipped my camera out - which would not be arriving overnight thanks to the 2 hour service call.
I ended up calling back the next morning still furious at how the initial call was handled. I spoke about how poor the support was in-store and during the previous service call. The gentleman told me that when the repair center receives my camera, they will look at it and determine what needs to be repaired, in which instance I may be able to have Sony provide a loaner.
I called back the day after that and was informed that the camera had been received at the service facility, but not yet assigned to a technician. The camera would be assigned around 3:30. I called back later wanting to know the status and was then told that it takes 24-48 business hours to assign the camera to a technician. The CSO then said she would expedite my issue to the best of her ability but that there is no guarantee I will have it back in time.
I do not want to worry about having my camera back in time. If they check it and it needs repair fine. But, while it is being repaired I would really appreciate if Sony would get over themselves and provide me with a loaner. I doubt that a customer would call back everyday if they weren't passionate about their equipment or the function it serves. You would think Sony would have common sense to realize this.
To top it off, their service number is not an 800 number. It is a 239 number. Meaning that not only were my minutes eaten up by the first CSO's incapability to perform customer service, but I don't just get to be upset about their poor customer service and incapacity to provide great customer support, but I also get to be angry about the minutes that are eaten up on my phone-plan and the very real possibility that I will have to pay for a phone-call that lasted much longer than it needed to.
I have Never Ever experienced such poor service. It is clear that Sony does not trust its customers and has no interest in fostering lasting relationships with their customers. I look forward to calling Sony back every day until I get my camera, and asking Nikon and Canon what they would do for a customer in a position like this.
- 5.0 out of 5
1st I must say that I tried to go with one of the two leaders in the DSLR market and was sorely disappointed. I shot a Canon for a while and it broke down after 1 month exchanged it and had a bad problem with blown pixels so about that time Sony came out with the A100 bought it and was very pleased with the results. When the A350 came out I read so many reviews I thought my eyes where going to pop out and the one thing that seemed to be the knock against it was 14 mg. pix on the same size sensor as the A200,300 so of course we had example of the higher ISO not performing as well, But I think the take on it has been some what misaligned. SO I set out to do some of my own testing and what I find is a camera that does not perform badly in higher iso settings such as 800-1600 yes there is a tad more noise but I find that it retains detail better and I can deal with noise with software I can't put detail back into though so for me I found that the A350 performs very well and I believe that because of better detail you have a photo that needs less processing which causes deterioration, plus the dynamic range on the Sony's is industry leading. If you do much cropping the A350 is a superb camera for that (I shoot macro and need to crop). As for any of the Sony's you have some of the Best quality glass ever made in Minolta and of course CZ.
I do shoot with a A700 as well and feel that in certain situations the A350 may produce better results.
The one thing that has me hooked is the IQ but Sony's have great features such as in camera stabilization which that in it self is a huge advantage over the C/N/F .. Her is my take on it.
Pentax would be my next choice due to glass and in camera stabilization and not bad feature set.
Not sure where they will be in next 2-5 years
I believe that Sony could become the Elite DSLR system if they keep on the track they are going.
I guess I am sold out to the Sony DSLR system..
Happy Shooting!!!!
- 5.0 out of 5
I like to take photo underwater, so when I wanted to buy DSLR for UWP, i was comparing between nikon D300, canon 50D, and Sony A350. I knew they're in different class. But then I realized that for my purpose, sony A350 is the best. Taking picture by DSLR underwater is not that easy, especially if your option to look the object is by viewfinder. Some solved it by add additional viewfinder that cost almost US1K. But using Sony A350, and used the Quick AF LiveView, it's so fast, make your life easier. I wished Nikon D300 or Canon 50D could do that. So, sorry Nikon/Canon, you let me down. I'm sure system like Sony A350 will make many divers love it... ;-)
- 5.0 out of 5
Very well designed camera...light, sturdy and easy to use. Very easy to understand features and bells and whistles..bought the kit with one Sony lens and one Sigma lens...both good lenses with excellent ranges
Sony Alpha A350 Comments & Questions (write your own!)
While the Sony A350 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) does have a higher resolution than the Canon XSi ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ), I'm not too sure it measures up in other specifications other than price. What do you get with an extra $100 on the Canon ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... )?
The Canon ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) does accept SD and SDHC while the Sony ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) used CompactFlash cards. Both cameras have next generation processors, and auto or fully manual settings. The Sony ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) has a longer flash range (39 ft vs 12 ft), but an external flash will fix that. The Canon ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) comes with a multi-point AF selector that ties your exposure metering to that point.
In my opinion, you need to ask what you want more. If you have lenses that will fit either camera, I would go with whatever they fit. Your real budget is going to go towards the lenses. If you want to stay under $1000 for a complete kit. I'd actually recommend a lower priced version of either camera.
A good lens is going to run you a couple extra hundred dollars if not more if you want good night shots. Things you'll need to invest in for low light shooting with these cameras are a tripod and/or monopod, and a fast lens (F2.8 or wider). A good multi-purpose lens of that caliber will run a minimum of $400 to $500 by itself. That's the price of quality in your photography. You need to ask yourself if it's worth it though.
I would also recommend picking up a higher capacity memory card, an extra battery or two, a good camera bag, and some lens filters for different lighting situations. That can set you back another few hundred dollars. I'm not saying you need all this at once. The camera with basic lens and a bag should be enough to start you off, but you'll find yourself wanting the extras sooner rather than later. Good luck and happy shooting.
Andrew
Thank you so much for your reply. There is so much to think about when weighing cameras, the help is VERY much appriciated. I really should have worded my question better I think. I keep retyping to try to get it right. I do a lot of Theatrical Photography, not professional or anything, but, I am getting asked more and more to come at take pictures. I love it, and my current camera is very cool, it has full manual so I can get some good shots. But I think it is time to move up to a DSLR. The fixed lense just does not have a low enough F stop on it to get what I want. Both the Canon and Sony will take some older lenses, which are not too hard to find, but that just makes it harder to decide. I looked at the Nikon D60 also, but the higher resolution on the others is just pritty darn tempting to see, but do not really know how much difference that will make. But, I just love taking pictures so the theatrical stuff is not all I do...gee now I'm rambling.
Again, thanks for the help, I appriciate all the good points you brought up and I know I will want the extra's sooner than I feel like I should.
Many thanks,
Santez
I'm glad we could help. Remember that with higher resolution cameras, you need a larger processor as well to handle the increased memory. A faster memory card is also recommended. You can actually get great photos with an 8MP dSLR with what you're working with. Couple that with a lens of at least f/2.8 or even f/1.4 and you should get some great shots in the theater without having to use a flash. You're also going to want more of a zoom lens, so the in-lens IS might be a better choice for you (so you can get closer to the action on stage).
If you do want to get close-ups of the action on stage, I would also recommend a tripod or monopod. You can find these items in major retailers for under $20. I just bought a basic tripod for my father-in-law for $15 after shipping on MicroCenter.com ( microcenter.com ).
A good way to save some money on these items is to also get them refurbished. I've had decent luck on eBay and Craigslist finding used and refurbished camera equipment. Good luck and happy shooting.
Andrew
Again, many thanks. I will start shopping now.
I'm glad we could be of assistance. Please come back with any other questions or issues.
Andrew
Even I,m weighing the Sony A350 as compared with some others. I cant ignore it's few unique features like the live view,tiltable lcd panel and compatibility with the great Carl Zeiss optics!! . Add to these-14.2mp and more powerful in-built flash.One draw-back I read somewhere is getting the subjects' eyes closed (after pre-flash) in many of the flash snaps.
Bill
plz reply me and suggest me if possible my budget is under 1000-1200$
Lens stabilization is nice for those cameras that do not have it built in yet while in-body stabilization might save you some cash on your lens purchases later.
The pluses to IS lenses are basically that the IS is tuned to the particular lens, and you will notice its effect better through your viewfinder. With a body, the major plus is what I listed above. You don't need to spend almost twice as much in your lens to achieve the IS functionality. There is a pretty decent write up of it all on this site here ( bobatkins.com/photography/d... ). In terms of performance difference, the in camera IS will lose effectiveness when used with longer lenses. The lenses with IS built in will cost more and are heavier because of the internal technology.
In my opinion, if you don't have lenses currently, you might look at getting a camera body with built in IS if you don't plan on using longer lenses. If you do want the functionality of a long lens, you might as well get a system that uses IS lenses instead. Good luck and happy shooting.
Andrew
I've been looking at buying a cheap 500mm lense off ebay to use with my A350 for surfing photo's do you think it's worth buying one of these cheap lenses off ebay at around $100 or should i save for a better quality lense?
Also do you have an opinion on the 650-1300mm lenses that are avaliable on ebay??
Thanks
Louis
You can get some great deals off eBay, I would just be careful as to who you buy from. I would recommend doing some extensive research on who sells the item before purchasing. I never buy from outside the US when I shop on eBay. Used lenses can also have scratches on the glass, so be careful. As for my opinions on the available lenses, I don't want to answer fully because the stock on eBay changes on a daily basis.
What manufacturers are you looking at for lenses? If you're taking surfing photos, I would recommend sticking to the Sony or Minolta A mount lenses, because they are specifically designed for your camera. With the sand and salt coming of the ocean, you want a good tight fit. I would also suggest getting a camera cover to keep your camera clean and in good working order.
Andrew
all the best louis
I'm glad to help. Please come back with any other questions or issues.
Andrew
the minolta lens that I have. I'm concerned, however, about the Sony's in camera stabilization system because I have the minolta 7D and it has gone out completely because of the stabilization system (according to the the pair people). I understand from several repair shops that the stabilization system is a common problem with Son's as well as minolta. Anyone had any experience with Sony. Any comments,suggestions are appreciated.
If your Minolta lenses are the A-mount styles, then they will fit on the Sony Alpha A350 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ), and I would recommend going with that camera to save on lens costs.
All of these cameras will enable you to capture fast action shots in indoor and outoor low lighting situations, it is the lens that you will need to choose. If the lenses you have already have an aperture setting of f/2.8 or wider (a lower f/#), then you'll be fine. If not, you might have some issues. The wider the lens aperture, the more light the lens will let in for the image being captured. That is what you need.
Another item to take into consideration when purchasing the right lens is the zoom length. If you're taking photos of sporting events, you're going to want at least 200mm zoom if not 300mm or 400mm (to get really close to the action). The longer the lens you get at a wide aperture, the heavier and more expensive it will be. If you want the capability though, you'll have to spend the money. Good luck and happy shooting.
Andrew
I'm glad we could help. Please come back with any other issues or questions.
Andrew
if I use a CF card 256 Mb on my camera it's OK??
Is There any internal memory in the camera ? Its possible to delete?
I have completly reset original settings of the camera but problem with card remain.
What I would do is to go back to the computer again and format the card with a FAT command. This would remove all the info previously written on the card.
Then use the camera to format the card a second time. It should let you use the card again.
If, for any reason, the computer fail to wipe the info, try a demo version of <a href="whitecanyon.com/wipedrive-d... Wiper</a>, followed by formating the card with your camera.
In addition, that telephone will work with your XSi and that means you're going to save more money over buying a new system and rebuying all those lenses.
Stick with the Canon family.
Simply that.
But what about going for different cameras? What about comparing them to the Olympus E520... or the Pentax K200??? Those are far better cameras than the other two.
What is that you need???
If features is what you want... go for the Pentax K200. Maybe you will miss the Live View... but is far better camera than any of those.
Alan.
As I mentioned in your other question about the same topic, the Canon is superior.
Here's the thing about SONYs. Although the Alpha series is getting great marks, it's just an improved Minolta design as far as I'm concerned. Sure, they can claim the Leica lens moniker, but these days, both Canon and Nikon are leading the pack in glass and quality. And that's the heart of any DSLR - the glass. Bodies will come and go, but the lenses are where the image is made or broken. And for me, you can't do better than Canon or Nikon. I have the XSi and LOVE it. Fast, sharp, and bold colors.
Stick with the Canon family.
Canon doesn't use a Sony CMOS. First of all... Canon doesn't buy CMOS from Sony, but CCDs for the point & shoot cameras. Second... Canon has it's own facility and even their own technology of CMOS. Third... if you are talking about the CMOS sensor that is used in the Nikon D300 and the Sony A700, I'm sorry... but NO again. Canon makes sensors that are actually not APS-C, but 22x14mm. That is why there is a difference between the Nikon, Pentax and Sony (1,5x) and Canon (1,6x).
And lenses... again: Canon is no way near to be the best making lenses nowadays.
And for Sony... I'd not trust anyone giving up a good viewfinder, in order to get a camera with fast AF in live view, just for the sake of selling more. That's my point of view.
Alan Schamber.
As for lenses. That's YOUR opinion, Alan.
This lenses are the EF-S 10-22 and the EF 70-200 f2,8. Don't like facts??? Well... that's NOT an opinion.
And thanks for showing that more points, doesn't is equal for more knowledge (come on... Canon buying CMOS sensors to Sony???)
Alan.
What are you talking about when you say you like the 18-55???
You are SO funny. If it's not even the best in it's class... how can it compare to higher class??? No... IT CAN'T!!!
Come on. Kit lenses from Nikon and Canon are way too poor. In performance, and ALSO in mechanical quality. You cannot compare those lenses with even the Pentax and Olympus kit lenses. They are in another league.
See ya in the next post...
Alan.
All I'm sayin'. Now, can we dispense with the flame wars? it's getting tiresome.
Without knowing exactly which pictures you are referring to, it would be impossible to speculate. You may be able to email the photographer and just ask.
I am planing to buy a new camera.
Still I cant decide N80 or A350?
Can anyone help me on this pls!
Tx
The legacy of SONY? It's a Minolta retread that's been taken over by Sony and had some of the bugs worked out of them. A good camera, don't give me wrong.
But Nikon vs. Leica? Gimme Nikon SLR glass EVERY Time.
I did so many backgroundcheck. Yeah ur correct!
But then i realize either I have to go for a D90 or Pentax K20D.
Only disadvantage with D90 is it doesnot caontain a wether shield.
I am more in to natural stuff. Esp snow mountains!
any ideas?
thanks in advance
BTW - If you're happy with the answer you received, you can simply click on "Mark for best answer" bubble and it will place the question in the "Answered" category for all to see. Or, you can leave the question open for a little while longer and see what else gets posted.
To avoid buying a new flash, you may want to buy an adapter instead.
<a href="voitzsch.net/flashconv_en.s... this article </a> gives a brief account of the adapter developed for such purposes and can be obtained from the address given near the bottom of the article.
a. Program Reset : not available
b. ADI Flash metering : not available
c. P-TTL Flash metering : not available
d. TTL Flash metering : not available
e. HSS : not available
f. Wireless / Remote HSS : not available
g. Wireless/Remote Flash : not available
Unlike 3600HS and 5600HS, 5400HS only works as a manual flash on Sony dSLR.
It wouldn't spoil the circuit, but program wise, it doesn't communicate, hence all the functions mentioned above wouldn't work.
Mounting it on a Sony dSLR literally ' downgrade ' an otherwise very good dedicated flash to an ordinary cheap flash unit.
See voitzsch.net/index.php/en/f...
I have converted two of my flashes, and it works great
I also have the Minolta 5400HS flash unit & would like to convert it to work with a Sony (A900) but the link you gives seems not to be available (my browser times out after a long delay). Is there another way I can get the information? Thanks indeed.
sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/st...
It's got all of the flashes for the Alpha camera set.
Personally, I like the 36AM a lot, it has served me well. If you want a more professional one, take a look at the 58AM, more options, brighter, things like that.
and <a href="digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... this page </a>
However, upon clicking the sellers site, instead of seeing Sony A350, <a href="mountsandmore.com/asp/show_... a portable screen </a> is shown, selling, yes, $289.
$799 as quoted by other venders for the camera sounds more accurate.
Hopefully somebody can look into the matter because something is wrong somewhere.
Paul
With cameras at this level, honestly, it's more a matter of preference than it is one of them performing better than the other. With these two DSLRs you can buy the body you like, since both are excellent cameras. Where you should be focusing your attention will be on the lens. You'll need something fast to handle low light sports situations.
If you don't need a zoom, getting a lens will be fairly easy. Zooms tend to be slower-acting and aren't ideal in low light, so be prepared to do some research and possibly spend some money if you need a zoom. If you don't, Canon makes a great f2.8/ 50mm lens for about fifty dollars, which is compatible with the Rebel, and is a fantastic quick low-light shooter.
And while I keep hearing great things about the Alpha line, all it really is is a redesigned Minolta. And considering you pay a premium for that Sony name plate, you can do much better with the Canon. MUCH. BETTER. IMHO, that is. The optical IS in the lens alone is enough to make the decision.
The Sony 350 is a great rig for what you want to do. The most important thing you can do is get what photographers call a "fast lens", which is a lens that has an aperature of f2.8 or better. Some of the best lenses are fixed zoom, like 50mm 2.8, 100mm 2.8, 85mm 1.8, etc. The best zoom lens for almost any purpose is a 70-200mm f2.8. Most pros consider this zoom lens a must have! They perform better in low light. The Sony's "in camera" Image Stabilization is far superior to "in lens" IS, and any lens you buy is going to be IS, so you can save money. Who wants to pay over $600 for a 75-300 IS by Canon or Nikon when you can get the same quality lens by Sony for $200. There is no premium for Sony name, only the impression of a premium product. Check out the question "Stuck between Canon Rebel XSi and Sony A350 " for more info on some of the benefits of the Sony. Canon is a great product, but the real value may be in the Sony. Also, check out some of the lenses by Sigma and Tamron, the make high quality, "fast" lenses at great prices.
And if you're telling me you don't pay more for a SONY, I'd like to know where you're buying your electronics.
And you are right about Sigma. They are making lenses right now that are off the hook.
motor
That is what i was thinking the auto might not work but manual will. Thanks for your info
bill
I'm a 1st year university student studying digital media (i.e. novice) and I am tossing up between getting a Sony A350 ($1148) and Nikon D5000 ($1500).
I have tried weighing up some pros and cons (sorry if i'm wrong for any of the following):
Sony A350:
+ cheaper
+ more megapixels (though i've heard this isn't necessarily better?)
- Sony has less experience in DSLR cameras
Nikon D5000:
+ video recording (though i don't really see myself using it too much)
+ nikon has a better reputation in DSLRs?
- more expensive
Please help! I have no clue and I'm terrible at making decisions.
Cheers!
x