Jump to content

From that very first a100 kit to now, please help tick my boxes.

Recommended Posts

I remember the day i bought my first Alpha 100, it was immediately on its launch and i was quite chuffed to have the Jessops 'special edition silver'. It was my first serious camera, and having been a Sony audio devotee for years it was an obvious choice. However, there were times I regretted the decision in the years that followed during which the initial press rave reviews were replaced with a fairly apathetic view of Sony's move into SLR, and it seemed Sony would stay way behind Canon and Nikon, perhaps among the front runners of the also rans was the best they could hope for. 

Though many a photographer dismissed my Sony with advice to jump ship, the A100 was doing the job I needed and by then I had built up quite an array of accessories and lenses - back then camera shops had loads of Minolta glass you could get for pennies. 

Turn the clock forward however many years it has been (wow - I just looked it up, 25 years!) and Sony are right up there with some awesome kit. Despite being in from the start i have only progressed as far as a 390 - which I doubt many people reading this would want as their main camera, but it has done the job i need and done it well. 

I do now need an upgrade as need video. Cameras are not a big enough part of my life to be looking at anything like the current flagship models. To get most bang for my buck I'll be most likely to buy from one of the professional second hand/refurbing sellers. You'll know the type, 50 Sony cameras in their eBay shop and a 99% feedback from Sony camera users. So I won't be looking at just the current models and when you consider the entire range, past and present, it is huge. I keep finding myself reading a spec, thinking this could be the one, then noticing it doesn't have live view or whatever. 

So, I am hoping somebody reading this will know the range so well that if i give a list of 'must have' and 'desirable' specs, they will be able to suggest cameras of whatever age that fit the bill, and which of them you'd recommend. 

Sony has a really good accessories compatibility bit on its website, so i can then cross reference suggestions to see which of my external flashes, remotes, grips, lenses etc could still be used. 

I could have just asked the question without rambling down memory lane couldn't I, sorry about that ?


  • a-mount
  • hd video
  • external mic 
  • live view (doesn't have to be the sony proprietory LiveView, any form of external monitoring)
  • standard tripod and hot-shoe mounts
  • availability in european market


  • wifi or other wireless connectivity
  • some form of macro or favourites to allow save & recall of multiple settings configurations
  • evf viewfinder
  • high megapixel (I fancy doing some wallpaper printing)
  • headphone jack
  • multi interface hot-shoe
  • image stabilisation (if you think i'd miss it)

In all other respects I am happy if the camera does the job as well as, or better than, the 390, which I'm pretty sure everything with my wish list would. 

Hope somebody can help with this, many thanks in advance. 








Link to post
Share on other sites


I went from Alpha 100 to A 68 (2nd hand) Cropped frame, which I still use but now have a 2nd hand A 99. Full frame.

Both these cost somewhere around £500. (obviously age, wear etc come into the price - but both are in "excellent" condition.

Both models have your essential features. However they do not have WIFI - A99 can use wireless remote shutter release.

The A99 was a "flagship" back in 2012 and A68 highly rated for cropped frame. Both are around 24 mega pixel - SLT (evf viewfinder) 

The newer A99ii is still way over £1000 2nd hand.

I'm really pleased with both cameras.

Do be aware that full frame cameras don't like lenses designed for cropped frame - particularly wide angled, picking up the edge of the lens in your photo! - I've just sold 3 lenses for this reason, as I can use my full framed glass on both cameras with no problem. The A99 does allow for cropping down to cropped lenses - but this only seems to work on Sony brand DT lenses.

I get my used gear from the likes of MPB, Wex photo and video, London Camera Exchange or Park Cameras - rather than Ebay or Gumtree.

Have fun hunting! and good luck

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Posts

    • I mostly see posterization artifacts, which are the result of lossy compressed RAW files (or bad jpeg conversion). Unfortunately, the A6400 doesn't offer uncompressed or lossless compressed RAW. The noise might indeed result from the smaller sensor than what you're used to. If you're not shooting at max aperture, you could try shooting at wider aperture and lower ISO. When you're not shooting at max aperture, fullframe versus APS-C shouldn't matter much in terms of ISO-performance combined with depth of field: at the same ISO and aperture value, fullframe offers better noise performance but with a narrower depth of field. This can be offset by choosing a larger aperture and lower ISO on the APS-C camera. If you want a fullframe camera the size of an A6400, try the A7C(ii).
    • ..unfortunately, the lighting was correct. The shot required deeper shadows. The K1 ff didnt have these banding issues [yes, I know the sensor is larger]. The film shots had details in the same light. The sony files, both the jpg and raw, had this banding/noise - with NO retouch or post adjustments [straight out of the camera]. the camera was purchased new a few years ago and I am trying to determine if there is something wrong, or the settings are wrong, or the camera just cant handle this kind of lighting [studio + softbox]. No shadow detail is one thing... banding/noise in the shadows is unacceptable. Does sony have a body this size that is FF ? Im wondering if that would make a difference..  dw
    • The root causes for banding are uneven lighting, incorrect exposure settings, or compression artefacts or certain kinds of artificial lighting, especially LED lights. Also the lens used plays a role, I have noticed it more with my sharpest lenses, looks like they outresolve the sensor when I have a uniform blue sky. There is more than one solution, and ultimately post-processing, but the root cause has to be identified first.
  • Topics

  • Create New...