I've been able to handle one of these off and on for several weeks now, and I'm very pleased with the handling and features for such a value price.

Compared to the older Alpha 100, this camera is a bit smaller, but not to any degree that a person would find it "too small" for their hands. It uses the same, full sized battery as the other current Alphas, including the now top-of-the-line Alpha 700. Additionally, it can be made bigger by adding the vertical grip (although this might make it a bit too large for some).

Typical of the Alpha series, the LCD is very good quality, and, when set to the larger type size, easily readable by older eyes.

Autofocus speed has definately been improved older the A100, and all performance levels seem to be at least as good, many improved to various degrees (but you'll notice the AF most).

Features that are lacking are a wireless remote option; depth-of-field preview; and a quick AF/MF (autofocus/manual focus) button or setting. Then again, there aren't any other cameras this inexpensive with a 9-point AF system, built-in anti-shake, and 10 megapixels!

A decision to make might not be which camera brand to buy, but which model. The Alpha 300 will have the same features as the 200, but will add the articulated LCD with Live View, for an extra $100. Personally, my experience with this feature on the Alpha 350 says, to me, it is worth $100. You get the same 2.7" LCD, but now it articulates. The Live View works great (no autofocusing lag like other brands), and allows a live, digital crop of 1.4x or 2x. [The Live View feature does have one drawback the way Sony uses it. It only shows 90% of the entire image].

All-in-all, this is a fine camera at a GREAT price!

I have had several digital cameras, and this is my first dslr. I love taking pictures with it, especially action shots. Super fast auto focus, choices of programs etc. are found on lots of dslr's. The reason I bought this one is that it accepts Minolta af lenses and the anti-shake technology is in the camera and not in the lens. This makes additional lenses much more affordable.

Sony has really done it. This isn't gonna be a technical review, just what I feel are strong points and weak points of this camera.

This is a great camera for beginners of SLR's to learn on but ain't too bad for those of you who know what you are doing. I myself have had film SLR's for many years, this is my first DSLR and cost was a factor for me. I am in no way made of money so the low price really sold me (no pun intended). The features you expect from an SLR are all there, and you can go from full auto to full manual and every point in between in a just a flip of a switch and the pressing of a few buttons to set up your shot.

Built in Image Stabilization is a great feature to have, especially when some camera makers build it into the lens, which, in turn, makes your lens prices considerably higher.

Some people complain about no live view on the LCD, but I personally prefer no live view. It saves on some battery life and it makes it feel like more of a real camera and less of a point and shoot. If you want live view, wait for the A300K

The camera feels sturdy and isn't too big or small. I have very large hands and the camera feels good in my hands. It is mostly plastic, which in a way can feel a bit cheap but doesn't seem to be a problem at this time.
ISO setting is great. If you want to shoot in low light situations you have ISO settings up to 3200 with a supposed noise reduction but I haven't checked that out yet. I personally have it set on 100 and will keep it there for the least amount of noise.

Media options are GREAT!!! Sony MemorySticks are ridiculously priced. Especially when you need to have a high capacity one for these big pics (esp. shooting in RAW). Luckily this camera takes CompactFlash cards, which are some of the cheapest one you can get. (I got mine here on Amazon 4GB for $42).
The only thing I have a problem with on this camera is that you have to pay an extra $12 for an LCD protector (small plastic cover for LCD screen). Some camera makers include this with their SLR's. Sony should have included this as well.

Just don't forget the accessories. It will be nice to get the 70mm-300mm lens (which I got for $229) for those far away and macro shots. Screen protector is $12. Memory will vary by the amount you get. I also bought a nice tripod/monopod for $40.

So that's it. With this camera you will be taking very nice pictures, at high resolutions and at a reasonable price. There are very few downfalls in the design, and a lot of extremely nice features. Hope this helps with your decision.

I am new to the DSLR scene and I took a while to make my decision on which one to buy, and after look over all the various camera I chose the Sony Alpha A200, for the many features and for the great price for a 10Mp camera with steady shot feature.
Sorry if I dont get technical, but I am just learning the ropes, here. But after speaking to several Owners of this camera, and other DSLR enthusiasts, all agree this is a excellent camera for the price with many great features.

IF you are looking to get into DSLR for the first time, you wont go wrong in choosing this camera, as I get more used to it and learn to take better pictures, I will update this review. But for now I give it a solid 5 stars. My first outing with the Camera was at a Dog show/working dog event and I took over 800 pics, and so far they beat any other pics I have taken in the past as far as quality .

When I set out to buy a digital SLR I was first looking at the Nikon D40 ($499) and the Canon Rebel XTi ($599). I was turned off by the D40 due to it's 6MP sensor and lack of JPEG (fine) + Raw capabilities. I ended up passing on the Canon Rebel XTI because of the complaints about the low-quality kit lens which would've added costs beyond it's initial price tag.

Looking in various photography forums I discovered the Sony Alpha being recommended to other people looking in the same price range I was. It had a 10.1MP sensor, a good lens and was in the same price range as the Rebel XTi. I'm really happy with the purchase. Picture quality is excellent with the kit lens (SAL-1870). I also purchased the SAL-55200 telephoto lens and it is also a very nice lens for the money.

The battery life on the camera is excellent. The auto-focus is super fast and delving into the manual a bit will reveal many powerful configuration options (I don't think a lot of the Nikon and Canon fans who are critical of this camera ever did that because I've seen claims made on forums that just aren't true).

Some of the myths I've heard:

*No Shutter Lock (not true, just set the camera to "Manual" mode)
*Limited and expensive lens selection (Sony has a pretty decent selection on it's own but this camera can also use many Konica-Minolta lenses dating all the way back to 1985).
*Can't use standard flashes (while the Alpha does have a proprietary hot shoe which is lame, there are good adapters out there like the Seagull that are very sturdy and also add a PC connector input for external flashes).

Lack of live preview a problem (this comes up a lot and apparently these people have never shot film before. most professionals I know do not need or use live preview)

There are many Pros but some that stand out in particular for this class are:

*Great bundled software (usually bundled software just sits in the box but the programs that Sony's included are actually quite good)
*3200 ISO (this is extremely rare in a camera in this price range)
*In camera image stablization
*Dynamic Range Optimization

All in all this camera is actually more in the class of the Nikon D80 as far as image quality goes but at nearly half the price.

Sinple to use, best, you can use your Minolta lenses!
Only complaint... camera does not cone with it's own bag!

I'd been in the market for a new digital camera for a few months after my Canon point-and-shoot started showing an error message and stopped working. I've wanted to move up to a DSLR for some time and now was the perfect time seeing as the prices for many of the entry level cameras has come down significantly in the past few years.

It was really a toss-up between this and the Nikon D60. I threw the decision to some of my photo friends who initially laughed at Sony (one of them actually said, "Sony makes TVs...would you buy a car from a skateboard company?" The Nikons are very popular at the moment, but I've had luck with Sony products--computers, camcorders, and yes, tv's--so I figured to give the Sony a shot.

I've really had a great experience with the camera thus far. I was able to get some great shooting time this weekend as there was a large festival at my campus and many of the shots came out great. For some night shots I wish I'd brought my tripod, but overall the shots were really great.

I feel that this camera has a good balance of features--auto modes and presets that are actually pretty good as well as really intuitive manual controls--AND it takes Minolta lenses (for more info on this, do a quick google search). The camera is light compared to regular film SLRs or other DSLRs, but it still feels very substantial.

Though they're not specific to Sony cameras, RAW images are great to work with. As one webpage put it, working with RAW images is like having a film negative to work with (in photoshop, iphoto, etc) whereas jpegs are like having a flat print. If you're into photoshop or other types of digital enhancing/manipulation, RAW format is the way to go. Sure, the files are huge, but it opens up a whole new world.

This is a great product, whit the sony alpha a200w you can a make excellent pictures!!!

I was thrilled to purchase this DSLR primarily because I had a bunch of old Minolta Maxxum lenses and could once again start to use them on a DSLR. As I did my research, I did notice that this model has won good reviews all around, even though it is considered a basic entry-level model in the SLR market.

The pictures I've taken so far have been nicely exposed and sharp. But you would expect that. So what's not to like?

1. Shortage of third party accessories. You can't get a cheap flash from, say, Sunpak like you used to for the old Minolta cameras. I haven't found a definitive yea or nay on whether the Minolta flashes work with the Sony.

2. Proprietary battery. Sony will take you to the cleaners when it is time to replace your (rechargeable) battery. I could buy batteries for the old Maxxum for less than ten dollars.

3. You won't be mistaken for a pro. But that's OK because you probably aren't one, otherwise you'd be buying the high end Nikons and Canons.

4. People stepping up from point and shoots -- note you won't be able to use the LCD screen as a "viewfinder". This is because of the mechanics of how an SLR works. Regardless there are other models (more expensive) within the Sony range that work around this limitation.

Overall I'm happy with what I got. Try to search around for used but useable Minolta Maxxum lenses, and you can get yourself a fancy DSLR package on the cheap.

I have used a wide variety of film SLRs and digital point-and-shoot cameras before. The Sony A-200K is by far the finest I've used.

I simply haven't found anything this camera can't do--and that's a surprise, given its teeny-tiny flash. Indoors or out, pictures are invariably sharp and well-lit. (Letting the camera make the decisions has worked well to date; I haven't needed to get into the manual settings.) The 18-70 mm lens is lightweight, amazingly sharp, and, at a 35 mm equivalent of 27 mm to 105 mm, is an almost ideal range for around-town and travel use. Built in image stabilization (Super Steady Shot) and sensor self-cleaning are features you don't get in comparable Nikon or Canon models.

One of the major selling points of this camera is its backward compatibility with Minolta Maxxum film lenses and flashes. This means that lenses can be acquired inexpensively, on Craigslist or elsewhere--to evaluate a lens for your needs, just multiply its focal length by 1.5. I haven't yet tried my very complicated Maxxum 5400xi flash with this camera, but Sony says it will work.

Dollar for dollar, there's no better entry-level SLR on the market today. I'm thrilled with this camera.

I bought this camera for my wife after looking and studying for about a month. We've owned quite a few sony point and shoots and after the birth of our son, my wife wanted the ability to take multiple pics quickly to not miss those quick grins. I love the fact the sony has built in anti-shake and that the zoom is built in the camera. The lenses for the Nikon and Canon has the zoom built in them which increases the price for the lenses. I also like the fact that the old Minolta lenses work with this camera so our old 35mm set up is not collecting as much dust. The battery life is great. Right out of the box my wife was taking awsome pics that can be developed in at least 11x14 and look like a pro. My only complaint is that if you own Sony Memory sticks you have to buy an adapter to use them in this camera. You would not beleive the money this has saved by not having to go to a pro for baby pics!!Overall my wife says this is the best gift I have ever bought her and that is good enough for me.

I agree it's a great camera for its price. I sold my D40 to buy the A200.
Great sharp shots in daylight. One thing bugs me .....The AF illuminator does'nt work well in dim light. I was actually looking for the AF illuminator on this and could'nt find one. I did some research and one site said it's built in w /the flash....Does'nt work too well as far as i'm concerned ....The AF goes loco in really dim conditions. This is one thing sony should improve on.

After much research I chose this camera over upgrading to a Canon 40D. I am so glad that I did. The pictures are really amazing. The auto focus so much faster than the Xti which is what I had. I totally am in love with the results. The camera really is great. The kit lens is even really great.

Hi,
This is my first DSLR. I can't really compare it to the Nikon d40 or Canon XTi as I haven't used them, but I did read lots of reviews. What I can say if you are buying this in order to shoot photos of your small kids, you won't be disappointed.
The outside shots are professional quality.
Inside are very good - I would probably need a fill flash, but I don't wish to spend any more money.
I have always bought Canon, but the price differential btw this and the Canon was significant and in my opinion the Sony was the best buy.
Consumer reports rated it just behind the Canon that cost over $1000.

I am thrilled with the close up pics of my sons - now I feel like a pro.

This is the first review I have ever written.
I wrote it in case anyone finds themselves in the same quandry and can't make a decision.
You can't go wrong with this camera - I got it for $499.
Bargain!!

Its just the right camera for an amateur as it has enhanced features and is very user friendly.

Love this camera. A super value and you don't all you have to do is point and shoot to take great pictures. Of course there are excellent DSLR features to take advantage of, but you don't have to learn it all right away to get excellent results.

I chose this over the Nikon D60 and Canon Rebel Xti because of the antishake technology and longer battery life and have not regretted it. The only advantage that I see with the Nikon and the Canon is that they are the top sellers and there are a few more accessories available.

Minolta AF lenses fit this camera. (check for specific details) but I got one and works great.

Would definetly recommend this camera.

I recently bought the Alpha 200 and took it to Alaska cruise trip and I am happy with it so far. Before to purchase this camera, I was waiting for the Canon 40D to drop price but I could not wait further more so I got my Sony the day before my trip.
I also bought Sony HVL-F36AM for USD100 and Sony camera bag + battery for USD30. I don't think you can get a better deal than this from other brand like Canon or Nikon.
I took the camera and Tamron 17-50 2.8, Minolta 50 1.7 to the trip and took beautiful portrait pictures of friends on the stairs of the ship Princess Saphire with 50 1.7 iso @800 no flash.
My friend with Canon 5D, Canon 28-300 5.6 IS + Canon 430EX got ugly pictures.
I got so many cameras and lens, maybe more than some pro photographers. But I consider myself an Amateur because I am not making any money from Photography.
My camera collection varies from Contax with CZ lens. Varieties of Nikon film bodies and Fuji S2 with a lot of Nikkor lens. Canon 20D with several Canon lens and one of them is 70-200 2.8IS.
To my personal preference Sony CCD sensor is better than Canon Cmos sensor. Colors are more saturate and brillant similar to Fuji sensor but faster because of newer technology.
My next purchase will be Sigma 70-200 2.8 DG macro when it's available and I will sell my Canon 70-200 2.8 IS.

This camera takes great pictures as expected but has quite a few user friendly available adjustments. Being able to adjust exposure is critical to me and there are several simple to use features in the camera allowing you to do that. Shake reduction built into camera works well and allows for use of any lens to take advantage of it.

The Sony A200 camer, I did not get a clear picture out of it yet, the reason that I gave it a 2 stars, because it will not take AA battery, and it will not take standard flash,( like my Vivitar, 283, 285.) The reason that I bought it, beacuse, I have all other camers already, and I like to try out for a sony, and turn out this is the worse camer that I have, because it will not take standar flash.

This is really an excellent camera. I definitely don't consider myself an expert in DSLRs (I have only spent time shooting with Nikon D200, D70, and Canon Rebel XTi), but I've been very pleased with this one so far.

Image quality is extremely comparable to the Rebel XTi, except in the greens, where it appear to be superior. Noise reduction is where the Sony sort of fails- low ISO noise is very acceptable, and definitely on a par with the Canon, possibly even better depending on the image. Once you get up to ISO 1600 the Canon appears superior and the Sony is beginning to look fairly noisy- check out sample images on camera comparison sites to see if it's acceptable to you. ISO 3200 results in very noisy images, but frankly the Canon can't hit 3200 anyway, so at least there's that! In short, at low ISOs the Sony holds it's own or slightly exceeds it's competitors, at high ISOs it looks worse, but at the same time it's capable of hitting ISO 3200 whereas the competition isn't. Kind of a toss up, I guess.

The kit lenses are about what you'd expect- a little soft, but overall not something the average user is likely to complain about. Image distortion and chromatic aberation don't really appear to be a significant issue. They're decent lenses, overall, definitely comparable to the kit lenses you'd get from any other maker.

Battery life so far is totally acceptable. The Dynamic Range Optimization isn't as powerful as I'd like, but does work and is actually fairly cool. The in-camera image stabilization is truly a great feature, and works well. From what I've seen it maybe buys you two speeds' slower shooting that without it.

The thing that really sets this camera apart from the others I've played with is accesibility- it's truly easy to use. I mostly got this camera for my wife, who's interested in SLR photography but generally unfamiliar with it. She's had absolutely no trouble or intimidation in picking up and learning the camera quickly.

Overall a very good little camera that's an excellent choice for learning and having fun with, and is also capable of taking great pictures in experienced hands.

Prequel: I am coming from a strict Nikon background and due to having my $4000 kit(D80, 3 VR, 3 2.8 pro lenses, etc) stolen out of my car, am starting all over again.

That being said, I don't have $4000 to plop down at once, so I decided to get an "entry to mid-level" system and after many internal battles, decided to try something different and go with the Alpha system. My thoughts were if things didn't work out with this setup, I haven't spent that much and could use it for a carry-around camera. So far I see absolutely NO reason to go back to Nikon. Yes, this system is THAT good.

First off, the built-in Image Stabilization(Super Steady Shot) works wonders. I was able to hand hold the camera at a shutter speed of 1/5th of a second with an ISO of 400 and still get usable output.

Second, the kit lens is actually pretty darn good! There are some signs of CA(purple fringing) and softness wide open, but they are kept to a minimum. This lens is CERTAINLY better than the kit lens offered with the XT and Xti (I haven't had a chance to try out the XSi kit yet) and equivalent to the excellent 18-55mm Nikon kit lens(The De facto of kit lenses). Not to mention the image quality the body brings to the table! I have printed out and framed a picture taken at (ASA) ISO 1600! Now don't get me wrong, theres noise at that level, but its nothing like the 1st gen, a100. Of course, it goes without saying, lower ISO shots are very vivid and sharp.

Lastly, the menu structure and usability are second to none. Everything is laid out in a fashion that just makes sense.

All-In-All, this is a system I have NO problems recommending to ANYONE!

This is a great DSLR at an amazing price. It is a very sophisticated camera yet easy to use. The fucntions you need to change most often are easily accessable, not buried in a menu.

Although this is considered an entry level DSLR, it's far more advanced then that description would imply. You have total creative control over the image as well as in body stabilization.

I would have given this camera 5 stars had it not been for the lens included in this kit. The lens is an old Minolta design that probably worked well with a 6MP camera but its limitations are clear with this 10MP CCD, the lens exhibits a limited area of sharpness and produces retatively flat images.

My suggestion is to buy the body and look elsewhere for the glass.

This one is for first time dslr buyers who do not want to go the nikon or canon way, yeah theres olympus, pentax, lumix, so on...so whats special about the Sony A200? The A100 has proved that Sony can live up to the levels of the big players. The A200 has a feature set for a price a 100-300 $ cheaper than rivals...
....thats not it....
I made up my mind on the A200 only after I played with in the store, it felt great on my hands, more like a mid range than entry level, and the most ergonomic. Do not decide solely on internet reviews and flickr images, you have to feel and handle a camera before you buy, and then you can decide if you really want to spend an extra 300 on the canon.
Picture quality is much better than the best point and shoots, but the bundled lens is average. Like any dslr you have to invest in better lenses, may be next year.....
Its a great choice for an entry dslr to learn and grow with.