Pull-out tilt/swivel LCD screens on DSLRs

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Dave I've an Alpha 350 and I can tell you that until now I'm pleased, however I'm still waiting to see if there is one between the old Alpha 700 and the 900 in order to upgrade.

Hi Daniel,

Thanks for advising that you're an A350 owner.
As I'm going seriously detailed and off topic for the intro thread, I have posted this reply here.

Having had a play with an A350 in a shop the other day it occurred to me that with the twisty screens (on say the Olympus E-30), in order to angle them up or down, I figure they'll have to be swung right round and sticking out the LH side, from where they are exposed to knocks and might get in the way.

Whereas the simpler up/down tilt of the Sony A300/A350 avoids that problem. OK, so it can't face forward, but how often would you/I want to do that?

EDIT: However, I've just realised that the Sony tilt screen is only really useful when shooting 'landscape', consider holding it at ground level, if camera held vertically, the screen will be unviewable, whereas the Olympus/Panasonic versions should cope with this. This occurred to me after reviewing some of my recent low/ground level shots with my Fuji, bad framing and crooked shots abound in both camera orientations

I find I use my LCD about 50% of the time vs viewfinder and almost everytime I use it, I wish it were tiltable to be either perpendicular to me when above or below eye level, or more shaded from daylight. Any thoughts on how useful you find it?

I have to say that with the rapid developments in camera technology, it feels shortsighted buying a year-old+ model without knowing what might be released in the next month or so (he says hopefully). A400, A800?

Although I wouldn't be looking for more megapixels than an A350 has at 14.4, improved noise at high ISO would be good. What other features do you wish the Alpha 350 had?

Thanks,

[Daniel Salazar]

Hi Dave, firstly and the most important, just buy the body, don't buy the camera with the kit lenses 18-70 mm and/or 55-200 mm, they're rubbish.

My wish, would have the mirror lock-up function could be perfect. Regarding the ISO, I really don't have experience shooting with higher than ISO 400, because I prefer to keep the noise low. You could read the following review, which I consider really good:

http://www.alphamountworld.com/reviews/sony-a350-review

I really like the camera, it is slow however I think that the price is good and the camera is really well ranked.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng...sor/(metrics)/

If there would be an update, I really don't think this year, the current financial crisis might not be the right moment to present a new product, however a firmware update for the A350 would be great.

Cheers,
Daniel

[Dave Humphries]

Thanks Daniel,

Is the mirror lock up what the firmware update would be for?

Lens wise, I'm used to a 28 - 300 range (35mm equivalent), so I guess that's 18 - 200 in "Sonyland", any lens suggestions for that? Ideally in one chunk with macro(!), but hey, the lens comes off on DSLR, so it doesn't have to be, and I'd like to go a bit more at the telephoto end ideally.

I'm coming from a small sensor bridge camera, so I am well used to noise and suspect that the Sony can't possibly be worse. With my Fuji I tend to shoot at just two ISOs; 200 and if necessary, 800. For the most part ACR4.3 can fix the ISO200 noise, but if I shoot at ISO800, it takes all of ACR plus a generous dollop of Neat Image while I'm in Elements and even then I'm struggling (see the owl in this week's challenge).

Speedwise, the A350's advertised 2 - 2.5 fps is slower than I'd like, but I have about 0.5 fps (RAW) at the moment! So again, I may be easy to please.

I haven't fully explored those links and reviews yet, but the one with review Q&A as well can be quite enlightening.

I guess my biggest concern is that if I look ahead to the next possible upgrade, neither the A700, nor A900, have live view, so I don't really want to buy into a dead end with lens investment. I suppose things may change by then, but its a worry.

Many thanks,

[Daniel Salazar]

Hi Dave

If I would know something about a firmware update - due to my contacts in Sony - be sure that I would not write it . And because I don't have any friends at Sony nor have some privilege information , I don't know if Sony would even give us an update for the Alpha 350.

What I can give you is my recommendation for the SAL DT 18-250mm, it's a really good all-rounder, unfortunately is not designed for full frame, so if once you decide to upgrade to a full frame format this won't give you the capability to use it without the crop factor.

[Dave Humphries]

And now (well, May 1st), there's a Nikon DSLR with one!

Introducing the Nikon D5000, see much more at dpreview

Fits in the range between D60 and D90

I'm thinking one of these at £720 + 18-200 Zoom (£550) and a spare battery could suit me well!

Any alternative lens recommendations?

.. and I have the possibility of using my old Nikon E series 50/1.8* on it (manual only of course)
* OK not a great lens, but free to me!

Cheers,

[crisscross]

And now (well, May 1st), there's a Nikon DSLR with one!

Introducing the Nikon D5000, see much more at dpreview

Fits in the range between D60 and D90

I'll come and pace you from your front door to the shop Dave ( I'm the green one ).

For lenses, make sure that particular 18-200 takes and is recommended for use with tele-converters; have a horrid idea you need to pay nearer £1000 or I would have got one rather than the 80-400; have you heard of Ian Kerr, an individual lens importer, will PM you his email if not, usually a bit cheaper than cheapest mainstream

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Chris,

I haven't heard of Ian Kerr, but would worry about grey imports and returns policy if anything were (or went) wrong with it.

This was the lens I was thinking of at dpreview. Not fantastic, probably no worse than on my Fuji. No idea about TC compatibility, or whether I'd use one.

The zoom range of 18 - 200 (= 27 - 300 equiv) exactly copies what I have now, but I did wonder about splitting in two and going a bit further each end; say 16 - 100 and 70 - 300mm, but it's gonna cost more than £500

[crisscross]

It is the 'universal' lens Ken Rockwell raves about http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/18200.htm
but says no to tele-converter (further links within main review).
I think it is the 70-200 http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70200vr.htm that is the 'proper job'

I am afraid you are back to the basic DSLR adage that your main choice lens is the tail that wags the camera/dog. When I was in your position balking at going DSLR I was advised by a guy I trust not to buy 'cheap' lenses (comparative) as you pay twice, getting nowt back for the 1st one when you become dissatisfied and buy the expensive version.

Perversely though I am quite a fan of kit lenses as they are so cheap it doesn't matter and good enough, as the manufacturer doesn't want trash going out with their name on it. More a matter of using more plastic and less steel and doing without IS/VR. My D80 came with a 18-135 which is incredibly useful and you would have to enlarge above A3+ to become dissatisfied. Its probably a skinned version of the 18-200 and that likewise you might have to be a perfectionist to get bothered about. My Sigma 50-150 for 350D was likewise good enough for camera club wins. Likewise I would expect any current Nikkor lens to be as good as anything in a compact zoom.

In your position now, I might look at the 18-55 kit + 70-200 with a view to getting the tele later (not to mention £100ish for Nikon Capture NX2). It hinges on what you see in your bag 5 years on. I think my 18-135 + 80-400VR will be there for keeps, but I join everyone else in the caution that the 80-400 is slow. Maybe I try 20 times for bird flight shots that with a fast lens you could bag 1st or 2nd time. But for me still trying to roam fells and cliffs at nearly 70, its compactness and weight are decisive.

With IK's lenses you still get the international 12 month guarantee. He was originally recommended by the WildAboutBritain crowd and wouldn't put him in the grey area.

[The Blue Boy]

Ken Rockwell did a review of lens caps. Need I say more?

[crisscross]

Ken Rockwell did a review of lens caps. Need I say more?

Mark, when I was buying a lens, I did also look at ByThom, ePhotoZine, Nikon and any others; OK just one can be tendentious, but if 3 or 4 say much the same, it could be right. From your kit list it looks as if you could be putting Dave right on this all by yourself; perhaps you have