[willj12]

I have an Olympus E-410 currently which I bought at PCWorld for £170 with an extra 40-150mm lens, someone I know asked me which camera to buy, I recommend the A200 and the D40 because they are only £275 and £250, but he then asked if he could buy my Olympus E-410 for £250 without the 2nd lens. Personally I think this is a very good deal as I can then sell the other lens for about £100.
So, is the E-410 better than the A200?
If so the A200 is at Amazon, I then have another £75 for another lens, preferably longer than my Olympus, what lens should I get?

[mne2]

Not much help on the decision but the A200 is only £259.99 in argos at the moment.

[chrism_scotland]

I chose between the E-410 or the A200 back in January when the Olympus was on offer, in the end I stretched to the A300 as the Sony had a better feature set, built in IS, more affordable choice of lenses and it just felt easier to hold.
Theres not a lot in it but I would say the A200 is better than the E-410.

[anthony566]

These links might help you decide....

Sony Alpha DSLR-A200 digital camera specifications: Digital Photography Review

Olympus E-410 digital camera specifications: Digital Photography Review

I do agree with Chris on the lens and IS point's the Sony bodies have built in Image Stabilisation so any lens you fit will benifit from this and if you go here A-Mount Lens Index - Dyxum forums you can see just how many New & Old lenses you can use on the Sony A mount system.

Hope this helps ...

[chrism_scotland]

Yeah there are some cracking Minolta Lenses available, I know I have spend money on a 50mm and a 70-210mm Beercan but also spent very little on some other lenses, such as £12 for my 35-70mm, excellent value and allowed me to experiement without a massive financial outlay, I believe you would struggle to get cheap used Olympus lenses.

[alan29]

But if you put an identical photo from each side by side, which one will be better?
Alan

[chrism_scotland]

Depends on the photographer really.

[topgrape]

Originally Posted by alan29

But if you put an identical photo from each side by side, which one will be better?
Alan

They'd be identical

[senu]

Originally Posted by chrism_scotland

Depends on the photographer really.

True

Originally Posted by topgrape

They'd be identical

Equally correct

Give a struggling newbie a state of the art camera and he/she will struggle. Give a more accomplished one a modest camea and he/she will deliver

The moral about comparing these camera ( in this way) is that the absolute output can be made identical either by shooting techniques or in PP
The truth is that these kit have evolved to the point where the vast majority are capable of quality results in the right hands
The differences are more in "how they feel in your hands" , Access to menu selections/ exposure modes, speed of operation , and in todays world, the ease and ability to aquire a system of accessories ( lenses flash ect)
Other than that a lot of opinions will be subjective (albeit well meant)

[willj12]

So would getting accessories, mainly extra lenses be cheaper for the sony?

[anthony566]

Being a Sony user I would have to say yes eg i picked up a very nice 35-105 Minolta lens off evilbay for £28 ( £35 posted ) and a nice 100-300mm for £52.88

S|orry I was £4 out on the 100-300 I just checked......

[chrism_scotland]

Originally Posted by anthony566

Being a Sony user I would have to say yes eg i picked up a very nice 35-105 Minolta lens off evilbay for £28 and a nice 100-300mm for £48

How long ago was that?

[anthony566]

within the past 2 months... the 35-105 came from Europe and has a mark on the outside and the 100-300 came from the UK and looked in almost new condition.

There is a 70-210 on evilbay for £51 at the moment

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...m=280337140065