Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Remember to visit our welcome thread here: Member Welcome Thread

Join our community!

*Flashing News*Email trigger on Alphadslr forum is now working.

To setup the email trigger for your account:
Just go to preference, select "Email & Subscription Settings" and Topic/Forum subscription alert type as "Alerts by email"..

For thread tracking, you need to manually enable it for each thread. Once you're viewing a thread, scroll down to the bottom of the page. Locate the option "Track Topic" which appears to the left of the Board Time.

From the page that loads you can select the notification type you want.




Username:   Password:
Add Reply
A300 vs A350; pros and cons?
Topic Started: Nov 19 2008, 05:50 PM (504 Views)
cecilsg
Member Avatar
Alpha Elite Member
has anyone done a comparison between the a300 and a350?

am thinking of getting one or the other for my daughter (was thinking of a700 - but it's a lot more expensive)... :P

any insights would be much appreciated :thumbsup:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jasahchun
Member Avatar
路人甲
A300 (A350)
10.2 mega pixels (14.2 mega pixels)
3 fps (2.5 fps)

i think A350 has smaller viewfinder as compared to A300... ;) hope that helps!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ChaoxAngel
Member Avatar
:@ :D :3 :) :] :x :o :z :> ;)
Hi... everything on both machines are identical, including the viewfinders - 95% (approx frame coverage) and 0.74x magnification

Except for the number of megapixels and frames per second - as pointed out by Jason. :D
Official Website | Facebook Profile | Facebook Page | Model Mayhem | iStudio | Deviant Art
ChaoxAngel's APAD on ALPHADSLR | Sony Digital Workshop
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jasahchun
Member Avatar
路人甲
oops.. sorry about the viewfinder error.. ;)

megapixel boost meaning higher noise tolerance.. i shot ISO1600 with A350 at its max resolution of 14.2 mega pixel.. printed out a 4R size photo and it looks noise free.. haha.. correct me if I am wrong.. not so pro in this field but this is just my observation ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ChaoxAngel
Member Avatar
:@ :D :3 :) :] :x :o :z :> ;)
JL-Photo Jason
Nov 20 2008, 12:49 AM
oops.. sorry about the viewfinder error.. ;)

megapixel boost meaning higher noise tolerance.. i shot ISO1600 with A350 at its max resolution of 14.2 mega pixel.. printed out a 4R size photo and it looks noise free.. haha.. correct me if I am wrong.. not so pro in this field but this is just my observation ;)
Hehe... :P



Actually, noise won't become an issue on... actually - almost all those DSLRs out there - until you print somewhere to the size of Super 8R, which is in the region of around 8.64 million pixels...

A Super 8R photo is 12 inches wide, and 8 inches tall, and in terms of pixels, it measures: 3600 x 2400 (8.64 mpx)

When this is placed in perspective with the current line up of Sony cameras:

A100, A200 and A300 should create files that are in the dimensions of around 3872 x 2592 (10.0 mpx)

A350 creates files that are around 4592 x 3056 (14.2 mpx)

A700 creates files that are around 4272 x 2848 (12.1 mpx)

A900 creates files that are around 6048 x 4032 (24.38 mpx)

Considering that a Super 12R photo is 5400 x 3600 (19.44 mpx), the Sony A900 and Canon 1DSMKII and 5DMKII are both capable of shooting photos that can fit into a S12R crop with the sheer number of pixels they have.



Given that 4R is 4 x 6 inch, it has a resolution of approximately, 1200 x 1800 (a puny 2.16 mpx)... a significant down sizing of the original file of the A350 will have to be done in order to print (done automatically when you send your photos to the lab) - from a massive 14.2mpx, all the way down to around the puny 2.16 mpx needed for a 4R photo. Thus, with this resize, the photo - along with the noise artifacts, will be scaled down - and become difficult to notice unless you plant your eye next to it.

So actually, despite of all that pixel peeping would more or less become pointless - when you mostly shoot to keep as just memories in small photo prints, or just to get something that's large enough to throw onto your own blog - where the photos can usually just end up being just 600 x 900 (0.54 mpx). At these sizes, the sensor output of most DSLR cameras would probably end up looking the same - much of the time. This, as stated, happens especially so when you develop into small prints where most sensor artifacts would have a very diminished effect.

So that kinda explains the reason why I shoot at JPEG (Small) for both my A700, (3.0 mpx) and A100 (2.5 mpx) + kit lens for all my non-vital, walkabout shots. It's a huge space saver, and I shoot thousands of photos on a card that would usually return me 306 cRaw photos (a700 with a 4GB card). With this, I can also pass my camera around to the kids in class so they can fire away like nobody's business - and I'd still be left with a lot of space on my card to shoot. ;)
Official Website | Facebook Profile | Facebook Page | Model Mayhem | iStudio | Deviant Art
ChaoxAngel's APAD on ALPHADSLR | Sony Digital Workshop
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cecilsg
Member Avatar
Alpha Elite Member
thanks very much for the good info :-)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · SONY A100, A200, A230, A300, A330, A350, A380 and accessories · Next Topic »
Add Reply