direct comparison of shots in high iso of alpha 300 and alpha 350

[ff1]

i search for examples of direct comparison of this two cameras in high iso (800-1600). Everywhere are presented results of alpha 350 .Because I want to pick one from this alpha's i would like to compare (for me) important factor. I understand that there is assumption that a300 should generate less noise. But this is assumption...

where i can find such comparison? some web address...

[Rooz]

ff1, the a350 shoots at 2fps which is downright criminal for a dslr. the a300 shoots at 3fps at least. the a350 is a 14mp dslr, (completely unnecessary for this market), and the a300 is 10mp. you would imagine that the a350 would have to show more noise cos it is packing so many more MP onto the same sensor. other than that they are no diffferent. the body, LV and sensor are identical. so i'd save the cash and go for the a300 or consider the canon xsi which is i think the same price.

[ff1]

tkanks for infos.But i know the differences between this two cameras except results of high iso images.I tends to alpha300 but i am interested in real comparison because i have feelings that sony is cheating some way when we talking about image sensors and despite big difference in their sizes the results of high iso will be similar.
So i search for examples of comnparison... co if someone has examples please send web adress

[DonSchap]

One of the problems is that no one owns BOTH.

If you have an α350 ... you aren't going even care about the α300 ... or even the α200 for that matter.

So, unless someone on here is a SONY rep .... this is going to be rather a strange request.

Personally, like many other early SONY owners, I can do comparison shots between the α100 and the α700 , because I own both and bought them in succession.

As an after-thought: You might want to contact Jeff Keller (DCRP owner) and see if he has done a comparison of the two cameras. That would, more than likely, be your best bet on this forum.


Good luck in your search.

[apt26c]

I just read the hot-off-the-press Alpha 350 review. Conclusion: pictures are soft. The pictures were taken with the standard kit lens I suppose. Sony also sells a higher quality zoom lens, carrying the Zeiss logo. Mr. Keller did not comment on IF picture quality would improve, and/or to what extent, should he have used a better lens. Would anyone have any experience or comment on using the better lenses? How about some thoughts, Mr. Keller?

[DonSchap]

My estimation is that if you use a "kit" lens for the camera body comparison purposes, you have just wasted a lot of time for nothing much in the way of a real evaluation.

The best lenses to use for a decent comparison are either the SONY 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 Carl Zeiss or the TAMRON SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF).

These two lenses, in most opinions, offer the sharpest focus in the "standard" range. I would suggest that these two are good ones for the comparison. The Carl Zeiss lens currently is very hard to get ... the TAMRON should be readily available.

If you are serious about investing in a SONY DSLR, it really doesn't matter which camera you are going to buy ... you still should get the SONY-mount TAMRON or CZ, because that is the lens you will use on ANY of them ... A100, A200, A300, A350 or A700. Take your CF card and your new lens ... go to the store and shoot all of them through that lens and decide for yourself. Take your CF card home with you and put it through the computer, for some in-depth analysis.