Previous news story    Next news story

Sony SLT-A35 review published

By dpreview staff on Sep 20, 2011 at 21:27 GMT

We've published our review of the Sony SLT-A35. This latest model in Sony's series of 'translucent mirror' cameras incorporates almost all the features of the original A33 and A55 but includes what Sony promises is an improved 16MP sensor, and handful of extra processing options. The only real losses compared to the A33 are the articulated rear screen and $50 from the MSRP of the 18-55mm lens kit, taking it down to $699. Is this enough to compete in the crowded entry-level segment? Read our review to find out.

Click here to read our review of the Sony SLT-A35

35
I own it
3
I want it
8
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 16
pixmaniac
By pixmaniac (Sep 27, 2011)

An unnoticed difference from the A33 and A55 is that the eyepiece of the A35 is made of plastic. The eyepieces of the former models are made of some kind of rubber.

For your information.

0 upvotes
newcameraguy2821
By newcameraguy2821 (Sep 21, 2011)

If anyone is looking for another review, here is a video review of the Sony A35 camera by CNET:
http://bit.ly/qArlCg

0 upvotes
N13L5
By N13L5 (Sep 24, 2011)

Its been ages since I've seen a review worth reading on CNET... They started to hire anyone who can fog a mirror sometime in the late 90's.
Usually, its 60% reworded press release text, thickened up with guesses and assumptions.

1 upvote
jagge
By jagge (Sep 21, 2011)

Sorry but why bother. Its been 3 months since the preview, Sony has put forward at least 4 cams in the meantime that deserves much more attention, the nex5n and 7, the a65 and a77.

I can for the life of me not understand that you dont make a editorial rule out of candeling all the reviews you could not get done within 2 months instead of dragging a stack of unfinished reviews along. The result is that you will put out a lot of uninspiring reviews out MUCH later than everyone else, and leaving the true groundbreaking cams on the shelf forever.

With this speed none of the new Sonys will be reviewed on this side of X-mas is that good enough ?

Kind regards

Jakob

2 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Sep 21, 2011)

Couple of points. One, we only review production versions of cameras. We think its important to test the same performance and capabilities that our readers will be getting when they buy one. So we can't begin a review until a camera actually becomes available. Two, just because one review gets published doesn't mean another one hasn't already begun.

1 upvote
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Sep 22, 2011)

Let us repeat ourselves again: None of the new Sonys have been reviewed yet because we don't have any reviewable cameras. The previews are usually based on pre-production models which typically don't run on production firmware and therefore cannot be used for our testing.

The A35 was actually finished about a month ago but has only been published now. We needed to double-check some of the test results with a a 2nd body and it took that long to get one and re-shoot the tests.

1 upvote
N13L5
By N13L5 (Sep 24, 2011)

Maybe they get to keep the cool cameras longer that way *wink wink

But really, everybody has a different opinion of what camera he wants to see reviewed first. So it seems impossible that DPReview can make everybody happy if they have limited resources...

I guess I'm not so bothered by the X-mas time frame, nobody is going to buy me a camera for X-mas *sniff, and I usually wait a few months before buying anything newly released anyway, I got stuck with early adopter problems too many times..

0 upvotes
Color Blotch
By Color Blotch (Sep 26, 2011)

I for one prefer the DPReview's meticulous approach even if it takes a lot of time to produce. The result you get is well worth it and while you can read those oh so fast reviews everywhere, the kind of review that DPReview provides is unique to this place.

0 upvotes
czesiu
By czesiu (Sep 20, 2011)

and Auto ISO limit is fixed at 1600?:/

0 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Sep 20, 2011)

"Conclusion-Cons" says ghosting is a problem, but under "Photographic tests" DPR stated the the internal reflection off the mirror that caused the ghosting in the A55 is pretty much a non issue in the A35. Did DPR forget to remove that from the Cons?

1 upvote
Lars Rehm
By Lars Rehm (Sep 20, 2011)

You're too quick, how could you possibly already have read the entire review? ;-) I removed that Con about 2 min after the review was up...so if you check again it should be gone now. In theory the effect should be the same as on the A55, but I could not reproduce it on the A35.

2 upvotes
futile32
By futile32 (Sep 20, 2011)

hallegedly some new coating... or at least I recall that mentioned in the A77 PR I think.

0 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Sep 21, 2011)

Not sure. Perhaps it was cached or something. Anyway, it is gone now. I'm glad Sony was able to fix the mirror ghosting issue that was my only reservation against the fixed mirror design.

1 upvote
futile32
By futile32 (Sep 21, 2011)

we'll see with user hands-on experiences popping up. Would be great news though. Its the only concern I also had with the SLT design. Not that fussed about losing some High ISO levels. Never normally shoot about 800iso, 1600 is plenty.

0 upvotes
pixelmess
By pixelmess (Sep 20, 2011)

One step forward. Two step back.
That a77 better deliver!

0 upvotes
Alpha Jack
By Alpha Jack (Sep 21, 2011)

Care to elaborate? What is the step forward? Step back? What happens if the a77 doesn't deliver?

0 upvotes
Total comments: 16