Wolf in sheep's clothing? Sony A3000 First-Impressions Review

“they give you 24-1000mm 35mm equivalent focal length...” no, they give you equivalent FIELD OF VIEW, which can be achieved on a APS-C simply by chopping the sensor smaller.

I know what a 1000mm lens looks like, but they are for real 1000mm perspective (for e.g., big moon background), not a 180mm perspective with chopping.

Agree with you that a3000 is actually targeting Pana G etc..
But my point is, since "a lot of people will look no further than the pricetag" and just want a cheap SLR-shaped camera, they might compare the above models together. Thus maybe dpreview should give a clear message to these people: A
Although a3000 is "low", "coarse" and "designed to ape", it have much better IQ at lower price than the above "really nice supper-zoom cameras".

As I know telephoto is mostly depends on the lens, not the sensor.
So, super-zoom camera are for super zoom and apsc cameras are for high image quality . they can't alternate each others, unfortunately. everyone has different priorities, that's why here are so many different type of cameras. so, personally, i can't see the point to compare them.

Well, with all your attack, you did not answer to the cons, as I stated them, did you.

I said good-enough-excellent, is fine. You probably don't understand that. Good enough crappy, and while yes, "good" enough, for low quality needs (web perhaps, Lomo, instagramers) is your choice, and right, it does not speak to making better cameras, with better pictures (and it's speeds, process, etc...). Not at all. In fact, it is WORSE cameras, among today's state of the art.

So yes, celebrate the price; but not the LOW standards. Why? Because this is not about printing wall sized photos. It's about color sensitivity, dynamic range, great glass (1st; when we're discussing the "brush"), and clean shadows, in any bright light. Even at low ISO. Also, without wider apertures, you're not going to get the shutter you need to stop motion, in many real world situations (like Kids candid, and sports). Along, with that, is cleaner high ISO, and not opposed to fast lenses, but COMBINED with them....

Plus too, it's not flash, vs. low light. It's both. Because a lot less, faster, less battery, less power, faster refreshing flash is needed, with both clean high ISO, and the combination of fast/wide aperture lenses.

Not to mention , that primes are currently a much better value, to do this. But that my preference, I understand.

So yes, you may waste you money, on a crippled, learning camera; but it will cost you more, over time, if you progress. If you do not really learn photography, and you are quite happy, with over priced, photographically crippled cameras, then those are the photo's you will never have, and you are the cause of manufactures, refusing to make a really good camera, at the low end. We will get exactly what we ask for, and apparently, that is the problem.

What's wrong exactly, with photographic education; for the buying public?

Elitist, or ignorance. You decide.

To be clear, I am NOT for high prices! I am not for slow progression, and I am not for these greatest (good fine) benefits (including a good price); but then only being crippled, by the sorely missing basic, photographic needs, in unbalanced cameras.

It's up to you, dear buyers. Else, explain to me, how uneducated buyers, are not hurting the design, of AFFORDABLE cameras today. Even with the expensive ones, you typically get a boat anchor, and greater depreciation. Are they "worth it"? No! Not in any, way, shape, or form. I didn't say it wasn't your right; to be stupid.

Uneducated buyers are what is halting the progression, of combined photographic goodness, in better carry-able camera systems, at an affordable price.

My thing is, so the manufactures then, are not even (there) trying!

So, I get that many of you are saying, this is Sony, trying more (and good for us all), and I am saying, the best "D", is still not an "A". You can't make the "D" camera better than what it is; by shooting the messenger.

If you have low photographic standards (Remember; I said good-enough -excellent is fine), then why are you paying too much; for them? Because this is currently the lowest price you can find; for just one, or a few, good, unbalanced benefits? What's missing? Oh, how our collective standards (FOR WHAT WE PAY), have been lowered, indeed.

With photography, almost everything matters! That's just the current reality folks. It's going to be the shots you NEVER get; if you disagree. It's that simple.

It's not that you can't pull-off some decent shots; by taking more, and also many long, post processing hours; but that's not better, folks.

What about the ones you missed? Were are they?

Where are they?

Hmmm. You read it. Why do you care?

You know, I hope this camera sells like hotcakes, and shakes up the over priced industry; but I will not agree, that it's cons are understandable, or justified, just due to a less expensive system price, (considering E mount lens prices).

Obviously, you work for Sony. Otherwise you'd take my view, and go make your own assessment. I'm not hearing you discuss the clear points; that I have made. Why is that?

Why not add some relevant facts, or any reasonable opinions? If you don't like my first impressions, as stated, and covering theses devilish details, then I can't help it. How narcissistic are you to imply i can't post my view?

I'll admit there's a lot to like about this camera, and at this price. There's only 2 main concerns. Sony will do things, like lock you in, to their accessories, if given a foothold. Secondly, Sony, and all manufacturers are still not putting all the state-or-the-art, photographic basics, into a balanced model....

... What's happening is this may indeed be one of the best values; that we have seen in a long time. I get that. Do you? Did you hear me? The problem is a feeding frenzy, for what's the "best"; by some measures; when it's really just the least bad.

My whole point is there's room to do much better, and you can see it in the working benefits, of many new camera. Not the things that can't be reasonably combined, mind you; but of those that are already proved.

But hey! At least a small step, in the right direction, is a very good thing.

@T3: You are not entirely correct. NEX 3N does have a built-in flash. 5R does come with an external flash like my 5N although not seem to be mentioned anywhere . I agree that Sony need mirrorless camera in DSLR form factor but I think Sony starts this model too low on some features that it fails to appeal to a wider audience. That will limit its success.

You keep forgetting that prices you are mentioning are street prices of old cameras. $400 is MSRP price. An year later when they are clearing stocks of A3000 (like the cameras you mentioned) this will be selling for $250 and less.

@ET2, Yes you are right; but what makes you think street prices will not change too?

Nex-5R was launched at $700. They are clearing stocks now to make space for 5T. Thus it's on sale now (with probably little to no profit to Sony). A3000's launch price is $400. These things are not comparable. Sony thinks they can make money from A3000 with MSRP at $400 (as it's cheaper camera to make). The prices on A3000 would go down even more, especially Holiday season.

"forgot that similar cameras already existed? OM-D, GH4? None of them 'ended' anything."

@Plastek - oh, so Olympus is still cranking out mirrored 4/3 DSLRs, are they? No, I think m4/3 mirrorless effectively ended the 4/3 DSLR. So your above statement is, to put it bluntly, wrong. The upcoming Olympus flagship body, the OM-D E-M1, is going to be mirrorless m4/3. Look it up.

Not today. Mirror-less can surpass mirrored reflex; but they desperately need to get on with it. That includes value, combined with an optical, beating, EVF, and faster, more accurate, AF-C tracking. We are seeing some (slow) progression (Phase detect in Nikon 1) mirorr-less; but those balances are way off. The Nikon 1 sensor is poor, and conversely, the X-Pro 1, is too slow, and way over priced.

Cameras/systems are so unbalanced today, that when one like the X100S comes along, it's way overpriced (and focal limited). Some people go ape over it, and only because it's a less-worse, balanced benefits, camera system. Our best, stinks.

It's like in school; where you best student, can be getting an F! Where's the A game?!?!?!?!?!?

you all write here with a wisdom, people, and you all act as if the VF was the picture you are supposed to shoot. I use the Sony EVF since bits of time and I do not step back. His disadvantage is his advantage, you see the noise of the sensor and by that you know what you will get. In few years, you will have OVF as exclusive yuppie accessory only, and probably only in nostalgic 10000$ bodies with some colored dots on it.

NEX6 rings a bell?
Now make a NEX3 with EVF in a same fashion and you got it.

SDF, What do you know about the AF that i do not?

Amen, brother, I don't think many of the whiners on DP actually spend much time daily taking shots-

I guess this camera take good pictures, no ?
I ask respectfully, WHO is the ignorant, or by the way THE SHEEP ?

@sensibill - Ahhh, how cute: an insecure, paranoid, bitter Sony A-mount user who feels threatened by the A3000. LOL. Change happens, and someday if the A-mount lacks the sufficient usership to continue supporting it, then Sony may very well terminate it. But I doubt that's going to happen soon. If anything, this new A3000 should bring a lot more consumers to Sony, which will be good for Sony's camera division, which will give them more money to continue supporting their users, including users of the A-mount. Anything that brings more users to Sony should be welcomed by any Sony user.

Don't hate the A3000 and blame it if Sony eventually dumped the A-mount. The biggest threat to the Alpha/SLT system is *other* DSLR brands. The "many thousands of existing [Sony Alpha] owners" is nothing compared to the "many millions of existing [Canon/Nikon] users.

T3, stop trolling with E-mount BS, please.

"New" is what sells products in our economy, otherwise everybody would still be looking for a Brownie camera to buy-

How many 35mm lenses you know have IS/VR

Good points @Rad, and @T3.

Yet, not everyone stays with the kit lens. Kits can be OK; but they are not better. As Zod.. above said, a refurb Nikon body gets your body expense down that way too. Then we're talking about some serious lens choices.

If Sony has any balls at all, they will deep discount the E lenses; and maybe, that's the plan.

Some of you (other) guys, and shills, get me wrong; when saying, that I'm just negative for pointing out the cons. I think this new <$400 price is great, and with that sensor; but I do not think that its an entirely, benefits balanced camera body, and mount. Without an optical view, isn't a higher quality EVF, a requirement?

I'm actually agreeing, with many of you, about the camera systems combined pros. The price especially. Yet, a low price still does not justify, the crappy, core photographic cons. Some, were talking; as if it's OK to add, all these good parts, and stir in the crappy ones. Manufacture can do better, even if they haven't....

The combined pros, do not sum up all things needed for better pictures. The cons are also not exclusive to the things that are not significant.

That adapter should work fine-

would prefer an A3001 with extremely cheap (= zero) EVF but a higher resolution (say 1M dots) display.

Exactly. I use the LCD all the time except bright lights where it's almost impossible to compose. I just need a cheap EVF for rare use.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52061058

We will find out soon from DXOMark on how well the new 20MP sensor perform on test.

No, better called "a tiger in a rabbit's clothing." This model might sell big in Asia, where millions might not afford a $800 DSLR, but could justify a $400 "good" camera as a frugal choice.

I beg to differ. NEX-series cameras are not P&S by any means. They can be used as such, but there's nothing in them that would prevent professional use either.

The price point is what will sell this cam, will probably set record sales worldwide- plus, the price will probably fall in the future, which will sell even more-