Sony A3000 First Impressions Review: Digital Photography Review

Sony A3000 specifications

{productspecstable: sony_a3000}

GearShop

Sony Alpha a3000 Mirrorless Camera Kit with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS Lens●

$398.00

Buy on GearShop

Sony a3000 Interchangeable Lens Digital 20.1MP Camera	$398.00
Sony a3000 Interchangeable Lens Digital 20.1MP Camera	$398.00
Sony a3000 alpha a3000 ILCE-3000K/B, ILCE3000, Interchangeable Lens Digital 20.1MP Camera Bundle with 32GB High Speed Card, Spare Battery, Rapid Charger, SLR Guide DVD, UV filter, Padded Case, Mini HDMI Cable + More	$429.00
Sony Alpha A3000 Digital Camera & 18-55mm Lens with 32GB Card + Battery + Backpack + Flex Tripod + 2 Lenses Kit	$449.95
SONY ALPHA 3000 KIT 18-55 MM SCHWARZ ILCE-3000K	$398.00
Sony Alpha A3000 Digital Camera & 18-55mm Lens with 55-210mm Lens + 64GB Card + Battery + Charger + Case + 3 Filters + Tripod + Tele/Wide Lenses Kit	$724.95
Sony Alpha DSLRA300K 10.2MP Digital SLR Camera with Super SteadyShot Image Stabilization with DT 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 Zoom Lens	$750.00
Sony Alpha A3000 Digital Camera & 18-55mm Lens with 32GB Card + Battery + Charger + Case + Filter + Tripod + Tele/Wide Lenses Kit	$454.95
Sony a3000 alpha a3000 ILCE-3000K/B, ILCE3000, Interchangeable Lens Digital 20.1MP Camera Bundle with 64GB High Speed Card, Spare Battery, Rapid Charger, SLR Guide DVD, UV filter, Padded Case, Mini HDMI Cable + More	$449.00
Sony Alpha A3000 Digital Camera with 18-55mm Lens (Black) with 55-210mm OSS Zoom Lens	$648.00
Sony Alpha A3000 Digital Camera & 18-55mm Lens with 64GB Card + Battery + Charger + Case + Tripod + Lenses Kit	$469.95

Show all listings (11) ...

Get more prices from Amazon

Comments

Total comments: 656

So, Sony said: let's introduce a very very cheap cam that can take very very good pictures. And DPR says: oh noooo, IT is a very cheap cam. Stear clear of this One. Nice One DPR. But Ama won't like this.

1 upvote

a decent sensor? seriously?
dpr lost it completely here. strange bias.
this sensor already proved to be the best apsc sensor out there.

2 upvotes

This would be great if Sony offered some <$500 18-270 that's similar in weight to the camera...

0 upvotes

Earlier this year (2013), Fujifilm announced FinePix HS50EXR, which also has a DSLR-like body with similar size and weight than this a3000, and... a 1/2' sensor, at $549.95. About the same time, Nikon announced COOLPIX P520 with a 1/2.3' sensor, for $449.

I think the editor should compare a3000 with these cameras, since they are all DSLR-like and have similar prices, targeting the same group of customers.

0 upvotes

these are absolutely different cameras for different group of costumers. Nikon p520 and Fuji hs50exr are really nice supper-zoom cameras. they give you 24-1000mm 35mm equivalent focal length in the size and weight of DSLR cameras.
1000mm lens for apsc sizer sensor... do you have any idea what it looks like?
I think best competitors for Sony A3000 are Samsung nx20 and Panasonic G series cameras. they are all dslr like Mirrorless interchangeable-lens cameras.

1 upvote

“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".

0 upvotes

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.

0 upvotes

Anyone can try this A3000 (at 55mm) and crop to get the same FOV (or frame, picture, ...) taking with one of those superzooms (at 800 or 1000mm) from a same position. Then he will have a solid idea about which one gets a better IQ.

1 upvote

How much, really, is one LCD over another? $5? $10?

1 upvote

Amazing price for an APS-C ILC.

0 upvotes

This has nothing to do with a 3000mA battery.

0 upvotes

The previewers' last paragraph on the first page is the most worthwhile part of this jaundiced preview. Obviously, this camera is meant to appeal to those who want to move up from an x-years-old point 'n' shoot, a phonecam or elderly superzoom that's now outfeatured even by the less-than-state-of-the-art Sony A3000. Then, there are those who'd like to give an ILC a try without spending upwards of $700.

I recall people disparaging the VW Beetle because it wasn't a V8-powered Ford, Chevy or Plymouth with power everything, lots of front and rear overhang, and able to pass everything but a gas station. Those critics just didn't get it.

I suspect most A3000 buyers won't be after a faux DSLR with which to impress others or to play let's pretend with themselves. Some like a DSLR-style design because it provides more to hold on to and controls tend to be less tiny and crowded. As for the lackluster LCD and manual EVF switch, look for fixes on a new improved A3000n in a year or two.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

Now, could Nikon please do something more competitive :)
Nikon 1 isn't what I want; APS-C is almost like a tolerable minimum for IQ, while FX still considered the best for overall IQ (lens aside).
Sure there are DBMF, but it's from another consumer market league; FX & APS-C could be considered in the same consumer league.

0 upvotes

NEX 3 sensor with built in evf and comfortable hand grip without the extra money? Nice play Sony!

0 upvotes

NEX3 sensor? Read the specs first, Dude.

1 upvote

I wonder why is EVF ALWAYS sticking out so much from the body? Is it for people with big noses :) or what? Or is it a Japanese thing or....

0 upvotes

Where should the EVF stick more out? In front or on the back of the camera?

I have a big nose and own the A900 and the A99 and I couldn't find any difference between them.

0 upvotes

Wow. There's way too much hand-wringing over the A3000. Yes, it's an NEX-3 with the form factor of a compact DSLR. I find nothing wrong with this - and I'm speaking as a person with a full-on three-body Pentax DSLR kit and a three-body micro four-thirds kit.

Yes, it would be nice if the EVF had more resolution. But it's still better than any rear LCD in bright sunlight. And as far as that rear LCD goes, the 230K-dot display on my Pentax K200D was perfectly adequate - just as it is on a number of Leica digital cameras.

My take: The A3000, at $399 with stabilized kit 18-55mm zoom, is a great deal. Maybe add the Sigma 19mm and 30mm primes in E-mount for a compact package with high image and video quality that you won't be too worried about trashing. Then go out and have fun.

Don't like it? Then don't buy it. Me? I may pick one up just for jollies - and to reward Sony for thinking a bit outside of the box.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

12 upvotes

I agree

3 upvotes

Think I will reward Sony too.

2 upvotes

I agree with all that too; but let's not ignore its cons, and let's see the MSRP drop, even more. Some typical benefits are missing. Perhaps Sony is leaving room for the next version. Plus, remember, this is Sony, and while this price is GREAT, don't forget to search Sony rootkit, and never forget their poor, demonstrated, character.

I really would like to see the faces of Nikon, and Canon right now, though, LOL. Wakey, wakey, or you're to late-ey. This is what happens when they do not make their best! Rght now, they are the tortoise, and Sony is the hare. Apparently Sony hates being the underdog. E $'s?

Make a better camera, or your brand is crap. This idea, of making less, and trying to hide it, will come out. Anti-competition will be exposed. The problem is not asking what photographers want, and misleading sales data. They assume everyone want cell phones; but really, we want a better, total, affordable camera. Missing that, some just use their phone. Stop making crap!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

...Stellar shake up of camera pricing, no doubt; but I will tell the truth. Until the EVF, and continuous focus, surpass the level of, now old, starter, DSLR's, then this is not a better light box, for what you can get otherwise; even if used. I think that speaks volumes, about how, to little, and too late, benefits progression, and value (especially with E-Mount currently) is currently still missing.

Could this rock an old film users world. Yes. Is it missing comparable viewfinder benefits, Yes. I mean, just stay optical; until you can build a better EVF. Please. This is where I part company; with those who say good enough (crappy), is OK, and especially, inferring that it would need to cost, so much more. It would not.

You know, I know 20Mpx can be a good thing (landscapes); but this sensor is already said to be less than comparable APS-C sensors, in low light. Translation, it comparably doesn't have the color sensitivity, and low noise, that any new camera today should have.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting

1 upvote

You see, color sensitivity (no to mention DR), is just one important factor, for the better gathering of light. Color, is light. This is a light gathering box, and as such, should gather light better. That means better IQ. Yet, IQ; while paramount, is not the whole "picture". Speeds, value, flow(controls); they all matter. This is why I always say, we can not do, without a photographic balance of benefits, and we should STOP supporting any camera; that doesn't have a good, photographic (Light gathering "brush".) balance. No offense to this particular combo, and respecting it's great price. At least for the body/kit.

You see, it's really both. The photographer, and the box. We can handicap the box, and still create; but why do that? That's wrong. That's not better!

You can't dismiss the photographer(I know), by the way. He comes first, and nothing happens without him, or her. You just can't say, the camera doesn't matter. It does.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 8 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Good enough (crappy), will no longer do. It's just crappier. Good enough (excellent), is the goal, and we are no where near it.

1 upvote

"Good enough (crappy), will no longer do. It's just crappier. Good enough (excellent), is the goal, and we are no where near it."

Sadly, there are a group of somewhat arrogant, self-centered people who seem to think that there are no beginning/ entry-level shooters moving up from compact digicams and P&S. And since these egotistical folks think that nothing short of *ultimate excellent* is good enough for them, than it shouldn't be good enough for *anyone*. Well, if they get off their high horse for just a moment, and step down to ground level, as opposed to having their head in the clouds like some elitist snob, they just might realize that there is a whole world of shooters for whom this camera will certainly be good enough, or even amazing.

Ignore the elitist snobs who have their heads up their butts. They think every camera has to be made for them, and no other users exist. Some of these people are just spoiled, whiny brats , looking for anything to complain about.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

14 upvotes

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....

0 upvotes

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.

0 upvotes

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.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

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.

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 13 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

What about the ones you missed? Were are they?

0 upvotes

Where are they?

0 upvotes

Neodp, you are simply talking to yourself, like a raving lunatic. Time to take your medication. You've basically become the dpreview equivalent of the crazy man standing on the street corner ranting incoherently about the end of the world while everyone avoids and ignores him. LOL. What a sad spectacle.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 13 minutes after posting

5 upvotes

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....

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

... 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.

0 upvotes

Neodp, give it a rest. You're getting a tad tiresome. We get the point. It's a feeble one but so be it. Now more on to the next thread please.

2 upvotes

Since NEX 3N has been on sale for $329 and NEX 5R is currently on sale for $439, would anybody still prefer to buy the A3000? and why?

0 upvotes

For people who want a viewfinder, a flash, and a DSLR-like form factor all in one camera, ready to go, straight out of the box. Neither the NEX 3N nor the NEX 5R have a built-in viewfinder, nor built-in flash, nor DSLR-like form. Obviously, it makes sense for Sony to offer their E-mount cameras in various configurations and styles to fit the various preferences of various consumers. Some will like the NEX style of cameras, some will like the A3000 style of camera.

3 upvotes

You have to make it look like an SLR with ha faux pentaprism and bulbous grip otherwise the American consumer will think its crap, its a disguise

7 upvotes

@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.

0 upvotes

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.

0 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

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.

0 upvotes

This camera has not more and no less features than the ancient Nikon D40. And, let's not forget, it was Nikon's bestseller. I still have one, I will not sell it since it makes excellent shots and still serves me. If I had to replace it, I would go for this A3000. This camera is a see and click toy, just like some children of all ages need them when on holidays. And, it has an amazing sensor. I wait a few more models to pass by, maybe the A3100, A3200, A5000, A5100, A7000, A7100. Do I write jokes here? or do we miss something?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

@xlotus There are rumors about a sony camera, E mount, SLR shaped just like a3000, which has moving sensor focus ( providing autofocus for legacy and manual lenses ). Maybe that one will be the high-end one?

0 upvotes

Better not to have EVF, oh wait that is Nex series camera...to me to adopt or even consider a Sony cam NEED to have optical or no viewfinder at all.I tried to focus with EVF on alpha series but my eye is drawn to actual grid on a small monitor not the object that I am trying to take picture off...that lead to blurry images.

1 upvote

Then Sony doesn't want your business. OVF is dead to them.

2 upvotes

It is an attempt to "guide" consumers down the path toward mirrorless cameras. Its about lowering production costs by getting rid of the mechanical mirror assy. The new consumers are being mesmerized by corporate marketing into thinking that whatever crap that giant corporations produce is "better". Granted, technology marches on, and I am sure at some point mirrorless will surpass DSLR technology, but it is a bit nauseating to go through this "transition".

Someone once claimed that as human history moves forward, the amount of technological change will progressively be larger, and hence change will occur quicker. Hang ON!

2 upvotes

the A3000 is the future of DLSR. It's the end of the mirror.

1 upvote

esmanhotto - forgot that similar cameras already existed? OM-D, GH4? None of them "ended" anything. Just like FS-series didn't end anything in video market despite of dozens similar prophets people like you made for it.

1 upvote

"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.

0 upvotes

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?!?!?!?!?!?

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

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.

0 upvotes

Years ago, the mirror was put in there for WYSIWYG, same as Shamael wanted above.
OVF will be obsolete one day, if something else can do better on the WYSIWYG job, and for now, that seems to be EVF.

0 upvotes

I don't get this camera at all? Is it a DSLR or not? It looks like one but from the specks it sounds like a point and shoot. Interchangeable lenses for E-mount and compatible with A-mount also. One the sale page it does not state that you have to buy ano adapter for the A-mount. I have two Sony Dslr cameras and my advice to people looking to by this one is to save a little more and get a DSLR instead. I get the feeling that this camera it a point and shoot in a DSLR body. But that is just my opinion.

0 upvotes

It's a pimp-up HX series compact.

Asking if it's a DSLR is ridiculous. It's not. In any way.

3 upvotes

the A3000 is the future of DLSR. It's the end of the mirror.

2 upvotes

copy&paste poster, huh?

0 upvotes

I am a bit wary of that power switch / shutter combination assembly.

0 upvotes

E-mount? Might as well get an NEX body that is more compact and lightweight!

Sony is likely targeting first time dslr buyers who will see this as a compelling alternative to a Canon Rebel. But we know better than that, right guys?

1 upvote

"Might as well...?" Unfortunately, to get an NEX with a built-in viewfinder and flash, you 'll have to pay quite a bit more. I mean, it's not as if Sony sells an NEX with a built-in VF and flash for the same price as an A3000, so you "might as well" get the NEX. Until Sony offers the same camera in NEX form, at the same price, it's not really a "might as well" situation.

2 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

The NEX 3N comes for 449$ and there is no optional viewfinder available (unlike with the NEX 5R) The NEX 5R is on sale right now (SONY) and comes for 499$ and an optional EVF for 349$.
And now the NEX 6 with integrated EVF; like you mentioned; comes for 749$.
So far is the A3000 still a good deal.

0 upvotes

This is the camera for those who just want to look the part. They want to buy a DSLR looking camera cheap. It will no doubt sell well, if the buying trend in US is any guide. They will just look at the price, OK, $400 with a zoom lens, and also look at the 20MP and they buy.

If Canon is the one making this camera, it will sell even faster. Such is the mentality of the average camera buyers. Sad but true. So, Sony said, if this is what you want, this is what we will give you.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

3 upvotes

Is simple. This is an alternative for a consumer that will spend $ 400 in a camera with a viewfinder that take GOOD pictures.
There are other cameras that cost $ 800 or more, that have more features, is OK. The people choice. Don't get angry for that.

1 upvote

There are other cameras that cost roughly 400$ and offer as good if not better pictures, while also offering BY FAR better autofocus...

1 upvote

Well, if you tell the true, good, tell me the model with a viewfinder. I have a G5 and it have a micro 4/3 sensor. I know that the A3000 will be better in low light and high ISO and will have Better dinamic range, so the G5 is not. It just have a good SINGLE AF. And now is in $ 400, because is an 1 year old camera. In 1 year the A3000 will sell for $ 300 / $ 325, so, neither they are comparable for the same money.

1 upvote

An A38(a37 successor) Slt at similar price range would have been better

2 upvotes

I eagerly await Jeff Keller's assertion that it's too big for a mirrorless camera.

2 upvotes

Hey guess what, for those looking for a higher resolution lcd and touch screen can check out the new Samsung NX camera. $1599 body only and 1699 with lens bundled.

2 upvotes

Yup. This is pretty awesome. $400 for a decent APS-C? Good ISO range. Good AF. Wide variety of good to excellent lenses available?

This is a win big time. Prepare to see Canon Rebel prices plummet.

6 upvotes

'Wide variety' is certainly a relative term referring to E-mount. Alpha would've been far preferable. You don't really even save much in terms of weight and size... Another facepalm by Sony, just like the A58.

0 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

Good AF? Nope. Just CDAF.
This camera won't affect sales nor prices of Rebel series. Especially when it's with E mount (so it got horribly overpriced lenses, almost no 2nd hand market and no options to go f/1.4 with native glass - only adaptors).

1 upvote

What if the Fujifilm X-A1 had the same sensor as this A3000? A great prospect for those who want a budget rangefinder format APS-C camera.

0 upvotes

I fail to see how this is any sense a bad camera. Lens makers long ago perfected the 18-55 lens, and there's an APS-C sensor, it's the Brownie Hawkeye of mirrorless cameras. Why the hate?

It would also make a great stunt cam for times when you don't want to risk your A900 and for hiking it would be wonderful.

I give up.

6 upvotes

Because it has an E-mount. Might as well get an NEX that is more compact and lighter. The average consumer will be impressed by it, however.

1 upvote

I DONT UNDERSTAND. What I see is a cheap chance to get a camera that take GOOD pictures. NOT ?
I start taking photographs with a used Panasonic G10, and it was at no point the best camera (distant of that) but I was fun taking my first shots of my baby and learning in the process. Now I have a G5, that is a good camera, but (like all cameras) have low points (SLOW and inaccurate continuos AF, not superb in low light or super high Iso.. just to say some) Again, it's a good camera, but I not paid a fortune for it, just $400 one month ago.
I applaud SONY for give us a chance to get a cheap camera WITH A VIEWFINDER that take VERY GOOD pictures, even better than many other more expensive cameras !!!!!!!!
NOT all the cameras have that it will be expensive !!!!!!
SUPERB !!!!!!!!!

10 upvotes

I have to agree.

I don't see why so many people are so negative.

This looks like a great product that will only get cheaper with time.

6 upvotes

"What I see is a cheap chance to get a camera that take GOOD pictures. NOT ?"

What? Get a camera to take pictures!? Sir, you've come to the wrong place. Around here, on equipment forums, people just see cameras as objects to whine, moan, and complain about. With all that whining and complaining, who has time to take pictures? Haven't you heard that people can no longer take good pictures unless they have a tilting screen, or a touchscreen, or 10fps shooting speed, etc?

Seriously though, you are absolutely correct. People who want to take good pictures should be able to get excellent results with this camera, and it should make a perfectly fine photographic tool, with a very nice APS-C sensor, with the flexibility of interchangeable lenses, for a great price.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

11 upvotes

Hey T3

Good summary of what happens on DP blogspace - but you left out trolling, brands wars, and general rudeness. Pictures? No time for those, too busy w/ trashing the opposition. :-)

1 upvote

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

0 upvotes

What's worse? 'Whining' about a camera that may be signalling a move away from Sony's Alpha mount that fails to match the SLT and SLR legacy they've already built up for many thousands of existing owners, or ignorant sheep whining about whining because they're easy to please and don't know better?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

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

0 upvotes

@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.

0 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

@Plastek - LOL, another insecure person who feels threatened by the E-mount, are you? I see nothing wrong with Sony offering both the A-mount and E-mount, and letting the consumers decide which one they want for themselves. Or do you consider that to be "E-mount BS"?

1 upvote

Buyer beware, this model will be replaced by another in 12 months. Sony has a way of making something "new" obsolete in no time at all.

2 upvotes

Isn't that even more good news though? Won't it mean this model will be even more affordable then?

This model wins.

3 upvotes

That only matters if you succumb to peer pressure or have a OCD condition that forces you to make needless upgrade purchases.

1 upvote

The same can be said of other manufacturers and other products, as well. For example, the Canon Rebel T3i was introduced in March 2011. The Rebel T4i was introduced in March 2012. Canon's update cycle for the Rebels is typically 12 months, sometimes 18 months. Products are constantly being replaced by newer versions. But that doesn't necessarily make the older model "obsolete". It'll still work just as good as the day you bought it.

In the world of electronics, if people heeded your warning, no one would ever buy anything, because products are constantly being updated, and often quite quickly. How often do smart phone manufacturers introduce new phones? Constantly! Does that mean you should just never buy a smart phone? Of course not.

4 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

Whenever a camera maker comes out with a "new" model a bunch of sites will "review" it = free advertising and buzz

0 upvotes

It's a superzoom cam without the superzoom lens. IQ should be excellent , however.

0 upvotes

I don't know why so many people are complaining about the A3000 EVF. Each pixel of the EVF shows the image captured by nearly 100 pixels of the CMOS sensor. This EVF is certainly one of the most efficient in the world!

1 upvote

Without getting my hands on one yet, I think this will be a great Camera for beginners and for up and coming youngsters. As a NEX user myself, I can afford this camera for my young son and allow him access to my lens's as he needs. And if the A-mount adapter works, then it opens a whole new world without breaking the bank. Cannot wait to get one in my hands to test.

4 upvotes

The problem:

The Sony SEL35F18 35mm f/1.8 Prime is going for the lowest, *USED* price, of $400. This is the most, recommended lens, and for (wise) prime users.

So much for affordability. There are much better lenses; for much less. This, barely, incrementally smaller system size just costs too much. It's no value buy. Then there's lens selection. Now, if the E lens prices dropped....

Plus, as far as fun adapter mania, you should know, some systems use fun, high quality, inexpensive, old lenses; without needing any adapters.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Good point. It's not the end though, the E-mount has the Sigma alternatives for around $200, only at f2.8 though.

But then, a refurbished Nikon d3200, body only costs $380 then add a new Nikon 35mm f1.8 for only $200.

1 upvote

How many 35mm lenses you know have IS/VR

0 upvotes

@Neodp
That isn't a problem. Another characteristic of the target market for this camera is that they don't buy a second lens at all.

1 upvote

Lenses are where you what you want to put your money into anyway. Camera bodies come and go, but lenses are what you keep. Besides, in the age of digital cameras, camera bodies come and go at a faster rate than ever! So it makes sense to not dump too much money into a camera body that you'll probably want to replace in a year or two because a newer model has been introduced.

1 upvote

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....

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

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.

0 upvotes

"Without an optical view, isn't a higher quality EVF, a requirement?"

I think most consumers as this price point just need something sufficient to frame the image with. The A3000's VF should be sufficient for that. It's mainly at higher price points that you start attracting people who get really anal about VF quality. As a starter camera for starter shooters, it's fine. Then, as people get more advanced in their shooting, and feel that they might need a better viewfinder, them they can upgrade bodies later.

Plus, people seem to have the bizarre notion that the camera industry is massively successful right now, rolling in cash. The reality is that camera companies are't generating much profits, revenue is down, sales are down, and in the next few years we may even see some companies pull out. Yet we keep wanting them to give is more for a lot less money. All things considered, I think the A3000 is a mighty fine value, even as profits on it may be very low for Sony.

0 upvotes

When criticizing the features of this $400 camera, consider how poor the screen and electronics are in a Leica M9. And people seem to muddle by with that and the lack of a tilting LCD, etc. Even the newest Leica M and X Vario do not have a state of the art EVF with a proximity sensor. And the Leica (Olympus) clip on EVF costs $100 more than this entire camera with lens.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

9 upvotes

You know you've got problems when you have to compare your camera's price to the cost per value of a Leica.

2 upvotes

EVF has very similar dot count to the Lumix G10 : is it the same old unit or more like a downsized NEX7 one?

2 upvotes

I Think this camera will sell well. It looks like a DSLR (professional in the Eyes of amateurs) and most of the things raised by people on Dpreview won't matter to the potential customers for this camera. It's probably aimed at present superzoom-owners and the like, and they are already used to mediocre EVF:s, and this camera will give them a leap in IQ which they will probably be happy with. So while I Think they cheaped out on a few too many Points, I don't Think the potential customers will care. It will be interesting to see a thorough Review of the sensor since I guess it will show up in more (and perhaps more interesting) NEX-cameras.

1 upvote

As if Sony were reading my mind: the superior NEX image quality in a NORMAL PHOTOGRAPHIC CAMERA BODY ! Finally. Unfortunately the lenses of the alpha system don't fit. Hopefully there will be a solution to that, or at least a series of really usable NEX E-mount lenses.
What I like with Sony is they are experimenting around. What I don't like: they produce something fantastic like the DSC-R1 and then completely drop the concept.

3 upvotes

??? Should the A-mount to E-mount adapter not work on this camera? It works fine on the NEX, so it should on this. And how did they drop the R1 concept? The technology of that camera went into many different models down the line.

1 upvote

That adapter should work fine-

0 upvotes

If by 'work fine' you mean the price will be halved (or bundled), have 100% compatibility with all Alpha and Min AF lenses without adding substantial weight or bulk to the camera, sign me up. Otherwise, no thanks.

0 upvotes

Let's see some photos. If "the most glaring miscue is that there's no infrared proximity sensor to switch between the LCD and EVF," then the camera might not be bad. A lot of great photography has been done without infrared proximity sensors.

3 upvotes

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

0 upvotes

more of a sheep in a wolf's disguise

3 upvotes

Hey Sony, can you do a NEX 3 with this cheap EVF?

1 upvote

Why ?

0 upvotes

Because he wants the NEX6 form-factor at a NEX3 price?

1 upvote

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

0 upvotes

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.

0 upvotes

And I use the EVF all the time and only use the LCD for reviewing. Just proves you can't please all the people etc.........

0 upvotes

Kodak digicams are no more - this looks like the replacement.

2 upvotes

Did they have a larger sensor than the Canon APS-C DSLRs ?

0 upvotes

I started my journey with Siony with the HX-1, then HX100v and finally the HX200V,,, which I think is the best of the three. Little details like not having to push a button to switch between the viewfinder and the rear display is important.

0 upvotes

Looks like SLR, but can it works like SLR? Good sensor does not mean able to capture good picture.

0 upvotes

most cameras are sold to people who have no knowledge of photography and seldom capture good picture including some pros.

after all that's why A3000 got an SLR style and EVF.

1 upvote

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

0 upvotes

An SLR 'clone' without the rattling hinged mirrors is actually a godsend. (No vibrations to worry about).

0 upvotes

look at how many people state their comments here on the new Sony A3000 1st day announcement.
This must be a l33t camera :)

Anyway, I'm thinking to get one myself; provided that it can handle good DR & High ISO Noise.
Sounds perfect & cheap enough for DIY Tilt-Shift lens project (focus peaking would help immensely to get-it-all-in-focus with TS UWA lenses).

Or.... should I go with m4/3? (more leeway to work with tilting & shifting the UWA lens?)

I got quite a lot of Nikon F-Mount lenses.

1 upvote

"Wolf in sheep's clothing?"
It's clearly the oposite : A sheep in wolf's clothing"
It only makes sense for somebody who wants to look like a pro with a dslr and would need a point and shoot actually.

0 upvotes

...which is the person who has been buying Canon's and Nikon's entry-level DSLRs for the last decade. And there are millions and millions of these people. And they buy more entry-level DSLRs with kit lenses than all the DPR-visiting enthusiasts in the world together buy any other class of DSLR or ILC or f/1.4 primes or 70-200 zooms.

So it makes business sense for Sony to go after them. It's deeply cynical but it might actually work.

4 upvotes

$400 camera (including lens) sounds like a sheep. First photo from Sony's 20mpx APS-C sensor paired with a sharp enough lens will prove otherwise. I think DPR has the title correct!

1 upvote

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

0 upvotes

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.

0 upvotes

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.

0 upvotes

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-

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

photogeek - to be P&S they would need to be newbie-friendly and really portable first.
Instead we got NEXes with some obscure, horrific GUI and most of the lenses being twice as expensive as the DSLR equivalent while offering very little advantage in size.

1 upvote

"Its appearance also screams low-budget, with few controls"

Oh come on, tell that to Phase One and Leica S owners.

2 upvotes

They could add 30$ to the price and put in the camera decent viewfinder... hope the sensor at least would be an improvement over the classic 16 of the others E models...

0 upvotes

You have a Psygnosis profile pic.

0 upvotes

I'm wondering... this might be a genial move from Sony as it's absolutely the perfect camera to set foot on the customer's door. :O

You lure unsuspecting customers into the system with a camera that offers unprecedented value for money, and leave them wanting more from week two. In my case that would be hour two, but you get the picture... Sooner rather than later you'll get yourself wondering whether to go for NEX5 or upper along Alpha Centaurus.

0 upvotes

Good try for your target Sony, but for me it's just over the line on Form over Function. :(

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I just hope the low-res EVF doesn't put new people off EVFs for good!

4 upvotes

I don't uderstand one thing. Sony has all pieces of technology to combine into a superior camera. But I haven't seen any camera in their lineup I would like to buy since previous decade. Every new model misses something that was good and should not be abandoned. I hardly believe it's Japan quality. I keep my alpha 700 and alpha 900 but won't replace it with new models...

3 upvotes

Well, there are some film photographers who say the same thing about every digital camera that has been introduced in the previous *two* decades. What they see in newer cameras just doesn't float their boat. Nothing wrong with that. If you're happy with what you have, stick with it. I think Sony is putting out a lot of interesting cameras...in so many shapes and forms...many camera types that no one else is even attempting...but if *none* of these cameras spark any interest in you, that's just the way it is. Just be happy that you're happy with what you have. Nothing wrong with that, and it doesn't necessarily mean that Sony is doing anything wrong. If anything, they did a good job of producing two cameras, the A700 and A900, that were so good and met your needs so well that you haven't found the need or desire to buy anything new.

10 upvotes

You should look at the RX1 or RX100 II...

1 upvote

0 upvotes

Total comments: 656

Editorial content

Product database

Community