Previous page Next page

Sony A3000 First Impressions Review

August 2013 | By Richard Butler
Buy on GearShop


Preview based on a pre-production Sony A3000

Sony's taking a different approach to the consumer interchangeable lens market with the A3000, essentially a 20.1MP APS-C mirrorless camera that uses the same E-mount as the Sony NEX line, yet which has the look and feel of a traditional SLR. Though not the first manufacturer to take this approach, Sony is the first to achieve the low starting price point of $399 for both lens and body. However, to achieve that price point the company had to choose lower quality components for the LCD and electronic viewfinder (EVF).

While small mirrorless cameras have caught on in much of the world, adoption is quite low in the US, with most consumers preferring more substantial-looking cameras like Rebel-class and mid-range SLRs. If they're going to spend several hundred dollars, the reasoning seems to be that most want something that looks like a professional camera. Superficially, the Sony A3000 is rather like the now-discontinued Panasonic G10, a low-priced mirrorless with an EVF and an LCD on the back, designed to ape, if not directly challenge Canon's Rebel and Nikon's D3000-series SLRs.

Sony A3000 key features

  • 20.1MP Exmor APS-C HD CMOS sensor
  • Compatible with Sony E-mount lenses and A-mount with optional adaptor
  • 1080 60i video
  • Built-in stereo microphones
  • Optical Steady Shot stabilization
  • 25-point Contrast-detect AF
  • 3-inch, 230K LCD
  • ISO 100-16,000 for stills, 100-3200 for video
  • 1/4000 to 30 second shutter speeds, bulb
  • Sweep panorama
  • Shooting tips, Intelligent Auto, other novice modes
  • HDMI out

From the front, the A3000 sells itself well, with handsome design and black spatter paint. The standard 18-55mm kit lens seems just a little small though, on the comparitively fulsome body. The grip is ample, and one could almost imagine a pentamirror fitting behind that Sony logo (though of course there isn't one).

However, the illusion falls apart when you pick up the A3000. While the feel of the grip is indeed substantial, the rest of the camera looks and feels hollow from the back. Its appearance also screams low-budget, with few controls. The LCD is more coarse than we're used to seeing these days, with disappointingly low 230,400-dot resolution; its 3-inch size amplifies the effect. The small EVF is also disappointing, and what appears to be a rubber pad around the outside is actually hard plastic, a hazard to glasses-wearers. Those who liked the menus of the NEX system cameras will feel right at home with the A3000's menu; those who did not will carry on hating. 

Perhaps the most glaring miscue is that there's no infrared proximity sensor to switch between the LCD and EVF. Instead you have to press a button on the top of the A3000, one that's difficult to reach over the Mode dial with your hand on the grip. A small thing, but for a camera that is designed to appeal to customers on the showroom floor of Best Buy and Costco, it'll likely fail the first test everyone will naturally put to the camera when they pick it up and look through the viewfinder - expecting it to perform like an SLR, they'll wonder why the finder is black.

Our concern is that while it was designed to appeal to those who want the perception of professional quality offered by the SLRs of other manufacturers (Sony openly admitted as much to us), despite its appearance the A3000 fails in two key ways: it neither feels like an SLR nor does it function entirely like an SLR either. And as potential buyers move down the counter trying the various other cameras on display, we think they'll notice the difference.

Of course, this is the enthusiast perspective. Naturally, a lot of people will look no further than the pricetag. This is a $400 interchangeable lens camera. It has a 20.1MP sensor. It captures 1080 60i movies with built-in stereo mics. Those specs are hard to argue with. And the A3000 has so many of the features that make Sony NEX cameras appealing, but packaged in an SLR-like body. For those willing to live with the low-res EVF and LCD, the Sony A3000 is undoubtedly a bargain. It enters a price range appropriate for older kids wanting a better camera, a smartphone upgrader, as well as simple impulse buys, gifts and anyone wanting a decent sensor and interchangeable lenses without spending a fortune.

Kit options and pricing

Expected to retail for $400, the Sony A3000 and 18-55mm kit lens will ship in early September 2013.


If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

Images which can be viewed at a larger size have a small magnifying glass icon in the bottom right corner of the image, clicking on the image will display a larger (typically VGA) image in a new window.

To navigate the review simply use the next / previous page buttons, to jump to a particular section either pick the section from the drop down or select it from the navigation bar at the top.

DPReview calibrate their monitors using Color Vision OptiCal at the (fairly well accepted) PC normal gamma 2.2, this means that on our monitors we can make out the difference between all of the (computer generated) grayscale blocks below. We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

This article is Copyright 2013 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Previous page Next page
55
I own it
10
I want it
7
I had it

Comments

Total comments: 676
12345
Sudo Nimh
By Sudo Nimh (Aug 28, 2013)

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
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Aug 28, 2013)

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

0 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (Aug 28, 2013)

more of a sheep in a wolf's disguise

3 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Aug 28, 2013)

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

1 upvote
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Aug 28, 2013)

Why ?

0 upvotes
Erik Magnuson
By Erik Magnuson (Aug 28, 2013)

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

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Aug 28, 2013)

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

0 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Aug 28, 2013)

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
Donald Clegg
By Donald Clegg (Aug 29, 2013)

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
Michael Barker
By Michael Barker (Aug 28, 2013)

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

2 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Aug 28, 2013)

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

0 upvotes
Paul Tople
By Paul Tople (Aug 28, 2013)

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
KW Phua
By KW Phua (Aug 28, 2013)

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

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Aug 28, 2013)

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
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Aug 28, 2013)

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

0 upvotes
hdr
By hdr (Sep 6, 2013)

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

0 upvotes
budi0251
By budi0251 (Aug 28, 2013)

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
mad marty
By mad marty (Aug 28, 2013)

"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
Marvol
By Marvol (Aug 28, 2013)

...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
Rob Sims
By Rob Sims (Aug 28, 2013)

$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
SDF
By SDF (Aug 28, 2013)

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

0 upvotes
jkoch2
By jkoch2 (Aug 28, 2013)

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
photogeek
By photogeek (Aug 28, 2013)

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
Krocket
By Krocket (Aug 29, 2013)

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
Plastek
By Plastek (Aug 30, 2013)

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
peterv-
By peterv- (Aug 28, 2013)

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

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

2 upvotes
Mapel
By Mapel (Aug 28, 2013)

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
sensibill
By sensibill (Aug 29, 2013)

You have a Psygnosis profile pic.

0 upvotes
duartix
By duartix (Aug 28, 2013)

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
duartix
By duartix (Aug 28, 2013)

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
don_van_vliet
By don_van_vliet (Aug 28, 2013)

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

4 upvotes
jimstar70
By jimstar70 (Aug 28, 2013)

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
T3
By T3 (Aug 28, 2013)

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
pkc55
By pkc55 (Aug 28, 2013)

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

1 upvote
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (Aug 28, 2013)

+1

0 upvotes
xlotus
By xlotus (Aug 28, 2013)

-low res LCD and viewfinder
-no tilting screen
-no touch screen
-no proximity sensor
-few buttons and same terrible NEX menu
-only up to 16000 ISO

It seems made for people who like the DSLR shape but only know how to push the shutter button.Even though the street price is expected to be at $400, I can see it soon falls further down to $300 or even $250.

Even if the price drops to that level, I would prefer to pick up a Panasonic G5, EOS M or Samsung NX1000/NX210. Even Sony's own NEX 3N is more preferable than this silly DSLR-lookalike.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Aug 28, 2013)

agreed that there are not bad cameras sold at bargain prices.

for the image quality, would like to see how it will compete with 70D of similar pixel count but a slightly smaller sensor area.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Aug 28, 2013)

"It seems made for people who like the DSLR shape but only know how to push the shutter button."

Regarding all those points you bring up, it might be worth noting that it wasn't too long ago that few, if any, of those features were on cameras, and many cameras that cost a lot more money *still* don't have a lot of those features. And yet, you make it seem as if all those features are *must have* features that no photographer could possibly live without...because if you can live without them, then you surely must be someone who "likes the DSLR shape but only knows how to push the shutter button."

There once was a time when a photographer could still be a photographer without all these extraneous bells and whistles like a touch screen, or tilting screen, or proximity sensor. They just needed the basic controls, a few buttons, something to frame the image with, and a shutter button. Sadly, these days, so-called "photographers" think they need so, so much more just to take a picture.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
13 upvotes
Marvol
By Marvol (Aug 28, 2013)

It's meant to compete on price against Canikon entry-level DSLRs. If you compare these:

Nikon 3200 - 0.49x OVF, no tilting or touch screen, beginner-oriented Nikon menu, ISO up to 6400 (12800 expanded). Does have 24MP and 921k LCD. Cost US$ 700 w/lens at introduction and weighs 500g without lens.

Canon 1100D - 230k LCD, not tilting or touch, 0.48x OVF, ISO up to 6400, 12MP. Cost US$600 w/lens at introduction, weighs 495g without lens.
(DPReview starts its review by stating "The first impressions of the 1100D are those of a camera that has been aggressively engineered to keep costs down". Imagine what the A3000 review will say >)! )

0 upvotes
Rob Sims
By Rob Sims (Aug 28, 2013)

Nikon D4 has no tilting screen, no touch screen, no proximity sensor. I guess it's also for people who only know how to push the shutter button.

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
xlotus
By xlotus (Aug 31, 2013)

I was comparing A3000 with other NEX cameras which have those features. I was also asking myself, if I have $400 to spend for a new camera, what can I get / what are the options out there? Well, I mentioned several cameras in that price level and even lower in some cases.

To me, the other models I mentioned simply are more well rounded cameras. They provide rich features while still produce great images.

A3000 takes a few steps backward in order to lower the price and as dpreview commented, assumed that non enthusiasts would be interested to buy a DSLR-shaped mirrorless camera. Time will tell if this model will fly off the store shelves.

@T3 I think it is unfair to compare current camera features with those from a while back. Would Ansel Adam prefer to use his film camera if a modern digital camera existed back then? I am sure he would pick up a more capable camera whenever possible.

0 upvotes
xlotus
By xlotus (Aug 31, 2013)

@Rob Sims: I am sure you are smart enough to figure out why D4 costs as much as it is and why it's worth it. My comment about A3000 made for people who only know to push shutter button came from dpreview comment which basically said that this camera does not seem to be made to attract enthusiasts with its dumbed-down features compared to other Sony NEX cameras. About the only two favorable A3000 features are the DSLR-shape and the 20Mpix sensor.

@Marvol: only time will tell if A3000 can convince buyers at large that it is a better buy compared to a real DSLR - entry level that is. Amazon Top 100 best seller digital cameras can provide the answer. I will be keeping watch to see if A3000 sells better than the competing real DSLRs. Btw, A3000 would appeal to me if Sony keeps the NEX common features, the ones I mentioned in my initial post.

0 upvotes
huyzer
By huyzer (Aug 28, 2013)

EVF kills it for me.

1 upvote
tabloid
By tabloid (Aug 28, 2013)

To make it simple.

I bet that if I took a picture with my Sony A65 and then a identical picture with a A3000, nobody would be able to tell the difference.

I bet that if I did a video with my Sony A65 and then a identical video with a A3000, nobody would be able to tell the difference.

To me that is the bottom line.

3 upvotes
Mapel
By Mapel (Aug 28, 2013)

Good IQ in a bad package. Results could be identical but the experience behind them will be a lot different.

I hope they had improved the IQ over the "old" 16 sensor at least...

0 upvotes
duartix
By duartix (Aug 28, 2013)

That is really making it simple.
Nothing you said could be more TRUE. :)
However, consumers nowadays are one bunch of ungrateful and unsatisfied MFs.
They get a camera that will take amazing photos and video but they will be left with wanting from day one. :( And they will immediately start wondering about the NEXt nevel.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
g7star
By g7star (Aug 28, 2013)

This is actually one of the few Sony cameras I'm tempted to buy.. It's so cheap!! But.. well I know I won't really buy.

0 upvotes
golfzilla
By golfzilla (Aug 28, 2013)

Gee, I was hoping for an NEX-7 Mk II instead. Oh well....

0 upvotes
forsakenbliss
By forsakenbliss (Aug 28, 2013)

more coming in sept.

0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (Aug 28, 2013)

Well, if the a3000 is still able to generate this many comments after the Christmas shopping season, then I'll be impressed. I kinda actually hope it does shake things up a bit, just to see how the other camera makers respond to it. Even though it's not something that I would buy, it would still be fun to see if this idea will sink or swim. Good luck Sony!

1 upvote
Gesture
By Gesture (Aug 28, 2013)

Great trend. APS-C sensor in affordable, compact package, a la Canon EOS-M now and Samsung NX1000.

3 upvotes
dynaxx
By dynaxx (Aug 28, 2013)

Done in a rush, obviously, but saying "Perhaps the most glaring miscue is that there's no infrared proximity sensor to switch between the LCD and EVF " is just silly when the feature is of trivial significance and was dropped by Sony on some of their high-end cameras. Wouldn't it be a shock to all of us if you fitted the gubbins of a Nex camera into a much fatter body and it didn't feel hollow ( it is hollow) !

The poor rear screen/viewfinder vs the price is the real trade-off that potential buyers will grapple with but if you prefer to hold something more substantial than a pack of cards behind your Zeiss lenses then this is a very attractive option. The SLT Alpha mount adaptor for Nex will look more at home on this body, too.

The real problem is that the reviewer ( like the rest of us ) has no point of reference for a "sort" of DSLR camera at this price point ; let's give Sony some credit for shaking up the industry again ( as with the RX1 at the opposite end of the price range ).

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 28, 2013)

No point of reference? How about Panasonic G1 (2008), G10, G2, G3, G5, G6? ;) All of them (except G6 - not for a couple months yet) fell to that price pretty quickly.

1 upvote
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (Aug 28, 2013)

The relevant point of reference was given by Sony when they explained that people in the USA prefer SLRs, so this is their next approach to addressing that market with mirrorless. Our next point of reference is our experience with those competing SLRs. You're right, we have no prior experience with other SLR-like cameras at this price point, but we make clear that our concern is how the A3000 will fare in Best Buy when it's compared by consumers to competing SLRs from just about anyone else.

I think we'd have been more impressed had Sony put in the LCD from the NEX-3N and used a 16MP sensor instead of a 20MP, making for a more well-rounded product overall. But we don't have access to the bill of materials for the price of two high quality LCDs vs one 20MP sensor. It may be that Sony's moving away from the 16MP sensor, or it may be they wanted the extra wow factor.

Get back to me once you see the LCD and EVF for yourself; I bet you'll be disappointed too.

4 upvotes
Tonkotsu Ramen
By Tonkotsu Ramen (Aug 28, 2013)

Shawn, the LCD from the 3N shows significant noise the moment you leave a well lit place.. it's one of the lesser lcd's sony has put out..

0 upvotes
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Aug 28, 2013)

I stand in the middle. I think Sony did the right decision to leave it out, assuming that people would use the LCD more often. Yet, it's quite embarrassing if people have to figure out why the viewfinder doesn't work while they try the a3000.

@Shawn I think they're moving to the 20MP sensor across their APSC products, or, to this series of DSLR style NEX bodies.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
ET2
By ET2 (Aug 28, 2013)

Really Shawn Barnett? 230K LCD is that bad now? I swear a few years ago I couldn't tell the difference between A550 (930K) and A500 (230K) LCD when I tried to spot a difference in a camera shop. Maybe there are other reasons why this particular LCD is bad.

230K LCD was norm on lower end cameras until recently. Nikon D3100 (not that old camera) had a 230K LCD.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
dynaxx
By dynaxx (Aug 28, 2013)

Replying to Peevee1 - apologies - I should have qualified my "no point of reference" comment with "having a decent size sensor" ( representing a fair whack of the overall cost ) which was in my mind to write but there it remained ! Brian

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 28, 2013)

And m43 is a decent size, practically the same height but a few mm not as wide.

0 upvotes
dynaxx
By dynaxx (Aug 28, 2013)

224 square millimetres approx. ( from Wikipaedia ) ; APS-C's vary from manufacturer to manufacturer but Sony ( at the smaller end of the range at 21.5 X 14.4 ) still has 35.23% greater area than the M43 sensor. Area is what matters and it is area, or the lack of it, that determines the pitch of the photo-sensors and their performance.
Don't misunderstand me ; no one applauded the creation of the 4/3 standard in this industry more than me but they mistakenly settled on a sensor that was way too small.

0 upvotes
dynaxx
By dynaxx (Aug 28, 2013)

Kindly ignore my reply above ; I have just seen the actual Sony A3000 sensor dimensions in the DPR spec' page and the M43 sensor is roughly 38% smaller - substantial difference by my reckoning

0 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (Aug 28, 2013)

ET2, yes, this LCD is among the poorest I've seen in some time.

0 upvotes
ezradja
By ezradja (Aug 28, 2013)

this with speed booster ...

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Aug 28, 2013)

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2832/8941810155_51392273a8_k.jpg

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8276/8968212423_f612e6a5ac_k.jpg

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
patriotspyke
By patriotspyke (Sep 9, 2013)

I have the NEX 5N, would I buy this? no... do I think it it is worth it.. hell yes. decent specs, EVF and interchangeable lenses. With mount adaptors you could add any lens. And its is cheaper than a single lens (body plus kit lens) I cant see how it would appeal to an existing NEX owner (except the EVF) but for anyone else it is a good low budget camera. Now if they brought out a premium version with high res screen, high res evf and in-body stabilisation then I would be interested.

0 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Aug 27, 2013)

One of the most scathing previews I've read on DPReview. Ha, ha...

1 upvote
samhain
By samhain (Aug 27, 2013)

It's actually a pretty cute little camera. If Sony had any interesting e-mount lenses I'd actually consider getting one.

3 upvotes
NowHearThis
By NowHearThis (Aug 28, 2013)

10-18/4 (tiny for an ultra wide)
24/1.8 Zeiss (if you've ever shot it you know why it added it)
35/1.8 (The Nikon 35/1.8 lived on my D40, this is even better)
18-200 SEL (No other all-in-one lens is as good period, downside is it is rather large)
16-70/4 (The perfect walk around lens, images on Dyxum show outstanding results, even on a cheap 400 camera) This one lens would work for over 90% of everything I shoot and need a lens for.
50/1.8 (Focus can hunt in low light, but on my NEX 7 IQ was great, portraits were almost too sharp.)

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Aug 28, 2013)

agreed that Sony don't have good lenses but the new 18-105 is interesting with power zoom for video (especially if Sony can come out with a Canon style dual-pixel PDAF) and the price is not too high compared with those with a blue dirt stain.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Aug 27, 2013)

So small, too small. Guess it is a camera for women? The picture of the a3000 being used by a man is pretty silly.

2 upvotes
steelhead3
By steelhead3 (Aug 28, 2013)

Gustav is a very large machinist, not your normal man. He handles a 500 f4 like a 135 2.8.

2 upvotes
ezradja
By ezradja (Aug 28, 2013)

the Canon 100D is smaller though

0 upvotes
AmateurSnaps
By AmateurSnaps (Aug 27, 2013)

That sounds like the worst camera sony has made for quite some time

After all their innovation this just seems like a half hearted effort

Would much rather see a higher spec slr/mirrorless camera. Shame.

3 upvotes
sportyaccordy
By sportyaccordy (Aug 27, 2013)

I think the A99 may begin to approach your rigorous demands.

11 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Aug 27, 2013)

Wait for the full frame A9000.

5 upvotes
Tonkotsu Ramen
By Tonkotsu Ramen (Aug 27, 2013)

This has the same sensor as the A58, which has incredible IQ. The only difference is that this doesn't have the translucent mirror, so IQ should be even more impressive.

At $399 with the lens.. there really isn't anything to complain about.

15 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Aug 28, 2013)

Mirrorless 20mp APS-C, with lens and EVF, for only $400, is an innovation in itself. Yes, innovation can come from whiz-bang features and technologies, but break-through, game-changing pricing can be just as significant. Remember when Canon broke the $1k price barrier for DSLRs with their first Rebel DSLR? That watershed moment was as significant as any "innovation".

2 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Aug 27, 2013)

This camera to upsets the status quo and all the small minds react predictably.

22 upvotes
NowHearThis
By NowHearThis (Aug 28, 2013)

Well said!

0 upvotes
captura
By captura (Aug 27, 2013)

If sony didnt sell millios of these, they couldnt stay in businejss to make the cameras we really like.

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Aug 27, 2013)

Wow, 424 comments, this is like Kyle Busch in NASCAR, you know you are popular when you get a reaction like that from people that hate you !

1 upvote
esmanhotto
By esmanhotto (Aug 27, 2013)

The sony did a great machine, I use with old leica leica R and M, Minolta and other ...... hopefully easy focus MANUAL

0 upvotes
waxwaine
By waxwaine (Aug 27, 2013)

Good for evf lovers.
Not interesting for ovf fan like me. I preffer Pentax K-01 on this sensor MILC range.

1 upvote
esmanhotto
By esmanhotto (Aug 27, 2013)

finally a Sony R2, and good photos

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 27, 2013)

You like OVF, but choose k-01 which has NO VF? ;)

4 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Aug 27, 2013)

Obviously it doesn't make a difference for him if camera has EVF or not VF at all.

2 upvotes
AndrewG NY
By AndrewG NY (Aug 27, 2013)

I'd say good for those who consider EVF a prerequisite rather than EVF-__lovers__, as it has a pretty mediocre EVF.

0 upvotes
waxwaine
By waxwaine (Aug 28, 2013)

Plastek, you interpreted me properly.

0 upvotes
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (Aug 27, 2013)

Built to a price, and a pity that both viewing formats are compromised. But, if the sensor is at least as good, or better, as in the slightly lower resolution Nex 5N, AND it were to be available without a lens, I see it as a much cheaper alternative to a used Nex7.

Viewing won't be the wondrous experience of the add-on EVF for my Nex 5N, but the IQ may conceivable make up for it. Will have to await the results of a dpreview full test, and if its sensor scores highly, who knows how well it would sell?

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 27, 2013)

"But, if the sensor is at least as good, or better, as in the slightly lower resolution Nex 5N"

Comparing the 5N sensor in A57 and a3000 sensor in A58 behind the same pellicle mirror, 5N sensor seems to be slightly better.

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Aug 28, 2013)

Its a good starter camera, and the lower lcd/vf resolutions will give advancing users a reason to upgrade later. But first you have to get people into the system.

1 upvote
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (Aug 29, 2013)

@peevee1,

Spot on. Sony gave us an excellent sensor in the 5N, and as I'm not a pixel chaser per se, I'm hoping for a commensurate increase in performance from the A3000's new sensor to tempt me. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

@T3. I'm fairly sure this is the direction Sony will go. Put a high quality EVF in it so users, such as I, can focus our legacy lenses. The slr shaped body is better suited for this than the small and sometimes awkward to hold Nex series bodies.

0 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 27, 2013)

It's simply incomplete. Proof of regression, and duping the general public.

It's going on 2014, you know?

If you wanted to go backwards, with benefits; to save money, then why not buy refurbished, instead?

This is the problem: Purposefully inferiority. That's as far as you can get; from building a better "mouse trap".

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Aug 27, 2013)

Hello? Anybody home?

3 upvotes
toughluck
By toughluck (Aug 27, 2013)

Regression? For 400 bucks at launch? What did you expect, full frame with all bells and whistles???

4 upvotes
Comitant
By Comitant (Aug 27, 2013)

The petting zoo called, they want you back Neodp.

11 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 28, 2013)

Sony called, Comitant. They want you; Ba-a-a-a-a-a-d. ;)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 28, 2013)

You know, "toughluck" (Sony), why don't you expect more? Even full frame, and the, "bells and whistles"!

Oh; but you've bought the Kool-aid; that a "35mm" sized sensor cost too much to produce, and with a profit. Wrong.

Some of you just don't get it. If they can keep pushing little crappy sensors, that are not, even remotely, conducive to better light gathering; then that's the HUGE profits they will take. Never daring to make a truly good (better mouse-trap), and very affordable camera. YOU, are letting them get the best of you.

How it's supposed to work:

The manufacturers are supposed to make better cameras/systems, or go out of business; because we don't buy theirs. It's a simple process, and it's grossly corrupted. But just think. What if they banned together, and teased us, with one new benefit at a time; but never COMBINED, with balanced benefits, in one system. Hmmmm.

Part of the problem is photography go's far deeper; than it may first appear.

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Aug 28, 2013)

What elitist rubbish. Yeah, how terrible of Sony to put a very good 20mp APS-C sensor into a mirrorless ILC body, with an EVF, built-in flash, good grip, and a lens, all for $400 MSRP! Not refurb, not used, not two years after it was first introduced...$400 from day one.

2 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 28, 2013)

It's good, that a value price is happening. It's not good, to assume important, basic, benefits can be acceptably removed.

It's good, that Sony is (perhaps) shaking up the market; *and* have gotten close to providing comprehensive benefits, from one system. It's not good, they haven't yet pulled it off, and with this camera, their not even trying.

You see, I recognize, its good benefits; it's just that they are stifled, by the lack of a benefits balance.

I think this form factor is fine; if it were done right. It's not. Though, a retro look, might be better. But, that doesn't really matter. A viewfinder does. No jello video does. Speed does, and the flash system does.

What matters (for a light gathering box) is price (good), Lenses (uh oh), sensor (Good at APS-C); but FF would be better.

Of course, with Sony, you can always phone home, and *BUY* menu add-ons. Just a glimpse, of the Hades, that is Sony's way. Feed that, and you may lose a limb.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 28, 2013)

We certainly need more starter prices like this! It's just so wrong, to cripple it, and infer that's all, that price could provide.

Again, it's not the sensor, that's the problem; in this particular model.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
straylightrun
By straylightrun (Aug 28, 2013)

Neodp pls go

0 upvotes
T3
By T3 (Aug 28, 2013)

@Neodp - real adults understand that things cost money, and they can't always get the things they want-- without paying more-- simply because they want something. In the real world, there are cost constraints. In other words, there really is a limit to what you can do, or can get, for a particular amount of money. And manufacturers know this quite well. Every item included adds to the cost of a product. Every component has a cost. Higher spec components cost more, lower spec components cost less, etc. To imply that "it's just so wrong" to deal with the *reality* of cost and price constraints, to simply ignore these factors like some crying child who wants mommy to buy a toy, without any regard for what the toy might cost...well, that's a bit immature and naive.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 28, 2013)

Oh no. Wanting more, and real competition, and to actually work, without corruption, and poor, knee-jerk buying habit demands is the very definition, of maturity. Wanting to see a better, balanced benefits camera, is maturity. Patiently ignoring the latest, unbalanced fads, is maturity. Asking for real leaps, in state-of-the-art camera progression (as combined where possible), instead of being spoon-feed false limits, is maturity. Finally, understanding, these are not custom made per person, and hugely masses produced items; by the lowest bidders, with very low pay (relative production costs), is also common sense, and maturity, at its best.

1 upvote
sdh
By sdh (Aug 27, 2013)

I cannot figure out a reason for this camera's existence. What does it offer over an entry-level SLT model (or generic entry-level DSLR for that matter)? Is the price floor that different? And even if it is, once you start buying lenses, like you're supposed to with any I.L.C., then body price differences diminish further.

And FWIW I'm generally a fan of Sony. In the MILC world I like the shape and feel of the NEX's over the most of the m43's bodies, outside of Pana's mini-DSLR early G models. And I still don't understand why the SLT system didnt become a game changer. (Because on-sensor phase AF will supercede it soon?)

But I just don't see the point if this new model...

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Aug 27, 2013)

NEX people asked for it, Sony made it.
Only neither Sony nor NEX people couldn't see that it doesn't make any sense and it's hardly much more than HX compact (or actually: less if you consider it's zoom, focal lenght and ease of use).
Still though I'm sure it will have some fanboys loving it beyond reason.

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 27, 2013)

"What does it offer over an entry-level SLT model (or generic entry-level DSLR for that matter)?"

Lower price and weight.

"(or generic entry-level DSLR for that matter)? Is the price floor that different?"

Yes, it is, no flopping mirror or separate focusing and metering sensors which need alignment with the image sensor.

1 upvote
Sangster
By Sangster (Aug 27, 2013)

It will be cheaper to manufacture and hence more profitable.

1 upvote
sdh
By sdh (Aug 27, 2013)

peevee1:
I'm not convinced. Is a lowest-spec'd SLT really that much lighter? Once you accept the bulk of a camera like the A3000 (holster-type case, space in your backpack/carry-everywhere bag/whatever) you're not going to notice a few ounces.
Flopping mirror, Separate focussing/metering sensors > So what? My Canon Rebel meters and focusses as well as the Sony A33 and Pana G2 & GF3 I had for a while. The notion of SLR lens front/back focussing is soooooo overhyped.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 49 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Aug 27, 2013)

It doesn't offer lower price than DSLRs. At least: not at 400$ price point. And it fails even more when you realize that lenses are twice as expensive as they are for the A-mount. Not to mention nearly non-existent second-hand market comparing to any other serious systems.

1 upvote
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Aug 27, 2013)

SLT is dead meat. Sony should have come out with this mirrorless E mount DSLR style camera years ago. The A5000,A6000,A7000 and full frame A9000 will spell the end of SLT light loss.

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 27, 2013)

"I'm not convinced. Is a lowest-spec'd SLT really that much lighter?"

A58 body weighs 492g, A3000 411g. DT 18-55 SAM II is 222g, E 18-55 is 194g, total weight saving of 109g. In other words, A58 kit is almost 20% heavier - longer too. And more expensive, you can buy A58+DT 18-55 for $598, 50% more expensive for the same sensor. And its low-light performance is worse because of the light-robbing mirror.

0 upvotes
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (Aug 27, 2013)

It's a test product for sony dumping the mirror completely as rumors have been out that they plan to do so. sony is into making new types of products instead of trying to build a great product people will keep coming back to year after year.

0 upvotes
Stanchung
By Stanchung (Aug 28, 2013)

Maybe you haven't been a poor student picking up photography as a minor in art college.

It's a smart move in catering to the 99% instead of just snobs like us. Yes me included. The difference is I can see why.

2 upvotes
digitalanalog
By digitalanalog (Aug 27, 2013)

Sony's thoughts:

I'm Jim and I'm an average tech user. Both me and my girlfriend / wife like photography, like everybody else, and we also want to take good pictures, let's say in a pro-style so we need a 'good camera'. But we're not rich.

Facts:
1. Both of us already own a $600 smartphone.
2. We want to buy a DSLR but body only is min. $600 plus lens.
3. Hey! New Sony a3000, interchangeable lens DSLR body PLUS lens PLUS 20mp!

Logical output?

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
ntsan
By ntsan (Aug 27, 2013)

In a world of HD and FHD world Sony still using 320 X 240 screen is a big mistake, but maybe for developing countries which money are really tight

Comment edited 12 seconds after posting
1 upvote
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (Aug 27, 2013)

Both your girlfriend AND wife like photography, win win.

4 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 27, 2013)

The question is when they will start sharing, you know... lenses.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 27, 2013)

Good price, but if you think about it, for the same amount of money you can buy Panasonic G5 with lens, a better all-around camera: better EVF, better screen – and fully articulated one, better controls, faster sequential shooting, faster focusing, more powerful flash… Just slightly worse sensor, assuming A3000 has the same unit as in A58.

6 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (Aug 27, 2013)

Once again, G5 was launched at $700 one year ago. They failed to sell it, so now they are clearing stocks (probably at a loss losing money). That's not the same as launch price of $399

9 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 27, 2013)

And I forgot - the old Panasonic 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 ASPH MEGA OIS LUMIX G VARIO (sheesh!) you will get with G5, despite the name, is also better - sharper and lighter.
http://slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/panasonic14-42f35-56g/tloader.htm
Not the best lens in the world, but so much better that the Sony E 18-55 junk:
http://slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/sony18-55f35-56e/tloader.htm

1 upvote
ntsan
By ntsan (Aug 27, 2013)

Doesn't matter if the launch price was set whatever price, if people want to buy camera now they pay the selling price now (like Nikon V1, EOS M, Pentax Q)

So A3000 still have lots of competition from this price bracket

2 upvotes
mpix345
By mpix345 (Aug 27, 2013)

Yeah, Sony is not good for photographers. It must be someone else who is offering breakthough options like RX100, RX1, and soon FF NEX.

The A3000 seems to be a DSLR style option to provide an Sony option vs lower end Canon and Nikon stuff. Makes sense on paper.

2 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Aug 27, 2013)

Sony already got an option vs low end Canon and Nikon stuff. Even before ILC-3000. There's no added value here when it comes to competition against Canon or Nikon - it can't even stand competition against SLTs to start with!

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Aug 27, 2013)

Right, for the same price I could buy 398 hamburgers off the Dollar Menu. If the A3000 is not your choice then get something else. What is the BFD ?

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 27, 2013)

"Once again, G5 was launched at $700 one year ago."

Who cares, Sony tries to compete now (or even in a few weeks), not a year ago.
Potential buyers of a3000 can make a mistake of buying it in a few weeks and not a year ago.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 27, 2013)

"So A3000 still have lots of competition from this price bracket"

I am not so sure - what else besides G5 has good sensor (not Pextax Q or Nikon 1 jokes) and a VF, at $400 with zoom lens? Well, I guess even older Pana G3 can be had even cheaper.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Aug 27, 2013)

The point is that only a few people can grab old models at end-of-life prices. Over the course of this model's lifespan, that old stock will sell off, and the A3000's price will drop.

This is the same reason it makes no sense to go mad when Canon launches a new DSLR at the same price its previous model launched at - not the end-of-life price it's now selling for.

Compare MSRPs to MSRPs, established street prices to established street prices and end-of-life bargains to end-of-life bargains. Doing otherwise becomes meaningless very soon after you've said it.

0 upvotes
AndrewG NY
By AndrewG NY (Aug 27, 2013)

Fortunately for Sony, in USA big-box stores they don't have to compete much against Panasonic m4/3 because most stores don't sell them. Sony will face Canon Rebel and Nikon 3xxx / 5xxx here.

Maybe some people like the NEX-style controls but to me they don't look very friendly for use when camera is at eye-level.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 28, 2013)

"The point is that only a few people can grab old models at end-of-life prices. Over the course of this model's lifespan, that old stock will sell off, and the A3000's price will drop."

By the time G5 will sell off, even better G6 will drop to its level, so it is not a valid argument. Besides, I doubt A3000 has margin to drop much in just a year.

"This is the same reason it makes no sense to go mad when Canon launches a new DSLR at the same price its previous model launched at - not the end-of-life price it's now selling for.
"

If it is a BETTER DSLR than older model (which is usually the case, although not with T4i to T5i "upgrade"), it is every right to be more expensive. The problem with a3000 is that it is not really better than G5, it is worse in all aspects but the sensor.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 28, 2013)

"Compare MSRPs to MSRPs,"

Useless. Who cares.

" established street prices to established street prices"

That is what I do, as street price of a3000 is $398 now, just like G5.

" and end-of-life bargains to end-of-life bargains."

At the same time (same actual day) - sure. Otherwise - useless, nobody chooses between a price today and price a year ago.

0 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 27, 2013)

"to achieve that price point the company had to choose lower quality components"

Yeah. Sure they did. Poor Sony. You must mean, they DECIDED to utilize the lower quality components.

This was almost a cool move. Yet not.

If Sony ever does get more traction, they have already proved to be anti-competitive. Don't feed the bears. Especially when they are hungry. What that means... Sony is not good for photographers!

That said, you'd think Canikon would wake-up. Which might be the case, if these manufactures were really competing against one another.

Oh, and I don't think people are loving the hefty size of cameras. We just want good pictures("Good enough" excellent; not "good enough" crappy), a view finder, a TTL flash, affordable lenses, and a camera with full control; but that will stay, "out of the way".

Comment edited 6 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
klopus
By klopus (Aug 27, 2013)

So you think that Sony can get to the low price point without compromises?

1 upvote
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 27, 2013)

So you buy the Kool-aid; that (mass produced) affordable cameras, can't take good pictures?

It propaganda, to suggest, we can't get a good sensor(Lens, body, flash, etc..); for less.

Look, camera systems cost far more; than desktop computers, or even guns. Are you saying computers are less complex? ...Gun's less mechanical? It's time we slowed down, and realized, the thing is a light gatherer.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 27, 2013)

Well, maybe never Sony, LOL. I see your point klopus.

1 upvote
dwm2020
By dwm2020 (Aug 27, 2013)

Ah, yeah, cameras ARE actually more complex than guns. Don't know if you've ever taken either apart before, but see if you can put your entire camera back together in less than 20 seconds.

I do get your point of price though, things are being kept artificially high for no real reason.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Aug 27, 2013)

Here's another way of looking at it:

If there are huge profit margins to be had on cameras, why has no-one significantly under-cut the current prices?

The A3000 has the lowest launch price (by around $100) of any interchangeable lens camera I can remember. If it was easy or profitable to do so, then why haven't any of the manufacturers desperate for market share done so?

(As always, you have to ignore end-of-life sales prices, which may be at a loss, to clear stock).

1 upvote
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 28, 2013)

"If there are huge profit margins to be had on cameras"...

Are you kidding me? The classic evil there, is the slick insertion of "if". I suppose you believe, they make just 100 units; per run. LOL. Think. Just go look up some verifiable unbiased facts, on actual cameras sales. You gotta do your own homework.

The public’s refusal to add, never ceases to amaze.

I suppose, the Sony cronies are upset.

1 upvote
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 28, 2013)

Computer are more complex, than (computerized)cameras. I was also saying, that guns are more complex; than today's cameras, non-computerized, mechanical parts. Certainly not, that guns were normally computerized. Never the less, any type of state-of-the-art camera, that's produced today, is comparatively overpriced. You are just used to it, and that's a bad thing.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (Aug 28, 2013)

"If there are huge profit margins to be had on cameras, why has no-one significantly under-cut the current prices?"

Sony just did, didn't they? But aside from the obvious, maybe they think that strategy of overpricing the camera at launch and only then bringing prices/margins down (so the bargain hunters would think they are buying more expensive camera at 70% off - see GX1) provides higher total profit than pricing a camera low to begin with? And they optimize their strategy for profit, not for market share?
And this is assuming nobody in those huge corps make mistakes and everybody is ready to take risks, which is obviously wrong too. :)

1 upvote
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 28, 2013)

Good point.

I'm saying the problems is, we are being coaxed; into accepting missing, combined benefits, to get one, or a few as unbalanced. I'm not saying Sony isn't trying to combined some good things here, including a better price here. I'm saying I have a problem, with blatant missing benefits, that are all for the manufacturers (all of them) bottom line, and unbalanced toward the buyers.

I'm saying we should expect more, or we are not going to even be offer it.

A. It's psychology. People still think an expensive, or huge camera makes them better, or "pro". It's doesn't.

B. People overvalue zoom telephoto, pixels (over their light gathering qualities).

C.....

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 28, 2013)

C. People generally don't understand, many great benefits, don't matter; without balanced benefits. The core, photography, critical benefits, and not stuff like GPS. We're accepting to many excuses. Such as, "good enough crappy", "the poor manufactures can't make a big enough profit", or that's it's too risky. We're assuming it can't be any better, than this.

We are getting screwed, and the choices, are very poor. many of us are used to it, and that is bad.

OK, I understand, there was a expensive bubble demand, for newly created digital cameras. Now, it's time to start making better cameras (much faster progression), or go out of business. It's time for buyers to do their homework, and be very, very, careful what we promote, with our wallet.

1 upvote
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 28, 2013)

Again, back to this new camera. Sony has several irons, into a good camera here, I'll agree; but this attitude of, of course we must leave (photography) stuff out, to make it cheap, is a lie. Some (core photographic) things do not even cost more, to include. Some core things will cost more (and that does not dictate ridiculous price hike) , but it's not OK to cripple a camera, just because many people will not notice, until it's to late.

It's not OK, to only do your best camera; with overpricing. There are good ways, to keep the costs down! ...and there are very bad ones.

It's never OK, to protect your high-line, and overprices cameras, by withholding good (even modern) photo graphic advancements; in value priced camera systems.

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 12 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Neodp
By Neodp (Aug 28, 2013)

There is one way, for any manufacturer to come out, on top of the pile, and that's better cameras. That's core photographic balances, including the system, the speeds, the sizes, and Including the price. The manufactures who are holding back (protecting expensive), are getting a very bad reputation, and are ruining their brand power.

The manufactures, with the best sales, need to stop resting on their successes; until they take a dive. People really are, starting to understand photography, better. Everyone can see IQ. Everyone can judge size, and easy-fast, control-abilities. No one likes slow.

If you can fool people, but only initially, then your brand is eventually crapolla. Get it? Low price does not mean crappy is OK. Your brand starts at the low end, not the top. It's it obvious? Your affordable camera are who you are. That's you honor, at stake. That's your quality. That's your brand.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 15 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Ahmet Aydogan
By Ahmet Aydogan (Aug 27, 2013)

More like a sheep in a wolf's clothing.

It's probably already been said, but I didn't want to read all 370 comments.

8 upvotes
munishkm
By munishkm (Aug 27, 2013)

the dimensions???..... and the weight???... or is it still me? :)

1 upvote
klopus
By klopus (Aug 27, 2013)

It's in a Specifications section of the preview

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
munishkm
By munishkm (Aug 27, 2013)

yea I know.. but it says

Dimensions
102 x 58 x 38 mm (4 x 2.29 x 1.51″)

Weight (inc. batteries)
281 g (0.62 lb / 9.91 oz)

don't think tats right

1 upvote
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Aug 27, 2013)

Did you even bother to look ?
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-alpha-a3000/3

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Aug 27, 2013)

That was the figure Sony originally gave us. They've now corrected it to 411g and we've updated our database accordingly.

0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Aug 27, 2013)

448g - Sony A37

0 upvotes
jdu_sg
By jdu_sg (Aug 27, 2013)

The return of the Maxxum3 !

1 upvote
Plastek
By Plastek (Aug 27, 2013)

What? Lol. No, not at all. More like: pimp-up HX-series compact.

2 upvotes
goblover
By goblover (Aug 27, 2013)

Ok... 400 USD.. Nikon D3100??

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Aug 27, 2013)

The D3100 was launched for $580 and is only available cheap because it's a generation old. It'll probably disappear soon - whereas the A3000 is starting at $400 ($99 less than the launch price of the next-cheapest interchangeable lens camera I can remember). It's likely that it'll drift down from that price during its time on the market - making it really cheap.

5 upvotes
MrTaikitso
By MrTaikitso (Aug 27, 2013)

Oh dear. No articulating display and the ergonomic nightmare that is the menu system. I just don't understand why after all this time, Sony came out with something that will give the whole budget mirrorless camera concept a bad name, rather than at least give it a decent display and control system. People picking up a regular DSLR will compare and choose the easier to control.

1 upvote
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Aug 27, 2013)

The A5000, A6000 , A7000 and full frame A9000 will be coming so just chill out.

2 upvotes
klopus
By klopus (Aug 27, 2013)

I really can't understand why people think that they can have a 20MP APS-C camera with a modern sensor for $399 kit and all of this without compromises.

0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Aug 27, 2013)

@joe - and they'll still use E-mount with all it's horrible features, like awesome menu system. Sorry, but there's no reason to chill out. It is garbage, and likely: will be.

1 upvote
T3
By T3 (Aug 28, 2013)

@plastek - the menu is probably the least thing the average consumer is thinking about when buying a camera. Not many consumers will say, "I bought this camera because it has a great menu system!"

3 upvotes
Marvol
By Marvol (Aug 28, 2013)

If this is aimed at P&S upgraders, the customer will be used to P&S menus which aren't known to be oh-so-user-friendly anyway.

They might feel right at home with the admittedly crappy NEX menu system (own the NEX-6 myself), or rather, won't know what they're missing.

Mind you, the average P&S upgrader isn't gonna think "I wish I could change the EV bracketing from 3 to 5 exposures with a customisable function button, so I'll not buy this camera".

0 upvotes
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (Aug 27, 2013)

BTW, the cam has a HDMI out. Wonder if it would be possible to substitute the poor LCD and EVF with a small external display.

0 upvotes
ntsan
By ntsan (Aug 27, 2013)

Well only a few camera have HDMI monitoring function during recording, most of them is used for playback only

0 upvotes
Rooru S
By Rooru S (Aug 27, 2013)

It's possible that you are allowed to do so. NEX-series have an HDMI port and work pretty good. I have seen small NEX cameras with that 5" Sony Monitor Screen mounted on a bracket working just fine, for both recording and playback.

0 upvotes
3systermuser
By 3systermuser (Aug 27, 2013)

hey, now it is the time to get rid of all annoying OVF and OVF-trolls from mirrorless land.
since I first used my first A77v , I have never looked back OVF any more ,OVF especially APS-C ones are really bad.
I still have a couple of Nikon D-SLRs but I am considering selling them for the NEX FF or whatever called rumored FF NEX camera.
or I maybe wait a bit longer for Samsung or Fuji to get a similar mirrorless FF out for us at more reasonable price, I guess what I have been after is something like digital version of the Contax g2?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
le_alain
By le_alain (Aug 27, 2013)

It lacks a button "dislike" on this this.

Not because you say the same thing many times that your a re right or representative.
Happy for you,
Happy that I desagree !

4 upvotes
Simple Guy
By Simple Guy (Aug 27, 2013)

I feel the comment about the LCD resolution seems a bit harsh. I am using D40 (yeah, that old Nikon camera if anybody remembers) which has the same resolution screen and never found it to be lacking. I use other high pixel density gadgets but still find D40 screen perfectly fine.

0 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (Aug 27, 2013)

I have seen both and the A3000 screen is not as good as the D40 screen. Incidentally, the D40 was introduced in 2006.

1 upvote
dual12
By dual12 (Aug 27, 2013)

Even if it sucks, it will still be better than the Eos M!

34 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Aug 27, 2013)

Very helpful.

3 upvotes
3systermuser
By 3systermuser (Aug 27, 2013)

well, better than any OVF cameras.

0 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (Aug 27, 2013)

I feel sorry for the people that paid $849 for the EOS M 18-55 kit when it came out last year. I bet the E mount works with more full frame and APS-C lenses than any other mount.

0 upvotes
DELETED88781
By DELETED88781 (Aug 27, 2013)

No IBIS?

2 upvotes
alphauser
By alphauser (Aug 27, 2013)

no, this is not DSLR, it is mirrorless (NEX) and lenses have IS

2 upvotes
DELETED88781
By DELETED88781 (Aug 27, 2013)

"this is not DSLR, it is mirrorless (NEX)"
Not relevant.IBIS can be implemented in any camera type. some sony lens do not have OSS so its not a big news for the moment

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
alphauser
By alphauser (Aug 27, 2013)

"this is not DSLR, it is mirrorless (NEX)"
"Not relevant.IBIS can be implemented in any camera type. some sony lens do not have OSS so its not a big news for the moment"

It is relevant, if you want IBIS and Sony, then Alpha line (A mount) is your camera.
There is no single NEX model with IBIS - so, why would you expect this one (and with $400) to have one?

4 upvotes
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (Aug 27, 2013)

Sony does in lens stabilization for it's mirrorless, not in body. Maybe in the future, but not this one.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Aug 27, 2013)

Sony do have sensor shift technolgy back in 2004 (before alpha was sold to Sony though). Oly is a late comer so they have to say 10-axis stabilizer whatever to attract eyeballs.

0 upvotes
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (Aug 27, 2013)

"Oly is a late comer so they have to say 10-axis stabilizer whatever to attract eyeballs."

...what?

1 upvote
dbateman
By dbateman (Aug 27, 2013)

Yabokkie is somewhat correct. Minolta has the first patents on in camera sensor shift. Followed by Pentax. Olympus was little late (not by much) with the E510 camera as first with Stabilization. This however was a long time ago (in camera years) 2007ish.
Olympus now has the best sensor shift mechanism.

0 upvotes
steelhead3
By steelhead3 (Aug 27, 2013)

Who does yabokkie work for?

8 upvotes
Eleson
By Eleson (Aug 27, 2013)

Good question, no posts for a year, and suddenly all h*ll breaks lose, and we get 6 almost identical posts on the lens announcement.

4 upvotes
SDF
By SDF (Aug 27, 2013)

Give him a break. He's mad because he just spent $750 on a DSLR 2 weeks ago while he can buy this for $399 :)

1 upvote
3systermuser
By 3systermuser (Aug 27, 2013)

he is a troll , that's all.

6 upvotes
don_van_vliet
By don_van_vliet (Aug 28, 2013)

No idea, he may just dislike any sensor smaller than FF. He posts negative comments on both M43 and NEX announcements.

1 upvote
Photato
By Photato (Aug 27, 2013)

Sony's Ford Model T.

1 upvote
Total comments: 676
12345