A57 or A65 for lowlight wildlife?

Started Oct 28, 2012 | Questions thread
NPPhoto Senior Member • Posts: 1,084
Honest answer?

jamesbm wrote:


Looking to buy a fast 300mm lens for photographing wildlife in low light - which camera body is better suited - A57 (16mp) or A65 (24mp)?

Thanks in advance!

I have used both cameras extensively as I wanted a backup for my A65. From everything I read about the supposed low light champion "A57", it was far from being a champion. I couldn't use ISO 800 above for real world wild life photography. I would not reccomend the A65 or the A57 both.

I have since sold my A65 and bought a used A33 and am very happy with the smaller file size. I did this because Sony's SLTs have some nice features like MFNR, HDR, etc. I have sold all my lenses and purchased a Tamron 18-200mm to go with my Sony A33 as a landscape only camera/lens combo.

I am looking at buying a used Canon 1D MK-II or III for action and wild life photography with a good lens aimed at that kind of photography. The A33 gives stunning results for outdoor photography and the 1D would be great for action.

Also, I don't understand the suggestions for A99 as it is a completely different class of camera and being an FF, you will lose the crop factor for wild life and the A99 is 3 times more expensive than the cameras you are aiming at.

-- hide signature --

Nick P

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow