SONY A200 - saving settings

[riverwhy]

after buying and using the A200 for a short while i've discovered that you can't save settings in auto mode.. bit of a bind because a lot of the time i want different focus/flash/drive settings to the defaults, and every time i turn the camera off they get reset. I think you can do it in some of the modes, but i need it in auto..  Of course, there is the simple solution.. don't turn it off.. but not very practical 🙂

so...   looks like the A200 could end up on EBAY... but what i was wondering - what is the cheapest camera in the sony dslr range that will allow you to save settings in auto ? wanting to stay with sony because i have now got the lenses i want..

[blaireau_photo]

Hello

You are right to say that the settings can only be saved in certain modes on the A200 ('P', 'S', 'A' or 'M') - this is mainly because the auto mode is designed as a sort of 'beginners' feature which will always reset itself back to default settings.

Before considering another camera, have you tried customising the settings when the camera is in 'M' mode? Whatever you choose here should be stored by the camera as long as you don't go into one of the specific scene modes.

Thanks,

Simon

[gimp69]

AUTO is, well, AUTO.  You shouldn't be using AUTO.

[riverwhy]

ah.. thanks.. was misunderstanding program mode! (been away from slrs for too long!) Am using the camera mostly for wildlife shots where i don't have much time to fiddle with settings and thought with Program i would have to make some (exposure/dof) settings before taking the pic, but you are right, i can set drive & focus modes in P and they stay there & everything else takes care of itself,

btw.. a using a minolta 75-300mm lens and it's pretty good.. but could be better.. any recommendations for a similar zoom lens of better quality? Mostly taking wildlife pics, songbirds etc and can rarely get closer than 20feet, often not even that close,  Lens has a crop factor of 1.5 so acting s 450mm..  that seems about right...

[blaireau_photo]

Hello again

When photographing wildlife, what sort of focusing performance do you get from your current set up / lens i.e. is it quick enough to enable you to get the shot before your subject decides to wander off?

I only ask this as there are different levels of 75-300mm lens.

Thanks,

Simon

[riverwhy]

hi Simon

yes it is quick enough on the occasions i can use AF.. but mostly i use manual focus because i am often photographing something that keeps hopping about among leaves and branches. Even spot focus on AF doesn't cope very well with that...

it might be i am expecting too much of the lens.. results are generally pretty good, but nowhere near as sharp as the pros, but then i am getting pics by stalking, hand held, using the sony steady shot feature.. I'm not sitting in a hide or using a tripod.. i enjoy doing it the way i do because i like the challenge of getting close up 🙂

But if someone says there is a better quality 75-300 than my minolta (the 'beer can model, which sony seem to have copied)  i'd have a look at it

[riverwhy]

it's all gone quiet..

i'll ask another question..  err. 2 questions

first, does anyone know how these 2 lenses compare, which is better at 200-300mm

Minolta AF 75-300

Minolta AF 100-300

and is it worth looking for the APO (Apochromatic)  version ?

[Mick2011]

I could help you choose a good wildlife lens, but you would have to move away from 'consumer' zooms to either prime (fixed focal length) optics or professional zooms, which obviously cost quite a bit more.

The only problem with the two lenses you mention is that they will only be really sharp stopped down to f8 or f11, which is no good for shooting birds etc. You need a lens that's sharp enough at wide apertures, letting you set a fast shutter speed at reasonable ISO.

This is particularly true of the 'sniper' approach! If you reckon on a tripod affording you at least 2 stops, by letting you use a slower shutter, your need for fast, quality glass is increased further still.

Apart from price, the major trade-off for fast lenses is weight. Not only inconvenience; it makes hand-holding much more difficult. The sort of professional images you refer to are often taken on tripods in hides, but many aren't... the crafty tool for heavier lenses is a monopod, fixed to a boss on the lens itself. You can carry it around, fixed in place, as even while it's collapsed it will let you brace much more effectively, reducing shake and giving you at least some of those 2 stops back.

You should look at APO lenses, certainly. If you opt for a fast lens you can use a teleconverter to increase your focal length: with an APS chip 300mm is ok, but affordable 70-200 f2.8 zooms are probably not quite long enough. A TC will cost you 1.4 stops or more, but let you use slightly cheaper glass.

Bottom line: without breaking out of the £2-300 price backet, you won't see major improvements. To do what you want to do, you could be looking at in excess of £1000 new. Second-hand is therefore worth exploring... perhaps the holy grail for you might be a used Konica 300mm f2.8: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/800763689-USE/Konica_Minolta_2608636_300mm_f_2_8_APO_G.html

Perhaps more realisitcally, Tamron could be a good choice, with this 70-200 f2.8 on special offer here and there: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Tamron-70-200mm-Macro-Sony-Minolta/dp/B0013DCWUE

Hope that's of some help anyway

Mick

[gimp69]

The Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 is slow to AF and hunts in low-light.  Not great for a wildlife lens.  Sigma is better, but costs more.