Sony SLT A58 Twin Lens Kit £339.99 Argos
262°Expired

Sony SLT A58 Twin Lens Kit £339.99 Argos

£339.99
26
Found 3rd Aug 2016Made hot 4th Aug 2016
Not strictly a DSLR but a nice small and light alternative. Was this price for the single lens kit not so long ago.

26 Comments

Err, this is a DSLR?

sergy2k

Err, this is a DSLR?


As the OP correctly states, it's not *strictly* an SLR - i.e. there isn't a mirror involved. It's an SLT, but for all intents and purposes, and for those that would equate an SLR with interchangeable lenses, I wouldn't get too hung up on this!

Absolute bargain!

FatalSaviour

As the OP correctly states, it's not *strictly* an SLR - i.e. there isn't … As the OP correctly states, it's not *strictly* an SLR - i.e. there isn't a mirror involved. It's an SLT, but for all intents and purposes, and for those that would equate an SLR with interchangeable lenses, I wouldn't get too hung up on this!


I think it does have a mirror but it's translucent so doesn't, have to move when the shutter is released

Dead system. Avoid

It's pretty much a DSLR, just faster. Good camera, good price.
Large & reasonably priced lens selection available. Not a dead system.

Original Poster

It has an electronic viewfinder rather than an optical "actual image" viewfinder which a true DSLR has.

I have an older A35, and it's a great piece of kit. With the cheap 50mm f1.8 prime lens, it makes for some really nice images, and opens up a range of older "film" Minolta AF lenses too.
Good find, OP.

Great price. This camera does lose some light due to the translucent mirror but has image stabilisation so a slower shutter can be used to make up for this.If you do allot of indoor photography in low light then a traditional DSLR might be better.

Personally I would buy a new Nikon D3300 or D5300 for a bit more. Far superior in quality.
Even better a used D7000 would be about the same and price and would be far superior. Used Nikons from places like Wex wexphotographic.com/use…m=2
Are good quality and the lenses and additional options are better quality.

pretty solid setup, two lenses are 18-55 and 55-200

afroylnt

Great price. This camera does lose some light due to the translucent … Great price. This camera does lose some light due to the translucent mirror but has image stabilisation so a slower shutter can be used to make up for this.If you do allot of indoor photography in low light then a traditional DSLR might be better.



That's not strictly true. Yes the mirror transmits 30% of the light to the AF system and EVF but that is all accounted for by the sensor design etc. You will get the exact same shutter speeds etc with this as you will with a conventional DSLR.

I wasn't a fan of the EVFs and then I bought the a77 which has the same translucent mirror/EVF (albeit better quality than this). The EVF is extremely handy as you can see the exposure before you take the photo and tweak it. It is basically Live View in the viewfinder. Also in very low light the EVF can be set to amplify the image and so allow you to see things you wouldn't even see through an optical viewfinder.

Regarding the other comment of it being a dead system, the A-mount is far from dead although Sony has been concentrating more and more on the mirrorless E-mount Alphas. At the end of the day the E-mount Alphas have adapters to use A-Mount lenses (and other mounts from Canon etc) available and so if they do get rid of these A-mounts the lenses are usable on the other E-mount Alphas anyway. Yes you would need to buy the adapter (the AF capable one isn't cheap) but it's still an option.

ICTHUS

Personally I would buy a new Nikon D3300 or D5300 for a bit more. Far … Personally I would buy a new Nikon D3300 or D5300 for a bit more. Far superior in quality.Even better a used D7000 would be about the same and price and would be far superior. Used Nikons from places like Wex http://www.wexphotographic.com/used-nikon-dslr-cameras/b3242?sortby=1&pagenum=2 Are good quality and the lenses and additional options are better quality.


why do people insist on this kind of nonsense? 282 for a used body so you have 58 quid to buy the 2 lenses and its still used? utterly irrelevant!
it may be a better camera but pay more and get more? SHOCKER!
Edited by: "brilly" 4th Aug 2016

Sony seem to be moving towards the E mount on their new cameras and lenses. This is the older A mount system left over from when they were Minolta cameras. On the up side you can get some fairly cheap used lenses but the downside is that if you buy any expensive lenses then you may find that when you want to upgrade the camera all the decent models are not directly compatible with your A type lenses as sony are putting all their efforts in to the E type mount.

FatalSaviour

As the OP correctly states, it's not *strictly* an SLR - i.e. there isn't … As the OP correctly states, it's not *strictly* an SLR - i.e. there isn't a mirror involved. It's an SLT, but for all intents and purposes, and for those that would equate an SLR with interchangeable lenses, I wouldn't get too hung up on this!



Yes you're right. I believe the traditional qualification of an SLR is a camera with a pentaprism and a mirror, which allows you to see the exact image which will appear on film or the digital sensor via your viewfinder; when you hit the shutter the light is permitted to hit the sensor directly by the mirror moving out of the way, instead of going through the pentaprism into your viewfinder.

The SLT design allows a semi-transparent mirror to split the incoming light into a phase-detect autofocus sensor and the digital recording sensor, allowing full-time phase detect autofocus which would not be possible in a traditional SLR e.g. when using live view and video recording. However, the SLT design is now not needed for full time phase-detect autofocus as newer cameras like the Fuji X-100 use sensors with integrated phase detection.
Edited by: "hcc27" 4th Aug 2016

brilly

why do people insist on this kind of nonsense? 282 for a used body so you … why do people insist on this kind of nonsense? 282 for a used body so you have 58 quid to buy the 2 lenses and its still used? utterly irrelevant!it may be a better camera but pay more and get more? SHOCKER!



The D3300 with kit lens is £279 brand new if you look around. The legendary 24MP sensor used in this camera is the same sensor in the D5X00 and D7200 enthusiast cameras and essentially, you can take decent shots in candlelight without a flash using the kit lens while bumping up the ISO to 6400. Significantly, Nikon also dropped the anti-aliasing filter from the D3300 without impacting image artifacts such as moire patterns, as mentioned in several reviews.

Here's is DXOMark's comparison of the two sensors; if you look at the low-light performance, the Nikon's sensor blows the A58's sensor out of the water - it is almost TWICE as good:
dxomark.com/Cam…864

And yes, I'd plump for a used D7200 with a reasonable shutter count from a retailer like Wex (they don't sell c**p and you get a proper warranty) over this brand new SLT any day. Compared to a D3300, which has some of the important imaging controls buried within the on-screen menus, the D7200 (albeit a larger but more robust body) makes available most controls on camera - this might mean the difference between capturing a money shot and missing it.

I'm not saying this SLT camera is not good; it is a good deal if you are fairly new to photography, don't have legacy baggage, need better Live View performance, need both lenses, don't mind the sensor's low-light limitations when compared to other options, don't really envision expanding your lens collection significantly (you'll have a much broader choice with Nikon or Canon) etc.





Edited by: "hcc27" 4th Aug 2016

D3300 with Twin Lenses is available for £379 at Argos: -
argos.co.uk/sta…htm
They are the Non-VR lens but still good value if someone is looking.

sergy2k

Err, this is a DSLR?


You'll always get the yes it is, no it isn't, clan here just to argue a point, basically one and the same!

mozbud

I think it does have a mirror but it's translucent so doesn't, have to … I think it does have a mirror but it's translucent so doesn't, have to move when the shutter is released


Never ever touch that mirror though or use more than a gentle action from a blower on it. It's essentially a thin film of plastic and the part alone costs about £30 to replace. (I imagine there are dire warnings about this on the camera itself though I've never had one).

Sony has been quoted as saying that A mount isn't dead, but they've done little in the way of releasing new lenses to make anyone think otherwise. The best approach to getting lenses would be to look at reviews on Dyxum and hunt down the better rated ones down on ebay. It seems like most people who buy this type of camera never get anything beyond the kit lens though.

crazylegs

You'll always get the yes it is, no it isn't, clan here just to argue a … You'll always get the yes it is, no it isn't, clan here just to argue a point, basically one and the same!




Far from it....there is a display lag with even the best EVF.......on the plus side the SLT is much quieter with no mirror rattle

For most tasks an SLT is fine, but for fast moving sports etc the EVF lag on an SLT is an issue

CyDoNiA

That's not strictly true. Yes the mirror transmits 30% of the light to … That's not strictly true. Yes the mirror transmits 30% of the light to the AF system and EVF but that is all accounted for by the sensor design etc. You will get the exact same shutter speeds etc with this as you will with a conventional DSLR......


Not sure I agree with you. If 30% of the light is lost to the mirror i.e. only 70 % of the lens coming through the lens hits the sensor, than that equates to a loss of light (hitting the sensor). So compared to a non SLT camera using say f4 the SLT camera also using f4 will require a slightly slower shutter speed, compared to the non SLT camera, to make up for the loss of light.

The only way for this not to be true would for the light that has hit the translucent mirror, to be then re-directed to the sensor after hitting the mirror.

Some people are saying a 30% light loss is roughly equivalent to half an f stop.

MusicmanJP

Dead system. Avoid



Hahaa.... That was funny!!

Original Poster

crazylegs

You'll always get the yes it is, no it isn't, clan here just to argue a … You'll always get the yes it is, no it isn't, clan here just to argue a point, basically one and the same!


Does it have a single lens? Yes it does. Does the mirror have a reflex action? No it doesn't. Therefore it is not an SLR (or DSLR). SLR = single lens reflex.

somersetpaul

Does it have a single lens? Yes it does. Does the mirror have a reflex … Does it have a single lens? Yes it does. Does the mirror have a reflex action? No it doesn't. Therefore it is not an SLR (or DSLR). SLR = single lens reflex.


you even acknowledge the basic irrelevance of the distinction in your op
you said 'not strictly' but for all intents and purposes its equivalent so who cares?

brilly

you even acknowledge the basic irrelevance of the distinction in your … you even acknowledge the basic irrelevance of the distinction in your opyou said 'not strictly' but for all intents and purposes its equivalent so who cares?


You'll always get fa nn ys on here Brilly!

afroylnt

Some people are saying a 30% light loss is roughly equivalent to half an … Some people are saying a 30% light loss is roughly equivalent to half an f stop.


That is actually a fact, not hear say :-).

Anyway, it is a dead principle, but not a dead system. The A mount is still very much alive, so you can benefit from a wide range of lenses and also other (SLR) bodies. And this is a great price.

Personally, I have moved on to CSC. You can still use A mount lenses with an adaptor in manual, and the image quality of modern CSC cameras is just amazing.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text