Sony Alpha A65 review

Well I have the a77, and LOVE the EVF, took some getting used to, had a go with a 7d in jessops today and much prefer my a77 :D made the 7ds viewfinder look quite small and boring, could go as far as to say I prefer it to the 5dmkii's, and on a related note could easily say that the handling kicks the crap out of the entire canon range bar the 1d ;) same can be said for the a65, beats the daylight out of its rivals handling :D

I have the A580 (optical VF) and the A77 9EVF). Whilst the OVF appears brighter, the EVF shows you what you will get. I used to spend time checking to see what the taken image was like on the A580 but I don't bother much with the EVF. All the information is there on the screen and you can change it all whilst holding the camera to your eye and not resorting to opening the LCD and making changes. You just have to learn where all the buttons are. I just had to make a decision between the A77 and the A65. Great camera, don't know about the lens that comes with it, but the 16-50mm f/2.8 with the A77 is an excellent and versatile lens.

All the above is true - but deleting images with the 'navigator' push button is a real pain.

I see you took some time to adjust to the EVF. I spent some time looking at various SLTs in Jessops and just didn't like the electronic image. I agree that many dslr viewfinders are pokey but fortunately that doesn't apply to my A700.

A good review of a great camera, as a person that plumped for the A55 instead, I would like to have seen how the 2 cameras compared, I bought my A55 for £480 (after cashback), it too shoots at 10fps & it too scored 91%, I also believe the A65 has the same af module, understandably the A65's resolution will be far superior at lower iso settings, but from iso 3200 (which I shoot a lot), I believe the A55 shades it, the A65 will have a better EVF, but as a whole is the A65 a massive improvement over the A55 & therefore worth the extra £200+ ?. Or to put it another way if you had an A55 would you upgrade to the A65 or the A77 ?.

Since last week I'm the owner of an A65. First, let me disagree with the con of the battery life. I worked with the camera all day and was able to take 500 pics with one fully charged battery.

I concur about battery life, yes it is poor when compared to other Sony D-slrs (after all they tend to hold more juice than the lesser brands;-) Slt's don't last as long (about the same as the lesser brands), however I have shot 529 photo's and still had 43% of charge left. With a spare battery (tenner on ebay), I can easily shoot 1000+ photo's. Being able to shoot at 10fps does help :-).

I will give the A65 4 stars amazing camera for the money

Got A55 recently and would like to see how this camera is different from my A55. Also, if you could share some tips for beginners. I have checked many sites to read about the tips. Sony India also has some tips on landscape photography and some more tips for beginers, i would like to share here for everybody’s benefit. This was posted on their Alpha gallery http://www.flickr.com/groups/sonyindiaalpha/discuss/72157628711362415/ Keep sharing more information

i have many sony products, i agree with the author, generally speaking sony products exhaust their batteries. however, to be fair, whenEver you operate any product wide opened with all the perks operating it will exhaust any battery quickly.

I own this camera an an A55. I previously owned an A100. The A55 was better than the A100 and the A65 is better than the A55. I am very happy with the A65.

Having read the review, Canon 60D v Sony a65 it was very obvious that the reviewer was heavily biased towards Canon, most probably owns a Canon DSLR himself. What about Sonys ability to cope with high contrast subjects by taking a 3 exposure burst at different exposures and stitching them together to produce 1 well exposed shot also the Sony can take Hand Held shots in very poorly lit and almost after dark situations by taking a burst of 6 exposures and stitching them together to form one good photo. Does the Canon D60 have either of these facilities? I own a Sony a65 and I consider it to be a superb piece of kit, the best camera that I have ever owned. The reviewer also refers to build quality saying that he doesn't consider the Sony to be as well built I don't think that he knows one end of a screw from another. In my opinion it is every bit as well built and robust as any other camera in the same price bracket. What qualifications have I to make judgments? I was a camera engineer for 45 years having started in the workshops of the long forgotten Wallace Heatons in Bond Street, London W1 and many 10's of years with a well known International Photographic Company. It must be remembered that Sony like all the large Corporations have large R&D depts. where parts are tested to destruction. Also they have the capability to view each other companies products

Although I strongly disagree with wdc when it comes to review consistency the mag isn't as biased as some out there, sadly the Sony platform is still young, we both know that there is nothing in Canon & nikon's arsenal that can match the A65 or A55 price, spec & performance wise. My brand new A55 cost £480 (with kit lens), one day someone at WDC and every other mag will tell me what £500 dslr betters it from Canon & Nikon ;-) I would love to be able to stand next to a 60d's owner, not only are the A55/A65 faster but they have better video,an excellent panorama mode etc,etc,etc The A55 is A LOT better than the A100 (slow, clunky & noisey etc). But is the A65 alot better than the A55?, 10fps, same af module, shall we compare iso 6400 shots ;-)

I just bought this camera and it's great on natural light or in well lit places but I'm disappointed at the camera's performance under low light. Even my now growing obsolete Nikon D5000 takes better pictures in low light at 3200 ISO. The Alpha 65 is noisy even at 1600. The camera is really great in every other respect but Sony will have to work in better low light performance.