| Recently Viewed Products | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Top DSLR Cameras | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Max Price: $7700
Filters
|
|
|
| A200 Prices |
|---|
| Latest Camera Reviews | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| External Reviews |
|---|
DPReview Sony Alpha DSLR-A200 ReviewCamera Labs Sony Alpha DSLR-A200Imaging Resource Sony Alpha DSLR-A200DCResource DCRP Review: Sony Alpha DSL...Photography Blog Sony A200 Review |

The ideal color in this test result represents the original color,
the outer rectangle the camera's rendition.
The A200 performed well when it comes to color accuracy, especially for a camera at such a low price. In the chart above, the original color from the Gregtag Macbeth chart is shown by the small rectangle at the right of each square patch. The color captured by the camera is shown by the large outer rectangle, while the captured color with luminance correction applied is shown by the inner square. As you can see, no glaring disparities appear anywhere in the color spectrum. An additional Imatest chart represents the reported color shift graphically:

The squares indicate the original color chart,
the circles what the A200 captured.

The ability to capture fine details is clearly another major factor in selecting the right camera for your needs. This is especially true with today's high-megapixel cameras, which enable you to blow up a small section of the recorded image into a large print. However, the number of megapixels doesn't necessarily correlate with useful resolution in the photos you take. To find out the true resolution performance of a camera we take it into the lab and take hundreds of test shots of a standard resolution chart, trying out the full gamut of camera settings. Then we fire up Imatest software to determine how many alternating horizontal and vertical lines the camera actually captured (measured in line widths per picture height, or lw/ph).

The industry-standard resolution chart that we use for testing
The A200 turned in decent results in this test, not quite on a par with the Nikon D60 and Canon XSi, but within shooting distance of these models. The maximum horizontal resolution measurement was 1803 lines, with slight undersharpening, with the lens set to a wide angle. Performance was reasonably consistent as we zoomed in, though it did fall off noticeably at the longer telephoto range.

Visual noise is kind of like the noisy static you hear when the radio's tuned between channels – random irritating speckles caused by electrical glitches. In your photos this translates into blotches in areas of flat color and bright spots in dark portions of an image. Noise is particularly prevalent in photos taken in low-light conditions, and gets progressively worse as ISO settings increase.
To test a camera's noise performance, we photograph the Gregtag Macbeth color chart at the full range of supported ISO settings, then analyze the results using Imatest software looking both for image noise at particular settings and for trends that arise as the ISO gets higher.
In our manual settings test, noise levels started out at barely over half a percent and rose at a modest rate. Interestingly, the choice to turn noise reduction on has essentially no effect at all until you hit ISOs above 800, when the imaging processing software in the camera kicks in and makes a major difference.


The overall white balance performance for the A200 is a decidedly mixed bag. The automatic settings had trouble with a variety of light sources, particularly shaded daylight and fluorescent illumination. Surprisingly, it handled tungsten illumination very well, which is a stumbling point for most of the cameras we test.
|
Exaggerated White Balance Errors |
|
|
|
|
|
|
![]() Auto WB - Tungsten illumination |
Preset (10.93)
The preset controls, on the other hand, produced very good results across the board, with flash and fluorescent lighting two notable standouts. In fact, based on these results, we'd advise taking the time to set the white balance manually whenever you're taking flash photos.
|
Exaggerated White Balance Errors (Presets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Still Life
To provide you with a useful comparison both of a single camera across the full range of ISO settings and of different cameras shooting the same scene from review to review, we include the following still life photos in our testing regimen. To view the full-resolution original, click on an image. These are large files, though (some more than 4MB), so they may take some time to download.
Low Light (8.32)
Shooting indoors without flash has become much more practical recently, as the sensitivity of sensors in even inexpensive cameras has increased and noise reduction technologies have improved. This is still an area, though, where cameras vary pretty widely, and differences are readily apparent in the final image produced. That's why we subject our cameras to two separate tests for low light performance. The key criteria: color accuracy as light levels drop, and the increase in noise as exposure times lengthen.
The A200 performed well in low-light environments, though two peculiarities did arise. First, we found that when shooting at 1 second under low-light conditions, the metering system produced grossly inaccurate readings (off by three or four stops), which threw off our initial results. We worked around the problem by setting the values manually, and it only occurred at that particular setting (though repeatedly), which probably indicates a software inconsistency of some kind. The second oddity: turning on noise reduction had virtually no impact on measured levels of noise. This is not a critical problem, though, since overall the A200 exhibited low-light noise levels that were perfectly acceptable across the board.
For the first test we maintain a constant light sensitivity setting of 1600 ISO but vary the light level, from 60 lux (roughly what you'd find in a normal room indoors) down to 5 lux (about the light level a single candle throws off in a darkened room).
|
Low Light Tests |
|
|
60 Lux |
30 Lux |
![]() |
![]() |
|
15 Lux |
5 Lux |
![]() |
![]() |
As shown above, colors didn't drift out of whack badly when shooting in low light, even down to 5 lux, and the exposures are acceptably even. The chart below indicates how noise performance varies as exposure time increases. The levels here are pretty good overall, with only modest variation from a short exposure out to 30 seconds. As for the fact that turning the noise reduction circuitry on has nearly imperceptible effects on performance, it could be worse - we've seen cameras where noise reduction produced increased noise at certain exposure settings.

When compared to other cameras we've tested, low light performance for the A200 is very competitive, with only modest differences between this camera and most of the others in the group. Again, the Canon XSi fared particularly well in our recent lab testing, and outperformed the others handily.


Dynamic range performance for the A200 was slightly better than the Nikon D60 or Pentax K10D. It lagged the Canon XSi by a wide margin, but the Canon proved to be an outstanding performer in this area.

Page 3 of 13
Components