# A33 vs. A55



## DiverDan

I went one of my local camera stores, searching for a replacement for my aging Rebel XT, and the Sony A33 and A55 caught my eye. So I asked the salesman to look at them. Instead of comparing the two, he just pushed the A55 on me. Telling me about how great it is, instead of comparing it to the A33. So, what are your thoughts on the A33 vs. the A55, is the A55 worth the extra money? Where does the A55 excel? Is the A33 any better in certain areas?

If it helps, the primary use of the camera will be for shooting sports, both indoors and outdoors. Also, just for an everyday snapshot camera. So basically, I need good iso performance, and plenty of manual modes.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## o hey tyler

Uh, you probably don't want an EVF for shooting sports. I wouldn't consider either of those. The refresh rate doesn't bode well for fast moving subjects. 

If I were shopping in your position? I'd look at a 60D. You won't have to sell your current lens lineup either.


----------



## ConradM

o hey tyler said:


> Uh, you probably don't want an EVF for shooting sports. I wouldn't consider either of those. The refresh rate doesn't bode well for fast moving subjects.
> 
> If I were shopping in your position? I'd look at a 60D. You won't have to sell your current lens lineup either.



Posting in the Sony sub forum to tell people not to buy Sony cameras?


----------



## ConradM

DiverDan, if you can swing it, the a55 is the better camera, especially for sports. 10 fps in continuous drive mode... 

I've been using my a33 to shoot my kids skating and I couldn't be happier.


----------



## o hey tyler

ConradM said:


> o hey tyler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh, you probably don't want an EVF for shooting sports. I wouldn't consider either of those. The refresh rate doesn't bode well for fast moving subjects.
> 
> If I were shopping in your position? I'd look at a 60D. You won't have to sell your current lens lineup either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Posting in the Sony sub forum to tell people not to buy Sony cameras?
Click to expand...


I pay very little attention to what forum the post is in when responding. I use the 'new posts' feature. 

And yes, I will recommend against a SLT camera for shooting sports. Because it's not practical, or useful. The fact that it has 10FPS is not the "selling point" for sports.

From Wikipedia: 



> Advantages and Disadvantages vs DSLR
> 
> Advantages:
> 
> 
> 
> Continuous phase-detection autofocus even during video, live view or continuous shooting mode
> Lack of camera shake due to mirror movement
> No viewfinder blackout while taking photograph
> Shorter shutter lag
> Exposure value, white balance and other settings can be easily and directly verified on the electronic viewfinder (and thus tweaked) before taking a picture.
> Disadvantages:
> 
> 
> Less light reaching sensor, due to portion of the light being  reflected to phase-detection autofocus array (approximately 1/3 EV or  21% in current designs).
> *Refresh rate limited by the time it takes the sensor to form an  image; in low light this causes severe stuttering of the viewfinder  image when panning (e.g. if it takes 1/4 sec for the sensor to gather  enough light to form an image then the EVF updates at 4FPS).*
> *No real-time viewfinder update at high shooting rates, the  viewfinder shows the last picture taken instead of where the camera is  actually pointed; mostly a concern with fast-moving subjects(Note: Some  DSLR's do not update the image at all, as mirror is up when shooting.  However, some will give you a gimps of what is being shot as the mirror  and shutter reset for the next shot.).*
> The EVF has far less dynamic range than the sensor, so the EVF does not properly show what will be captured.
> *The bright light of the EVF in current implementations can cause  eyestrain when used over long periods and can affect dark-adapted  vision, causing temporary nyctalopia (Adaptation (eye)#Insufficiency).*
> Over a period of time, the mirror surfaces can become soiled. As a  result of this the mirror scatters the light rays and degrades the  recorded image.


When shooting sports, the bolded areas are what I'd be concerned with.


----------



## dxqcanada

The A33 has an older sensor.
The A35 is the updated version ... same sensor as the A55.

I have had no problems with using the A55 EVF under low lighting situations, nor any issues with taking pictures of moving subjects.

You can read this user's blog: The Picture Desk: Almost one year with the Sony A55 and this is what I've learned


----------



## ConradM

o hey tyler said:


> ConradM said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> o hey tyler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh, you probably don't want an EVF for shooting sports. I wouldn't consider either of those. The refresh rate doesn't bode well for fast moving subjects.
> 
> If I were shopping in your position? I'd look at a 60D. You won't have to sell your current lens lineup either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Posting in the Sony sub forum to tell people not to buy Sony cameras?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I pay very little attention to what forum the post is in when responding. I use the 'new posts' feature.
> 
> And yes, I will recommend against a SLT camera for shooting sports. Because it's not practical, or useful. The fact that it has 10FPS is not the "selling point" for sports.
> 
> From Wikipedia:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Advantages and Disadvantages vs DSLR
> 
> Advantages:
> 
> 
> 
> Continuous phase-detection autofocus even during video, live view or continuous shooting mode
> Lack of camera shake due to mirror movement
> No viewfinder blackout while taking photograph
> Shorter shutter lag
> Exposure value, white balance and other settings can be easily and directly verified on the electronic viewfinder (and thus tweaked) before taking a picture.
> Disadvantages:
> 
> 
> Less light reaching sensor, due to portion of the light being  reflected to phase-detection autofocus array (approximately 1/3 EV or  21% in current designs).
> *Refresh rate limited by the time it takes the sensor to form an  image; in low light this causes severe stuttering of the viewfinder  image when panning (e.g. if it takes 1/4 sec for the sensor to gather  enough light to form an image then the EVF updates at 4FPS).*
> *No real-time viewfinder update at high shooting rates, the  viewfinder shows the last picture taken instead of where the camera is  actually pointed; mostly a concern with fast-moving subjects(Note: Some  DSLR's do not update the image at all, as mirror is up when shooting.  However, some will give you a gimps of what is being shot as the mirror  and shutter reset for the next shot.).*
> The EVF has far less dynamic range than the sensor, so the EVF does not properly show what will be captured.
> *The bright light of the EVF in current implementations can cause  eyestrain when used over long periods and can affect dark-adapted  vision, causing temporary nyctalopia (Adaptation (eye)#Insufficiency).*
> Over a period of time, the mirror surfaces can become soiled. As a  result of this the mirror scatters the light rays and degrades the  recorded image.
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When shooting sports, the bolded areas are what I'd be concerned with.
Click to expand...


I tried shooting in continuous today with my dogs in the backyard, it shows the last pic taken but it's so fast I had no trouble tracking them while they played tag. I imagine that it's only easier with the a55.


----------



## Omofo

I would take that wiki info with a grain of salt. "*Refresh rate limited by the time it takes the sensor to form an image; in low light this causes severe stuttering of the viewfinder image when panning (e.g. if it takes 1/4 sec for the sensor to gather enough light to form an image then the EVF updates at 4FPS)*"

Who's going to pan or shoot action shots at 1/4? absurd!!!!!!!!

The only foreseeable problem with either camera, would be noise issues at high iso levels(above 1600).  There is some slight lag in the evf, but the fast shooting rate makes it negligible. I find it easier to use the lcd when shooting fast subjects.

10fps allows me to get some great shots


----------



## Omofo




----------



## Omofo




----------



## Omofo




----------



## ConradM

Nice shots Omofo! What settings those for those pics?


----------



## ConradM

Here's a pic I took of my 8 year old doing a boardslide last saturday... 






I didn't even think to use continuous drive mode as this was my first time trying action shots.


----------



## o hey tyler

Omofo said:


> I would take that wiki info with a grain of salt. "*Refresh rate limited by the time it takes the sensor to form an image; in low light this causes severe stuttering of the viewfinder image when panning (e.g. if it takes 1/4 sec for the sensor to gather enough light to form an image then the EVF updates at 4FPS)*"
> 
> *Who's going to pan or shoot action shots at 1/4? absurd!!!!!!!!*



Who's going to have to re-read the wikipedia statement that you quoted? Or do you not understand it? 1/4s isn't the shutter speed being used. It's .25s that it takes to activate the EVF in low light because it needs enough light hitting the sensor for it to display. As opposed to AS SOON AS THE MIRROR comes down on a DSLR, which is like .01 seconds. It's a huge improvement if you're shooting sports with not a lot of light. 

So next time, exercise some reading comprehension.


----------



## DiverDan

Rather than continue to argue amongst yourselves, what are the major differences with the A33 and A55?


----------



## o hey tyler

Sony SLT-A33 vs SLT-A55

Or if you want greater detail and more technical jargon: 

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=sony_slta33&products=sony_slta55


----------



## ConradM

DiverDan said:


> Rather than continue to argue amongst yourselves, what are the major differences with the A33 and A55?



With the a55 you're getting higher image quality, more fps, and better high ISO performance. 

That being said, the a33/a35 still offers better IQ and more fps than any other camera below $700. 

In my opinion you would get the best bang for the buck going with an a35. (2nd gen a33)


----------



## Omofo

@ Conrad-Not sure the settings, that was my 1st week w/ the camera and in the 10fps mode all the settings are auto.

@tyler- I did misread the post, however...   Why would it take a 1/4 sec to gather enough light, yet be able to have a shutter speed conducive to action shooting? The sony evf shows you exactly what the sensor is seeing at a refresh rate of 60Hz, that's 1/60 of a second not 1/4.  Those low light conditions it speaks of are not situations in which you would be shooting action shots nor are those "facts" specific to the A55.  I frequently shoot band photography in dark nightclubs and have never experienced a problem with the refresh rate, the evf just displays more noise. Tracking can be tricky if you are photographing erratic, fast moving subjects but the fps more then makes up for it.  To say an slt is not practical or useful is ridiculous!
 The 60D does have a better sensor and high iso performance, but caps at 5fps and can't compete w/ the continuous phase detection auto focus of the A55. When shooting continuous with the A55 the evf shows you an uninterrupted view of your subject, how could that be considered unpractical?   Unless you are speaking from experience, take you fanboyism elsewhere.


----------



## ConradM

Omofo, you should be able to look at the properties of the pic file and find the settings.


----------



## Omofo

ConradM said:


> Omofo, you should be able to look at the properties of the pic file and find the settings.


If I must ;-).  1/2000, f5.6 iso 400-800


----------



## o hey tyler

ConradM said:


> Nice shots Omofo! What settings those for those pics?



*Exposure Time (1 / Shutter Speed)    1/2000 second ===> 0.0005 second*
*Lens F-Number / F-Stop    28/5 ===> &#402;/5.6*
*Exposure Program    action program (high-speed program, fast shutter speed) (6)*
*ISO Speed Ratings    400*
Unknown tag, Tagnum 0x8830    data ===> 2
Unknown tag, Tagnum 0x8832    data ===> 400
EXIF Version    0230
Original Date/Time    2011:05:03 17:55:31
Digitization Date/Time    2011:05:03 17:55:31
Components Configuration    0x01,0x02,0x03,0x00 / YCbCr
Brightness (APEX)    887/100
Brightness    467.88 foot-lambert
Exposure Bias (EV)    0/1 ===> 0
Max Aperture Value (APEX)    40761/8200 ===> 4.97
Max Aperture    &#402;/5.6
Metering Mode    pattern / multi-segment (5)
Light Source / White Balance    unknown (0)
Flash    Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length    55/1 mm ===> 55 mm


----------



## ConradM

Omofo said:


> ConradM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Omofo, you should be able to look at the properties of the pic file and find the settings.
> 
> 
> 
> If I must ;-).  1/2000, f5.6 iso 400-800
Click to expand...


Sweet thanks! Similar settings for I shot that pic of my boy skating.


----------



## dxqcanada

Back to the original question ... 

The SLT-A55 is better than the SLT-A35.
The SLT-A35 is better than the SLT-A33.

There are better camera's for shooting at very high ISO.
Sony (for some unknown reason) decided not to make that a priority. The SLT's are better than their DSLR's, but they are not rated as high as other brands.

There is only one "manual mode" ... M (exposure control).
If you are referring to the camera controls and layout for Manual exposure shooters ... the SLT-A77 is better in design (IMO).
I would prefer two control dials.

Even though I am a Sony user (too much Minolta Maxxum glass investment) ... I will have to say you should really compare/look/review/test other camera's, for the type of shooting you want to do.


----------



## ConradM

dxqcanada said:


> Back to the original question ...
> 
> The SLT-A55 is better than the SLT-A35.
> The SLT-A35 is better than the SLT-A33.
> 
> There are better camera's for shooting at very high ISO.
> Sony (for some unknown reason) decided not to make that a priority. The SLT's are better than their DSLR's,* but they are not rated as high as other brands.*
> 
> There is only one "manual mode" ... M (exposure control).
> If you are referring to the camera controls and layout for Manual exposure shooters ... the SLT-A77 is better in design (IMO).
> I would prefer two control dials.
> 
> Even though I am a Sony user (too much Minolta Maxxum glass investment) ... I will have to say you should really compare/look/review/test other camera's, for the type of shooting you want to do.



From what I've read this is strictly due to a lack of an optical view finder which is more of a "old habits die hard" kinda thing. Take that out of the equation and their value goes up dramatically.


----------



## dxqcanada

I think it has more to do with the other related circuitry, and programming.
Their OVF DSLR's were not all that good at high ISO.
Other manufacturer's have used Sony's sensors (ex. Nikon) in their cameras and have achieved better high ISO imaging.


----------



## ConradM

I just figured out that the a35 doesn't come with a flip out screen.  Kinda glad I didn't realize the a35 was even available when I bought my a33.


----------



## KmH

DiverDan said:


> Rather than continue to argue amongst yourselves, what are the major differences with the A33 and A55?


22?

Did I pass the test?

You know, between 12-07-2011 02:34 PM and 12-08-2011 01:15 PM you could have visited any number of web sites, like Sony . com, that list the specifications/differences for each camera and had all the specs memorized by now. :er:


----------

