A wish list for a perfect digital SLR would read like a Alpha 100’s spec sheet

So, what would the perfect digital SLR give us ? How about a substantial jump from the 6 mega pixel Resolution standard for low-cost  SLR’s, right up tp 10 million pixels, skipping the modest increases to 8 mega pixels of the Canon 350D and the Olympus E300/E500. Now, what about an anti-shake system built into the camera body so that you don’t have to pay through the nose for expensive stabilized lenses? And built-in dust removal is surly essential in a modern SLR – to date only Olympus has tackled this particular issue with its Supersonic wave filter. We don’t want yet another new lens mount, so what would you say to an SLR compatible with some 16 million lenses already being used worldwide? And we want all this for not much more that the price of an existing DSLR – lets say $1400/£700 RRP and less in the shops. And that, dear reader, is exactly what the Sony A100 gives you.

It’s the first result of Sony’s take over of Konica Minolta, and it is obvious that many of the cameras come from the Dynax production line. The anti-shake system is straight out of the Dynax 7D and Dynax 5D, thought Sony’s adapted it to give the sensor a little shiver every time you shut down to shake off any dust too. And this compatibility with over 16 million lenses world wide (Sony’s figures) is equally east to explain as the A100 uses the Konica-Minolta lens mount. For anyone who used the Dynax 5D, the similarities go a lot further. That Sony G kit lens is a dead ringer for the 18-70mm Konica-Minolta lens on the 5D. The zoom grips been changed and some of the lettering is in a different font but the likeness is inescapable. In fact, the whole camera is exactly what you’d get if you gave the 5D a cosmetic makeover. When you start it up it still sounds like someone shunting a good train, the shutter still has the 5d’s characteristic metal “clank” about it. Not that we want to be rude about the Dyanx 5D. It was realy rather a good camera that simply wasn’t out there long enough to make a proper impression on the market.

Easier to use

Using the Dynax 5D was a mixed bag with a superb white on blue status display on the LCD during shooting, but poorly finished buttons and a control system that was spread about to much between the various menus dials ad buttons. Sony’s pulled the A100 together extremely well. The display is now white on grey (oh well) but the overall finish is better and the cameras major functions have been pulled together in to a single dial on the top plate. You rotate to metering pattern, flash mode, focus mode. ISO, white balance, dynamic or DEC (image adjustment) settings, then hold down the central ‘Fn’ button. This brings up the mode on the LCD and you simply turn the control dial to change the settings. This is a very good. Admittedly , many users wont change these options from day to day, but those  who are more ambitious will be delighted. This contrasts with other low-cost DSLR that offer similar options but bury then in menus so convoluted they have you screaming with frustration.  The Clarity and accessibility of the A100’s creative functions really set it apart form the crowd.

There is one change worth moaning about. The Dynax 5D had little rubber feet on the base that kept is securely anchored on the skiddy tabletops. The A100 dispenses with  these and as a result does slide around on polished surfaces. And there are other problems. The start-up time is around a second, whitch is good compared to an old stager like the original 300D (around 3-4 seconds) but it’s not the same as the instantaneous and silent Nikon D50. And you never quite get used to the very heavy clanking that accompanies it. The shutter release is loud and harsh, too. And as if that wasn’t enough, focusing is neither quite nor fast and, when you release the shutter button after half-pressing it, there’s and odd mechanical ‘flip’ sound from inside the camera. This isn’t an unusual problem – the Dynax 5D was the same – Bit is never the less rather unsettling.

Picture quality

So does the 67% increase in pixels over a 6 megapixels SLR deliver 67%more definition ? Not in the A100. When looking at images on screen at 100% magnification to check for ‘per pixel’ sharpness, the A100 doesn’t give a per pixel sharpness of say the  6 megapixel Nikon D50. of course, there are more pixels, but the upshot is a less than certain relationship between pixels and detail.  It could be that the sensors has a fairly heavy low pass filter  (sensors have these to subdue interference effect). It could be that image processing is a little conservative and needs a little sharpness applied in the camera. It could be that the kit lens we had is not terribly good. Evidence for the latter comes in the form of visible  chromatic abrasion around the high-Contrast or silhouetted outlines towards the edges of the frame. It’s a bit worse here then we’ve come to expect from a DSLR, but you’ll only notice if you study enlargements closely. The colour and tonal reproduction is good, as is the auto white balance, but it wasn’t clear what the dynamic range optimiser achieved, if anything, in out real-world tests.  And metering system, like those on most armature-orientated cameras, is heavily biased in favour of shadowed parts of the scene, even if this means over exposing (or “blowing out”) the highlights. The A100 feels to much like the Konica Minolta Dybax %d to come across as a genuinely new camera. On the one hand it has integral image stabilisation and an excellent control lay out, on the other it has only a middling image  quality (compared to what you might have been expecting) and is mechanically noisy.

Forthcoming new Carl Zeiss lenses may reveal the full potential of the sensor, but they’ll also blow apart the A100 current – very attractive and very competitive pricing. And, in the absence of any obviously superior image quality, it’s the price that’s likely to determine the A100’s success.

Verdict

For its first digital SLR, Sony has borrowed heavily from  the Konica-Minolta  Dynax 5D, but the A100 is a better camera. The kit lens is indifferent, though, and proves that a 10-megapixl sensor isn’t necessarily a passport to pro level quality.

87%