is the picture quality really worth it over and above a really good compact - expensive once lenses are included!
2043276
pika2000 said is nice and to the point. The APS-C sensor is that size that most DSLRs have. The next biggest sensor is a "Full Frame" but then you are looking at $2K+ for body only. Also good point - if you have no interest in learning how to use lenses - go with the RX100 - great camera.
2043277
Oh yes. This has APS-C sensor, larger than any typical compacts. As for price, Sony frequently do discounts on the bundles. If you don't want to buy lenses, look at cameras like Sony's own RX100.
291656
It's excellent! Especially if you know how to use the camera in its Manual mode. Because once you can adjust the ISO and just find the f-stop, you're golden. Ive gotten wonderful images of flowers, beneath the shade of a tree on an overcast day. So that says something as well.
328794
Thanks for the info. I don't think I'm quite ready to pay that kind of money for a lens for a camera that I paid $600.00 for. May as well upgrade the camera and keep the lens. I do appreciate the reply.
728065
I agree with the other two respondents. I think it's a bargain. I paid 160 for an excellent condition used one and feel I got my money's worth. I don't use it in low light much, but for outdoor sports it's SWEET. And the 1:2 "macro" quality is also very good.
682871
If you have a f/1.8 lens and decent lighting, yes, this thing is a beast indoors. Failing that, high ISO performance is good but not great, I wouldn't recommend going above 1000 if you can avoid it. I love this camera and for the price you can't do much better.
442574
If the optical quality was better, I would use it often. The size is very compact, and having to manually focus is no bother because the depth of field is very large. Unfortunately the image quality matches the price.
1813610
Yes the image quality is much better. This lens is over all sharper and has a much better build quality. I own and use this lens on my Canon 70D.
1069306
No, but unless you have a visual impairment, you will be happy with it. The camera takes fantastic quality pictures! It has done well for me over the entire USA as well as for "Family" shots.
1239594
Is it crisp? Yep, I'd say so. I'm getting so many compliments on my photo's. One thing to note, it's a little heavier than the original lens I had (28-55?) so you'll need a good camera bag (it's about the same size though which is good.) I'm really happy with it.
1675074
Hi; The picture quality is great. I feel the optical qualities of this camera are superior.
1222503
Yes, this is an excellent camera! Instead of purchasing the $500 Canon compact camera I was planning to purchase, I bought the E-PL3 at around $260 and got much more beyond what I was looking for (i.e., RAW files, flash hot shoe, total flexibility with shooting modes such as P, A, S, and Manual), such as interchangeable lens capability with a wide range of excellent, available lenses! I then was so hooked on the micro 4/3 format, that I upgraded after only two months to the E-PL5, and then after only a few weeks to the OM-D E-M10! Not because the E-PL3 was inferior, but because the Olympus cameras were so good and I wanted the best! Go for it! Yes, this is an excellent camera! Instead of purchasing the $500 Canon compact camera I was planning to purchase, I bought the E-PL3 at around $260 and got much more beyond what I was looking for (i.e., RAW files, flash hot shoe, total flexibility with shooting modes such as P, A, S, and Manual), such as interchangeable lens capability with a wide range of excellent, available lenses! I then was so hooked on the micro 4/3 format, that I upgraded after only two months to the E-PL5, and then after only a few weeks to the OM-D E-M10! Not because the E-PL3 was inferior, but because the Olympus... » Read More Yes, this is an excellent camera! Instead of purchasing the $500 Canon compact camera I was planning to purchase, I bought the E-PL3 at around $260 and got much more beyond what I was looking for (i.e., RAW files, flash hot shoe, total flexibility with shooting modes such as P, A, S, and Manual), such as interchangeable lens capability with a wide range of excellent, available lenses! I then was so hooked on the micro 4/3 format, that I upgraded after only two months to the E-PL5, and then after only a few weeks to the OM-D E-M10! Not because the E-PL3 was inferior, but because the Olympus cameras were so good and I wanted the best! Go for it! « Show Less
1398398
Yes. It might be a touch behind on quality, but it is a very good, highly-reviewed lense for a fraction of the price. Very well built.
869838
I would say yes, because the lenses that you can get for this camera, will help your shooting get to that professional level and at this cheap cost for the camera it was very worth it for me. I do Video so I love it, but my photographer friend is the one who suggested I get it.
2093006
In every comparison, you have a couple of considerations. I recently shot with the SONY RX100, and was really impressed with its performance. The images are very nice, low noise, fast focus, and of course, it is small. The image on the D800 is amazing. You have a ton of functions to play with, but what stands out is the image quality that is superb. In short, if you want a small camera for travelling, today my favorite is the SONY RX100. If you want a professional grade interchangeable lens camera, you can't go wrong with the D800.
1196709
I suppose it also really depends on what you budget is now vs later down the line. You really cannot go wrong with a kit lens - especially if you don't have any MAJOR plans for upgrading or spending too much more money down the line. However, I will forever speak highly of the 50mm and the 35mm. They're prime lenses, so they're not as user-friendly to somebody, if just starting - but in reality, that also teaches you more manual-techniques, while still being an amazing lens, in general. I might be bias, though, as I no long have a kit lens, and only primarily use my prime lenses. But, maybe that means something? That I've sold most of my other lenses, and truly use my 50mm & 35mm on a daily-basis, and more frequently than my other four lenses, combined. The Tamron Tom mentioned - it's a great lens. And with the price where it currently is, it's most cost-efficient, as well; considering all the GREAT use you'd get out of it. He also mentioned the 85mm - this is another lens I have, and I love it very much. I just do not have as much wiggle-room when it comes to distance-from-subject very often. If you do have that wiggle-room - I would also very much recommend the 85mm. So really, it depends on what you're wanting to do and spend; both now and in the long-run.
1117321
I have one. For the price... it is a great lens. Make sure it is well mounted and set camera to high contrast and max sharp. Don't run it more than 12-1500mm. Hard to focus but does a great job "for the price." On a side note: the lens mount is high maintenance and will loosen after a few uses. Make sure your camera body is supported somehow. Take the lens off when not in use.
1926557
Yes it's worth the upgrade! 10 times higher contrast ratio. With a projector, that is everything.