It took a long time ...

[InTheSky]

After a multiples complaint on the forum ... now the review is there ...

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonydslra580/page12.asp

But they have review a lot of comparable DSLR before... probably they not wanted to affect the other brand .

Frank

[KevinBarrett]

The end rating of 75% seems arbitrarily generated, considering Canon's 600D is 77% and Nikon's D5100 is 76%. I get the feeling that they ranked their favorites and distributed their scores based on achieving a narrow separation among the players in the class.

[agorabasta]

So their raw ISO-noise graph shows that a580 has exactly the same noise as an a55, and it's also higher than 600D noise.
Yeah, right, that's dpr at its best...

[bfitzgerald]

The review seemed reasonable though missing some parts (menus etc)
DPR's scoring has gone a bit iffy they now score too low whilst giving out gold and silver awards when all that was needed was to ensure most cameras didn't get 85- 90% odd "what digital camera" style everything is great reviews.

Leaving that aside the most curious thing about the A580 is how it's maker seems unwilling to even attempt to promote it. I've see no ads for it at all only the NEX and SLT seem to get an advertising budget. Strange...it's almost as if Sony want it to fail.

[Greg Beetham]

The A580 isn't going to do very well here in Australia, Sony don't even sell it here. Maybe they never made enough of them to distribute to every market, or maybe they think that DSLR's just don't sell based on the lack of sales on all those basic models they introduced and then dropped.
Greg

[bakubo]

Leaving that aside the most curious thing about the A580 is how it's maker seems unwilling to even attempt to promote it. I've see no ads for it at all only the NEX and SLT seem to get an advertising budget. Strange...it's almost as if Sony want it to fail.

I'm surprised dpreview even bothered reviewing it. Why go to all that trouble for a product that the maker has no interest in? Also, the review just annoys Sony users. It seems like a lot of wasted effort that could have been used on other products. Don't you think so?

[Greg Beetham]

Possibly the object of the review was so that dpr could give the camera a slightly less % mark than other cameras. But yes I agree, as it has become obvious now that basically Sony aren't really interested in it why bother with a review at this late stage.
Greg

[Birma]

The A580 is looking a very good deal in the UK - down to £479 body only, which incidentally makes is cheaper than the discontinued A500, A450 and A390 where these are still in stock . The way stuff gets priced just seems weird. The A580 is also now £80 cheaper than the A55.

[bfitzgerald]

Birma is right there are some good deals going on the A580 right now. I was almost half tempted myself as I still have all my A mount stuff...almost that is.

There was no harm in reviewing it and it did get a Silver award. Saying that so did the D5100 and there are some critical flaws with that model that never even got a mention. On balance the A580 is probably a better camera for the money than the D5100 as the Sony is quite a bit cheaper and overall is a better featured camera.

Nothing amazes me more than how Nikon get away with their heavily crippled lower end bodies with mostly glowing reviews from almost all sites/magazines etc. I like some of their higher end offerings the ones I have played with but I'd walk on nails before I'd buy a camera that can't even do HSS with a dedicated flashgun.

[Eiffel]

Without any mention of the in-body stabilisation or the fact that the built-in flash adds wireless TTL compared to the Nikon D5100 (this is neither mentioned as a pro for the Sony or as a con for the Nikon), I question dpreview's impartiality

[bfitzgerald]

It's a general problem in most sites washing over entry Nikon's many did so with the D3000 which was really not great at all. Nikon were treading water for years and everyone knew it. On DPR review the reviewer for the D5100 he's a long time Nikon user and I too doubt there is enough critique and punches are def being pulled, but then they are across almost all review sites for Nikon.

Nikon are now the only maker that does not offer wireless flash via onboard (Canon added this at long last with the 600d), no HSS even with dedicated flashes, and no DOF preview on there lower end models everyone else offers this..add to that the no metering for older lenses and lack of AF motor in the camera body I can't understand why anyone would even look twice at them bar a long term Nikon user looking for a second body.

[Greg Beetham]

Yeah Nikon began that new way of doing things with the D40 I think, no in body focus motor and a couple of lenses with focus motors just for it. The strange thing was it sold heaps...and one would have to ask why? The camera was very basic and it could only AF with it's own lenses, lenses that were needlessly more bulky and heavier because of the extra motor, I suppose it's become a bit more of a trend with them now that there are more bodies in the range with similar design. Maybe it was because of video making it's appearance into the scene, and they had to re-jig things for that, if so what a waste of tme when they could have devoted those resources into making a better still camera.
Greg

[bakubo]

Nikon are now the only maker that does not offer wireless flash via onboard (Canon added this at long last with the 600d), no HSS even with dedicated flashes, and no DOF preview on there lower end models everyone else offers this..add to that the no metering for older lenses and lack of AF motor in the camera body I can't understand why anyone would even look twice at them bar a long term Nikon user looking for a second body.

I believe that the Canon 7D was the first, followed by the 60D, followed by the 600D.

[bakubo]

Nikon are now the only maker that does not offer wireless flash via onboard (Canon added this at long last with the 600d), no HSS even with dedicated flashes, and no DOF preview on there lower end models everyone else offers this..add to that the no metering for older lenses and lack of AF motor in the camera body I can't understand why anyone would even look twice at them bar a long term Nikon user looking for a second body.

I believe that the Canon 7D was the first, followed by the 60D, followed by the 600D.

Yeah, I was right. Here is more info:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E ... DFLASH.HTM

The EOS 7D was the first Canon SLR to support wireless flash control using the built-in flash, and Canon 60D follows suit. That is, the 60D's built-in flash can act as a controller or commander to multiple, remote wireless flashes. You can have the built-in flash contribute to the exposure, or just command the remote flashes. Several other manufacturers have had built-in wireless flash support for a while now, but the 60D is only the second Canon SLR to offer this capability. The Canon 60D's wireless flash capability supports four channels and defines two groups (the 7D defines three groups). Exposure compensation and flash ratio of 1:8 to 8:1 can be set on a per-group bases, allowing a lot of control over how multiples flashes contribute to the final exposure.

[Heidfirst]

Nikon are now the only maker that does not offer wireless flash via onboard (Canon added this at long last with the 600d), no HSS even with dedicated flashes, and no DOF preview on there lower end models

methinks that you misunderstood Barry - he was referring to features on lower end models not ones like 7D etc.