Canon Rebel T2i vs Sony Alpha DSLR-A330

Winner
Canon EOS Rebel T2i

57

Sony Alpha DSLR-A330

41

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Canon Rebel T2i

Full HD
Movie format
1080p @ 30fps
High resolution screen
Screen resolution
1,040k dots
24p movies
Supports 24p
For that film look
Almost no delay when powering up
Startup delay
400 ms startup delay
 

Reasons to buy the Sony Alpha DSLR-A330

Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Sensor shift
Shutter lag
Barely any delay taking photos
199 ms shutter lag
Storage slots
More storage slots
2
Size
Really small
Prosumer size (128×97×71 mm)

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS Rebel T2i.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Sony Alpha DSLR-A330.

competitors

Canon EOS Rebel T2i Competitors

Canon EOS Rebel T5

Canon EOS Rebel T5

Entry-level DSLR

$289 body only

$399 with 18-55mm lens

Autofocus Video autofocus
Lowest price Significantly cheaper
Screen resolution Much lower resolution screen
Canon Rebel T3i

Canon Rebel T3i

Entry-level DSLR

$699 with 18-55mm lens

Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Lowest price Cheaper
Startup delay Much more startup delay
Canon Rebel T5i

Canon Rebel T5i

Entry-level DSLR

$404 - $649 body only

$480 - $599 with 18-55mm lens

Autofocus Video autofocus
Touch screen Has a touch screen
Color depth Worse color depth

Sony Alpha DSLR-A330 Competitors

Sony Alpha DSLR-A230

Sony Alpha DSLR-A230

Entry-level DSLR

$342 body only

Viewfinder size Larger viewfinder
Thickness Thinner
Live view No live view
Nikon D3200

Nikon D3200

Entry-level DSLR

$249 body only

$309 - $447 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Low light performance Much lower noise at high ISO
Image stabilization No image stabilization
Sony SLT A58

Sony SLT A58

Entry-level DSLR

$498 - $629 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Autofocus Video autofocus
Viewfinder Has a digital viewfinder

discussion

Canon EOS Rebel T2i
Rebel T2i
Canon

Report a correction
Sony Alpha DSLR-A330
Alpha DSLR-A330
Sony

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments