Sony SLT cameras

[TCav]

I'm suprised and disappointed that you thought I was being condescending and sarcastic. What I was trying to convey is my genuine concern that you were about to make a mistake, and were doing so for the wrong reasons

[Streets]

what good is it to compare image quality between 2 cameras when the lens is not the same on both camera bodies? I question that any differences seen in this case might be lens induced rather than camera body induced.

[Marawder]

Originally Posted by TCav

I'm suprised and disappointed that you thought I was being condescending and sarcastic.

I'm really sorry. I become aggressive whenever my "convictions" are shattered.
I didn't want to believe those super-zoom lenses where that bad, but after seeing more photos on Flickr, I've changed my mind.

What about the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8?

Sure, I'll probably crave for more reach, but as a lot of people said, all-in-one lenses aren't, for now, that great. And besides, the +100mm tele is mostly for wildlife and sports shooters, right? Those are things I almost never shoot, so I shouldn't be missing the telephoto reach...

[TCav]

The Tamron 17-50/2.8 is an excellent replacement for the kit lens.

You never talked about what you wanted to shoot, and there are soem other very good lenses out there, many of which are available on the used market. Can you go into some detail about what you want to shoot?

Another option is to find out what focal lengths you've been using for the shots you've taken with your current camera. Fortuantely, there's a free program called ExposurePlot that can do the work for you. Just point it at the folder that contains your photos, and it does all the work.

[shoturtle]

I think with all the landscape you shoot, you will benefit from a ultra wide angle lens. 17 may still be a bit tight.

[Marawder]

Originally Posted by TCav

Can you go into some detail about what you want to shoot?

Basically I shoot anything I come across and find interesting. Have you never looked at my threads?

Originally Posted by TCav

...on the used market.

I never buy second-hand equipment, sorry!

Originally Posted by TCav

what focal lengths you've been using for the shots you've taken with your current camera.

Here's my chart:

Originally Posted by shoturtle

17 may still be a bit tight.

Sony's iSweep Panorama feature will compensate for that... :P

[shoturtle]

the sweep pano has flaws. I would go with a tripod and multi single shots, and stitch on the computer over the sweep pano feature. But this adds allot of setup time.

[TCav]

From the charts, it seems the Tamron 17-50/2.8 will cover a good deal of what you currently shoot, except for a significant peak at 20mm and minor peak at 100mm. (Remember that the chart shows the 35mm equivalent focal length, not the actual focal length. The Tamron 17-50/2.8 has a 35mm equivalent focal length of 26-75mm, which corresponds nicely with a significant portion of what you've shot in the past.) Sony's Sweep Panorama is also a very nice way to handle the wide shots you've made, especially when using a very good lens like the Tamron. The only part of your range that's left uncovered is the 100mm focal length, which is just beyond the 35mm equivalent focal length of 75mm of the Tamron, but it's close.

You also seem to do a lot of shooting at very large apertures, yet you don't use higher ISO settings or longer shutter speeds, which indicates to me that you might be using larger apertures for creative purposes rather than just to achieve a proper exposure. The Tamron is a large aperture lens, and you should probably be quite satisfied with the results at its maximum f/2.8 aperture.

All in all, I think the Sony A35 with the Tamron 17-50/2.8 would be a superb tool for almost all of what you do.

[Marawder]

Originally Posted by TCav

The only part of your range that's left uncovered is the 100mm focal length...

Yeah, about that...later on if I'll want to buy a tele, wich one would you recommend out of the 2:
Tamron 55-200 mm f/4-5.6 Di II LD MACRO or the Tamron SP 70-300 mm f/4-5.6 Di USD ?

Originally Posted by TCav

You also seem to do a lot of shooting at very large apertures...

Yes, that's part of the reason why I changed my mind about the 18-270mm lens.
After some thought I realized that a minimum aperture of only 3.5 is a deal breaker for me...

[TCav]

Originally Posted by Marawder

Yeah, about that...later on if I'll want to buy a tele, wich one would you recommend out of the 2:
Tamron 55-200 mm f/4-5.6 Di II LD MACRO or the Tamron SP 70-300 mm f/4-5.6 Di USD ?

Where their ranges overlap, the 70-300 has less distortion and vignetting. They're about equally sharp, but the 70-300 has the extra range and it's also a 1:2 macro lens.

Originally Posted by Marawder

Yes, that's part of the reason why I changed my mind about the 18-270mm lens.
After some thought I realized that a minimum aperture of only 3.5 is a deal breaker for me...

That's f/3.5 at 18mm. At 35mm it's f/4.5, at 50mm it's f/5, and at 70mm it's f/5.6. It gets pretty dim pretty fast.