Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 14, 2006, 3:28 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 83
Default

Hi guys,

Just wondering if you could help me out with my choice.

Would you guys go for the KM 85 1.4 or the Tamron 90mm 2.8 Macro DI

1 factor is the tamron is cheaper.

Need your help.

Thanks

Gobs
Gobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 14, 2006, 6:46 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

Gobs wrote:
Quote:
Hi guys,

Just wondering if you could help me out with my choice.

Would you guys go for the KM 85 1.4 or the Tamron 90mm 2.8 Macro DI

1 factor is the tamron is cheaper.

Need your help.

Thanks

Gobs
I'm not sure what the real difference is in quality but they are usually a huge differnce in price. You can get the Tamron non DI used for 225- 250. New for 299.

I have seen the DI used for around 300. New seems to vary depending on the dealer but there is a 40 dollar rebate.

I'm not sure the high price of the KM 85 is all about quality. I'm sure it is a decent lens but you might be paying a premium due to limited availabilty.


meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2006, 9:00 AM   #3
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

It depends on what you want to use the lens for.

If you want to take more closeups, the Tamron is a better choice. It's a macro lens. ;-)

If you want to use it in low light, the Minolta is the better choice (at f/1.4 it's two stops brighter than f/2.8, which means it's four times as bright as the Tamron).

As a general rule, most Macro lenses are going to focus much slower, too. That's because they're geared for very fine focus adjustments. So, if you need faster focus, the Minolta is a better bet.

For portraits the Minolta is probably your best choice, too (better bokeh, able to use wider apertures for a shallower depth of field).

The Tamron is a very sharp lens by all reports I've seen. But, whether or not it's a better choice for you, depends on how you'll use it. Some KM owners have both lenses.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2006, 10:00 AM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 83
Default

The price of the KM 85 1.4 is around $750-800, don't you think its kinda pricey? So would you think prices will go lower when sony starts to sell the Ziess 85?

I would like to get my hand on the tamron also....


Gobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2006, 10:07 AM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Gobs wrote:
Quote:
The price of the KM 85 1.4 is around $750-800, don't you think its kinda pricey? So would you think prices will go lower when sony starts to sell the Ziess 85?
Your guess is as good as mine what prices will do. It's all a matter of supply and demand. A lens is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. ;-)

The new Sony 85mm f/1.4 has a suggested retail price of $1,299.95 , and we'll have to wait and see what "street price" ends up being for it and what impact it (if any) it will have on prices for the Minolta 85mm f/1.4. The new Sony 85mm f/1.4 should start shipping at any time now (it's supposed to start shipping before the end of this month).

P.S.

Better glass tends to get pricey. But, a lot of users are willing to pay for it. Sometimes a little more quality/brightness can cost you a lot more money. ;-)

For example, street price on the Nikon 85mm f/1.4 runs a bit over $1,000 at reputable vendors:

Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 at B&H

The Canon 85mm f/1.2L sells for a bit over $2,000

Canon 85mm f/1.2L at B&H

So, the price for the Sony/Zeiss lens is not out of line with competition at all. Actually, for a Zeiss lens, it's a bargain at Sony's suggested price of $1,299.95.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2006, 10:46 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

Gobs wrote:
Quote:
The price of the KM 85 1.4 is around $750-800, don't you think its kinda pricey? So would you think prices will go lower when sony starts to sell the Ziess 85?

I would like to get my hand on the tamron also....


It is pricey, but to some it may be worth it. My needs don't require something that nice. If I was shooting professionally, I would get the brightest and best, but I just shoot for fun. As it is my lenses in quality and quanity are overkill and I don't even have the best of the best. For my needs the non-DI Tamron is a bargain and I might even consider the DI for the right price. For the price of the 85 1.4 I can get tw decent lenses.

As Jim pointed out, the Minolta has some advantages. If you need a bright lens in that focal length, it is a solid contender and maybe even a champion without going for something super exotic. Good glass is everything but if my wife ever found out I was looking at something that expensive, I'd probably be single again. Hmmmm.... maybe that's not a bad idea.:-)


meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2006, 11:06 AM   #7
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I passed on two of these lenses (85mm f/1.4G), selling for under $400 when lens shopping about a year ago (I watched a couple of them go through keh.com at around $310 in bargain condition).

But, they typically went for more than that (when graded in better condition)

In hindsight, I should have grabbed them (since keh.com tends to have the most conservative ratings around, and they were probably in pretty good condition).

I decided to get a 100mm f/2 instead for my needs (since it tests sharper at all apertures compared to the 85mm f/1.4G according to MTF charts). Of course, I don't have f/1.4 (which is twice as bright as f/2), and some users may find the shorter 85mm focal length more usable.

But, from a competitive perspective, the 85mm f/1.4G is not overpriced compared to similar glass from Nikon and Canon. When you buy "top of the line" glass, you pay a premium for it.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2006, 2:29 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
Default

I say go for it. You have nothing to lose!!!!


meanstreak wrote:
Quote:
Gobs wrote:
Quote:
The price of the KM 85 1.4 is around $750-800, don't you think its kinda pricey? So would you think prices will go lower when sony starts to sell the Ziess 85?

I would like to get my hand on the tamron also....


It is pricey, but to some it may be worth it. My needs don't require something that nice. If I was shooting professionally, I would get the brightest and best, but I just shoot for fun. As it is my lenses in quality and quanity are overkill and I don't even have the best of the best. For my needs the non-DI Tamron is a bargain and I might even consider the DI for the right price. For the price of the 85 1.4 I can get tw decent lenses.

As Jim pointed out, the Minolta has some advantages. If you need a bright lens in that focal length, it is a solid contender and maybe even a champion without going for something super exotic. Good glass is everything but if my wife ever found out I was looking at something that expensive, I'd probably be single again. Hmmmm.... maybe that's not a bad idea.:-)

maxxum7d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2006, 11:14 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
I passed on two of these lenses (85mm f/1.4G), selling for under $400 when lens shopping about a year ago (I watched a couple of them go through keh.com at around $310 in bargain condition).

But, they typically went for more than that (when graded in better condition)

In hindsight, I should have grabbed them (since keh.com tends to have the most conservative ratings around, and they were probably in pretty good condition).

I decided to get a 100mm f/2 instead for my needs (since it tests sharper at all apertures compared to the 85mm f/1.4G according to MTF charts). Of course, I don't have f/1.4 (which is twice as bright as f/2), and some users may find the shorter 85mm focal length more usable.

But, from a competitive perspective, the 85mm f/1.4G is not overpriced compared to similar glass from Nikon and Canon. When you buy "top of the line" glass, you pay a premium for it.
I was referring tothe non G version of the 85 1.4. I thinkthat is the version at KEH. I'm not sure how much of a difference it is but it still gets decent reviews.

I am always happy with condition of stuff I get from there. My 24-85MM is nice and shiny with a minor scuff on the hood and very fine rub marks on the zoom extention tube that looks like they were created by moving in and out. The glass is ammaculate. Of course it should be since it was EX+. I also picked up a nice EX Minolta wide strap for 5 bucks. I was using the rinky strap from the 7000 on the 5D I bought without accessories. The stock strap for the 7000 is a piece of junk... very uncomfortable.
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 15, 2006, 9:00 AM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 83
Default

Maybe i should wait for awhile and see what happens to the market when sony intorduce the ziess 85....

Gees its gona be a long time to wait....



Gobs is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:17 PM.