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 Nov 14, 2006, 11:14 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

Hawaii Built wrote:
Quote:
yo meanstreak!

gadzooks man! how much does that new lens of yours weigh? looks like a nice lens, that zoom range looks pretty tasty - and the f/2.8 throughout is pretty cool. i bet finding a filter for that bazzooka will set you back a bunch though! congrats on your new purchase, and have fun with it!



we wanna see some sample photos!!

~aloha~
67mm filters are kind of expensive but not as bad as 72mm. There also asupposedly reputable supply of Hoya filters on EBay for pretty cheap. I only buy UV filters for protection and as of late I have given up buying one for each lens. In fact, I am also shooting without filters. Based on what I read lately, there seem to be conflicting opinions regarding the use of filters. I am generally good with my equipment and not too concerned about damaging the glass but sometimes UV can be a problem.
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 14, 2006, 12:12 PM   #12
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

It could be worse... The Tamron 28-105mm f/2.8 uses 82mm filters (it's larger and heavier compared to the 35-105mm f/2.8 ). lol


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2006, 12:20 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

When I first received the lens I thought its focus capability in low light was better than good. Tonight I took pictures in my living room with barely no light. I had some ambient light from my kitchen and light from a ceiling fixture at the far end of the room. I set the camera on a tripod and used the remote so as to eliminate any chance of shake. Obviously this was a situation AS would have trouble with. Though I could have gone higher I set the ISO at 100 just because I have never used my DSLRs on a tripod except for moonshots and I felt like experimenting. I absolutely cannot believe how well this lens focuses in dim lighting. I'm not saying it's better than my brighter lenses but I don't recall being as impressed with anything else responding as well in such extreme conditions. I will have to run some tests against the 50mm F1.7, 28-75mm F2.8, 90 F2.8 and my 20-40mm F2.7-3.5

Here is an ISO 100 at 1/2 sec




Here is another... notice you can read the card. The original image is actually better than this Photobucket version.




meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2006, 12:28 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

ISO 400 extremly lowlight shots. Bear in mind that I'm not saying these are terrific shots. I'm just impressed that I could get a focus lock in some cases.


















meanstreak 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 6:58 PM.