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 Dec 2, 2006, 3:20 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 338
Default

Ok, there are now a few decent (or better) choices for a standard zoom. I'm looking real hard at both the KM 28-75 f2.8 and the Tokina 28-70 (or 80) AT-X zooms. (there are several of the Tokina zooms in this range, which makes it hard to trust reviews) The Sigma is also available in 24-70 f2.8 EX DG (or DF), and the extra 4mm on the short end interests me but the Sigma isn't getting very good reviews (and my personal experience with Sigma is not super either). I've had Tokina AT-X lenses in the past, and found them to have some of the best build quality I've ever encountered.

I've sent in about a dozen Minolta lenses to Adorama to sell ( they were good lenses, but only low to mid range in quality for the most part) and I'd like to replace them with one standard zoom and perhaps one or two primes.

While I'm on the subject of selling to Adorama, the used guy there (Fred) was quite helpful and polite. They will ship your equipment inat their cost, give you a price, and return whatever you don't sell also at their cost. I couldn't get a read on how reasonable their offer would be, but Fred sounded like he knew his business. I expect they'l be on the low range of reasonable, but I don't have any money into shipping or Ebay fees and I don't have to worry about dealing with customers. I did make an itemized list of the package including Serial numbers, just in case.Their shipper (UPS) however was not so easy to work with. When I dropped off my package at the UPS store the girl behind the desk didn't want to give me a reciept for the package and also wouldn't stamp it 'fragile' until I demanded a manager.My wife tells me that the UPS store in the next town has treated her quite well, but I was reminded of why I normally ship FedEx. (Ok, so I'm a bit off topic)

The vast majority of my candid shots are going to be shot with whatever lens I decide on, so I'dprioritize quality over price on this lens. I'd love something about 20mm to 80mm at f2.8, but a 4x zoom normally lacks the sharpness I'm looking for. I have 70-210 covered well with a Minolta f3.5-4.5 (until I can save up for a 80-200). I also kept a 50mm f1.7 prime, and a Tamron28-300XR LD. I don't mind buying a used lens, IMO the quality of a lot of newer glass is lacking. I'd really like to keep it f2.8, though some of Minolta's best standard zooms are f3.5 -4.5.

Ok, in a nutshell- I'm looking for a f2.8 standard zoom. ~24mm- ~75mm would be a great range. I'm pretty sure I'll be looking for a 35mm and a 20 (or 24)mm prime though I can afford to take my time on those. I'd like to have the zoom by Christmas.


Thanks, Merc


Mercury694 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 2, 2006, 3:39 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

Mercury694 wrote:
Quote:
Ok, there are now a few decent (or better) choices for a standard zoom. I'm looking real hard at both the KM 28-75 f2.8 and the Tokina 28-70 (or 80) AT-X zooms. (there are several of the Tokina zooms in this range, which makes it hard to trust reviews) The Sigma is also available in 24-70 f2.8 EX DG (or DF), and the extra 4mm on the short end interests me but the Sigma isn't getting very good reviews (and my personal experience with Sigma is not super either). I've had Tokina AT-X lenses in the past, and found them to have some of the best build quality I've ever encountered.

I've sent in about a dozen Minolta lenses to Adorama to sell ( they were good lenses, but only low to mid range in quality for the most part) and I'd like to replace them with one standard zoom and perhaps one or two primes.

While I'm on the subject of selling to Adorama, the used guy there (Fred) was quite helpful and polite. They will ship your equipment inat their cost, give you a price, and return whatever you don't sell also at their cost. I couldn't get a read on how reasonable their offer would be, but Fred sounded like he knew his business. I expect they'l be on the low range of reasonable, but I don't have any money into shipping or Ebay fees and I don't have to worry about dealing with customers. I did make an itemized list of the package including Serial numbers, just in case.Their shipper (UPS) however was not so easy to work with. When I dropped off my package at the UPS store the girl behind the desk didn't want to give me a reciept for the package and also wouldn't stamp it 'fragile' until I demanded a manager.My wife tells me that the UPS store in the next town has treated her quite well, but I was reminded of why I normally ship FedEx. (Ok, so I'm a bit off topic)

The vast majority of my candid shots are going to be shot with whatever lens I decide on, so I'dprioritize quality over price on this lens. I'd love something about 20mm to 80mm at f2.8, but a 4x zoom normally lacks the sharpness I'm looking for. I have 70-210 covered well with a Minolta f3.5-4.5 (until I can save up for a 80-200). I also kept a 50mm f1.7 prime, and a Tamron28-300XR LD. I don't mind buying a used lens, IMO the quality of a lot of newer glass is lacking. I'd really like to keep it f2.8, though some of Minolta's best standard zooms are f3.5 -4.5.

Ok, in a nutshell- I'm looking for a f2.8 standard zoom. ~24mm- ~75mm would be a great range. I'm pretty sure I'll be looking for a 35mm and a 20 (or 24)mm prime though I can afford to take my time on those. I'd like to have the zoom by Christmas.


Thanks, Merc

The 28-75mm 2.8 KM is an excellent choice but you will hear reports of people that aren't happy with it. I think it depends on the individual copy. I am very pleased with mine. I wish it were 20 or 24 to 75mm but then again that might diminish the quality. I also have the Minolta 24-85mm F3.5-4.5 and it is a very good lens with a nice range but indoors it can't compete with 28-75mm 2.8 D lens.

I recently picked up a Tamron 35-105mm 2.8 andis a sweet lens... just a little tight indoors and not good for landscape unless you can take some steps back. They are hard to find used but because the range isn't that popular, and they canhad for a reasonable price. It works great when I pair it with the 20-40mm F2.7-3.5 Tamron, but carrying two lenses may not be an option for you. If you can only carry one lens, the 28-75mm 2.8 is a great lens.
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2006, 8:12 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
cope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
Default

I have the 24-105 3.5-4.5 Minolta on my 7D 90% of the time. I have the 24-85 and 28-75 also. The 24-85 lives on my Maxxum 9.
cope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 2, 2006, 9:35 PM   #4
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
I'd love something about 20mm to 80mm at f2.8, but a 4x zoom normally lacks the sharpness I'm looking for
You never know... you may even be able to get 16-80mm with good quality if you can give up a stop. It looks like we won't see it for a while though.

Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 3, 2006, 4:46 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 338
Default

I'm not ready to abandon f2.8 yet, though the CZ's zoom range is more attractive. Also it's not currently available and Sony isn't the best at meeting production demands, it may be mid summer before I can actually get one in my hands to see if the (surely enormous) price is justified.

I've also considered the Minolta 28-70 G, but so many reviews claim the AF is way too slow. That is not going to work for my use, even if the quality of the images is stunning.

That Sigma 24-70 f 2.8 EX DGis sounding pretty good, anyone use it?

Mercury694 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 3, 2006, 6:21 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

Mercury694 wrote:
Quote:
I'm not ready to abandon f2.8 yet, though the CZ's zoom range is more attractive. Also it's not currently available and Sony isn't the best at meeting production demands, it may be mid summer before I can actually get one in my hands to see if the (surely enormous) price is justified.

I've also considered the Minolta 28-70 G, but so many reviews claim the AF is way too slow. That is not going to work for my use, even if the quality of the images is stunning.

That Sigma 24-70 f 2.8 EX DGis sounding pretty good, anyone use it?
I can't think of anyone here who has it but there are some reviews from users on Dyxum. I have yet to pull the trigger on a Sigma because I hear about too many focusing issues.I don't think it applies to the 24-70 or tothe newer Sigma models. Of course Sigma will re-chip the lenses, but to me that is a hassle. I was going to buy their 24-135mm F2.8-4.5lens butit would be redundant with some of the stuff I already own.
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 3, 2006, 6:27 PM   #7
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Call me a wimp, but I didn't want to lug the Sigma around. lol

I originally looked at a lot of lenses in that general focal range. I ended up putting multiple lenses side by side in a table on paper, looking at size, weight, focal range, minimum focas distance, etc.

I decided to pass on both the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 (size/weight) and Minolta 28-70mm f/2.8G (mostly due to minimum focus distance).

I decided to go with a two lens setup to cover the focal ranges I wanted at f/2.8... I went with the Tamron SP 20-40mm f/2.7-3.5 (which is only a half stop down from a 2.8 zoom on it's long end) for the wider part.

According to MTF Charts, it's actually sharper than both the Minolta 20mm and 24mm f/2.8 primes at f/2.8 (with slightly less distortion, too). I then went with the older Tamron SP 35-105mm f/2.8 for the longer end (this one tests much sharprer than the newer Tamron 28-105mm f/2.8, and it's smaller and lighter). It's a bit larger and heavier than I'd like (but, still smaller and lighter than the newer 28-105mm f/2.8 ).

I also bought the Minolta 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 to get good coverage in a walk around lens that's not too large/heavy, keeping me within a stop of an f/2.8 zoom through most of it's focal range, while starting out a bit wider and going a bit longer than most similar f/2.8 zooms.

I probably keep the Minolta on the camera more than the others. I have used the Tamron SP 20-40mm f/2.7.3.5 more lately (I've used it at a few family gatherings recently with no flash indoors). But, I do the same thing with the Minolta 24-85mm from time to time too.

None of them are as good at f/2.8 as my Minolta 28mm f/2 is at f/2.8 though (as you'd expect). The Tamron 20-40mm is sharper wide open compared to the Tamron 35-105mm f/2.8. The 35-105mm has it beat for contrast/color.

If you're interested in the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 as compared to the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8, see the tests from Lightrules (formerly known as fstopjojo) in this album:

http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/exvdi

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 3, 2006, 9:25 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 338
Default

As an old timer, weight in a lens doesn't really bother me much (to a point). I bought the 7d over the 5d mostly for it's balance and in hand feel- which its weight is a significant part of.

I do appreciate the link though, and I really do like my Tamron 28-300's contrast and color rendition, which seem at least equaled by the 28-75 XR Di. From those samples, the Tamron has an edge to me on color and contrast. But then there is also focal length to consider, #^&$/.

The author of that review/ shoot out is definately more taken by the Tamron also. ( Am I correct in thinking that the Minolta 28-75 f2.8 is in fact the same lens as the Tamron?)

The 'plasticky' feel of the Tamron is the only thing that really bothers me about the 28-300, it's otherwise a good compromise. This is part of why I was thinking of giving Tokina a go. Nobody thinks of those Tokina AT-X lenses as poorly built.

I've got about 2 weeks to kick it around till Adorama gets back to me with a price on my stuff, so I am not in a huge rush. I do want to know what I'm looking for when they call though, I'd like to have the new glass in hand by Christmas.
Mercury694 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 3, 2006, 10:04 PM   #9
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

The general consensus is that the KM and Tamron 28-75mm are optically the same. But, there are some apparent differences in the electronics and lens coatings (or so the scuttlebutt in the forums would have you to believe).

The Tamron SP (Super Performance) series are Tamron's better lenses (similar to Sigma's EX series lenses), and the 28-75mm is an SP lens. Build quality seems OK to me with my SP 20-40mm and SP 35-105mm. These are my only two Tamrons.

If I were going to buy a 28-75mm f/2.8, I'd probably lean towards the KM branded lens though (mostly for peace of mind on how the lens is chipped and communicates with the camera for AF, since I can recall someone running into a batch of them that apparently front focused a while back). That appeared to be a "fluke" (i.e., bad batch) versus a common problem though.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 4, 2006, 9:37 PM   #10
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 15
Default

It seems to me that a 28-75 zoom lens would be a great standard zoom lens for a film camera but not for 5D, 7D, A100 DSLR. When I think of a standard lens, I think of 50mm on a film camera. So, a strandardzoom should cover equally above andbelow 50mm (or about 35mm on a DSLR). My standard zoom for my 5D used to be a KM 24-105 3.5/4.5, but there were just too many times when it was just not wide enough. Merc, have you considered the new Tamron 17-50 f2.8. I know it is not a classic peace of glass, but I just got one and find it to be a great standard zoom. With a film range of 26-75 and f2.8, it is much like the KM 28-75 f2.8 only for a DSLR.
MaxImage 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 6:14 AM.