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 Mar 4, 2007, 1:15 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 323
Default

How about this one for your low light normal lens? 200085633569.

It won't be cheap by the time the auction ends but it would sure look nice in any collection.

--FrankD
FrankD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2007, 5:46 PM   #12
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I wouldn't want to part with my 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5. If I had to pick just one zoom, that would be it (even though I've got a couple of brighter zooms).

It's on my camera more than any other lens. I find it's compromise between focal range, size, weight and quality to be "just right" for a walk around lens for what I typically shoot.

But, I'm not sure I could settle for just two more lenses. I'd have to keep my 100mm f/2. I like it too much. I'm not sure I'd want to give up my 28mm f/2 or 50mm f/1.7 either. Ditto for my 135mm. If I had brighter versions of these primes (or primes close to the same focal length), I'd probably give 'em up in exchange for brighter ones. But, that would still leave me with more than 3 lenses, even if I gave up my other zooms except for the 24-85mm. LOL


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2007, 9:40 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
Default

i am running out of time, i have a friend who leaves for new york on thursday, only can buy one

minolta 24-105 or 24 -85 please help me narrow it down
dafiryde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2007, 9:56 AM   #14
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I haven't used a 24-105mm. So, I don't know how they'd compare.

I posted a few snapshots from my 24-85mm a while back in this thread:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=84

If you look through this thread, you'll see that Alex 007 has a lot of photos from his 24-85mm in it you can look at:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=84

I think that cope has both lenses if memory serves. So, perhaps he'll see this thread and make some comments on the differences between them. I seem to remember him deciding to keep the 24-85mm on on of his film cameras, and use the 24-105mm as a walk around on his 7D. But, I might be mistaken about that.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2007, 11:35 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
cope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
Default

Jim is correct, my 24-85 is on my film 9, and the 24-105 lives on my 7D. The 24-85 seems to be getting more expensive, but it is still a great value, and I have seen some like new in the box ones lately. The 24-105 is a D ;ens if that matters, but my loosely run experiments indicate that TTL VS ADI settings on my 7D don't seem to make a lot of difference in typical decent light scenarios. It would be hard for me to make a decision if I had to give up one or the other, but in my case, the longer range of the 24-105, coupled with the clutch on the AF(ring doesn't rotate when using AF) might make it my choice. Even though I use the 24-105 more, I have no plan to get rid of the 24-85. In a thoughtfully laid out inventory, the 24-85 along with a 70-210 makes more sense than the 24-105 with the 70-210. There are no easy answers,. too bad you can't get some time in with both before making a decision.
cope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2007, 2:07 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
Default

cope thanks for your reply

the main answer i was looking for is if there is a difference in quality between the two, autofocus speed, and sharpness etc.

adi and extra zoom range does not matter, its the better in quality of the two i am narrowing down to
dafiryde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2007, 3:34 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
cope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
Default

I see no difference in the two as far as AF and sharpness go.
cope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2007, 6:37 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
Default

well i finally won a minolta 50 1.7 on e bay

i know i will go after the minolta 100-300 apo one day

but just wanted to make sure that the extra zoom on the 105 was not in some way comprising some quality


dafiryde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 30, 2007, 7:17 PM   #19
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 34
Default

anyone us the tamron 75-300 macro? j
jellero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2007, 12:26 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

Why aren't you happy with the Tamron 28-300 output? I find it superb. To answer your original question if we leave the Tamron out, which I would have otherwise
recommended:


1. Sigma 10-20

2. KM 28-75 2.8

3. Beercan Minolta 70-210 f4

Vivitar 100-400 Series 1 (compares very well to the Minolta 100-300 APO, but longer zoom) if you had the budget for a 4th one.

...and of course the Minolta 50 f1.7 if there is some left.

Rainer



rduve 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 3:10 AM.