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 Jan 8, 2008, 1:52 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 146
Default

I have the KM 28-75 F2.8 D, the lens is very good except I have to stop down to F4 to get good sharpness. Do you think it is worth to pay $850 to buy the used 28-70/2.8G? This G lens should be lots better, but not sure it is worth to pay this much.
lsifs is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 8, 2008, 3:07 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 2,299
Default

How much better do you want? The 28-75 is an extremely good lens. It focuses faster, focuses closer then the 28-70 and is a very very sharp lens. You will NOT get better pictures.

Spend your money elsewhere.
lomitamike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2008, 3:49 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 146
Default

Thanks for your opinion, I am waiting for the new Sony / Tamron 70-200 F2.8.
lsifs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 10, 2008, 11:52 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 144
Default

Just curious, why every one thinks the new Sony 70-200 f/2.8 will come from Tamron?

I'm thinking its more likely that it will be of a Zeiss design.
kberntsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2008, 7:32 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

kberntsen wrote:
Quote:
Just curious, why every one thinks the new Sony 70-200 f/2.8 will come from Tamron?

I'm thinking its more likely that it will be of a Zeiss design.
Tamron has announced a new 70-200mm f/2.8 (Full Frame), and Sony already resells Tamron's 18-200 and 18-250 (both APS-C). This would give Sony a quick addition to the line-up of full frame lenses for a full frame dSLR, while letting someone else do all the hard work.

Sony has hinted at a 75-300mm f4.5-5.6 "G" that might be a Zeiss design, though. It may or may not replace the mediocre and inexpensive 75-300 in the current line-up.

MHO.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2008, 10:06 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 144
Default

So are people hopeing fora Sony (Not G) 70-200 f/2.8?

I know that G probably doesn't mean the same under the Sony brand as it did under the minolta brand butit would give me some serious reservations about the future of the system if the Tamron replaced the current G. Unless a Zeiss 70-200 f/2.8 came out along with it.

I know the new 75-300 G is coming out and I'm waiting to see if it minolta G quality glass or if just a good lens with SSM. What they should do is come out with a 70-200/210 f/4 G SSM.



kberntsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2008, 12:16 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

kberntsen wrote:
Quote:
So are people hopeing fora Sony (Not G) 70-200 f/2.8?
ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME !ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!ME!

kberntsen wrote:
Quote:
I know that G probably doesn't mean the same under the Sony brand as it did under the minolta brand butit would give me some serious reservations about the future of the system if the Tamron replaced the current G. Unless a Zeiss 70-200 f/2.8 came out along with it.
I don't think a Sony (Tamron) 70-200/2.8 will replace the "G".Sigma has a70-200 f/2.8 that goes for about $900. I'm hoping that Tamron's will come in under that, which would clearly distinguish it from the "G".

But who knows? Canon and Nikon have 70-200 f/2.8 lenses for about $900-$1,000 (but not for the Sony/Minolta mount). Maybe a $2,000 lens in the same range is an embarassment to Sony. Canon's and Nikon's versions are quite good, and maybe an extra $1,000 for the Sony, even if it isa "G", is a hard sell.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2008, 4:08 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 144
Default

Its only $300 more and it is also a better lens just slightly better but better than than a Canon L or Nikor lense.

B&H
Canon 70-200 f/2.8 L IS $1659
Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8D G-IFS ED-IF VR $1579
Sony 70-200 f/2.8 G $1999


Edit: Just noticed that B&H still has Canon non IS for jsut over $1000


On the other hand I've not yet seen a Tamron or Sigma lense that was up to par with G, L or Highend Nikor glass.

Oh and don't get me wrong would love to see a goodentry 70-200 or even a-mount Tamron 70-200



kberntsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 11, 2008, 4:26 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

kberntsen wrote:
Quote:
Edit: Just noticed that B&H still has Canon non IS for jsut over $1000
Adorama has the Canon for just over $900, and the Nikon at just over $1,000.

But everybody's selling the Sony for list price. No price competition makes me nervous.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 12, 2008, 7:33 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 323
Default

Is this one of the lenses under discussion?

http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/70200_di.asp
FrankD 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 12:16 PM.