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 Apr 12, 2008, 10:24 AM   #31
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 48
Default

Thanks Jim. I will try that.
Chefkenny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 13, 2008, 1:26 AM   #32
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 48
Default

Hi Jim, sorry to bother you again. The information I got from Dyxum shown that both tripod collar are identical only different colour. But, when I call sony they told me they don't have them if I want I have to buy a new lens. The part number for 70200G is TMC-1071W ( w=white ), the other one for my 200/4 is TMC-1071. So even they still selling the 70200G (they start selling on 2006) but they will not provide the tripod collar as a spare part, so sad. Also sony reps. just don't want to deal with me, I tried like 10 phone calls to 4 different depts. and 3 emails, none of them can give me anything but ask me to buy a new lens. Well, I think a lot of Minolta fans out there also have the same thing happen like me. So sony really did a great job just bought over Minolta ( I believe they also bought the support/service aggrement) and ask you to buy a new sony lens because they don't want to sell you parts.
Chefkenny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 17, 2008, 12:27 AM   #33
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 48
Default

Hi, Jim sorry to bother you again. I real love my 200/4, I can even use it on my tripod without hte collar but just like you said it is little to long for me. I am trying to sell it and tyr to get a Minolta 100/2.8 or a tammy 180/3.5. How do you think about the Tammy one? also I am trying to get the A700 and sell my A100. Thanks a lot, oh I love that 28-75/2.8 the pics of those food came out very very nice and that realy suprising me.

Kenny
Chefkenny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 17, 2008, 9:22 AM   #34
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

If you think a 200mm is too long, then a 180mm is probably going to be too long. ;-)

For something like food photography without any added lighting, you may even want to consider a shorter lens (something like a 50mm f/2.8 Macro).

But, unless you're taking photos of very small subjects and you can't focus close enough with the lenses you have, it's benefit over an f/2.8 zoom is going to be limited (other than you'll probably get slightly sharper photos with the aperture wide open with the prime).

See what focal length you think is best using a zoom first (i.e., is the 75mm setting too long or too short for what you are trying to take photos of).


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 17, 2008, 9:55 AM   #35
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 48
Default

Hi Jim, the 75 is just a little short. I don't want to Photo Shop it (Crop) that's why I wonder if 100/2.8 or 90/2.8 evern 105/2.8 might serve me well ? the 75 is sharp enought but just a tiny short. Thanks alot. I try 50/1.7 just not that kind of lens for my shooting. Thank a lot. Please correct me if I asked silly question? I am kind of newb of those but I am learning :-) a lot from you.

Kenny
Chefkenny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 17, 2008, 10:05 AM   #36
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Well, I'd be careful not to go too long (as you can only back up so far, but you can usually move closer), especially if you want to use the lens for other purposes indoors or in outdoors where you may not be able to back up enough for the desired framing (or don't want to shoot from as far away from your subject).

B&H still has some of the KM branded 100mm f/2.8 Macro lenses in stock (for less than the Sony branded lens). It looks like they're going to be closed after today for a while though (they'll be closed from April 18 through April 27).

KM 100mm f/2.8 Macro at B&H for $499

They're not hard to find on the used market either.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 17, 2008, 11:29 AM   #37
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 48
Default

Thanks Jim, now I think just down to the chose of which 2.8 macro? I read review for all those 3 lenses Min. 100/2.8, Tammy 90/2.8 and Sig. 105/2.8 please advice me because the Tammy has a rebate for $90 (I think after rebate will be $350) it will be $150 cheaper but how do you compair this 2? Thanks.

Chefkenny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 17, 2008, 11:31 AM   #38
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

They're all very good lenses. I'd probably lean towards the Minolta if price was close.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 17, 2008, 11:35 AM   #39
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 48
Default

Thanks a lot.
Chefkenny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 22, 2008, 3:23 PM   #40
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 48
Default

Hi, Jim just got my 100/2.8 today haven't try it yet. But did use some of my lenses to shoot some samples, please advice. ( Food picture will be uploaded later on picasa, large group so takes awhile-may be next week.)

http://picasaweb.google.com/chefkenny/samples

Kenny




Chefkenny 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 8:48 AM.