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 17, 2009, 3:59 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

I had a Beercan and was very pleased with the results. But I was usually shooting outdoors. When I tried to use it indoors, I could never get fast enough shutter speeds. While it is a great lens, I don't think it will be a great lens for what you do.

But for <$200, I'm sure you'll be happy with it for something.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 21, 2009, 10:08 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Decatur, GA
Posts: 2,053
Default

I got the lens yesterday. Haven't had a chance to test it at night or indoors yet. I did use it at a 5k race this morning and got some nice shots. The focus was working well. I will hopefully get a chance in the next week to test it at night and see what becomes of it.

What is interesting about this lense is I thought it was an f/4 and turns out its an f/3.5-4. Or at least thats what the display screen shows as I zoom out.

Also the lens hood that came with it is huge/longer -- larger/longer than the one for my 28 - 300mm.

What I have determined from all my resent shooting and paying attention to the settings on the camera screen is that most of my shots are in the 120 - 200mm range so the 50 -150 f/2.8 would not be long enough in my opinion.

dave
Photo 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 21, 2009, 10:20 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Photo 5 View Post
What is interesting about this lense is I thought it was an f/4 and turns out its an f/3.5-4. Or at least thats what the display screen shows as I zoom out.
Minolta also made a 70-210mm f/3.5-4.5. It's not bad, but it's not a 'Beercan'. Check to make sure what you got was a 'Beercan'.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 21, 2009, 10:29 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 750
Default

I have the beercan and it is a great lense however it won't thrill you in low light situations.
__________________
A77, 28-75mm f/2.8, 16-50mm f2.8, 18-250mm f3.5, 70-300mm f4.5G SSM
Flying Fossil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2009, 12:30 PM   #15
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Photo 5 View Post
What I have determined from all my resent shooting and paying attention to the settings on the camera screen is that most of my shots are in the 120 - 200mm range so the 50 -150 f/2.8 would not be long enough in my opinion.
Yea, but if your photos are blurry because your shutter speeds are not fast enough, then having a longer focal length isn't going to help much. ;-)

If that's a 70-200mm f/3.5-4.5 (which is what it sounds like), then you'll be at f/4 or so at those focal lengths, meaning that your shutter speeds are going to be twice as long as you'd get using an f/2.8 zoom for a given lighting and ISO speed (f/2.8 is exactly twice as bright as f/4).

You may also want to consider something like a Minolta 135mm f/2.8 AF lens as a compromise if you normally shoot in the 120-200mm range, using your feet for zoom. It's a relatively small and light lens for it's focal length and brightness (I'll sometimes carry one along in a larger vest pocket when I think I may need something longer than my normal walk around zooms).

But, for indoor use without a flash, even f/2.8 may not be bright enough, depending on the lighting, subject type, and how tolerable you are to noise levels at higher ISO speeds. For example, I tend to use my Minolta 100mm f/2 AF lens a lot more in low light compared to my f/2.8 lenses in that general focal range (f/2 is twice as bright as f/2.8).

Note that Sony offers a brighter Sony/Carl Zeiss 135mm f/1.8 (more than twice as bright as an f/2.8 lens). But, it's pricey (lists for approx. $1479).
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 22, 2009, 8:58 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Decatur, GA
Posts: 2,053
Default

I had a chance to test it out tonight in low light at a fire scene. It worked pretty well. Most of the photos were not that blurry (about the same as I would get from my 28-300 f4.5-6.3) I was using ISO800 which is the norm for me....... I know that the 50-150mm f/2.8 will give me much faster shutter speeds. The ones I did save were nice shots a little bit better than what I was getting before in low light/night shooting.

Thanks for everyone's help with this thread now back to work (unfortunately)

dave
Photo 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 24, 2009, 7:35 AM   #17
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 64
Default

i just got myself a minolta 28-135mm f4-4.5 and got to say im loving it..paid 70 for it off ebay .Which i think is a bargain..Very fast focusing on my A700 with quality sharp photos all the way through the lens ....Best lens i have at the moment .and its a great walkaround lens ..Only if it were a little lighter . But its the classic minolta build which is excellent .Its definalty a keeper and its got pride of place in my bag

Martin

Season greetings to all
linearamp 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 11:34 PM.