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 Sep 7, 2010, 9:51 PM   #51
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Diana-

www.amazon.con has the F42AM on sale at $173.00 right now which is an excellent price reduction.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 7, 2010, 11:56 PM   #52
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtclimber View Post
Diana-

www.amazon.con has the F42AM on sale at $173.00 right now which is an excellent price reduction.

Sarah Joyce
Thanks for the info. That is a good price. The lowest I found it was for 199 at B&H and Adorama with $100 instant rebate. Seems like all are quite a good deal right now.
purpleehobbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2010, 2:59 AM   #53
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 202
Default

I know, I know. I said I'd try not to bug you anymore with questions....

My son is going to play basketball again this year. Usually he also plays an outdoor sport like baseball or football, but this year he said he only wants to play basketball. I know that this is the most difficult of kids sports to try and capture. I've also read how extremely expensive and challenging it can be to do sports photography.

Having said that, will either the 18-55 or the Tamron 70-300 give me decent shots? Would I benefit from revisiting the Sigma 17-70? Or would I need to look at a completely different lens?

I'm not looking for magazine quality. Just something that might print well as a 4x6, or to be included in a slideshow (I make these for family and burn them to dvd to watch on tv).

This was the best I was able to produce with my husband's Nikon P&S (an L22 or something like that) last year. I think the H5 would have done a little better, but I'm thinking not by much. For me, it barely passes as a "capturing the moment" kind of picture. This is a gym at the local rec center. In the background there are kids sitting on a bench, that's the seating all around the court so I don't have bleachers to contend with as well.

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-...6_162549_n.jpg
purpleehobbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2010, 3:08 AM   #54
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

You are pushing into the realm of canon and nikon, needing the right action lens with fast AF. This can get very expensive very quickly.

with the sony, the sigma 50-150 2.8 HSM would work with indoor and outdoor basketball. For football on a short field you should be able to get away with the tammy 70-300 for day light games.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2010, 3:23 AM   #55
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,452
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleehobbit View Post
Thank you for the information and the examples. I tend to favor the blurred background look for pictures of my daughter, especially when the background is not the greatest to begin with. I've managed to get a few of them with my H5 by sitting several feet away from her and zooming all the way in. I was kind of hoping this trick would work with something like the sony 55-200 or the tamron 70-300.
Yes you will be able to do similar with the 55-200 and the 70-300. With the 70-300 at the 70mm setting you have f4, which is already good if you frame head and torso for some background blur, much better than the H5 too if you then follow the same plan of backing up and zooming more you can take the background out to a greater extent. The only way to get this better is to go to a prime like the 50mm f1.7 or Sigma 30mm f1.4 etc

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleehobbit View Post
I know, I know. I said I'd try not to bug you anymore with questions....

My son is going to play basketball again this year. Usually he also plays an outdoor sport like baseball or football, but this year he said he only wants to play basketball. I know that this is the most difficult of kids sports to try and capture. I've also read how extremely expensive and challenging it can be to do sports photography.

Having said that, will either the 18-55 or the Tamron 70-300 give me decent shots? Would I benefit from revisiting the Sigma 17-70? Or would I need to look at a completely different lens?

I'm not looking for magazine quality. Just something that might print well as a 4x6, or to be included in a slideshow (I make these for family and burn them to dvd to watch on tv).

This was the best I was able to produce with my husband's Nikon P&S (an L22 or something like that) last year. I think the H5 would have done a little better, but I'm thinking not by much. For me, it barely passes as a "capturing the moment" kind of picture. This is a gym at the local rec center. In the background there are kids sitting on a bench, that's the seating all around the court so I don't have bleachers to contend with as well.

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-...6_162549_n.jpg
This is going to be your problem area, you need light into the camera for good shots and you won't get these in a gym without a wide aperture lens. You could look at the 50mm f1.7 I mentioned above but this is only good for close shots usually taken from under the basket. It's not going to allow you to shoot well even from the corners of the court. I'm not sure what other fast primes are in the Sony/Minolta mount lineup so I would check that out if you really want to get usable shots from the gym.
__________________
[SIZE=1][SIZE=2]Any problems with a post or thread please use the report button at the bottom left of the post and the team will help sort it out.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2010, 3:40 AM   #56
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,452
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
You are pushing into the realm of canon and nikon, needing the right action lens with fast AF. This can get very expensive very quickly.

with the sony, the sigma 50-150 2.8 HSM would work with indoor and outdoor basketball. For football on a short field you should be able to get away with the tammy 70-300 for day light games.
I hadn't realised that the a500 did so well at ISO 3200 and 6400 so actually as long as the gym isn't terrible a lens like the Sigma with f2.8 could really work. It would also be wonderful for your portraits with a shallow depth of field. The down side is the price.... isn't that always the way
__________________
[SIZE=1][SIZE=2]Any problems with a post or thread please use the report button at the bottom left of the post and the team will help sort it out.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2010, 3:52 AM   #57
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
You are pushing into the realm of canon and nikon, needing the right action lens with fast AF. This can get very expensive very quickly.

with the sony, the sigma 50-150 2.8 HSM would work with indoor and outdoor basketball. For football on a short field you should be able to get away with the tammy 70-300 for day light games.
I had a feeling I'd get that kind of answer, but wasn't sure. The T1i was on my list before I chose the a500. But oy. I've spent so much time researching the a500. I'd hate to start over

The 50-150 is definitely out of my price range. I think my husband would think I had lost my mind, lol.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark1616 View Post
Yes you will be able to do similar with the 55-200 and the 70-300. With the 70-300 at the 70mm setting you have f4, which is already good if you frame head and torso for some background blur, much better than the H5 too if you then follow the same plan of backing up and zooming more you can take the background out to a greater extent. The only way to get this better is to go to a prime like the 50mm f1.7 or Sigma 30mm f1.4 etc
Thanks for the tips! I've been leaning towards the 70-300.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark1616 View Post
This is going to be your problem area, you need light into the camera for good shots and you won't get these in a gym without a wide aperture lens. You could look at the 50mm f1.7 I mentioned above but this is only good for close shots usually taken from under the basket. It's not going to allow you to shoot well even from the corners of the court. I'm not sure what other fast primes are in the Sony/Minolta mount lineup so I would check that out if you really want to get usable shots from the gym.
I would be satisfied with close shots under the basket. I know that this is a problem area. Was hoping to get usable but obviously I know I can't afford the greatest.

The 50 1.7 you mentioned, is that Sony? so far all I'm finding is a 1.8 and a 1.4 but haven't made an exhaustive search yet..too late for that.
purpleehobbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2010, 3:59 AM   #58
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark1616 View Post
I hadn't realised that the a500 did so well at ISO 3200 and 6400 so actually as long as the gym isn't terrible a lens like the Sigma with f2.8 could really work. It would also be wonderful for your portraits with a shallow depth of field. The down side is the price.... isn't that always the way
Well, if I got the Sigma, I'd get just the body and forego the 18-55 kit lens. So 369 for the Sigma and 165 for the Tamron, It's a bit over my initial 400 budget, but not too much, considering...

The gym is a rec center gym so it seems kind of smaller, at least to me, but then again, I don't hang out in school gyms that often. It does feel a little cramped considering you can stretch out your legs and touch the court. There are some windows so it gets some light.
purpleehobbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2010, 4:04 AM   #59
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,452
Default

There is the new Sony 50mm f1.8 and there was the original Minolta 50mm f1.7. Not overly fast focusing but you can get one cheap which will at least allow you to start shooting.

If you could afford the 50-150mm f2.8 then forget the Tamron 70-300 as you would still want the wide angle for some shots, 50mm is way too limiting. You can also add (at a later date) a 1.4x tele converter to the 50-150 to gain some reach.

As I'm quite new to this thread and might have missed a few points, can you please list your key needs. I've so far got portraits and basketball? What else would you want to shoot?
__________________
[SIZE=1][SIZE=2]Any problems with a post or thread please use the report button at the bottom left of the post and the team will help sort it out.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 8, 2010, 4:08 AM   #60
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Liveview is important do to vision issue. That is why the sony is at the head of the list.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle 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 8:49 AM.