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 Oct 1, 2010, 5:34 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 202
Default Changed my again and going with the A500, quick (hopefully) lens choice question

So I decided to go with the A500. I threw out sports shooting because I just don't want to mess with it. I did some reading (and also some shooting with the FZ100) and I think I'd rather just let my husband video tape it and sit back and watch. Terrible, I know.

I have the body on order for 399 w/free shipping from amazon.

I just want 1 lens for right now and maybe a suggestion for a decent flash (was thinking about the metz 48...we live in a small house so I don't think it really needs to be super-super powerful but I want to use bounce flash).

My main focus is going to be portraits, preferably with a blurred background, and second will be low-light like night landscapes of the city, Christmas lights (indoor & outdoors) and general landscapes during the day.

I want to stay light so I'm putting off getting a longer zoom lens right now.

Here is my thought process:

More than likely I will just pick up the 18-55 Kit lens to learn with. I've seen a few on ebay (with 7-15 day returns) from around 90 used or 100-150 new.

My other considerations were something like the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. I saw one used from a reputable dealer for $309.

I also saw a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 for 360 on ebay, but am not sure about buying from Canada. Here is the link btw, http://cgi.ebay.com/NEW-TAMRON-17-50...item483c90510f

I also considered the Sigma 18-125, but my guess is that the range on this lens starts pushing into that category where you are asking for too much range for one lens, and I'm really fine with something either in the 18-55-ish or 28-75-ish range.

Also looked at the Sigma 28-70 f/2.8-4, but I'm guessing there is a reason that is only a 120.00.

I'm just wondering if I'd see a big improvement for what I want to do over the kit lens. I'd like to stay under 400. This will be my 1 lens for at least several months to a year.

Thanks for your help!

Diana
purpleehobbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 1, 2010, 5:45 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Metz 48 is what I would suggest or a sony one, I would tend to avoid sigma.

You can also consider the sam 50mm 1.8 it is a pretty inexpensive lens. Used is under 100 doors.

It does not make to much sense to get the 18-55 and the 17-50 2.8. Just go with the 17-50 2.8 if you are serious considering it.

The 28-70 is very tight in close in environments, not quite wide enough for allot of people.

18-125 is not pushing it, it would actually make a good walk around range.
__________________
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 Oct 1, 2010, 6:01 PM   #3
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Congrats on ordering the A500. That is a very tempting price point (only $399 for one). Even though I don't need another camera right now, I'm tempted to get one for a spare camera at a price that low. LOL

What kind of sports, and how much room will you have for the portraits?

Sony has a new 85mm f/2.8 that should be hitting vendor shelves soon, at a very nice price point of only $249.99. Here's a listing for it (still not in stock, but expected anytime now).

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Mid_range.html

If you mean indoor sports and you can shoot at ISO 3200, it would probably be a good bet at a *much* lower price point compared to something like a 70-200mm f/2.8 zoom lens (or a brighter 85mm prime).

A 50mm would also work (newer Sony 50mm f/1.8 DT lens, or a Minolta 50mm f/1.7 AF lens). But, I think you'd get more keepers with an 85mm, as you'd have a bit more working room for AF with one. I typically use a Minolta 100mm f/2 AF lens when I shoot indoor sports (not very often). But, that lens is hard to find and pricey. The Minolta 85mm f/1.4 AF lens *much* easier to find (usually in stock at popular vendors of used gear) But, it's not cheap at around $800 used. The Sony/Carl Ziess 85mm f/1.4 is very pricey at around $1369 new (although it's a superb lens).

Given the better high ISO performance of newer camera models, I'd probably just get the new and inexpensive Sony 85mm f/2.8 instead if I needed a lens in that focal length for low light use (as using f/2.8 would also make it easier to keep what you want in focus compared to trying to use wider apertures).

As for a flash, I just saw a listing for the Sony HVL-F42AM for under $200 somewhere. If I can find it again, I'll post a link.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2010, 6:04 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
Metz 48 is what I would suggest or a sony one, I would tend to avoid sigma.
So if not the Metz 48, then the Sony F42AM... but not the F20AM?


Quote:
You can also consider the sam 50mm 1.8 it is a pretty inexpensive lens. Used is under 100 doors.

It does not make to much sense to get the 18-55 and the 17-50 2.8. Just go with the 17-50 2.8 if you are serious considering it.
I wouldn't get the 18-55 and the 17-50. It would be one or the other. The 50 1/8 might be a possibility, but only if I got the 18-55 and then I'd wait a bit to get a feel for my camera most likely. Which is why I considered the 17-50 2.8, thinking it might offer me a little zoom and help with portraits/low-light
purpleehobbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2010, 6:11 PM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
As for a flash, I just saw a listing for the Sony HVL-F42AM for under $200 somewhere. If I can find it again, I'll post a link.
Here's where I saw it. I'm not familar with the vendor (so, do your own research in that area), but it looks like amazon.com is fullfilling the orders.

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-HVL-F42AM...5970914&sr=8-1
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2010, 6:15 PM   #6
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
So if not the Metz 48, then the Sony F42AM... but not the F20AM?
The Metz 48 AF-1 or Sony HVL-F42AM would both be pretty good choices for most purposes. But, I'd lean towards Sony's flash if the price is close.

As for the Sony HVL-F20AM, it's a bit weak for use in anything but smaller spaces (especially if you want to bounce a flash, as that decreases range significantly) and it does not give you swivel (it's tilt only). You also don't get High Speed Sync with it (limiting it's usefulness for fill flash outdoors at wider apertures, since your fastest shutter speed would be limited to 1/160 second with the A500 without a flash that supports HSS). So, I'd probably avoid the HVL-F20AM for most purposes and go with one of the other choices instead.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2010, 6:19 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC View Post
Congrats on ordering the A500.
Thanks! I'm quite excited

Quote:
What kind of sports, and how much room will you have for the portraits?
No sports. My husband is just going to video tape. I've read up on the difficulties with trying to shoot sports, and after trying to track action shots and totally aggrevating my vertigo, I think maybe it's just not going to be my thing. I'm fine with that. It's more fun to just sit and watch him play

As for how much room for portraits. I've moved most of my portraits to outside in the front yard because indoor IQ was just bleah. Outside I have about 8-10 feet before I have to go stand in the street lol. Indoors is more tricky. We do have one larger room, I'd say 15-20 feet but there is a lot of backlighting in that room for a screen door. The other rooms are smaller and I'd probably be shooting from about 4 feet away, maybe 6. My last option is that the way our house is set up there is a sort of hallway... it's not enclosed, but you can stand at the front door and see past the kitchen, through to the other side of the house... but i've never tried positioning anyone in this area because of the differences in light from where I'd be standing to them, etc.

So in summary, sorry for rambling, on my H5, I typically shot an equiv of 24-48 mm to get at least a waist up shot.

Quote:
As for a flash, I just saw a listing for the Sony HVL-F42AM for under $200 somewhere. If I can find it again, I'll post a link.
That would be great if you remember

Thanks,

Diana
purpleehobbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2010, 6:19 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

The 20 is a bit weak for bouncing, the Metz 48 will give you greater flash reach over the f20am.

For the difference between metz and the F42AM it may be worth it for the extra reach and the ability to do firmware upgrade for future compatibility. But the sony would work allot better then the 20.
__________________
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 Oct 1, 2010, 6:21 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC View Post
Here's where I saw it. I'm not familar with the vendor (so, do your own research in that area), but it looks like amazon.com is fullfilling the orders.

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-HVL-F42AM...5970914&sr=8-1
Thanks for the link. I checked into Amazon's policy on orders that they fulfill and they handle the returns as well, so I'm thinking that typically makes it a safe bet.
purpleehobbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2010, 6:31 PM   #10
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleehobbit View Post
...I typically shot an equiv of 24-48 mm to get at least a waist up shot.
With a dSLR using a Sony APS-C size sensor, you'll need to multiply the focal length of a lens by 1.5x to see what focal length you'd need to use on a 35mm camera for the same angle of view.

For example, a 50mm lens on the A500 would give you the same angle of view you'd have using a 75mm lens on a 35mm camera (50mm x 1.5 = 75mm).

That's one reason most kit lens are around 18-55mm now (which would give you about the same angle of view you'd have using a 27-83mm lens on a 35mm camera). That's also one reason lenses starting out at around 28mm are not very popular with dSLR models using an APS-C size sensor (since that would give you the same angle of view you'd have using a 42mm lens on a 35mm camera, and you don't always have enough room to back up far enough to get what you want into the frame).

So, I'd keep angle of view differences in mind when lens shopping. IOW, you'll have a narrower angle of view (more apparent magnification) for a given focal length lens on a model like the Sony A500, as compared to the same focal length lens on a 35mm camera.
JimC 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 6:27 PM.