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 11, 2012, 6:13 PM   #41
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

I'm suprised and disappointed that you thought I was being condescending and sarcastic. What I was trying to convey is my genuine concern that you were about to make a mistake, and were doing so for the wrong reasons
__________________
  • 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 Jan 12, 2012, 7:43 PM   #42
Senior Member
 
Streets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Euless, Tx.
Posts: 933
Default

what good is it to compare image quality between 2 cameras when the lens is not the same on both camera bodies? I question that any differences seen in this case might be lens induced rather than camera body induced.
__________________
Sony A57 with 18-55 kit lens, Sony A200 and Sony H70
50mm f3.5 Minolta Maxxum macro
24mm f2.8 Minolta Maxxum
100-300mm Minolta Maxxum APO Zoom
70-300 Sony apo G SSM Zoom
Streets is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 14, 2012, 5:44 PM   #43
Senior Member
 
Marawder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Geneva, SWITZERLAND
Posts: 677
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
I'm suprised and disappointed that you thought I was being condescending and sarcastic.
I'm really sorry. I become aggressive whenever my "convictions" are shattered.
I didn't want to believe those super-zoom lenses where that bad, but after seeing more photos on Flickr, I've changed my mind.

What about the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8?

Sure, I'll probably crave for more reach, but as a lot of people said, all-in-one lenses aren't, for now, that great. And besides, the +100mm tele is mostly for wildlife and sports shooters, right? Those are things I almost never shoot, so I shouldn't be missing the telephoto reach...
__________________
Sony α
dSLR-A580
Minolta AF 35-70mm f/4
Sony DT 50mm f/1.8 SAM

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD
Tamron SP AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di USD XLD
Marawder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 14, 2012, 7:34 PM   #44
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

The Tamron 17-50/2.8 is an excellent replacement for the kit lens.

You never talked about what you wanted to shoot, and there are soem other very good lenses out there, many of which are available on the used market. Can you go into some detail about what you want to shoot?

Another option is to find out what focal lengths you've been using for the shots you've taken with your current camera. Fortuantely, there's a free program called ExposurePlot that can do the work for you. Just point it at the folder that contains your photos, and it does all the work.
__________________
  • 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 Jan 14, 2012, 11:05 PM   #45
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

I think with all the landscape you shoot, you will benefit from a ultra wide angle lens. 17 may still be a bit tight.
__________________
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 Jan 15, 2012, 5:59 AM   #46
Senior Member
 
Marawder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Geneva, SWITZERLAND
Posts: 677
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
Can you go into some detail about what you want to shoot?
Basically I shoot anything I come across and find interesting. Have you never looked at my threads?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
...on the used market.
I never buy second-hand equipment, sorry!

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
what focal lengths you've been using for the shots you've taken with your current camera.
Here's my chart:



Quote:
Originally Posted by shoturtle View Post
17 may still be a bit tight.
Sony's iSweep Panorama feature will compensate for that... :P
__________________
Sony α
dSLR-A580
Minolta AF 35-70mm f/4
Sony DT 50mm f/1.8 SAM

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD
Tamron SP AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di USD XLD

Last edited by Marawder; Jan 15, 2012 at 6:27 AM.
Marawder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 15, 2012, 7:47 AM   #47
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

the sweep pano has flaws. I would go with a tripod and multi single shots, and stitch on the computer over the sweep pano feature. But this adds allot of setup time.
__________________
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 Jan 15, 2012, 11:58 AM   #48
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

From the charts, it seems the Tamron 17-50/2.8 will cover a good deal of what you currently shoot, except for a significant peak at 20mm and minor peak at 100mm. (Remember that the chart shows the 35mm equivalent focal length, not the actual focal length. The Tamron 17-50/2.8 has a 35mm equivalent focal length of 26-75mm, which corresponds nicely with a significant portion of what you've shot in the past.) Sony's Sweep Panorama is also a very nice way to handle the wide shots you've made, especially when using a very good lens like the Tamron. The only part of your range that's left uncovered is the 100mm focal length, which is just beyond the 35mm equivalent focal length of 75mm of the Tamron, but it's close.

You also seem to do a lot of shooting at very large apertures, yet you don't use higher ISO settings or longer shutter speeds, which indicates to me that you might be using larger apertures for creative purposes rather than just to achieve a proper exposure. The Tamron is a large aperture lens, and you should probably be quite satisfied with the results at its maximum f/2.8 aperture.

All in all, I think the Sony A35 with the Tamron 17-50/2.8 would be a superb tool for almost all of what you do.
__________________
  • 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 Jan 15, 2012, 5:41 PM   #49
Senior Member
 
Marawder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Geneva, SWITZERLAND
Posts: 677
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
The only part of your range that's left uncovered is the 100mm focal length...
Yeah, about that...later on if I'll want to buy a tele, wich one would you recommend out of the 2:
Tamron 55-200 mm f/4-5.6 Di II LD MACRO or the Tamron SP 70-300 mm f/4-5.6 Di USD ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
You also seem to do a lot of shooting at very large apertures...
Yes, that's part of the reason why I changed my mind about the 18-270mm lens.
After some thought I realized that a minimum aperture of only 3.5 is a deal breaker for me...
__________________
Sony α
dSLR-A580
Minolta AF 35-70mm f/4
Sony DT 50mm f/1.8 SAM

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD
Tamron SP AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di USD XLD

Last edited by Marawder; Jan 15, 2012 at 5:49 PM.
Marawder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 15, 2012, 6:28 PM   #50
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marawder View Post
Yeah, about that...later on if I'll want to buy a tele, wich one would you recommend out of the 2:
Tamron 55-200 mm f/4-5.6 Di II LD MACRO or the Tamron SP 70-300 mm f/4-5.6 Di USD ?
Where their ranges overlap, the 70-300 has less distortion and vignetting. They're about equally sharp, but the 70-300 has the extra range and it's also a 1:2 macro lens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marawder View Post
Yes, that's part of the reason why I changed my mind about the 18-270mm lens.
After some thought I realized that a minimum aperture of only 3.5 is a deal breaker for me...
That's f/3.5 at 18mm. At 35mm it's f/4.5, at 50mm it's f/5, and at 70mm it's f/5.6. It gets pretty dim pretty fast.
__________________
  • 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
 
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 8:23 AM.