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 18, 2012, 2:06 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Australia, New South Wales central coast
Posts: 2,907
Default

G'day Streets

I really don't know what the fuss [above] is all about - but you are mentioning focus & viewfinder brightness...

Some time ago here on Steve's, I published an article re- the Fuji X-s1 camera that I use daily ~ and each week I get a PM or email from 'someone' asking 'something'...

I was doing some low-light comparisons using the Pentax and the Fuji - with the Pentax in Live View mode. It's vf was very dark whereas the fuji was sparklingly bright; it struggled to focus [failed more often than it did focus] whereas the fuji snapped into focus every time and as to shutter / mirror noise of course the Fuji was so quiet [no mirror] it could have been used anywhere...

Regards, Phil
__________________
Has Fuji & Lumix superzoom cameras and loves their amazing capabilities
Spends 8-9 months each year travelling Australia
Recent images at http://www.flickr.com/photos/ozzie_traveller/sets/
Ozzie_Traveller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 20, 2012, 2:35 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
MVASteve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Adelaide South Australia
Posts: 793
Default

Mmm I'm thinkn that sometimes we all can be swept up with new technology, the latest and greatest etc. I know I'm one of them!! I still shoot with my Sony A700 and will for a while yet. It's impossible to keep up with every new gadget that hits the market. Sony has taken quite a bit of my hard earnt cash as Ive just bought the RX100 and I must say for a point and shoot I think its a ripper.
Sometimes we can focus way too much on the "tool" rather than our own skill in capturing what you see and of course post processing which can provide a huge amount of artistic scope.
What I'd really would love in a camera is low light capabilites, and time to really learn the craft of photography.
MVASteve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2013, 10:16 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
hkmp50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 1,370
Default

heh heh heh heh Steve said "TOOL" heh heh heh heh heh..............
__________________
The hardest part of accepting criticism is realizing I am not perfect.......
hkmp50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2013, 11:10 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Hawgwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Posts: 3,547
Default

I think it depends on your usage, whether you need to upgrade often. I shoot with my Sony A300 and get fantastic shots. I have a Minolta 70-210 F/4, a Sony Sal 50 F/1.4, a Tamron 70-300 DI LD Macro, and a Tamron 28-300 zoom, and as long as they give me great results, I'll save my money and feed my other vices. When the A300 breaks, I'll replace it, but (probably) not until then.

But I also have a 1994 Ford F-150, and will probably keep it, even after I buy a new one this year.

So, to each his or her own, I always say. Hey,we're all brothers/sisters behind the lens.
__________________
Always use tasteful words - you may have to eat them.
You cannot find knowledge by rearranging your ignorance.

My Flickr
-Robert-


Hawgwild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2013, 12:39 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawgwild View Post
I think it depends on your usage, whether you need to upgrade often. I shoot with my Sony A300 and get fantastic shots. ...
I had an A200 and then the A300 back in 2009. For some obscure reason, I decided to sell my Sony gear and buy Olympus instead. Nothing personal. Then I sold the Oly stuff and got into the m4/3 business. I've been quite happy with it. However, a few weeks ago I was searching for some pictures I knew I had taken with the A300 and as I was browsing to the A300 folder, I was amazed by so many great shots I had taken with it. Well, to make a long story short, I started searching the net and bought myself another A300 with the kit lens. I had forgotten how much I like it. Now I'm debating whether I buy the Tamron 18-200 or 28-300. Any suggestions?
__________________

Tullio
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2013, 2:37 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

Forget the 18-200. If you must go the superzoom route, the 18-270 is probably the best.
__________________
  • 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 Feb 24, 2013, 3:07 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Hawgwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Pensacola, Florida
Posts: 3,547
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tullio View Post
I had an A200 and then the A300 back in 2009. For some obscure reason, I decided to sell my Sony gear and buy Olympus instead. Nothing personal. Then I sold the Oly stuff and got into the m4/3 business. I've been quite happy with it. However, a few weeks ago I was searching for some pictures I knew I had taken with the A300 and as I was browsing to the A300 folder, I was amazed by so many great shots I had taken with it. Well, to make a long story short, I started searching the net and bought myself another A300 with the kit lens. I had forgotten how much I like it. Now I'm debating whether I buy the Tamron 18-200 or 28-300. Any suggestions?
I can't say one way or another about the 18-200, having never used one, but I have had some success with the 28-300, given the type of shooting I do.

This is a shot of the castle at Disney World in 2009, with the 28-300, at 30mm, iso 400, 1/20 sec and F 3.5. Oh, and this was hand-held. I hardly ever use a tripod, especially away from the house. You have to love the Sony I S.



One more, and I'm done (I promise). This one at 1/5 sec, F/4, 40mm iso 400. Hand held. Tamron 28-300

__________________
Always use tasteful words - you may have to eat them.
You cannot find knowledge by rearranging your ignorance.

My Flickr
-Robert-


Hawgwild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2013, 6:08 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

The 28-300 is a capable lens (I had one). I also had a Tamron 28-105, which was surprisingly good considering I paid $40 on Amazon at the time. Never had the 18-200.

TCav, Im sure the 18-270mm is a much better lens but its price tag is also much higher. I already invested too much money on my m4/3 equipment and certainly don't want to take the same route with the Sony. I quite like the compactness of the m4/3 and I don't think I'll be taking the A300 with me all the time. I just want to add some zoom for wildlife shooting. When I had the A300, I bought the Minolta 100-300 (both models). I think they were some of the worse lenses I've ever shot with. CA was horrendous and sharpness was way below expectations.

Robert, the Disney castle shot looks real good. Thanks for posting.
__________________

Tullio
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2013, 6:15 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

I had the 18-200. I've got some shots with it that I'm pleased with, but it also disappointed me on several occasions. When I bought my first Beercan, I sold the 18-200, and I never looked back. Every bad thing I ever saw in the reviews and test results, I saw with my own shots. The 18-250 and 18-270 are improvements, but I still wouldn't buy one with my money.
__________________
  • 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 1:31 AM.