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 May 9, 2006, 10:41 AM   #21
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Hey Alex...

I'm glad your decided to try your 24-85mm.

You can't attach more than one photo to a post using the browse button (you'd need to make more than one post).

You can also make an image viewable without attaching it if you have it stored on a web site that allows direct linking using the [img]images/buttons/image.gif[/img]icon you'll see when entering a new post.

The file size restrictions don't apply if you are linking to one (but, we'd still prefer it if the file size isn't too large, because some of our users are dial up). Ditto for the width (try not to make it too large from a dimension perspective so that users don't need to scroll back and forth to see it). Using direct linking this way allows more than one image per post.

Here is a thread on how to post images:

http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/view_topic.php?id=40634&forum_id=2[img]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/JIMCOC%7E1/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot-1.jpg[/img]


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2006, 11:17 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Hi Jim!

First I learn how to post one, so i will do it as a example!, when my son that is his job computers....will visit us, he will try for me your second way..., OK, smaller ones, but more photos.

OK...Jim from today!
Attached Images
 
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2006, 11:19 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Jim, a second one smaller as you ask!
Attached Images
 
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2006, 12:05 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

thanks Alex, but honestly the quality is hard to see in a small resized image like that. Thedifference in quality among lenses is only going to be noticable at 100% crops. By the way, here is a shot I took on Sunday with my Tamron 28-300 XR. What a great lens for under $150.


Attached Images
 
rduve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2006, 12:17 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Hi Rduve!

Yes I agreed, here a photo with the "Kit" lens of my first son! 1024 resized...i think that larger size...will take a lot of space in this forum. BTW...is my first try at this size!
Attached Images
 
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2006, 12:53 AM   #26
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

Honestly, for my purposes, I have not really seen a bad lens. I find the 18-70 is pretty soft at wider apertures, but it only shows in crops or enlargements. Everything else I tested is very good. My current lens assortment is:
  1. KM 18-70 kit lens for wide angle purposes only [/*]
  2. Minolta 50mm 1.7 for low light situations [/*]
  3. Tamron 28-300 XR3.5-6.3 for my all-purpose lens (see discussion of that lens here: http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=84) [/*]
  4. Vivitar Series 1 70-210 2.8-4 for low light tele zoom needs [/*]
  5. Vivitar Series 1 100-400 4.5-6.3 for ultra zoom purposes [/*]
ALL of these lenses are GREAT!!! And I got them CHEAP on ebay. I would not lose any sleep over the subject. Go take some pictures.
rduve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2006, 5:25 AM   #27
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Dear Rduve!

Another example, during the same day session, & same original Minolta 24-85mm lens!

My best wishes always,

Alex 007:|
Attached Images
 
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2006, 1:23 PM   #28
Member
 
Cavemandude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 62
Default

I found this to be a informative link for Minolta lenses:

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

Scroll down to User Performance Surveys and click on Minolta AF Lenses. Just select whattype of lenses youwant to look at from there. You can sort them by Brand or Performance.

The ratings for the zoom lenses that rduve listed all ranked very low in this survey, so it isno surprise they are so cheap in price.

I wonderhow much betterhis model photos would have lookedusing a Minolta 70-210 f/4 "beercan" zoom or Minolta 28-75 f/2.8 (D) zoom?

Randy Wheeler
Cavemandude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2006, 2:10 PM   #29
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

The last couple of fishing trips I went on, I left a Tamron 35-105mm f/2.8 on my 5D.

I sometimes tag along with my brother-in-law, his neighbor, and their kids and grandkids.

It seems to do a pretty good job with color and contrast.

Here's one taken at 35mm and f/5.6 with the 35-105mm f/2.8. I haven't decided whether to straighten the horizon yet or not. lol


Attached Images
 
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2006, 2:13 PM   #30
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Here's another from the same fishing trip.

Konica Minolta Maxxum5D, ISO 400,f/14, 1/125 second at 85mm with a Tamron 35-105mm f/2.8

That's the lizard's tongue.

Attached Image (viewed 61 times):

[img]attachment.php?id=63024[/img]

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 4:22 PM.