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 Jul 18, 2006, 7:56 PM   #51
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

maxxum7d wrote:
Quote:
Ya, if it wasn't for you, I had not clue how to approach this. Thanks! I am not too good with returning items (guilt...) even if they are faulty. Gotta learn!!!

meanstreak wrote:
Quote:
maxxum7d wrote:
Quote:
I finally returned my lens to adorama. I followed your advice and went straight for the manager (Mark) and explained how I had to exchange the camera body twice and now the lens itself is defective. He quickly looked at my account and told me to bring it back so he could exchange it.

I went there on sunday with the lens and within 5 minutes walked home with a new and perfect 28-75mm. This one doesn't creep and doesn't reset itself each time I point it downwards!

The salesman I want to avoid each time is Gary. He is pretty manipulative and last three times I was at Adorama, he was the guy I had to deal with.

Quote:
I am so glad I was able to help out... I really am.
Anything for a fellow New Yawka!
meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 19, 2006, 4:35 PM   #52
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
Default

Here is my lens collection:

AF 50mm f/2.8 macro ($100)
AF 100/2 ($200)
AF 18-70mm D (walmart kit)
AF 28-75mm D (Adorama kit)
AF 75-300mm D (Circuit City lens) ($60 + tax)

So, what are my keepers?

bernabeu wrote:
Quote:
imo:

the best minolta glass;

50mm f1.7 *

35-70mm f4 macro *

85mm f1.4

100mm f2.8 macro

70-200mm f4 'beer can'

HS AF 80-200mm f2.8 APO *

300mm f2.8

AF reflex 500mm f8 (mirror) *

(* lens I have and can vouch for)

FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:





maxxum7d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 19, 2006, 6:28 PM   #53
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 338
Default

That 100 f2 is definately not a keeper, you should give that one to Mercury as soon as possible so it doesn't contaminate your other lenses.
Mercury694 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 19, 2006, 7:11 PM   #54
Senior Member
 
cope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
Default

Mercury694 wrote:
Quote:
That 100 f2 is definately not a keeper, you should give that one to Mercury as soon as possible so it doesn't contaminate your other lenses.
Yeah, right after he gives me the 85 1.4&500 mirror.
cope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 19, 2006, 9:36 PM   #55
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

maxxum7d wrote:
Quote:
Here is my lens collection:

AF 50mm f/2.8 macro ($100)
AF 100/2 ($200)
AF 18-70mm D (walmart kit)
AF 28-75mm D (Adorama kit)
AF 75-300mm D (Circuit City lens) ($60 + tax)

So, what are my keepers?

bernabeu wrote:
Quote:
imo:

the best minolta glass;

50mm f1.7 *

35-70mm f4 macro *

85mm f1.4

100mm f2.8 macro

70-200mm f4 'beer can'

HS AF 80-200mm f2.8 APO *

300mm f2.8

AF reflex 500mm f8 (mirror) *

(* lens I have and can vouch for)

FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:





Maxxum:

The only keepers you have are the

AF 18-70mm D (walmart kit)

AF 75-300mm D (Circuit City lens) ($60 + tax)

To help you out, I will buy the following just because I want to help and please don't feel obligated because I helped you get an exchange on the 28-27 2.8

AF 50mm f/2.8 macro ($25)
AF 100/2 ($100)



meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2006, 7:05 AM   #56
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

As a reminder, we don't allow wanted and for sale posts in the forums.

We don't post the rule anywhere. But, it's in the confirmation e-mail new members receive and agree to when joining the forums.

I know you guys are just kidding. But, Steve doesn't want the forums to turn into a big flea market for buying and selling gear. So, this is just a friendly reminder since so much kidding is going on about the value of gear.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2006, 7:24 AM   #57
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 338
Default

Sorry Jim, didn't mean to start anything. I certainly don't want the forums to become a flea market.

On the serious side- to me a keeper is one that produces results that you find acceptable. What you need to spend on a lens and how much quality you need varies greatly for different people and their styles. I've got several lenses that are mediocre and I'd not likely use them for a contract job but I use them from time to time for family stuff and I mount them when the kids are doing the shooting. I'm a lot less upset over fingerprints on a $20 lens than I am on a more expensive one. Frankly the pictures from most cheap glass are completely acceptable for casual use. On a huge monitor the differences are a lot more profound than they are on a 4x6 photo. So again, a keeper is one that works for you.

One thing that bothers me is CA, I do try to steer clear of lenses that produce a lot of it.
Mercury694 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2006, 10:20 AM   #58
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Nothing is really started. Since I know the offers are just "in fun" versus serious, I just wanted to mention the rules so it didn't get to the point of serious buy/sell offers.

If we allowed it, it would be too hard to police. We'd have scammers posting, companies posing as individuals, etc. It's hard enough keeping the spammers out of the forums now. :-)




JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2006, 10:37 AM   #59
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Mercury694 wrote:
Quote:
One thing that bothers me is CA, I do try to steer clear of lenses that produce a lot of it.
They all do it in some conditions. It used to be one of my major pet peeves. But, I'm starting to soften up on it a bit.

Even the best lenses can exhibit it in the right conditions. For example, focusing on a closer subject with out of focus highights in the far background (limbs against a white sky, etc.).

It does seem to be a lot worse with digital compared to film. The microlenses over the photosites in the sensor seem to be a contributing factor. I can remember comments from Kodak engineers a few years back discussing it.

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 20, 2006, 10:39 AM   #60
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 202
Default

*please delete this, double post*
Attached Images
 
maxxum7d 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 7:36 PM.