Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 6, 2009, 8:28 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

vexedviking wrote:
Quote:
Do you feel its all woth the 80 he is asking.
The Minolta 35-70, whichever it is, is a nice lens, and it's faster than the kit lens at that range. And if it's the f/4.0 Macro, that would be a nice plus, but I wouldn't buy it just for that.

The Sigma 70-210 only has two reviews on Dyxum, but the rating is 3.55. If you look closely, you won't find many lenses with lower ratings.

If you know the seller, take it and consider the Sigma as a toy until you can replace it with something better (like a Beercan), and consider everything else as disposeable.

If you don't know the seller, pass it up, and save up for something else. The kit lens will do most of what you want, and do it reasonably well. If you want something longer, the Beercan is a lot of lens for not a lot of money (though certainly more than $80.)
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 6, 2009, 9:16 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
vexedviking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Winnipeg Manitoba Canada
Posts: 191
Default

vexedviking wrote:
Quote:
Nevermind I didnt realize you had given me a link . I will read itvexedviking wrote:
Quote:
Went to the dyxum listing and couldnt find the lens, Do you feel its all woth the 80 he is asking. Your help has been a real god send. Thanks againTCav wrote:
Quote:
vexedviking wrote:
Quote:
The package is as follows:

A complete 35mm package:
- Minolta 3xi camera body
- Minolta AF 35-70mm zoom lens with protective filter
- Sigma UC-II AF 70-210mm, 1:4-5.6 zoom lens with protective filter
- Cokin filter system including sepia, sunset, soft and polarizing filters
- all manuals
- padded case

I want to shoot my daughter at the beach and in the water. I also enjoy taking pictures of nature and scenery. Family get togethers. group shots. pets. You get the idea. Hope this clarifies things :-) I did say 75-210, as you can see my memory isnt what it used to be.
The Minolta AF 35-70mm is nice, whichever one it is. See the Dyxum listing for the Sigma UC-II AF 70-210mm, 1:4-5.6. The Cokin Filter System is very nice, but most of what it can do can be done in the camera or in post processing, and make sure the polarizing filter is the #164 circular polarizer. The #160 Linear Ploarizer interferes with autofocus systems.
Ok, I looked at the review and even saw some pics shot with the lens. To the un trained eye I thought they looked Ok. Wasnt sure how the rating worked though.
vexedviking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2009, 5:02 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

vexedviking wrote:
Quote:
Ok, I looked at the review and even saw some pics shot with the lens. To the un trained eye I thought they looked Ok.
It's hard to evaluate a lens from a reduced version of a photo. The reduction process reduces any softness that might have been in the original.If you look at the high contrast areas near the necks of the geese, you'll see traces of chromatic aberration, though.

I'm not saying it's a bad lens. I'm saying that there are much better lenses available, and buying a cheap lens serves to discourage people from buying a better lens because they would have to admit that their initial investment was a waste of money. You're not making a big investment, so that is less likely to be a factor.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2009, 3:18 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
vexedviking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Winnipeg Manitoba Canada
Posts: 191
Default

I spoke with him and he said he would sell it all for 50$. And the polarizer is a #164 so it wont effect the auto focus as you had said. It is however not the screw on type but the older type that you have to put the adapter on and slide it down into the holder.
vexedviking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2009, 3:34 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

vexedviking wrote:
Quote:
... And the polarizer is a #164 so it wont effect the auto focus as you had said. It is however not the screw on type but the older type that you have to put the adapter on and slide it down into the holder.
Actually, the Cokin Filter System is newer than the screw on type.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2009, 4:36 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
vexedviking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Winnipeg Manitoba Canada
Posts: 191
Default

Im glad I have a good teacher. I did buy the package of equipment he had. I just got home and tried the lens out, and its exactly what the review said about it. Seems ok for a lens Im only going to use till I can afford better. The polarizer is a bit of a pain to use. I will have to get a screw on one later when I can afford one of those aswell. The wide angle that came with my sony seems to be better then the one I got today. All in all for $50 I think it will tide me over till the money tree in the back yard gets a little biger :-). I feel fortunate to have had your help. Im sure we will talk again real soon when the tree is ready. Take care and thank you
vexedviking 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 10:23 AM.