Calling all Sony Alpha users! (Part 4)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd have gone for the 135mm at that price - can't make it down though :(
 
onomatopoeia said:
No danger of me buying that one as I've already got one :D


On another subject, those thinking of going to Focus might want to know if there are any bargains to be had, so here's what I remember ..

at Jacobs:
ZA 85/1.4 £809 (I might have bought one :naughty: )
ZA 135/1.8 £899
70-200/2.8 SSM G £1099
35/1.4 G £ 749 (I think. And it might have been at cameraworld not Jacobs)

Cameraworld:
70-400 SSM G £1049
ISTR the prices on the 16-35 and 24-70 Zeiss zooms were very reasonable as well, but don't remember what they were.
CW also had the Epson 2880 for £449, if anyone fancies an A3 printer.


Neither had an A900 on the stand, last year both had them at £1499.
Click to expand...

Just to add, Camulet had the 135 STF for £759. The 35mm 1.4 G was at Jacobs, Cameraworld had one for £899.

Overall I was disappointed with the Sony stand, you had to ask to see whatever camera lens combo. Rather than having a few dotted around so that people can play with.
 
I picked up a 30mm f/2.8 macro here the other day, and its a damn impressive optic.

Plasticy little thing, and the AF is noisy, but hell... its sharp!
 
What would you lovely people recommend as a kit lens replacement? I've been looking at the Tamron 17-50 but having looked back a lot of my photos were taken at over 50mm. I've also been looking at the Sony 16-105 but it's a bit beyond my current budget. Is there anything I should look at or just save for the Sony? Or adapt my technique to suit the shorter 17-50? :thinking:
 
rob_t said:
What would you lovely people recommend as a kit lens replacement? I've been looking at the Tamron 17-50 but having looked back a lot of my photos were taken at over 50mm. I've also been looking at the Sony 16-105 but it's a bit beyond my current budget. Is there anything I should look at or just save for the Sony? Or adapt my technique to suit the shorter 17-50? :thinking:
Click to expand...

Sony or Minolta 24-105mm. Great lens that has strangely poor reviews (Sony version).

I had the minolta version for ages until I got the Sony 16-105mm.
 
Not used it in Sony fit specifically, but the Sigma 17-70 is very good.
 
I realise I'm biased as I've offered you mine :LOL:... But hopefully others will agree with my comments.

For the price it's fantastic and will open up a lot of possibilities that your kit lens just can't compete with.
f/4 sharpness will be better than f/8 with the kit lens. Even at f/1.8 it will be sharp enough and obviously that will let you shoot in far darker places and give you a lot more control over DOF.
It's also pretty light and compact, if that appeals to you.

On the downside... Well, it's fixed 50mm. I needed a more versatile lens to replace my kit lens, so I bought a Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8. Yes it's over a stop slower than the 50mm and much bigger/heavier/more expensive, but it's just as sharp and the zoom range is exactly what I needed.

Click for a sample from the 50mm with my A300.
 
Does anyone know how to contact heidfirst?

I bought a Minolta lens off him 3 weeks ago, and let him know almost straight away that it has a back-focus problem.

Since then he has been strangely quiet - not answered my PMs with sample images, not logged onto the forum, not even answering texts or phonecalls!

Thing is... He has still been active on other forums that he's a member of.

Have I been scammed? :thumbsdown:
 
bobiscuit said:
I bought a Minolta lens off him 3 weeks ago, and let him know almost straight away that it has a back-focus problem.
Click to expand...

Have you ruled out an issue with your body - backfocus issues are 90% issues with the body, as its the body that tells the lens where to focus. With screwdriven lenses, its all down to the body.

If you want a second opinion, I'm very experienced in these matters - if you are anywhere near Cambridge, I'm happy to test it out for you. My A900 focusing is absolutely 101% on..
 
Thanks for the offer puddle :), Cambridge is a bit of a trek from Perthshire though :bonk:

I did wonder if it could have been a problem with the body - I know it normally is. But I have an A300 and A350, this lens has the exact same issue with both.

And all my other lenses focus perfectly on both bodies - at all apertures, all focal lengths, etc.
 
Sony a300
In menu 1 Aspect ratio, what will be the differences in photo's between 3:2 and 16:9.
Any idea ?
Alan
 
Ok a little confused would this make much difference if any in quality of a photo? Sorry for the stupid questions.
 
Had a nightmare yesterday, took my camera to a wedding and got some nice shots, really happy with some of them then gettin my bag out of my car and i must have put the camera in without doing up the bag, picked the bag up and the camera fell out, cracked the function dial nicely. Then in the process i thin i manage to loose my eye piece from it. Great.

Camera still works fine ***, just gutted about it. No lens damage, in a way it was lucky i had my 50mm attached.
 
PDub said:
Had a nightmare yesterday, took my camera to a wedding and got some nice shots, really happy with some of them then gettin my bag out of my car and i must have put the camera in without doing up the bag, picked the bag up and the camera fell out, cracked the function dial nicely. Then in the process i thin i manage to loose my eye piece from it. Great.

Camera still works fine ***, just gutted about it. No lens damage, in a way it was lucky i had my 50mm attached.
Click to expand...

Ouch, bet you felt sick seeing that hit the deck.
 
Sick is not the word. On a plus side ive managed to find the eye piece on the road 24 hours after i lost it.


Just a quick question, how many shutter activations are these cameras good for?

I know its gone past the 10,000 and the file name is 2500+ and im not sure if its been reset before that, Stan?
 
PDub said:
Sick is not the word. On a plus side ive managed to find the eye piece on the road 24 hours after i lost it.


Just a quick question, how many shutter activations are these cameras good for?

I know its gone past the 10,000 and the file name is 2500+ and im not sure if its been reset before that, Stan?
Click to expand...

good news on the eye piece phil (y)

i'm sure the A100 is good for 50,000 plus shutter actuations..and i've never re-set it[wouldn't know how too,to be honest].
 
Thats great news then. :)

Seems to be fine anyway, just superficial damage thank god. Phew. :)

After this year i'll probably get a new body anyway, 1 year of doing a 365 will probably take its toll anway.
 
I've wanted to do this for ages :)


DSC00120.jpg

​

Got my lovely Nikkor AI-S lenses fitted to my A900 :)
 
Just a heads up from a link on Dyxum - Min' 200mm f2.8 £410

Bit tatty but worth a look.

might help if I put the link on :)
 
Last edited:
PDub said:
Had a nightmare yesterday, took my camera to a wedding and got some nice shots, really happy with some of them then gettin my bag out of my car and i must have put the camera in without doing up the bag, picked the bag up and the camera fell out, cracked the function dial nicely. Then in the process i thin i manage to loose my eye piece from it. Great.

Camera still works fine ***, just gutted about it. No lens damage, in a way it was lucky i had my 50mm attached.
Click to expand...


I know its a sickening feeling dropping your camera, but the A100 is a tough little beastie, I dropped mine at least 6 times and it always carried on going..so dont panic about the body..just be more worried about your lenses!
 
Some great photos there. Makes me want a 70-400, but I'm not prepared to sell the 70-200 SSM or 300/4 to get it!
 
onomatopoeia said:
Some great photos there. Makes me want a 70-400, but I'm not prepared to sell the 70-200 SSM or 300/4 to get it!
Click to expand...

I used a Minolta 80-200 f/2.8 APO HS too which I also found excellent, but a bit short. I'd still like a Minolta 300mm f/4 but I actually got a Nikon 300mm f/2.8 now, so I guess that'll not happen now.

I did intend not to keep the 70-400 SSM since getting the Nikon prime, but its really rather good. It's WAY better than Nikon's 80-400 offering.
 
does anyone use a SAL18250 ....if so how would you rate it....i'm aware that it need pretty good lighting
 
I'm starting to use high ISO on my A900 more and more.

Here is one from last week, at BTCC:

sony-a900-iso1250.jpg


100% noise crop:

sony-a900-iso1250-crop.jpg


This is with Lightroom 3 beta, at defaults.

For a 25 megapixel camera with a poor rep. for high ISO I think it looks fine pixel peeped too.
 
Beer_Stalker said:
What's it like in terms of weight? I find the 70-300G & A850 underwhelming and have been thinking about the 70-400G.
Click to expand...

The 70-400 SSM is much much better than the 70-300 SSM which is an underwhelming, over-priced and an over-rated lens.

Weight wise? Not too bad, I happily carried it around all day from 10am until about 5pm at BTCC. By the end of the day it got a bit tiring.

I really recomend this lens - its excellent wide open even at 400mm. Honestly once I got my Nikon 300mm f/2.8 I intended to move the 80-400 on (in fact I had an Ad. here but no interest). But I'm glad it didn't sell - I recommend it.
 
puddleduck said:
I really recomend this lens - its excellent wide open even at 400mm.
Click to expand...

So tempting. I'm in Bangkok for a few months and I've only seen the 70-400G in one store. The price is the same as in the UK but I can get a VAT refund. I'll go and have a play with it. Just got to convince the Mrs now (I swore the A850 was the last purchase for a while).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top