sony a200 lens help

bungle29

bungle29

Messages
241
Name
colin
Edit My Images
Yes
hey all :wave:
i have a sony a200 and want to get a longer lens for the bike racing, i have a 70-200 but i think i need to get closer like 400mm, i found a couple on ebay but as ive read on here theres different "f" that they are as in f8 f4 f5 ect.. but i don't understand what it means :shrug: can anyone tell me what id need for bike racing also is there such a thing as a bad make? heres the ones i found on ebay. let me know which you think is best
cheers

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SONY-MINO...=UK_Lenses_Filters_Lenses&hash=item589cdb8d5c

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SIGMA-28-...99?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item53f78ed2cf]

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Sony-75-3...130?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item53f7a702ba

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/TAMRON-AF...448?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item4ac3a78478
 
Out if those I would personally go with the Tamron. I used to have a Sony A500 with that lens and its a good combination. I wouldn't however pay the price that is on that listing, you should be able to pick one up for around £60 ish.
The f stops are the size of the aperture, the bigger the number means less light coming into the camera and so you would need a slower shutter speed to compensate, meaning if you were to get an f8 max aperture lens you would need really good light to get a decent shutter speed, which really would rule it out for motors sports etc
 
None of those lenses will set the world on fire I'm afraid. I owned the Cosina 100-400mm before and it was pants. Not sure about the Sony 75-300mm.

If you need 400mm, go for the Sigma 120-400mm OS, I will set you back £500.00 or so used though. If you can deal with 300mm, then go for the Tamron SP 70-300mm VC (not the one you've listed, which is also poor).

If you're really strapped for cash, then the newer Sigma 70-300mm might be OK.
 
Hi thanks for the reply. So the lower the f the better it will be?
With the lens are they different fit for different cameras or are they all the same? After seeing the pics on here is it the lens that makes the pics clear or is it the megapixels?
Thanks again for the help, I really appreciate it.
 
I would recommend a Tamron 70-300 Di USD if you can stretch to it - it is significantly better then the budget 70-300's, almost as good as the Sony 70-300G.

If you're looking for lenses for the Sony system, a good place to research is Dyxum.

There's one for £249 at LCE Norwich

New they are £289 (WEX)
 
The f number tells you the maximum aperture the lens has - which determines how much light gets to the sensor.

Just to confuse people learning about photography, the smaller the f number the larger the aperture - and apertures go up in what looks like a very odd way.

Lenses with large max apertures are referred to as 'fast' - the reason being that a larger aperture lets more light in, so the shutter needs to be open for less time for a given exposure -> large aperture = fast shutter speed.

Fast lenses have apertures such as 1.4, 1.7, 2.8.

Note that when buying lenses you MUST have the right lens fitting for your camera - with the Sony A200, you need an 'A-Mount' lens - but as you can see if you follow the link above to Dyxum, there is a huge range of options (and if you had Canon or Nikon the choice would be larger still).

The picture quality is a combination of several factors - the lens, the sensor, the camera electronics, the skill of the photographer and the skill in post processing - all are important!
 
so by what your saying is that the sony lens on my list is not the best at F4.6-5.6. also when you say "post processing" do you mean cropping? its just that i do a bit of photoshop and when you zoom in the pic just goes grainy which must be due to the low megapixels. it does say its 10.2 on the box but when playing with the settings it says a large image is 8.3 megapixel is that normal?
 
Colin,

It's worth reading up on the basics before splashing out too much on a lens. Any grain is more likely to be due to the poor high ISO capability of the a200 i.e. the ability to shoot clean images in lower light. A lens with a smaller maximum aperture e.g. f/4.5 rather than f/2.8 will gather less light and force the camera to work at higher ISOs resulting in grainier images.

A few years ago I bought the cheaper Tamron 70-300mm lens for about £100.00 and it wasn't very good. Images lacked clarity in lower light and it suffered from purple fringing around high contrast areas. The Tamron SP lens has the same maximum aperture, but is a much more modern lens and produces superior images. It's about three times the price though :)

Good luck.
 
bungle29 said:
so by what your saying is that the sony lens on my list is not the best at F4.6-5.6. also when you say "post processing" do you mean cropping? its just that i do a bit of photoshop and when you zoom in the pic just goes grainy which must be due to the low megapixels. it does say its 10.2 on the box but when playing with the settings it says a large image is 8.3 megapixel is that normal?
Click to expand...

In order to make lenses to a budget compromises have to be made - they might suffer more CA shooting into the light, lack sharpness at max aperture, lack sharpness on the edges of the image, show distortion of the image, etc.

Sony sell the 75-300 for £219, the 70-300G for £869 (from the Sony UK site, expect to get them cheaper elsewhere). The 'G' lens is 4x the price for a lens that is, at first glance, very similar - because it has a far superior (expensive) optical design, better coatings on the elements, SSM AF motor, better build quality, etc.

In general, with lenses, you get what you pay for - but as price goes up, improvements get relatively more expensive (so the Tamron 70-300 USD offers a significantly better lens than the budget lenses, but is not vastly more expensive. The Sony G is better, but not by much, despite being a lot more - you are paying for both a slight improvement, and the Sony G badge!).

Post Processing refers to any editing of the image after you have taken a shot. This can be simple changes like cropping, or more complex editing such as merging multiple images - you have a wide range of options with digital.

Regarding image size - I am guessing you are looking at the size of the JPeg image that you get.
The 10.2 Mp of the A200 is the resolution of the sensor - 10.2 is fine for normally viewed images - certainly for anything you will view on-line, or print up to A4.
The Image you get from that is typically in JPeg format - this uses compression to reduce the size of the file, even on maximum quality settings, hence the difference.

Note that every time you save a JPeg, you lose a little quality, so be wary of continually editing and saving an image.
 
Last edited:
you can get that Tamron new from WEX for £99 + postage.
The 75-300 Sony is a kit quality lens that dates back through several versions even at Minolta i.e. it's dated (mind you so is the Tamron).
The new Sony 55-300 or the Tamron SP 70-300 are much better but are also nearly £300 new.
 
the best sony tele zoom, is the 70-400 g2 (the first version isnt bad either)

mind it is £1k or 1.6k for the new g2
 
thanks all for the advice!

i've got about £150 to spend at the mo, is there anything good at that price? or should wait and save more? its only that i bought the camera second hand for £200 with a 18-70 and 55-200 lens it seems mad to spend almost double just for a lens or is that the way it is that the lens costs more than the camera?
sorry for all the questions, im new to all this its a lot more involved than the compact i had.

thanks again colin
 
bungle29 said:
it seems mad to spend almost double just for a lens or is that the way it is that the lens costs more than the camera?
Click to expand...
that's pretty much the way that it is with DSLR lenses.
With a lens of any particular focal length you essentially have 4 variables - light gathering ability (aperture/f-stop), AF speed, optical quality and general build quality. Improvements in any of those usually increase the price.

However, coming from a compact any of them may well be an improvement on what you are used to (the 55-200 in particular has no right to be as good optically as it is for the normal selling price ;)).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top