PDA

View Full Version : Lens questions from new a100 owner



Don Wingate
09-10-2007, 10:30 AM
I just got an a100 with a sony 18-70 3.5-5.6 lens. I assume this is the kit lense that is supposed to be pretty bad. I am looking at upgrading, and I am pretty sure I am going to want something with more range for general use. I am looking at a couple lenses and wondered whether I could get some opinions about them, quality/price. I am totally new to DSLR photography, so I don't want to invest too heavily at this point.

One is a Konica Minolta AF DT Zoom 18-200mm for $400.
The other is Quantaray 18-200 f/3.5-6.3 DC for $275.

Could I go wrong with either of these lens? Is one or the other an especially good deal? Thanks!

DonSchap
09-10-2007, 11:25 AM
I just got an a100 with a sony 18-70 3.5-5.6 lens. I assume this is the kit lense that is supposed to be pretty bad. I am looking at upgrading, and I am pretty sure I am going to want something with more range for general use. I am looking at a couple lenses and wondered whether I could get some opinions about them, quality/price. I am totally new to DSLR photography, so I don't want to invest too heavily at this point.

One is a Konica Minolta AF DT Zoom 18-200mm for $400.
The other is Quantaray 18-200 f/3.5-6.3 DC for $275.

Could I go wrong with either of these lens? Is one or the other an especially good deal? Thanks!


If you truly want to go with a full featured and get the most bang for the buck, in that class of utility lens, go with the:

TAMRON AF18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) This lens has a little added reach beyond the other two lenses you had mentioned and has won the following awards:

2848428485

It truly is effective on the SONY A100. I know, I use it, personally, that way.

Don Wingate
09-10-2007, 12:04 PM
Thanks Don,
I'm not quite sure I'm ready to spend nearly $500 for a lens (though I suppose you could talk me into it.) Both those lens I mentioned are on ebay, and the prices I quoted are the buy it now prices, but they are still up for auction, and might go for less. If I could get either for say half what I could get the one you mentioned, would it be worth it? Other than the longer reach, is the one you mentioned that much better? Obviously, the cheaper one is the Quantaray, with a buy it now price already almost half off the Tameron, and I may be able to get it for less. The Minolta is older, but is it better than the Quantaray? As good as the Tameron (other than extra 50mm)?

DonSchap
09-10-2007, 02:11 PM
Here's a little teeny tiny secret: "Quantaray" is TAMRON w/o the 6-year warranty.

28490 <-- you don't get this.

If your money means that much, then get the Quantaray ... and save a couple of bucks, but if anything goes wrong, you've got about one-year's worth of warranty to get it settled. Depends on the problem ... I had a few on my lenses upgraded for free ... after owning them 4-years. It would been at least $90 per lens, if I hadn't had that warranty.

Don't take this wrong, as the 18-200 is a good lens ... you can look at my gear list "A couple of cameras and a few lenses", in my signature, I actually have one for my Canon EOS. Since buying the f/2.8 lenses (17-50, 28-75, and 28-105), it doesn't see nearly the use it used to, but then again, my "grab and go" camera is the SONY w/ the 18-250.

The 18-70 is a doorstop ... and I keep it around just in case every other lens got broken. So you can kind of tell how I stand on using that one. :rolleyes:

AllanMarcus
09-16-2007, 10:39 AM
The 18-70 kit lens is actually a pretty darned good lens. Light and sharp.

If you want more range and are willing to change lens, get a used 70-200 f4 (bearcan) lens. You should be able to get one for under $200. Don't forget to get a case for it too.

If you must have one lens, really look at the 18-250 as Don recommends. It's a much better lens that the two you are considering.

-Allan