slr lenses on Sony alpha 100

[klh54]

Hi all! I haven't been on this forum in quite some time! I have the Sony Alpha100 and am looking to buy a zoom lens. I saw a recommendation for the tamron 28-200 slr lens to be used on my Sony. Can you use a regular slr lens on a digital camera? If so, I have a Canon mount tamron 28-200, can I buy an adapter so it will fit on my Sony or no? Thank you for your time in answering my post!
Kathy:)

[DonSchap]

1) Canon lenses will not work on SONY mounts.
2) Older Minolta SLR A-mount or AF lenses will mount and work on the SONY Alpha DSLR cameras.

There is a subtle image quality degradation issue with using the older film zoom lenses on digital sensors, but until your are ready to make a bit of an investment in your photography, the quality is acceptable, for the most part. The fixed focal length lenses (PRIMES) don't seem to have the same degradation and should be the lenses of choice, initially.

[klh54]

:confused:Finances are limited but I was given a little cash for Mom's day and I have a choice between a tamron 55-200mm di macro ultra compact lens for my a100 or a tamron 70-300mm di macro compact. Which is the better lens or am I comparing apples to apples?
Thanks for any info you can provide!
Kathy

[DonSchap]

:confused:Finances are limited but I was given a little cash for Mom's day and I have a choice between a tamron 55-200mm di macro ultra compact lens for my a100 or a tamron 70-300mm di macro compact. Which is the better lens or am I comparing apples to apples?
Thanks for any info you can provide!
Kathy

Personally, Kathy, I have no experience shooting the 55-200mm, in particular, but I do know this. If you are planning on shooting sports with the kids ... you should probably grab the TAMRON AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 instead. It will give you some more reach over that 55-200mm ... and when you are out at soccer or football practices or games, reach is always good thing to have.

The thing about the 55-200mm, is that it closes the gap on most 18-55mm lenses, but I'm assuming you have a newer SONY 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6, anyway. If that is the case, then the 70-300 would be the perfect match up. There is no gap.

So ... 70-300mm, would be my call.

Make sure you get (and read this exactly off the box):

TAMRON AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD Aspherical MACRO

because, there is an older non-Di lens out there, that a lot of online and older camera stores are still trying to sell. The Di-version has a coating on it, designed and optimized for use on a digital SLR camera.

Here's a long-necked combo, for your consideration.

It's the A100 with a 2x teleconverter and a TAMRON 70-300 lens (effectively a 900mm shot on a 35-film SLR or Full Frame DSLR). You should be able to count the freckles with this baby. Minimum Focus Distance (M.F.D.), in normal mode (not MACRO), is still about 5-6 feet away and roughly 3 feet in MACRO mode, with the addition of the 2x T/C. (The 55-200mm will allow you to get 2 feet close, in normal mode ... so it is slightly better indoors.)

36069

Not real good at autofocus*, but you can see a country-mile with it. :D


* - Autofocus is effectively lost with the addition of a 2x T/C on a f/4-5.6 base aperture lens, because it pushes the base aperture beyond f/8, where autofocus can no longer function properly or fails altogether, requiring switching from AF to MF mode ... and manual operation of the focus ring, on the lens.

[klh54]

Thanks, Don, for your guidance. I have found both lenses-one is at B&H photo (70-300mm) it is a DI lens for the Sony A100 for $159.95. I'm thinking that's about as good as I can find it. Didn't turn up much different pricing on a search. I agree the 70-300 will be a better lens, although I'd love the Sony 18-250mm. I'm lazy I guess:eek: I would like one lens to do it all! I have to say my biggest beef with this camera is the terrible lowlight indoor shots. One day I will have to read more diligently all the things I can do to improve my shots:D
Kathy

[DonSchap]

Practically speaking, "low light" can really only be solved in one of three ways:

a wider base aperture lens (such as AF 50mm f/1.4 - PRIME) or a zoom (17-50mm f/2.8). The f/1.4 PRIME is four times brighter than the f/2.8 zoom ... and 8 to 16 times brighter than the 70-300mm f/4 -5.6 zoom. Handheld, this is your best option, but also the most pricey. Also, at these wider apertures, your focus will have to be dead on, because the Depth of Field (DOF) is extremely shallow (a matter of inches from the center of focus)

36076

.

a tripod ... allowing the shot to take place over an extended period of time without any camera movement. Anything longer than 1/15th second, even with a SONY DSLR, is difficult to almost impossible to maintain handheld. If your subject is moving, this can be a nightmare.
.
an external flash ... which offers better control than the pop-up. This device will offer a decent enough pop to cope with most distances you may encounter using it indoors. This is the best solution to a moving object in low light.


Even the α700, with the available ISO-6400 setting, still does better with plenty of light. It's hard to argue this.

You can get usable shots with Tunsten 60W as a light source under the following settings:

Subject dist: 6 feet away
Aperture: f/1.4 (on a lens that can do it)
ISO: 400
Shutter speed: 1/15 sec.
WB: Tungsten
SSS: On

Give it a try and ... good luck with your decision.