Sony a300 and DSLR newbie!

[thcheme]

Hello all, long time reader, 4th time poster.

I just picked up the a300, 18-70 and 75-300 lenses. I am impressed after day 1. Anyhow, I am a former point and shoot guy :confused: and was wondering if anyone knows of literature, tips, etc to get the most out of my a300. I'm afraid that I'll just leave it on "auto" instead of moving into more advanced photography:rolleyes:. My previous cameras had scenes, but never allowed for optimization of the settings like this camera is capable of.

What are the critical accessories (filters, flashes, etc) that I should consider as the budget allows?

Looking forward to learning what this camera can do for me.

Thanks!

[DonSchap]

Congratulations on your purchase ... have taken your first step into a larger world.

Photography contrasting a DSLR vs a "point & click" camera truly remains a mystery. So many "point & click" folks will jump up and down proclaiming that their camera is capable of "oh so much", yet ... if that were "so true" ... why would anyone ever again purchase a DSLR? Better yet ... why would the camera manufacturers put so much time and effort in such devices ... if they were indeed at the "end of the road."

Well, as many have found out ... through trials and tribulations, the DSLR is the solution to problems you simply cannot solve with the limited nature of a point & shoot. Sure ... given a bright sunny day ... no need for a flash or other lighting considerations ... the two would shoot a very similar shot. In fact, there is a lot less FUSS with a P&S camera, all things considered. Let's face it, it's convenient ... but, is it up to the task? The true answer is: It depends.

Life isn't perfect ... and your lighting conditions and the fact things actually move has a lot to do with how you set up your camera for "the shot."

Let's assume in your case, the P&S camera simply isn't hacking it (I know, big surprise :rolleyes: ) So, in your quest for the better image, you have seen fit to purchase an α300 and the two lenses to improve on something you simply could not find a way to do with the point & click. So ... now you need some education on how to make this newfangled contraption work outside of the AUTO setting with the MODE control.

The problem is ... where to start? There are several generic books written that discuss "exposure" ... which is talking about the very heart of photography. Your first consideration is to purchase one of these books, read it, question what you have learned and begin to come together with the basic photographic concepts of "Aperture", "Shutter-speed" and "ISO" (as it applies to digital cameras). Your α300 is a very capable tool ... some would call the cutting edge "Intro-DSLR". It works better, faster and with more options than almost all of cameras that came before it.

In this forum, are literally dozens of efforts to explain these basic things (concepts). Out of respect for those you ask for assistance, you should take the time to go through the postings ... read most of them (some can be kind of strange) and try to get a handle on what you have asked. Don't be afraid to experiment and take lots of images ... testing settings you have learned about and contrast them against the same image taken in "AUTO".

I expect you'll enjoy a lot of what is discussed. I know you are chomping at the bit to be able to produce the "Art of a Lifetime" out of your new little "darkroom", but you need to pay your dues first ... and that requires learning the ways of the Force, Luke ...

Read on, brave soul ... there's much to be discovered and practiced. And for goodness sake ... shoot something ... a lot!

[sparkie1263]

You just heard it from the best. Don has help me improve my images tremdously. He has always been there when I had a problem or a question. Just keep shooting and you will learn from your images what works and what don't. That is what they make delete for.
I never leave the house without my camera. And I am always looking for something to shoot. You will get the bug once you start seeing the great shots you get.
Good luck
Frank

[thcheme]

I will search for knowledge in the forums and hopefully not feel overwhelmed!

If only Yoda could say "master thy camera you will".

[donfenyk]

Hello All - just found this forum and there seem to be alot of people with alot of knowledge as compared to my complete lack of it.

Back in the 35mm world i had a minolta 7000i which got thrown into a closet once i got my first digital - until two weeks ago i had a Canon Powershot SD630.

I got the DSLR bug - did a bit of research and decided that I could not go wrong buying the Canon XTi but instead bought the Sony A300 because... well basically i thought it was cool and i am a big Sony fan accross the board.

With that being said i now have a A300 with the stock 18-70 lens. Just took a much of pictures in the Bahamas last week - some good some bad and none great - i have some learning to do and will be spending some time on this forum and also ordering a book from amazon on DSLR photography.

Primary reason for the camera is to take pictures of my 18 month old little girl but would like to also get into photography more. I guess the next steps would be a good tripod, good flash, and a bigger lens.

I would definitely like to hear some thoughts before i go and buy these things.

Thanks in advance.

Don Fenyk

[DonSchap]

Tripod:

Your tripod should be sturdy enough to hold your camera, lens and flash. They are usually rated in "pounds", both the tripod and the "head." Make sure you do not purchase too light a rig ... otherwise you may be putting your camera may be at severe risk.

In earlier days, I have personally watched as a tripod leg failed, after several minutes of support, in apparent slow motion, on an older tripod ... seeing a couple hundred dollar flash bite the dust, as its footing broke off on impact. (shudder) The actual friction grip of the leg clamp gave way ... under pressure of the camera, a decent lens and the standard external flash ... coupled with all the battery weight. With just the camera, it would have been fine ... but those few extras did it in. That tripod never saw another day of use ... but, neither did the flash unit.

Flash:

SONY has recently released the new flash, HVL-F42AM, which was specifically designed for the newer Alpha 200, 300, 350 & 700 cameras.

The HVL-F36AM flash unit is still available and a bit cheaper ... but, note that it was an earlier design for the Alpha 100, KM-5D & KM-7D cameras ... and may not have the same interactive response of the newer one.

Lens:

As far as a bigger lens goes, I'm assuming you mean longer in focal length. A 70-300mm f/4-5.6 is a good "outdoor" compliment, since you already have the 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 in your bag.

Anyway, that's kind of the "Cliff Notes" take on it.

[donfenyk]

I will keep the sturdy aspect in mind on the tripod.

Flash - i'll do a bit of research on the difference between the two you mentioned.

Lens - i see a huge price difference between the Sony lens specific to the Alphas and third parties - is most of that marketing or is the quality better in proportion to the cost difference - If you could point me to a specific lens that you have experience with and like i will use that as a starting point.

[DonSchap]

Without knowing what kind of budgetary restraints you have in mind ... I am assuming that since you went for the α300, rather than the far superior α700 ... image quality is not a super-critical aspect of your choice, but pricing probably is ... therefore I suggest also going with third-party lenses and getting variety of them them, rather than reaching deep and having only one great lens to work with, which would limit your shot selection enormously.

Therefore:

SIGMA 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC Ultra-wide angle lens (~$500)
TAMRON AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Macro telephoto lens (~$180)
SONY SAL-50F14 - 50mm f/1.4 lens (~$330)

These three lenses, plus your current SONY 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 will cover most shots.

But ... if it were me, I'd consider dumping the SONY 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6, mainly due to image quality concerns, that you simply will not be able to work around ... and replacing it with either:
SONY SAL-1680Z - Carl Zeiss® Vario-Sonnar T DT 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 Zoom lens (~$680)

or to save a few bucks,

TAMRON SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical Zoom lens (~$425).

Either one is a tremendous improvement in image quality over that SONY kit lens.

Deciding on purely SONY's lenses is exceptionally pricey for those starting out of the blocks, that's I recommend using a good third-party alternative. TAMRON has been a source for Minolta lenses for many years, so the chances are better than most that their lens offerings will work extemely well with the SONY bodies. I use them, almost exclusively ... and have been very pleased with the result.

For your consideration ...

[thcheme]

I've kind of fallen (no pun intended) for a monopod myself. While it doesn't give you the self portrait option, it can "protect" your gear as you can't just leave it standing there for gravity to take effect. It stabilizes the shot but still gives you freedom of mobility. In my case, it is not practical for sky or ground shots as mine does not have a tilt mechanism on it. They do make them, I just chose not to have one with this feature based on my typical use.

[donfenyk]

Well - to say image quality was not part of my selection criteria is completely wrong - of course it was - but price also was. Thats like saying that i dont care about processing speed because i purchased a $1500 Dell and not the top of the like $5000 gaming platform.

The A700 is $1400 body only while the a300 with lens is half of that. It all depends on your end goals - and based on where i wanted to be coming from a point and shoot i felt that the A300 was a good starting point. my goal is to get some good looking pictures of my child and i wanted to do better then the little point and shoot i currently have. Sorry for my little rant but just wanted to point out that setting a target budget has nothing to do with not wanting the best quality possilbe at a price.

This technology (the sensors and electronics in the body) is advancing so fast just like all electronic technology. you just have to pick a price point and go with it. Sorry about my little rant - did not mean to offend.

[DonSchap]

I understand ... kind of. There are limits to everything ... and value judgments are part of that.

Your choice of the A300 will, more than likely, serve you well. Whatever you do, though, don't skrimp on the glass you use. It will bite you back ... and hard. Consider that you will keep the glass long after you've change the camera body.

[donfenyk]

But ... if it were me, I'd consider dumping the SONY 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6, mainly due to image quality concerns, that you simply will not be able to work around ... and replacing it with either:
SONY SAL-1680Z - Carl Zeiss® Vario-Sonnar T DT 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 Zoom lens (~$680)

or to save a few bucks,

TAMRON SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical Zoom lens (~$425).
__________________________________________________ ___________
Don - can you comment on the image quality concerns with the stock Sony lens - and point me to any articles on the topic - that is if you are still talking to me :).

Also i have always heard that its good to keep a UV filter on a lens - not only for filtering UV but also for lens protection - do you agree - and what would you suggest for my currrent Lens?

[donfenyk]

TAMRON AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Macro telephoto lens (~$180)

do i specifically get the one that says "for Sony" or do i need to know more.

By the way - could you email me at dfenyk at iphase.com i would like to ask you some questions but dont feel like filling up this forum with my back and forth questions.

[DonSchap]

Filters: A "prophyllatic" filter is a good idea to keep fingerprints and the occasional cap-coming-off problem from screwing up your lens right when you need it most. To be correct, you do not shoot through "unnecessary glass" if you can avoid it. The lens was "tuned" without it. For the most part, a Circular Polarizer (CP) is my preferred filter ... especially on the outdoor shoots. It eliminates a lot of glare and unwanted reflection, while also allowing you to improve the cloud contrast in your skies.

DT 18-70mm review: I can create several side-by-sides that easily demonstrate the problem and done so in the past. If you are going to ask my opinion on this particular lens, then I would recommend you take it for what it is worth ... I been shooting the α100 for two years, now ... and if the camera saw ten minutes of the 18-70mm's use, that was a waste of time, in my opinion.

Here's a 18-70mm review (http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/sony_18-70_3p5-5p6_m15/page4.asp)

and here's a comparison of the SONY 16-80Z versus the DT 18-70 (http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Carl_Zeiss_16-80mm/outdoor_results.shtml)

You have to ask yourself ... if I had to shoot images ... what kind of image quality is important? Personally ... the 18-70mm has been on the shelf for two years ... and I plan on keeping it there. One other thing you might consider ... how could the third party lens manaufacturers make any money on their lenses, if the kit lens were so ... good? :confused:

70-300mm lens: Yes, chose the one that says "for SONY" and make sure is has "Di" in the lens description.

[sparkie1263]

Don
Why would Sony not try to correct the problem? When they sell a kit you would think they would want it to take the best pictures. How would somebody know it it was the lens or the body. It doesn't make sense for them to try to break into the camera line with a lens that doesn't take good pictures. Just my two cents for what it is worth.
Frank

[Rooz]

sony arent the only ones guilty of crap kit lens'. canon was doing it for years until the latest kit lens was released. why do it ? simple. you get to have the honour of spending more money on a better lens.

[donfenyk]

Don - i really am amazed at the comparison photos in your link- it really is night and day- almost as if the kit lens was purposely left out of focus. it actually kind of pisses me off.

[DonSchap]

You taken your first step into a larger world ... LOL

In other words:


36162

"Away put your 'kit' lens ... better, there is."

[donfenyk]

TAMRON AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Macro telephoto lens

Just ordered this - figured it would give me the zoom i need to pull things close. I do want to get a good quality lens next -

What would you say i get next -
the sigma wide angle or a good 50mm/f1.4 lens
or the CZ that you mentioned?

[DonSchap]

The true value in the SONY or Minolta AF 50mm f/1.4 is sharp image quality and its low-light capability. It does what the zooms simply cannot do ... and that is provide more light, indoors, to the sensor. f/1.4 is a tremendous amount of light compared to f/3.5 or f/4. It also allows for shots you probably could not get without using a flash.

Conversely, if you are planning to do more outdoor stuff, this coming season ... I would suggest going for CZ and dump the "kit" lens you current are using. The "CZ" offers terrific flexibility and a much improved "starting point" for your photography. Having about the best lens for what it does is a leg up that defies description. You simply feel better about the images you take ... and it's kind of hard to put a price or value on that.

The UWA, in my estimation, is a "special use" lens ... when you simply are "trapped" in a shot, where you cannot properly back up (physically obstructed) to get more zoom room in the shot. It is a solution for architectural images ... group shots in a confined area ... or special images you simply cannot get with a 16-80mm lens. When you have your telephoto and your "walk-around" lens needs fulfilled, then explore the UWA lens. I feel confident in saying it is $500 you can spend on other needs, before it really is a problem.

Admittedly, w/o the SIGMA 10-20mm in my bag, I would not have been able to get this rather unique aspect. It was at a very wide 10mm:

36235


But, as I tried to infer, shots like this are rare ... unless you are specifically indoors and, again, interested in architecture. When you are doing group shots, it usually just means you can succesfully cram two or three more people, in the shot, that you would have gotten at 16mm focal length on the CZ.

[sparkie1263]

Great capture Don. If you stop by New England Moments can you check out my post in the odds and ends section. I took a series of six shots 3 with my Sony kit lens and 3 with my Minolta 35-70 can you let me know what you think. I was told my shots were soft so I bumped up the sharpness.
Thanks
Frank

[DonSchap]

Frank,

I offered my own sample for you to evaluate using that same lens on the A100. While not a super dramatic shift, if does make a definite difference in appearance. When you can add highlights to an object ... it tends to make the focus look keener.

[donfenyk]

or so i assume...

[donfenyk]

Just snapped a few macros - hard to get focus on the maple picture due to movement from the wind and lack of tripod.

36389

36390

[DonSchap]

Okay ... I just shot this TAMRON AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 LD MACRO ... handheld and manually focused

36391

It is as it comes out of the α100 ... with the pop-up flash
for lighting, with the following EXIF data:

180mm - f/5.6 - 1/60 sec. - ISO-800 - Manual - WB: Flash -2 - Dist: 2.5 feet

And here it is, straight out of the TAMRON SP AF 180mm f/3.5 MACRO lens with the identical settings. Still HH & MF.

36392

You tell me which lens shoots brighter with the pop-up? Really something pretty peculiar about that. E-TTL ... isn't it wonderful?

Probably needs to be shot under a standard strobe ... not the pop-up ... but still, looks like 2/3rds to a full f-stop of light
difference ... with just a lens change.