Funny you mention that Don
Originally Posted by DonSchap
Funny you mention that Don. Those are two of the lenses that I put my hands on almost immediately and I love the results. About the 50mm f/1.4, I decided not to buy it, basically because I rather have it new from Sony and not only about a hundred dollars less for the used Minoltas that you can get, say, over e-Bay.
Another lens that I am planning to have soon is 50mm f2.8 Macro (I am a sucker for macro). By the way, what is your view on the Sigma?. There I can save a buck or two compared with its counterpart from Sony.
SIGMA and SONY ... uh, nope
Every SIGMA lens I have had, I either sold or lent away. I guess that has to be telling.
Originally Posted by fos
The TAMRONs have delivered good and solid results. Any issues with them have been solved quickly and the first time. The six-year warranty doesn't hurt, either. I'm in for the long haul, anyway.
If you are in the mood for a 70-200mm f/2.8, TAMRON has one coming out in Fall 2007. It looks like a solid entry and I have it on my "to get" list, for the SONY. Unlike the other manufacturer's offerings, it weighs a mere 39 ounces and a minimum focuusing distance of 37 inches (0.95 m). (I have an image of it on my Gear List.)
Although the next lens does not sport the fastest focusing on the planet, the TAMRON AF70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD serves up a decent looking shot for only $150. It is what I am using, instead of my older TAMRON 28-200mm f3.8-5.6 and in lieu of the new TAMRON AF18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF), which I have on order. SONY-mounts tend to lag the Nikon and Canon mounts by a month or two.
The 18-250mm is a much faster focus and has a minimum focusing distance of only 18 inches. That's good stuff, indoors.