I know my stuff isn't perfect, I also know how to work with it to produce decent results, so do you, so does Rooz. But what I can't figure out is why you feel the need to sell your system to everyone, with half truths, skewed logic, and contradicting stories, while at the same time putting down the other systems out there.
The reality is, that Sony is no better than any other out there. Each system has strong and weak points and the photographer has to work within the limits imposed by their system. For example, you purchasing a $1600 flash system because you are afraid of upping sensor sensitivity.
Jim ... the results are not what I would like. The knock on SONY has always been high-ISO. That's alway been the dispute and the hope. Once they close that door, the system is just about airtight and invulnerable to criticism.
It is kind of like having a pair of beer goggles on. After midnight and a six pack, everything will look better.
So, where do we go from here? Do I pursue getting better images with accessory power ... or do I just keep trying to muddle through, at 1/640th sec, without doing anything but pushing post-processing?
Oh, the choices we make.
I mean, not everything is a basketball game. :rolleyes:
Personally, I really want to take better images. All kinds! What kind of noble goal is that? What's wrong with me? According to you blokes, I should have three zoom lenses and a D300. That's not happening. Welcome to MY world.
Sony will always be vulnerable to criticism, whether it's the high price of quality Sony lenses, the limits of SSS not being tuned to a specific lens(more difficulty with longer lenses due to more sensor movement needed), the FACT that SSS isn't as effective as a lens based system, etc. ect. All of the systems out there are vulnerable to some criticism. Sony is in no way perfect, and in no way will it ever be.
You say "I'll use Tamron lenses", well good luck with their stellar focusing habits. You aren't going to change the limits of sensor based IS, and so far the 2 stops or so of help with SSS hasn't caught up the the latest lens based systems. There isn't a perfect system out there.
You guys tend to miss the point of real variety ... you get more color in your rainbow. Take Tiger Woods for example ... oops, that was a bad "tee shot", I admit.
I do enjoy having the wide selection of lenses to choose from. When I walk into a scenario, I get to flip through the lens cases, pluck the one I want and ... HERE WE GO.
The convenience of hoisting around the following lenses also has merit:
CZ 16-35mm f/2.8
CZ 24-70mm f/2.8
AF 70-400mm G SSM
When you need a condensed version of your best kit and just do not have room in your tote for it. Hell, I would trade the corresponding TAMRONs, obviously, for them ... and I would add them! Along with their additional weight and substantial cost. Happily, I am feeling no rush to do this, though.
I get absolutely no aperture improvement for anything I currently have, except for the 17-35mm f/2.8-4 lens. With the 28-75mm f/2.8, I do have the upper, tighter-aperture covered, though.
I mean, it would be an awesome improvement to get a 16-35mm f/1.8 or a 24-70mm f/1.4 ZOOM. Then, the expense of the money would be fully understandable. (I still kind of wonder who cut off zooms from really widening up past f/2.8? Darn shame, actually.)
So ... you guys still have not addressed how we are going to get more light into the camera. I came up with one avenue ... a hand-held laser beam, if you will. One of you suggested wiring the gymnasium with remote controlled slave units, which would be fine except these games are held in areas that are entirely subject to the prying public. No a good situation, if you know what I mean. I mean, c'mon, this is the city. :rolleyes:
I am working with SONY's best and newest DSLR. I have their BEST 135mm f/1.8 PRIME lens occupying space on the front of it. I am using their top-drawer flash, on occasion ... yet, I could use some improvement.
Perhaps I am just expecting too much from the unit: Portrait performance in an action environment. Are my standards too high? Are yours? How high is UP?
Stay tuned ...
I'm pretty sure you mentioned more than once that in your basketball shots, you ended up going back to the CZ 85MM F1.8 over and over again. Hey, look at that, suitable portraiture lens as well...
So the answer to those first two questions is a definite "no", then, huh.
Variety is... nice, but has no bearing on utility in this case, especially if you keep going back to the same few lenses to "get the job done", so to speak. With the quality of lenses available in all the systems these days, it's more of a security blanket than a great idea.
Besides, the more you have to pick through and choose lenses, the more likely you are to lose a shot, especially in a sports setting. That's why sideline shooters, for example, tend to carry multiple bodies (generally at least two) with different focal lengths to cover the ranges they need.
And Elisha82, yeah, grow up. All systems have more than one vulnerability, and I quite remember you defending Sony quite vehemently... up until the moment you dumped your entire Sony system and bought in to Canon.
I don't see your Oly system attempting anything close to what Don has tried.
Kudos to him for experimenting.
All you do is make snarky remarks :eek:
I have no problem with Sony. I just wanted video so I went Canon so you need to get your facts straight!
I don't have an CZ 85mm f/1.8 ... they don't make one. It is a SONY CZ 85mm f/1.4 ($1349) and I STILL don't own one. I opted for the Rokinon MF 85mm f/1.4 ($259) for portrait use, since autofocus is a little redundant for that purpose.
Here's a shot of "Rusty" that I took with it, tonight.
I use the CZ 135mm f/1.8 on my Full Frame, for the b-ball shots. It has the length and yes, I would understand the need for a second body slung around your neck (not mine, thanks) for a quick grab and use of another focal length. Better yet, a second photographer.
The 85mm would be more appropriate on the APS-C, providing a similar 135mm effective shot. The point is ... the gym lights suck, even with killer aperture.
Ah ... this is going everywhere but where it should. I am uncertain why to want to wrestle this baby to the ground ... as it really has so many loose ends, you cannot make it into on pretty bundle. (exasperated :eek: )
Like I said ... and am saying again, I will wait until season start up and see what I can get away with, to GET THE SHOT.
It this case, it is the END justifying the means. :p