Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    5

    a100 and minolta lenses

    somewhere i've have read that on a100 older lenses from minolta are less sharper because they are built for conventional film cameras.....so for example
    that sony dt 18-80 3.5-5.6 are sharper that (if exists such model form 35mm film cameras) Minolta AF 18-70 3.5-5.6. is it so . or older minolta lenses with af mount for minolta film cameras....or MD with MD-AF adapter

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,590
    The Sony 18-70 is not sharp or good at all, and is the exact same lens as the Minolta 18-70.

    Most older Minolta lenses are better!

    What makes a lens worse or better has little to do with "age", more with the lens design and care that is taken to fabricate the optical elements.
    So... no blanket statement can be made about lenses like that.

    If you are concerned about sharpness, then look for a better lens. Like the SIgma 18-50 f2.8 EX DG Macro, or the Zeiss 16-80mm.
    Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Winnipeg Manitoba
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by coldrain View Post
    SIgma 18-50 f2.8 EX DG Macro
    Who all is using this lens? Seems like a great "first purchase" lens. (I don't count my 50mm 1.7 minolta ebay special).
    I really want to get a fisheye, and a good one at that, but I think this is a better decision for the time being.
    I'd love to see some sample pics, or better yet, some comparison pics between this and the kit 18-70.
    Trevor.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    57

    disagree

    Quote Originally Posted by coldrain View Post
    The Sony 18-70 is not sharp or good at all, and is the exact same lens as the Minolta 18-70.
    I totally disagree. The kit lens from KM or Sony are a very good value. They are light and very sharp. They just are that well built. They make for a great walk around lens when weight matters.

    From popphoto:

    "CONCLUSION: Considering the sharpness, distortion, and macro numbers this zoom produced, we're compelled to think that, among the catalog of Konica Minolta glass, Sony chose wisely for its first DSLR wide-angle kit zoom.

    Should you wait for the expected line of Carl Zeiss lenses being designed for the Alpha? While it's unlikely that any comparable Zeiss lens will outperform this excellent 18–70mm optically, construction quality is another question. We have trouble, for example, picturing a Zeiss zoom with a plastic lensmount."
    Allan Marcus

    Sony A-100 (former KM 5D user)
    Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, Sigma 10-20, 18-70 KM Kit Lens, Bearcan, 28-135 KM (walk-around lens), Sigma 135-400, KM 70-210 3.5, 5600 & 3600 flash

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Lightbulb Some older zooms may not cut it ...

    Some older AF lenses don't focus as sharply as they did on 35mm-film bodies. They were optimized for a much different surface than the sensor represents. The 28-80mm is a perfect example of that. It is a low-grade piece of glass ... not just low cost.

    Your best best with the older lenses is to stick with all the older PRIME lenses and forget the 35mm-film based zooms, unless they optimized for digital. It's a small price to pay, considering what you can acheive with just the PRIMEs, alone.

    Your best UTILITY lens, on the SONY, is the SONY SAL-18250 or TAMRON 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II LD Asherical (IF).

    Best 70-200mm ... at this point in time, the Minolta/SONY 70-200mm f/2.8 G (TAMRON SP AF70-200 f/2.8 Di LD (Model 001) is coming in a couple of months ... the money says it is definitely worth the wait.)

    Best 300mm ... toss up ... SONY SAL-300 f/2.8 G or the TAMRON SP AF300mm f/2.8 LD

    Best 70-300mm ... toss up ... SONY SAL-75300 or TAMRON AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD

    Best 17-50mm (Class) ... TAMRON SP AF17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) or SONY SAL-1680Z - Carl Zeiss® Vario-Sonnar T* DT 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 Zoom


    This should solve all your zoom issues ... and if you need sheer length ...

    The TAMRON SP AF 200-500mm f/5-6.3 Di LD ... this lens is very sharp and weighs only 43.2 ounces. The A100 and A700 (even more so) will work on the lens shake that usually prohibits this from being handheld in less than ideal conditions.

    Using TAMRON lenses will definitely save you a lot of cash versus SONY lenses and considering that TAMRON sources a lot of the SONY lenses, to this day ... that six-year warranty from TAMRON really makes the deal sweet.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 09-16-2007 at 01:47 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr® & Sdi

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,590
    Quote Originally Posted by AllanMarcus View Post
    I totally disagree. The kit lens from KM or Sony are a very good value. They are light and very sharp. They just are that well built. They make for a great walk around lens when weight matters.

    From popphoto:

    "CONCLUSION: Considering the sharpness, distortion, and macro numbers this zoom produced, we're compelled to think that, among the catalog of Konica Minolta glass, Sony chose wisely for its first DSLR wide-angle kit zoom.

    Should you wait for the expected line of Carl Zeiss lenses being designed for the Alpha? While it's unlikely that any comparable Zeiss lens will outperform this excellent 18–70mm optically, construction quality is another question. We have trouble, for example, picturing a Zeiss zoom with a plastic lensmount."
    Well yes, that is pop. photo for you. Who needs enemies with pop photo as your friend.

    More reliable sources have quite consistenly found that the KM/Sony 18-70
    does not excel in optical qualities.
    Canon EOS 350D, Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 macro, Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC EX, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L USM, Tokina AT-X124 Pro 12-24mm F4, Soligor 1.7x C/D4 DG Teleconvertor, Manfrotto 724B tripod, Canon Powershot S30

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Exclamation Stop the madness

    Cynically put, Coldrain.

    But, there is much truth in the fact that SONY 18-70 ... bites!

    I refuse to use the lens, personally ... and when i thought the Canon EF-S 18-55mm was a weed-eater and there wasn't anything futher down the food chain ... I WAS WRONG!

    SONY found it.

    Look ... just to be extremely clear on this ... the only KIT lens worth having for the SONY is the SAL-18250 or the TAMRON AF18-250 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) (Same lens, different shell). Any other kit lens is a reduction in available quality and your photographic standards. And if you are going to sight PopPhoto as your source, this lens was voted as one of the 25 best buys of 2007. There's a lot of stuff out there ... so it's way up there.

    In other words, "Don't waste your time with a 18-70mm." I did it for you ... just testing the darn thing. Mine collects dust ... relegated to the bottom of an old glass bag. Use better glass ... that's why you take images with DSLR ... not a PofS ... oops, P&S.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 09-16-2007 at 02:40 PM.
    Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography
    A Photographer Is Forever
    Look, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.

    flickr® & Sdi

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    57
    I agree that the 18-250 is a way better lens than the 18-70, but it's also like $400 more. For a first lens for a first time dSLR user, the 18-70 is a fine lens to get started on. I now always recommend the 18-250 for any camera to my friends, but for those of a tight budget, the 18-70 is a good buy. It's still the lens I use when I hike, just because it's light.

    My usually lens is the 28-135 - not a light lens :-)
    Allan Marcus

    Sony A-100 (former KM 5D user)
    Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, Sigma 10-20, 18-70 KM Kit Lens, Bearcan, 28-135 KM (walk-around lens), Sigma 135-400, KM 70-210 3.5, 5600 & 3600 flash

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •