SONY 75-300mm F4.5-5.6 Lens for $129

[Elisha]

so anyone looking for a cheap zoom in Canada?
go to Blacks and get the 75-300mm for $129 CAD: http://blackphotostore.com/english/p...l.asp?sku=3306

[DonSchap]

Just because a lens is "ON SALE" says nothing about its quality. A SONY 75-300mm f/4-5.6 is a "kit lens" ... they throw them in the A200W kit ... and that has to be a warning ... because the A200 is the most entry-level camera you can get in the Alpha DSLR line. Right now, in fact, if you go on line, you can get the A200W for a $549. Subtract the $199 for the SONY DT 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 "kit lens" and your 'on-sale' price of $129 for the the other SONY 75-300mm f/4-5.6 "kit lens" and you are paying $221 for the A200 camera body.

The A300 and A350 at least have the 55-200mm in their kit offerings .. and that is still a marginal lens ... and if you spending REAL money ... this is not one you get. These are the "cast off" lenses you have on your shelf, when you upgrade two months later, when you've about had it with the lousy images you consistently are getting.

Remember: On the site ... we are talking photography and hopefully how to IMPROVE it for everyone. Shooting images through inferior lenses is NOT an improvement ... even if it is FREE!

Please take a moment and consider it, BEFORE you post these extraordinarily terrible ways to spend good money. $129 could buy you a "nice" second-hand lens on ebay ... or elsewhere. One of these "older" lenses, placed on any of these introductory DSLR cameras, will provide that the image will more than likely be better than shooting through a SONY 75-300mm f/4-5.6.

In fact, just adding a mere $25 to that wonderful sale price you found and get yourself a TAMRON AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD lens. You will be a lot happier with the results and not looking forward to find someone to give and pawn off the other lens you bought ... on sale.

[Elisha]

i'm in no way advocating the purchase of this lens. i had it for 2 days and dumped it when i first bought the camera and i think i mentioned it in a couple of other threads as well. i personally think it was too slow and soft.
i didn't want to say anything bad about it because one of our members has it and seems to like it.
just posting the deal as i saw it while looking for a new flashgun.

[DonSchap]

Okay ... and if there was any doubt ... I hope to have cleared that up. The manufacturers will sell just about anything ... I figure we can help one another by sorting between the wheat and the chaff.

[Peekayoh]

Maybe Elisha was just being provocative because she said it's NBG.
Still the more often people are told it's NBG the less likely they are to buy and encourage Sony to drop it.

Incidentally Elisha I like the three Minolta lenses in your kit bag. The 35/70mm f4 is underated IMO; mine is sharp throughout the range and the constant f4's a bonus. You should dump the other two sooner rather than later.

Peter

[Elisha]

Maybe Elisha was just being provocative because she said it's NBG.
Still the more often people are told it's NBG the less likely they are to buy and encourage Sony to drop it.

Incidentally Elisha I like the three Minolta lenses in your kit bag. The 35/70mm f4 is underated IMO; mine is sharp throughout the range and the constant f4's a bonus. You should dump the other two sooner rather than later.

Peter

what's NBG?
the Sigma i have is pretty good actually but only outdoors. tried it at a hockey game and it was not too impressive. the 35-70 however was really good at the rink.

[Peekayoh]

Sorry UK speak ... No Blinking Good.
Sigma unsusably soft above 200 and you got <200 covered with beercan (if it's a good one)
35-70mm, like I said sharp through the range.
Peter

[DonSchap]

This looks like we need to do a 35-70 shoot off.

Let me break out the "players" in our tale of two focuses:

• Minolta AF 35-70mm f/4 MACRO
• TAMRON 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Ashperical (IF) MACRO
• Konica Minolta AF 24-105mm f/3.5-4.5 "D"
• TAMRON Powermaster AF 28-200mm f/3.8-5.6
• TAMRON AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)
  

and let the games begin. We will try to get around f/4 for focusing quality ... and shoot identical shots at 35mm; 50mm; 70mm ... all taken from a tripod with only the lens changed off.

Since the M.F.D. (minimum focus distance) of the old "Powermaster" is 6.9-feet ... I'll shoot seven.

I think you are in for a real surprise, but then again ... it could be the copy I have. Had the AF 35-70mm f/4 delivered on its promise of a sharp shot, I would not be shooting or wasting my time with anything else in that range. As you can plainly see ... I have it covered four times over. I also know that Frank has issues with this lens, too, otherwise he would not be looking for a new TAMRON solution.

Man, I tell you ... there are days this all feels a little regressive ... you know, like I have covered this ground before. Deja vu all over again.

[Peekayoh]

New member syndrome, I guess.

[Peekayoh]

So you've loaded the dice against the Minolta 35-70mm f4. Any lens will be at it's softest wide open and the only lens wide open at f4 in that group is the 35-70.

Based on that criteria the league table will be:-

TAMRON 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Ashperical (IF) MACRO
TAMRON AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)
Konica Minolta AF 24-105mm f/3.5-4.5 "D"
TAMRON Powermaster AF 28-200mm f/3.8-5.6
Minolta AF 35-70mm f/4 MACRO

In addition to being the widest in the group the Tamron's a $400 heavyweight (510gm) lenses aginst a lightweight (255gm) walkabout.
Thats a no-contest!