Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 12 of 18 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 179
  1. #111
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,406
    pete is right, sell the useless glass and buy some decent stuff. you may have been able to get away with using them on the a700 but putting that sort of glass on the front of a 24mp a850 sensor is gonna show them up for what they really are.

    buying a 2x and 3x converter was a waste of money.
    D800e l V1 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l EP5 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  2. #112
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Monmouthshire, UK
    Posts
    2,152
    Don, I doubt the fringing is because the lens is "pre-digital". These two 100% crops of a Weather Vane and a Tower Crane don't show a propensity for that characteristic although the 200 HS APO G was not wide open.

    You're doing the 200mm HS APO no favours by sticking a 2x converter on it, f8 will be needed to defeat the aberration introduced by the 2x. Upsampling from the 1.4x converter will give a better result and an extra stop.

    I wouldn't try to dissuade you from the 400 APO G but I was suggesting a replacement for your 200-500mm Zoom lens not a prime. The 70-400 G beats the Tamron in IQ, is a stop faster and the weight penalty is not all that great 1500gms versus 1237gms. I know which I'd prefer at an airshow.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  3. #113
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,545

    Smile 400mm is f/5.6 -> on both lenses

    Peter, I am not being contentious, but the TAMRON SP AF 200-500mm f/5-6.3 Di LD is f/5.6 @ 400mm, just like the highly touted SONY AF 70-400mm f/4-5.6 G SSM, there is no difference in base aperture between them.

    The image quality is better ... but, you are paying for it. 400mm is not my preferred shooting length ... and having the TAMRON solves the issue well enough, for the moment, by my having the 70-200mm f/2.8 (a much more useful 'base' aperture). Should matters change, that will be one thing ... but I cannot "write it off" and since I have the range covered ... it really seems kind of pointless, for a rare shot.

    I appreciate the suggestion ... perhaps, next year.

    @Rooz: If I want an A700-style shot out of the 200-500, I can opt from the "menu" and switch the α850 into APS-C crop mode, effectively cropping the image to 750mm. That's a reach, huh?
    Last edited by DonSchap; 09-11-2009 at 07:27 AM.
    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

  4. #114
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,204
    The 70-400mm is only slightly heavier than the Tamron and it has a more useful range at starting at 70mm. It's also a lot sharper, will focus much faster, and I think it's well worth it. I'd be shocked if you couldn't fund it with your current gear too. It would replace the Tamron 70-300, 80-400 Tokina, and 200-500mm at the least.

    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    @Rooz: If I want an A700-style shot out of the 200-500, I can menu out and switch the A850 into APS-C crop mode, effectively cropping the image to 750mm. That's a reach, huh?
    Then, what would be the point of getting a new camera and putting the sensor to use?
    flickr

    Canon 7D - 5D | 550EX - 430EX II - (2) PW FlexTT5 | 24-105 f4L | 70-200 f2.8L IS | 100 f2.8L IS | 50 f1.8 II

  5. #115
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,545

    Talking Broadening my photographic horizon

    Quote Originally Posted by dr4gon View Post
    ... what would be the point of getting a new camera and putting the sensor to use?
    It boils down to Options, Ryan ... I now have a whole new set of options with this camera, that the α700 simply could not offer. I did try to explain that when I made this decision. You might want to review some of the last month's postings in that regard.

    I can get wider FOV shots than ever before. Lenses "come alive" that were ... well, 'locked away' with the APS-C sensor, specifically the SP AF 14mm f/2.8 LD and the AF 20mm f/1.8 DG EX I have found that the "crop" mode of the α850 comes in very handy when mounting the SamYang (Bower) MF 8mm f/3.5 "Fisheye" lens. It immediately lops off the "unused" or vignetted portion of the lens FOV and provides a dandy looking shot.

    I also have a KM AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4 'D' which, until I got the α850, had no use in my bag at all. Now, it is my widest zoom for the full frame.

    No, Ryan ... my photography is spreading out in new and fun ways. It is explosive in its own regard ... and with my current schedule, for the rest of this month and the next, just a little overwhelming.

    I fully expect a wave of new lenses will come my way in the upcoming year ... I'm in no hurry. No pressing issues in that way, thank God.

    One thing for sure, I did not buy the Full Frame as an excuse to go on a glass binge. I'll leave that thunder, to the man Down-Under.

    I agree with the idea of having the AF 70-400mm f/4-5.6 G SSM lens ... but, I need to remind you that some lenses were "building" lenses ... waiting for SONY & TAMRON to get their acts together and basically were there for use on the Minolta Maxxums I have and the early α100. Things have changed and some lenses, specifically the TAMRON AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 LD are not used by yours truly any more, except for comparisons. Since the purchase of the 70-200mm f/2.8 and the 200-500mm f/5-6.3, the Tokina ATX-840 AF 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 does not get much use, either. Having a choice of wider aperture is always nice.

    You really need to recall that once TAMRON released the SP AF 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD ... it immediately filled the year-long, wide-aperture gap I had, after return my OOTB-defective SONY AF 70-200mm f/2.8 G SSM. This just is not a hole that I feel I need to fill, yet.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 09-10-2009 at 08:01 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. #116
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Monmouthshire, UK
    Posts
    2,152
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    Peter, I am not being contentious, but the TAMRON SP AF 200-500mm f/5-6.3 Di LD is f/5.6 @ 400mm, just like the highly touted SONY AF 70-400mm f/4-5.6 G SSM, there is no difference.
    Don, I don't think you are being contentious for the sake of it, me neither, I just want to convert you.
    Although both lenses will operate at f5.6@400mm there is a difference and the Sony is overall sharper than the Tamron.
    The Sony is useable wide open, stopping down to f8 sharpens it up, but beyond f8 is not necessary. The Tamron needs f10/11 for maximum sharpness, which is why I said the Sony has an extra stop.
    We are comparing chalk with cheese, of course, at half the price the Tamron is good value. But "no difference"?, I think not.
    I realise you don't use the Tamron very often, but the larger zoom range of the Sony may lead you to get more use out of it.
    I just feel that the 70-210 f2.8 plus the 70-400 G makes several of your other lenses redundant and getting rid would lighten the load and free up the cash. I think you also have a 500mm mirror lens? Upsampling the 70-400 gives a sharper image than the Mirror (Mirror is very light of course).

    We all get attached to stuff which has given good service and are reluctant to part, me included. But I've bitten the bullet and been gradually selling off all my gear that no longer sees the light of day. Oddly enough, it's turned out to be a rewarding process as the lenses are now being put to good use and some of the purchasers are keeping in touch with progress reports.

    Having said all that, if you're happy with the status quo, who am I to judge.

  7. #117
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,545

    Lightbulb Optical shortcomings ... mass manufacturing

    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    ... there is no difference in base aperture between them.
    Peter,

    One of the benefits of having an all-SONY (KM/Minolta) lens bag is that you can get the AF Micro-adjust of the A850/A900 to register each lens (up to 20 of them) and not shift the kit & caboodle with non-M/KM/S lenses. So, there is that aspect (You have got to be kidding - SONY should allow for non-SONY additions w/o wiping out the entire registry ... this feature is KIND OF IMPRACTICAL in its current form).

    Truth be told, the better lenses should not need one skosh of adjustment. For example, the Minolta AF 200mm f/2.8 APO G HS is "dead nuts", as they all should be. I have gone to great effort to get most of my lenses in such condition and AF Micro-adjust, to me, is just the industry's way of compensating for poor manufacturing Quality Assurance/Quality Control of their shoddy optical products. If you are going manufacture something ... do it correctly. That extra step may cost a buck or two, but it is deeply appreciated by those looking to have sharp and excellent work, without having to struggle with every single mount of a lens.

    If I wanted to futz with lenses, I would have bought a Canon or Nikon, where even STABILITY is a reach! I gave that up three years ago! SONY offered a solution that simply made a lot more financial sense than the proprietary design of the other two. If Canon and Nikon really were concerned about Image Stability, they would have put it in BOTH the camera and the lenses. Then, everybody would be happy.

    Obviously, we are left with two camps, here:
    1. people who have stability with ALL their mounted lenses ... and
    2. those people who only have a few lenses with added stability ... everything else shakes handheld w/o support.


    Oh, I digress ... I guess I am still annoyed with the direction it went. Sorry.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 09-11-2009 at 07:24 AM.
    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. #118
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,204
    Quote Originally Posted by Peekayoh View Post
    Don, I don't think you are being contentious for the sake of it, me neither, I just want to convert you.
    Although both lenses will operate at f5.6@400mm there is a difference and the Sony is overall sharper than the Tamron.
    The Sony is useable wide open, stopping down to f8 sharpens it up, but beyond f8 is not necessary. The Tamron needs f10/11 for maximum sharpness, which is why I said the Sony has an extra stop.
    We are comparing chalk with cheese, of course, at half the price the Tamron is good value. But "no difference"?, I think not.
    I realise you don't use the Tamron very often, but the larger zoom range of the Sony may lead you to get more use out of it.
    I just feel that the 70-210 f2.8 plus the 70-400 G makes several of your other lenses redundant and getting rid would lighten the load and free up the cash. I think you also have a 500mm mirror lens? Upsampling the 70-400 gives a sharper image than the Mirror (Mirror is very light of course).

    We all get attached to stuff which has given good service and are reluctant to part, me included. But I've bitten the bullet and been gradually selling off all my gear that no longer sees the light of day. Oddly enough, it's turned out to be a rewarding process as the lenses are now being put to good use and some of the purchasers are keeping in touch with progress reports.

    Having said all that, if you're happy with the status quo, who am I to judge.
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    Peter,

    One of the benefits of having an all-SONY (KM/Minolta) lens bag is that you can get the AF Micro-adjust of the A850/A900 to register each lens (up to 20 of them) and not shift the kit & caboodle with non-M/KM/S lenses. So, there is that aspect (You have got to be kidding - SONY should allow for non-SONY additions w/o wiping out the entire registry ... this feature is KIND OF IMPRACTICAL in its current form).

    Truth be told, the better lenses should not need one skosh of adjustment. For example, the Minolta AF 200mm f/2.8 APO G HS is "dead nuts", as they all should be. I have gone to great effort to get most of my lenses in such condition and AF Micro-adjust, to me, is just the industry's way of compensating for poor manufacturing Quality Assurance/Quality Control of their shoddy optical products. If you are going manufacture something ... do it correctly. That extra step may cost a buck or two, but it is deeply appreciated by those looking to have sharp and excellent work, without having to struggle with every single mount of a lens.

    If I wanted to futz with lenses, I would have bought a Canon or Nikon, where even STABILITY is a reach! I gave that up three years ago!
    What?
    flickr

    Canon 7D - 5D | 550EX - 430EX II - (2) PW FlexTT5 | 24-105 f4L | 70-200 f2.8L IS | 100 f2.8L IS | 50 f1.8 II

  9. #119
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,545

    Question Hmmm ... where did we turn incorrectly?

    Quote Originally Posted by dr4gon View Post
    What?
    One of the drawbacks of the AF Micro-adjust is that its registry ONLY works on Minolta/Konica-Minolta/SONY lenses. If you add a non-SONY lens and AF Micro-adjust it ... it has the potential of throwing off the entire previous lens registry. Uh ... now, that is confusing.


    Besides, I am still going through my selection of glass to determine which works well ... and which is not. This takes time.
    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

  10. #120
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Wild, Wonderful, Wyoming
    Posts
    1,043
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    One of the drawbacks of the AF Micro-adjust is that its registry ONLY works on Minolta/Konica-Minolta/SONY lenses. If you add a non-SONY lens and AF Micro-adjust it ... it has the potential of throwing off the entire previous lens registry. Uh ... now, that is confusing.


    Besides, I am still going through my selection of glass to determine which works well ... and which is not. This takes time.
    I think the "what?" has to do with the usual right turn you took in this thread. Peek was explaining the benefit of upgrading your glass, and you go into how Sony's micro adjust isn't very compatible with 3rd party glass. Basically Peek's suggestion would benefit you in two ways:
    1. Much better glass
    2. Your micro adjust wouldn't get all messed up with third party lenses.

    Then, you edit your original post to take a shot at the better Stabilization systems on the market, IN LENS. Superiority proven by DP review on more than one occasion. What would you rather have? One size fits all, or a custom system designed for the tool you are using at the time? Cost savings? not really Sony's 1st party glass is more expensive on just about every count than Canon 1st party glass. How's that poll going for you? Not exactly the way you thought, huh?

    Sony Forum:
    This is Don's usual method, he gets backed into a corner and instead of an intelligent debate he flies off on a tangent and deflects the original conversation.
    Last edited by TenD; 09-11-2009 at 07:49 AM.
    A good photograph is knowing where to stand.
    Ansel Adams

    Rule books are paper, they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and metal.
    Ernest K. Gann-Fate is the Hunter.

Posting Permissions

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