Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,204
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    Oh stop, Ryan.

    At least there are plans ... Canon/Nikon NEVER planned any PRIME or MACRO lens solutions to their lack of stabilization. Don't believe me ... go ahead and mount an EF 135mm f/2.8 and shoot wide open at 1/15th of a second, ISO 400 ... and see how that works for ya. Nice and sharp looking, is it not? NOT!

    You just lost patience. Hey, it's okay ... the line is long.

    One thing I have noticed about camera-people ... patient about equipment and releases, they are not!
    What do you mean by they never planned any prime/macro lens due to their lack of stabilization? Nikon's 105mm VR came out in February of 2006 and Canon's 100mm L came out after they released hybrid-IS which is dedicated to macro work. But 1/15" for anything at 135mm doesn't really seem practical to handhold. And regarding macro, the main issue is holding your focus steady.

    I do miss stabilization in my 50mm, but I can deal without it and just maintain my shutter speed at 1/50-1/80 of a sec to be sure it's sharp.

    That's technology in general for you. Always chasing that next best thing.
    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

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Cool Why I do it ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooz View Post
    what exactly are you shooting at 1/15th with a 135mm lens ? more swords hanging on a wall ?
    No, I shoot like that because ...


    I CAN!


    I told you long ago, why I made the change. I did not like what I saw in my mirror.

    But, I contend we should stay on topic ... a pair of lenses that offer one of the best all-around solutions on a SONY DSLR.

    The AF 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) construction:

    Name:  18-250-construction.jpg
Views: 51
Size:  91.4 KB
    Last edited by DonSchap; 01-10-2010 at 02:00 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

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Wild, Wonderful, Wyoming
    Posts
    1,043

    I had no idea what your actual pathway was...

    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    Gosh, Jim,

    I do not even remember it going that way at all. As far as my DSLR experience went:

    I interviewed the Nikon D70S ... then opted for the Canon EOS 20D "kit", with that horrible EF/S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens and 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III, back in Oct 2005 (Minolta had gone lights out and the future was suspect).

    I quickly learned how awful it all was and sought relief with TAMRON. I then bought:
    • the TAMRON AF 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF),
    • the TAMRON SP AF 11-18mm f/4.5-5.6 Di-II LD UWA,
    • and a CANON EF 50mm f/1.8.

    truly similar to the plan that is offered, today. It flippin' works!

    Over the next six-months, I worked up a number of improved zooms, each time cursing the lack of Image Stabilization in them:
    • the brand new TAMRON SP 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF),
    • and older TAMRON SP AF 28-105mm f/2.8 LD(which was gone for four weeks for update),
    • the TAMRON SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) (got a sweet deal on this as an interim lens),
    • the CANON EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM,
    • the TAMRON SP AF 200-500mm f/5-6.3 Di LD SuperTelephoto Zoom

    ... all the while, waiting for SONY to provide the α100 w/ the "right thinking" in-the-body Super SteadyShot stabiliziation, from the ashes of the Minolta Camera Division. A year after its introduction and SONY finally realizing the α700 ... the SONY-mount lenses became available on most third party stuff.

    I CHUCKED THE CANON
    and sold it all off for their lack of vision. Four years later ... they still cannot see straight. I knew and had proved that having in-the-body IS was the only way to go.

    For the SONY part of the story, check out the gear list in my signature.

    And that, my friend, is where we currently stand, so I really think you have this rather twisted around.

    Attachment 51355

    Leave it to Beaver ...
    But hell, I got pretty darn close:

    I said you'd walk in with no knowledge and end up with a kit...you did.

    Be it a Canon or Nikon or Sony or whoever, you walk in with no knowledge, you end up with the kit, convenience, marketing, hype. That's what the salesman sell and that's what most end up with.

    Then I said you look at Tamron because it's cheap and you if you found you on a site such as this, promote it like you work for the company. And so far you're still in this phase.

    You're starting to see the value of top quality stuff though, buying some Sony Zeiss. Which is exactly what I said stage three would be. The Canikon crack was just that a crack.

    So I pretty much hit the nail right on the ole head. And you should have know better with all of your film experience. I had learned not to buy Sigma or Tamron a long time before I saw a digital SLR. I also learned the value of top quality glass before I went digital.
    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.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Thumbs down Out of the league ...

    I didn't have a single Canon lens and quickly remedied that, as my Minolta glass sat idle in their respective lens cases.

    The kit was kind of an "offer thing" and had a hefty discount and rebate to it and 75-300 was a cheap gap-filler ($150) and was also rebated, until I re-oriented myself and decided on a real glass course. I did not have the benefit of the DCRP forum, at that time, and that is probably the biggest problem in my decision making. That came around March of 2006, as I recall.

    Well, Viola! I have gone the "extra-mile" to make sure that kind of nonsense does not happen anymore, on the DCRP's SONY DSLR forum. From the moment a perspective lensman logs in and starts reading, I and others have addressed (and continue to address) dozens upon dozens of deciding factors and considerations, despite your continued and il-informed ramming down of the decision to use TAMRON where TAMRON works very well ... on SONY DSLRs.

    Jim, I am not too sure why you would think some other third party (there's only SIGMA, at this time) would work better or any better, other than SONY's expensive Zeiss or G-offerings or Minolta's G-glass and whatnot. So, unless you actually use TAMRON glass on a SONY ... I heartily suggest you heave to, big fella, and stop the uninformed critique. Sheesh

    Enjoy your Canon lenses and gear, however you may use them. I will not debate your results with them. I am almost sure you have never done a side-by-side with a SONY using similar lenses. I have.

    The results are in MY GEAR LIST. The Canon stuff is history. An asterisk to my long Minolta/SONY run.

    Meanwhile, back to the temporarily derailed attempt to "off-topic" the thread, here is the construction of the TAMRON SP AF 60mm f/2 Di-II LD 1:1 MACRO (IF) lens:

    Name:  60mm_optical_construction.jpg
Views: 56
Size:  29.1 KB

    Note the two SD elements provided to counter the effect of chromatic aberration in telephoto lenses.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 01-10-2010 at 03:48 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

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Monmouthshire, UK
    Posts
    2,152
    A six year warranty is useless if the user gets fed up with the IQ and stops using the lens after one or two (and they probably will). In any case, why would you buy the Tamron when the Sony has faster focus speed. The Tamron is never going to catch up with a moving subject.

    The 18-55mm kit is much better at the short end (SAM motor is rubbish) and the Beercan hugely better at the long end. Incidentally, the Beercan is built like a tank and if you buy a good one now I expect it will still outlast the 28-250mm.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Wild, Wonderful, Wyoming
    Posts
    1,043
    My experience years ago has shaped my opinion of third party glass. And my opinion whether or not I use that glass on a Sony, which is no different than any other SLR out there, in fact it's still worse when it comes to low light performance, still holds true. You don't get something for nothing, you pay for your third party glass.

    Take the very good Tamron 28-75 xr di f/2.8: It's build doesn't hold a candle to the Canon 24-70 or 28-70 offerings, it's focus is molasses when compared, and in every example I've seen the Tammy has a slight magenta cast. Can you live with these things? Sure you can, the color cast can be fixed in post, the slow focus can be mitigated by pre focus and knowing your equipment, and the build makes the lens lighter, so if you handle it carefully it should be fine. I choose not to make those concessions.

    The 70-200 has some of the same problems: slow to focus and lightweight build. I like my chunk of glass to feel like a chunk of glass. I'll take the bad back to have the robust build and lightning focus.

    I don't have to "heave to" the glass is the same glass whether it's on a Sony or a Canon. I can read, just like you can. And reading, except here, shows the Tamrons to be a decent but not even close equal product, maybe equal or slightly superior to consumer glass, but not even close to pro glass. You've seen the same thing when you buy a new Zeiss lens, the Zeiss is just, well, amazing. I can see it when you post a photo taken with Zeiss glass. It's good...the Tammy doesn't hold up, it does well in it's price range, but it's not a good glass killer.
    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.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560
    Okay ...

    for $1018 ... we have the TAMRON 18-250mm & the TAMRON 60mm MACRO w/ 6-yr warranties.

    to get the simlar coverage with adv SONY glass, you would need the CZ 16-80mm f/3.5-4.5 DT ($749), the SONY 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 G SSM ($849) and a lowlight SONY AF 50mm f/1.4 ($369)... and let's sacrifice the real MACRO, because this is getting expensive.

    DING DING DING ... $1967 ... and no flash

    Effectively a $1000 more for rock solid 'beginner" optics. No question of the quality involved. Hey, if you have it to spend ... strap 'em on! Also ... that robust SONY one-year warranty ... and then YOU get to pay for any extra coverage beyond that.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 01-10-2010 at 04:40 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. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,204
    Quote Originally Posted by Peekayoh View Post
    A six year warranty is useless if the user gets fed up with the IQ and stops using the lens after one or two (and they probably will). In any case, why would you buy the Tamron when the Sony has faster focus speed. The Tamron is never going to catch up with a moving subject.

    The 18-55mm kit is much better at the short end (SAM motor is rubbish) and the Beercan hugely better at the long end. Incidentally, the Beercan is built like a tank and if you buy a good one now I expect it will still outlast the 28-250mm.
    The IQ of the Tamron lenses are actually excellent. It's the focus speed and build that just don't cut it. But you're righta bout getting fed up with the AF (on the 70-200/2.8).
    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. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,424
    all this nonsense aside, i'm actually quite surprised more people dont have the 60/2. seems like such a fine piece of glass on paper.
    D800e l V3 l AW1 l 16-35 l 35 l 50 l 85 l 105 l EM1 l 7.5 l 12-40 l 14 l 17 l 25 l 45 l 60 l 75
    flickr

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    2,204
    Reading some of the reviews, it seems like a very sharp performer.
    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

Posting Permissions

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