Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Upgrade Time

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Mount Pleasant, SC
    Posts
    145

    Upgrade Time

    Okay, I finally have obtained enough money to buy myself an 18-250 lens. I have been beating myself to death over the decision of Sony, or Tamron, or the Sigma. I have heard so many opinions that it's frightening. The Tamron is cheaper, lighter, and takes "Above Average" pictures, but slower focus. The Sigma is "Heavy" and "Bulky", but is fast and takes good pictures. And the Sony is quicker focus, "Good Quality" build, but is more expensive.
    Now my question to all of you is... Do any of you have an 18-250mm lens that you would want to sell? or do you have any information on a decent sale going on that would assist me in making the purchase less painful?
    Joe Holmes
    Sony α550
    Sony HVL-F42AM Flash
    Sony DT18-55 F3.5-5.6 (Kit Lens)
    Minolta Maxxum 50 1:1.7(22) Prime
    Minolta 35-70 F4 (Mini Beercan)
    Minolta 70-210 F4 (Beercan)
    Minolta 28-135 F4-4.5 (This beast is pretty heavy)
    Minolta Maxxum 100-200 F4.5
    Quantaray D28-90 1:3.5-5.6 Ver 5
    Tamron DiII 55-200 1:4.5-6

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Monmouthshire, UK
    Posts
    2,152
    Not likely.
    The thing with this "Do It All" lens is that, in terms of the zoom range it covers it does a good job, but it's not really good at anything.
    For instance, your 100-200mm is sharper (and sharp wide open), and a constant f/4.5 unlike the sloow 18-250mm which is really quite poor at the long end.
    What about the CZ 16-80mm to go with the 100-200mm?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Mount Pleasant, SC
    Posts
    145
    Peter, thanks for your input. if you have a CZ 16-80 that you are willing to sell me for around $375 or $400 then I would be willing to go this route. Please understand, I don't know that I am enough of a "photographer" to be this choosy. I think that my lack of skill, and lack of ability to judge good photo's would mean that I would be satisfied with "Good Job" for the convenience of a "do it all" lens.
    Joe Holmes
    Sony α550
    Sony HVL-F42AM Flash
    Sony DT18-55 F3.5-5.6 (Kit Lens)
    Minolta Maxxum 50 1:1.7(22) Prime
    Minolta 35-70 F4 (Mini Beercan)
    Minolta 70-210 F4 (Beercan)
    Minolta 28-135 F4-4.5 (This beast is pretty heavy)
    Minolta Maxxum 100-200 F4.5
    Quantaray D28-90 1:3.5-5.6 Ver 5
    Tamron DiII 55-200 1:4.5-6

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

    Lightbulb While I ... (a former users opinion)

    Usually am one to snap up the better equipment, I have to say that a lot of people have opted to go with the 18-250, which does cover a lot of ground, but WITHOUT a HVL-F42AM or HVL-58AM flash, it can kind of a "dog" indoors. It simply cannot get enough light to take good images. You need to know the limitations of your gear.

    I sold mine with the SONY α100 a couple of years ago ... and while I really did not like parting with that convenience lens, it did offer an unequivocal one-lens wide solution, outdoors, to the buyer.

    On the α100, it is probably the best match-up for the lowest cost, but you do need a 50mm f/1.8 lens to augment going inside, if you do not have an external flash. With the 50mm, you can successful use the pop-up, and while the images will not be "great", they should get you along until you are ready to upgrade to better optics.

    Pant, pant, pant ... anyway, if you are strapped for funds ... the TAMRON 18-250 delivers the best looking images of the three -> the true bargain.

    Again, all of them suffer from light starvation, indoors. Keep that in mind.
    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. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Mount Pleasant, SC
    Posts
    145
    Thanks Don. I knew I could depend on you for information. I feel as if you didn't read my signature. I have the A200 and I do have the HVL-F42AM flash. I also already have the Minolta 50mm. Also, since I am looking for a good "walk around" lense, I'm still leaning towards the 18-250.
    Unless someone on here has either the CZ 16-80, or one of the other 18-250's for the Alpha, I guess I will go with the cheapest one available when I pull the trigger. Thanks for your help gang.
    Joe Holmes
    Sony α550
    Sony HVL-F42AM Flash
    Sony DT18-55 F3.5-5.6 (Kit Lens)
    Minolta Maxxum 50 1:1.7(22) Prime
    Minolta 35-70 F4 (Mini Beercan)
    Minolta 70-210 F4 (Beercan)
    Minolta 28-135 F4-4.5 (This beast is pretty heavy)
    Minolta Maxxum 100-200 F4.5
    Quantaray D28-90 1:3.5-5.6 Ver 5
    Tamron DiII 55-200 1:4.5-6

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,560

    Lightbulb Two lens combo

    Sorry about that, Joe. You are right ... I was just kind of going down my notes list and did not tune in on the siggy. The '42 should be enough to make the 18-250 do its job, indoors.

    As an after-though and just for some real flexibility, you might consider selling the 50mm f/1.7 and grabbing a TAMRON SP AF 60mm Di-II LD f/2 MACRO.

    Name:  pic_g005_02.jpg
Views: 124
Size:  43.6 KB

    Goodness knows, the timing is right, as there is a $100 rebate on this lens until 4/30/11. There have been a lot of good things being said about this one, too. If you can only carry two lenses with your APS-C sensor camera, this makes for a well-rounded set -> MACRO, low light, portrait, lightweight.

    The 60mm also does NOT change its physical dimensions when you focus, unlike the 90mm MACRO does (it lengthens by almost two inches). That keeps the lens action from scaring the bugs and elements of nature.

    Good luck with your new lens.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 01-30-2011 at 02:47 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

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Monmouthshire, UK
    Posts
    2,152
    Quote Originally Posted by joenmell View Post
    Peter, thanks for your input. if you have a CZ 16-80 that you are willing to sell me for around $375 or $400 then I would be willing to go this route. Please understand, I don't know that I am enough of a "photographer" to be this choosy. I think that my lack of skill, and lack of ability to judge good photo's would mean that I would be satisfied with "Good Job" for the convenience of a "do it all" lens.
    Sorry Joe, can't help, I never considered buying a DT lens because I always knew that APS-C was not for me.
    You need to have a good think about where your money goes next.
    Seems to me that, if the one lens do it all 18-250mm suits, then you didn't need a DSLR in the first place.
    I guarantee that a lens with flaws will begin to irritate and get less and less use as time goes on.
    The plain facts are that a Do It All lens with 14x zoom range is always going to be optically flawed, seriously flawed.
    And seriously, your 100-200mm eats it for breakfast.
    And seriously, it's not a cheap lens either at almost $600

    When you buy a camera body, it's got finite life and will be obsolete before you know it.
    Not so with a lens. I have 30+ year old lenses which are still in service, and I'm not alone.
    What's the ROI on that.

    Your "lack of skill", as you put it, doesn't mean that a mediocre lens is a match for your ability or that you will be satisfied with it, doesn't work that way.
    Your level of ability will grow with time, the lens will never change. Once a dog, always a dog.
    On the other hand, good glass will reward year after year and you don't need to feed it either, just wipe it's *** from time to time.
    By ignoring the lens quality when considering new kit, you may as well forget the quality of camera too and the A200 has a pretty decent CCD sensor capable of good resolution.
    What the A200 Sensor doesn't have is any capability over ISO400, another good reason not to buy a slow lens.
    The 18-250mm is at f/6.3 from 150mm up (yes, that's 150mm and up) and in any case, to get anything approaching sharp centers, you have to stop down to f/8 (best at f/11) so you can't even get a decent shot outside without upping the ISO which, with the CCD Sensor, you don't want to do.
    Cheaper lenses have a permanent effect on the quality of your pictures. Poor resolution, blurry borders, purple fringing (Chromatic Aberration), poor AF, distortion, poor perspective on walls and buildings...the list is a long one.

    Quote Originally Posted by joenmell View Post
    ............ Also, since I am looking for a good "walk around" lense, I'm still leaning towards the 18-250............
    That's not my definition of a "walk around lens".
    On "walk about" (non OZ) I just plonk on a my 28-135mm lens. It covers wide-angle to short telephoto and is probably the ideal walk about on Full Frame (but not on APS-C) and falls broadly within the generally accepted definition. Anything wider or longer falls into the "specialist" category.
    It's no accident that the ZA 16-80mm is an equivalent 24-120mm on APS-C.
    Also that's almost a 5x zoom range and just enough to make optical compromises tolerable in a good lens.
    A 2x zoom poses fewer optical problems for the designer which is partly why your 100-200mm is so good. Same applies to it's shorter twin, the 35-70mm f/4.
    Also no accident that the excellent new kit lens, the SAL-1855 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 DT lens restricts the zoom range to 3x and an equivalent 27-83mm.
    BTW, you can pick these up on eBay for $50/60.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Mount Pleasant, SC
    Posts
    145
    Minolta AF 28-75mm f/2.8 D Lens is available. Any ideas about this lens? I know it's not a 16 or 18mm, but it's within my price range. (Maybe, it's Ebay!) I missed out on the 18-250 by being undecisive. I just can't get up the nerve to do it. it's a lot of money for someone who doesn't have a chance to recoup by selling photo's. Maybe I just need to accept the fact that I might be a Point and Shoot kind of guy. I will update soon when I get testicular fortitude. Thanks for giving me different perspectives on this.
    Joe Holmes
    Sony α550
    Sony HVL-F42AM Flash
    Sony DT18-55 F3.5-5.6 (Kit Lens)
    Minolta Maxxum 50 1:1.7(22) Prime
    Minolta 35-70 F4 (Mini Beercan)
    Minolta 70-210 F4 (Beercan)
    Minolta 28-135 F4-4.5 (This beast is pretty heavy)
    Minolta Maxxum 100-200 F4.5
    Quantaray D28-90 1:3.5-5.6 Ver 5
    Tamron DiII 55-200 1:4.5-6

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

    Thumbs up TAMRON SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Ashperical - again

    Joe ...

    The TAMRON SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Ashperical

    1. for the price, is one of the best lenses in its class.
    2. SONY adopted it as the kit/base lens for their a900/a850 offerings
    3. Although designed for a full frame mount, on an APS-C sensor camera, it becomes effectively a 42mm-112.5mm (not a bad walk-around lens, to be sure)
    4. The photo award given by EISA (European Image and Sound Association) is one of the most prestigious and internationally recognized awards in the industry. The jury, representing the leading photo magazines in 15 European countries, annually votes to give the award to newly released products in recognition of their contribution to the development of imaging technology. The Tamron SP AF28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di zoom received the award for 2003-2004.


    Look, if you are going to choose a clear winner, for the money, this lens is the clear choice. The Minolta-version is the same lens, just rebranded by contract.

    Do I own one ... yeah ... I had two of them. Canon and SONY mount. Still have the SONY mount.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 02-02-2011 at 09:14 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

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Monmouthshire, UK
    Posts
    2,152
    Quote Originally Posted by joenmell View Post
    Minolta AF 28-75mm f/2.8 D Lens is available. Any ideas about this lens? I know it's not a 16 or 18mm, but it's within my price range. (Maybe, it's Ebay!) I missed out on the 18-250 by being undecisive. I just can't get up the nerve to do it. it's a lot of money for someone who doesn't have a chance to recoup by selling photo's. Maybe I just need to accept the fact that I might be a Point and Shoot kind of guy. I will update soon when I get testicular fortitude. Thanks for giving me different perspectives on this.
    Joe, I don't think you'd be unhappy with that lens providing you can live with the lack of a true wide end (42-112mm equivalent). The depends on how much (or not) you use the wide end.
    If you could find a Sigma 18-50mm F/2.8 EX (27-75mm equivalent) that could be a better choice although it does leave a bigger gap to your 100-200mm.
    Same with the Tamron SP AF 17-50 F2.8

Posting Permissions

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