Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 19 of 23 FirstFirst ... 91718192021 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 224

Thread: SONY a99

  1. #181
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,406
    ohhh look...another gadget ! lol
    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. #182
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,545

    SIGMA in better focus

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooz View Post
    ohhh look...another gadget ! lol
    I applaud SIGMA stepping up and making a clear stride to adjust these lenses to compensate for the poor design of the camera bodies. If these manufacturers watched their tolerances a little better, we would NOT have to have a micro-adjust (the "slop-factor").
    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. #183
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,406
    is there anything you don't whine about ?
    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

  4. #184
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,545

    Surprised...

    Quote Originally Posted by Rooz View Post
    is there anything you don't whine about ?
    I am a bit stunned that you don't think clear focus is important enough to be addressed with a cracker-jack lens. Good lord, after all the hubbub that we have had concerning the crappy alignments between new cameras and high-end lenses, requiring the addition of "micro-adjust."

    Right now, this device only works on five SIGMA lenses, the "new" 120-300mm F2.8 DG OS HSM ; 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM ; 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC MACRO OS HSM ; 30mm F1.4 DC HSM & 18-35mm F1.4 DC HSM

    DG lenses are full frame
    DC lenses are APS-C only

    Currently, this device also only works on Canon, Nikon and SIGMA mounts.

    I know of at least six lenses I have had to return to the manufacturer (SONY, TAMRON & SIGMA) to have this nonsense alleviated/corrected (@ $30-50 a lens). That's a lot of "wasted money" in shipping/freight... and that, mate, is not getting any cheaper, last time I looked.

    Here, SIGMA has offered a $60 device to "correct" their lens for your camera/cameras. That's pretty cheap, in the long run. Of course, if you only buy a 75-300mm f/4-5.6 or the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 P.O.S. lens... you needn't bother. You're probably not taking anything that would make much of a difference, anyway.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 05-11-2013 at 02:30 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

  5. #185
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    313
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    Of course, if you only buy a 75-300mm f/4-5.6 or the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 P.O.S. lens... you needn't bother. You're probably not taking anything that would make much of a difference, anyway.
    Wow what a snob of a comment. It takes guts to make a comment like that when it seems you spend most of your time whining about gadgets (and the ones they won't make for you) instead of actually photographing anything.
    I've seen amazing shots by people using lenses you are deriding here. Heck I've seen amazing shots by people using phone cameras. I'll tell you a little secret Don: it's not really the gear that matters most.

  6. #186
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,545

    Here's mud in your eye!

    Quote Originally Posted by jr_rodriguez View Post
    Wow what a snob of a comment. It takes guts to make a comment like that when it seems you spend most of your time whining about gadgets (and the ones they won't make for you) instead of actually photographing anything.
    I've seen amazing shots by people using lenses you are deriding here. Heck I've seen amazing shots by people using phone cameras. I'll tell you a little secret Don: it's not really the gear that matters most.
    Sure, a lot of people "get away" with using the "off-the-shelf" kit lenses. I figure nearly 90% of the users do it... and do not give it a second thought. It is the way of the world.

    I rarely see people pop for a 24-70mm f/2.8 or 70-200 f/2.8 lens the day they buy their first DSLR/DSLT. Heck, I would go as far as to say most folks do not even realize these lenses exist. Awareness usually happens when they sit down and begin to review the "less-than-impressive" shots they are getting from their gear when they ask that golden question:

    "WTF can I do to get a better image? These crappy lenses are not returning what I had expected to get from my brand new $3000 a99 camera."

    Hence, the birth of a germ of an idea... better glass. Who knew, right, J.R.?

    Look, I have been at this, legitimately, for the past few years. I figure I have as good a handle on how the glass works as most with some level of EXPOSURE. Line them up, my friend... and shoot the glass. You will see the short-fall of low-end 75-300 f/4-5.6 ($150) glass and the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 kit lens the manufacturer dumps on you, when you pick up your DLSR/DSLT bundle, to get started. If these were firecracker lenses, why would you even be tempted to buy anything else?

    As far as I am concerned, you can take the kit lens and...

    "PULL!"



    BLAM!
    .
    .
    .

    Even a bottle bottom will provide some kind of image to the camera.




    J.R. -> Please bear in mind that there should be plenty of other SONY DSLR/DSLT photographers in this forum, with plenty of opportunity to share their images with the masses. I really do not see why I always have to be the entertainment around here. Have a heart... someone has to pay the bills. It's not always fun & games in the dark room, my friend.

    If you take some time and thumb your way through this forum alone, my contributions to imaging are pretty well represented. Many comparisons have been done making examples of the KIT lens versus the higher-end solutions. I have nothing to apologize for other than not having enough money to keep charging forward with my imagining with even higher-end glass and whatnot.

    Even my signature DICTATES what a person should do to improve their photography. So it is written, so it shall be done.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 05-13-2013 at 01:55 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

  7. #187
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    God's Country - Australia
    Posts
    10,406
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    I am a bit stunned that you don't think clear focus is important enough to be addressed with a cracker-jack lens. Good lord, after all the hubbub that we have had concerning the crappy alignments between new cameras and high-end lenses, requiring the addition of "micro-adjust."
    I don't recall commenting about the sigma invention, merely your incessant whining about equipment you seem to use as an excuse for your own failures.

    I shoot at f2.8 or larger regularly and guess how many lens' I have that are micro adjusted ? zero. I guess I must be just very lucky huh ? I used my new sigma 35/1.4 to shoot a wedding only 2 weeks ago, along with my 24/1.4 and 85/1.4 I was at f1.4 or f2 for almost the whole service until I could pull a flash out later. challenging ? yes. did I miss shots ? yes. were some of them OOF ? yes. was it cos of the gear ? absolutely not.

    that's not to say that some glass doesn't need the odd tweak...even out of the box. ok...so be it. tweak it and get on with the job rather than yammering about it like a baby with such monotonous regularity.
    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

  8. #188
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    313
    Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
    Even my signature DICTATES what a person should do to improve their photography. So it is written, so it shall be done. [/URL]
    Your signature doesn't DICTATE anything. Just because you say it doesn't mean a thing, other than you being full of yourself. I HAVE seen your contributions. What I've been trying to say politely before (and you don't get) is that I'm not impressed, and that perhaps you should work on your photography instead of worrying about gadgets.

  9. #189
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,545

    The future of image taking on Social Media

    Quote Originally Posted by jr_rodriguez View Post
    Your signature doesn't DICTATE anything. Just because you say it doesn't mean a thing, other than you being full of yourself. I HAVE seen your contributions. What I've been trying to say politely before (and you don't get) is that I'm not impressed, and that perhaps you should work on your photography instead of worrying about gadgets.
    I might consider hang-gliding with the gods, too.

    I think I'm brave enough and old enough to worry about anything I care or dare to, J.R. While I appreciate critique, antagonistic prodding really has no value.

    I have tried to discuss the merits of some device additions to my own photography... certainly nothing of yours or the Rooz-meister's. In fact, I may not have offered critique on much of any work presented in other forums.

    The SONY forum, as far as I could determine, pretty much had its respective hands full with proprietary flash issues and other third-party incongruities (limited high-end lenses due to mount). Dealing with these issues has not been easy... and has caused enough grief to have many members (not too deeply entrenched in SONY gear) to move off the line and onto the more common approach Nikon and Canon designs.

    Personally, I cannot appreciate SONY's continued resistance to sharing lens' mount design and electrical connection/integration. I suppose someone has to object... and I will. I paid to get into this zoo.

    Sadly, I have watched the participation level dwindle... and I find that rather amazing, considering how many people own these cameras. I know I have not found anywhere near the interest/experience level on other social networks. At least, not to the level we enjoyed on the DCRP.

    Perhaps it is just me... but, I do not believe so.

    Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography


    This may be pompous... but, hey, it's my nickel. Yes, it is!
    Last edited by DonSchap; 05-13-2013 at 01:50 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

  10. #190
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Des Plaines, IL
    Posts
    9,545

    Whatta power hawg!

    One of the bigger knocks on the a99 is its ghastly power consumption. At full tilt, it consumes at levels that might be as much as 200% the consumption of the a900 on its worst day.

    Now, of course there are mitigating methods to reduce the power consumption by shutting down certain aspects of the a99 camera, such as "GPS" and the EVF display on the back of the camera.

    Now, I must admit, that's what I want to do with my $2500 camera... depower it so it runs just like a $700 model! Please, stop me from falling over.

    I mean, doing this may buy-back levels that would be tantamount to 150% the a900-level. But still, batteries are going pretty fast, by comparison. This may not be such a big deal to those operating in a relatively urban environment, but when you take your "big boy" out to the field... you may consider investing in multiple battery packs, which, of course, you will be obligated to support each battery's charging for each trip -> Get a couple more re-charger units.

    "Battery management" rears its ugly head (dig deep)!

    Okay, what to do? What alternatives exist to further mitigate this madness?

    Here's one: Solar Recharging Panel

    Better, yet... how about this baby? Array Solar Laptop Charger Backpack - Solar Bag It'll do your laptop, too.

    Either way, the cost of adequate operation just went up.
    Last edited by DonSchap; 05-24-2013 at 01:25 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

Posting Permissions

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