Calling all Sony Alpha users! (Part 3)

Status
Not open for further replies.
puddleduck said:
Sorry all gone. Ebay'd it and sold with half an hour.

There is just no interest in Sony stuff on TP!
Click to expand...

I know...:( It's hard fins something.. I actually found Sigma 50mm macro on ebay - some bluefire221051 is selling few months old lens, but I don't have an ebay account to contact with this guy... also cannot find him with same nick on any forum:(
I guess I need to wait and get one somewhere else...
 
Just trying to figure out what to do lens-wise for an upcoming holiday. The Sigma 18-200mm isn’t too expensive, so trying to decide whether I need the range. Apparently the 18-250mm is better, but significantly more expensive as well…

I’ve only got my A200 few months ago, and haven’t had a chance to really give it a good use, apart from a bit here and there, but think I’ll probably need more than my current lenses. Don’t have a lot of faith in my kit lens, and while the Minolta is nice to use, it had a couple of problems going up Snowdon earlier this year (over-exposing as if it was on a +5setting - think it sorted itself by doing a quick swap with the kit lens) – it’s also heavy as hell for the range!

So I’m thinking whether I should go for the Sigma or consider something else? Thoughts welcome :)
 
phinix said:
I know...:( It's hard fins something.. I actually found Sigma 50mm macro on ebay - some bluefire221051 is selling few months old lens, but I don't have an ebay account to contact with this guy... also cannot find him with same nick on any forum:(
I guess I need to wait and get one somewhere else...
Click to expand...

Why not open an Ebay account?
 
puddleduck said:
Why not open an Ebay account?
Click to expand...

2 days left of the auction, I won't make it waiting for an activation.. Already checked it..:( Only hope he won't sell it, then I could send him a message..
 
GafferTape said:
Just trying to figure out what to do lens-wise for an upcoming holiday. The Sigma 18-200mm isn’t too expensive, so trying to decide whether I need the range. Apparently the 18-250mm is better, but significantly more expensive as well…

I’ve only got my A200 few months ago, and haven’t had a chance to really give it a good use, apart from a bit here and there, but think I’ll probably need more than my current lenses. Don’t have a lot of faith in my kit lens, and while the Minolta is nice to use, it had a couple of problems going up Snowdon earlier this year (over-exposing as if it was on a +5setting - think it sorted itself by doing a quick swap with the kit lens) – it’s also heavy as hell for the range!

So I’m thinking whether I should go for the Sigma or consider something else? Thoughts welcome :)
Click to expand...

18-250mm? I say, only Tamron. I was going to get this one as well, but haven't decided yet... I don't think I would need that 250.. 105 would be ideal I think. But the only thing out there is Sony 16-105, which is pretty dark, 3.6 or something like that... 16-105 2.8 - that would be something...:D
 
phinix said:
18-250mm? I say, only Tamron. I was going to get this one as well, but haven't decided yet... I don't think I would need that 250.. 105 would be ideal I think. But the only thing out there is Sony 16-105, which is pretty dark, 3.6 or something like that... 16-105 2.8 - that would be something...:D
Click to expand...

A 16-105 f2.8 would be awesome but you'd probably have to sell both kidneys in order to afford one. :lol: The Tamron 18-250 is a good lens to take away if you only want to take one lens, it's the first lens I bought other than the kit lenses.
 
fabs said:
A 16-105 f2.8 would be awesome but you'd probably have to sell both kidneys in order to afford one. :lol: The Tamron 18-250 is a good lens to take away if you only want to take one lens, it's the first lens I bought other than the kit lenses.
Click to expand...

I heard Tamron 18-250 has pretty slow AF and not that sharp - is that truth?
Other question - is there anything else than 18-50, 17-70 with wide angle and ending up near 100? soemthing with 2.8 of course..?
 
phinix said:
I heard Tamron 18-250 has pretty slow AF and not that sharp - is that truth?
Other question - is there anything else than 18-50, 17-70 with wide angle and ending up near 100? soemthing with 2.8 of course..?
Click to expand...

Well I suppose it depends on what you're photographing with it as to whether the AF is fast enough but I shot a polo match a couple of years ago with the 18-250 attached to an A100 and it was fine, sharp too.

I've not seen a wide angle - 100mm with constant f2.8 but if one did exist, I imagine it would be prohibitively expensive.
 
fabs said:
Welcome Jono, but I fear you may well fall foul of the selling regulations here as tyou have to have been here a month and have 100+ posts in order to sell and then it would have to be in the classifieds section.
Click to expand...

ooops...forgot about that.i'm not able to PM you either jono,your just gonna have to wait until your post count/1 month time lapse has gone..
 
Is the Tamron 18-250 a significantly better option than the Sigma 18-200? It's about about £180 more expensive than the Sigma from new...
 
have you compared user reviews in the lens database on dyxum.com?
 
Yep, thats a nice one...
 
Put it in the context of a wedding tog's requirements at the "end of the film era".

I think the change of format is what really killed this lens.

Fast APS-C lenses took a while to arrive, and there's still not a constant f/2.8 18-70mm for those prepared to put up with the inherent compromises.
 
Yes I did not realise but back now and will behave until I meet the critria. Would be intersted to know how people store their images and what they back them up to as I have a need to update my current storage currently evrernal USB drive and DVD backups with around 4 terrabites of storage. Any thouhgts
 
External drives make sense, but duplicate them and replace as and when necessary.
 
Jono75 said:
Hi stan ,
I see you have the sony 1.4 converter are you please with this on the 70 200 and can you post any results that I can see.

many thanks
Click to expand...

hi jono...very pleased with the results to date.AF speed is not adversely affected,and IQ is neither affected.used it today at an airshow with no problems.here's a couple of images i've used the combo for....



DSC03072.jpg


DSC02979.jpg


DSC01461_filtered.jpg


DSC01264.jpg


DSC01210.jpg
 
Stan, met a chap at the Waddington airshow the other weekend and he had the new 70-400 f4 - f5.6, he comes on here too - although I didn't get his name.... A great looking lens. May be tempted to trade or swap my 70-200 f2.8 for one. It's almost ideal for airshows. I say almost as a 600mm would be better but that would be way too much £££££££
 
JPS said:
Stan, met a chap at the Waddington airshow the other weekend and he had the new 70-400 f4 - f5.6, he comes on here too - although I didn't get his name.... A great looking lens. May be tempted to trade or swap my 70-200 f2.8 for one. It's almost ideal for airshows. I say almost as a 600mm would be better but that would be way too much £££££££
Click to expand...

hi mate..yep,i would love the 70-400 SSM G lens,but the current financial situation has "curbed" my spending for the forseeable future...especially when it costs £1400 at the moment.i could PX my 70-200 for it,but i'd miss the wide aperture too much to do that...now,how does one win the lottery :lol:
 
With the price of the 70-200 going up a few hundred £££ recently - well in some stores anyway - you may be able to get a better PX price, I don't think I'd miss the 2.8 too much as I've studied the photos that I take with the lens and most of them are at 200mm at f8 - f11 ish. I find that the 200mm is not long enough really and have now all but decided not to get a 1.4 or 2x converter. Instead looking at seriously the 70-400 on a PX deal if I can.
 
JPS said:
With the price of the 70-200 going up a few hundred £££ recently - well in some stores anyway - you may be able to get a better PX price, I don't think I'd miss the 2.8 too much as I've studied the photos that I take with the lens and most of them are at 200mm at f8 - f11 ish. I find that the 200mm is not long enough really and have now all but decided not to get a 1.4 or 2x converter. Instead looking at seriously the 70-400 on a PX deal if I can.
Click to expand...

yep,the 70-200 has indeed gone up a few hundred quid recently...i could probably live without the 2.8 for most of my togging,but i'd guarantee as soon as i get rid,i'll be needing it for some shoot or other..i've got a wedding to shoot on the 7th of august,so i'll definately need it for that anyway...will see how goes after though :naughty: ;)
 
JPS said:
Stan, met a chap at the Waddington airshow the other weekend and he had the new 70-400 f4 - f5.6, he comes on here too - although I didn't get his name.... A great looking lens. May be tempted to trade or swap my 70-200 f2.8 for one. It's almost ideal for airshows.
Click to expand...
if you are the chap with the 70-200/2.8 in the park & view on Friday that was me :)

Yup, it's almost perfect for airshows. I would have preferred constant f4 as an improvement rather than 600mm (it's so sharp that you can crop in no problem).
 
yes, thanks & hope the same for you
we disappeared from the park & view in the afternoon because some contacts kindly sneaked us in - nice to get pictures with no cones/fences etc. in the way :).
the weather wasn't great for the arrivals shots anyway.
 
just wondering about a new lens for my a200 that I have had since Feb. Currently have the kit lens only but main interest is wildlife mainly birds, butterflies and dragonflies etc. At present the choice I have that I can save up for in a reasonable time frame are

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro (Sony A / Konica/Minolta AF) £149

or

Tamron 70-300mm F4/5.6 DI LD Macro (Sony)

I tend to take most of my pics whilst out walking.

Reading in Outdoor Photography (August edition) about macro on the cheep it mentions close up lenses or magnification filters would it be worth getting some whilst saving up for the lens or should I just put the money to the lens.

Paul
 
The 70-400 G does look an amazing lens, when I had a A900 I was sooo close to getting one...
 
I'm very familiar with the Canon 100-400 L IS - the 70-400 G beats it happily & I'm confident in saying that it's best in class.
of course a Nikon 200-400/4 would be nice ...
 
If I end up with an A900 again (which could happen ;) ) think I might get one of those..
 
Stan, about those photos you posted - you know the guy fiddling with his camera, and the shots of birdies

I'm assuming they were taken with your A700. How much post-processing was involved? They're really nice photos :)
 
MarkydeSad said:
Stan, about those photos you posted - you know the guy fiddling with his camera, and the shots of birdies

I'm assuming they were taken with your A700. How much post-processing was involved? They're really nice photos :)
Click to expand...

hi mark...which photos mate,can you post a link up to remind me.my heads in a spin at the moment...just got back from 2 days in london with the missus,and my daughters getting married on friday......:cuckoo: :bonk: :gag: :lol:

had a look at the 70-400 in jessops oxford street yesterday..man, i want one :love:
 
stan the man said:
hi mark...which photos mate,can you post a link up to remind me.my heads in a spin at the moment...just got back from 2 days in london with the missus,and my daughters getting married on friday......:cuckoo: :bonk: :gag: :lol:

had a look at the 70-400 in jessops oxford street yesterday..man, i want one :love:
Click to expand...

The photos at post 1144 in this thread


Another new lens?? You must be made of money! Do you work for the BBC? ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top