Calling all Sony Alpha users! (Part 3)

Status
Not open for further replies.
PAS said:
thanks, that would be great... this is a camera thats just come back from sony and is supposed to be "repaired":bang:
its still the same as it was when it went away, apart from my wallets £112 lighter:razz:
Click to expand...

Aw well, the cameras now in posession of Royal Mail... on its way back to Sony again!

Another weekend without the A700, and not a happy bunny!:'(
 
I am now the owner of an A200 and though I haven't had the chance to have a proper play it feels like I made the right choice.

One question - should I leave the lens attached or should I take it off after each session?
 
Slimbert said:
Leave it on! Less chance of dust getting inside the camera body:thumbs:
Click to expand...

I Agree... My Sigma 24-70mm stays on my A700 and my Tamron 17-50mm stays on my A350 I only change when I really need to for example taking landscape and switch to my 10-20mm or doing portraits and use my 50mm prime lens
 
Thanks. I did think that may be the case but wanted to check.

I'm desperate to get out and use it properly - I look after my little boy (16 months old) on a Saturday while my wife works, and with the added company of my Mum this weekend I'm probably not going to get near me newly beloved A200! I can only hope that on Sunday I can persuade them to somewhere scenic under the guise of it being a 'nice day out for us all' :D
 
mutamist said:
Thanks. I did think that may be the case but wanted to check.

I'm desperate to get out and use it properly - I look after my little boy (16 months old) on a Saturday while my wife works, and with the added company of my Mum this weekend I'm probably not going to get near me newly beloved A200! I can only hope that on Sunday I can persuade them to somewhere scenic under the guise of it being a 'nice day out for us all' :D
Click to expand...

You could always spend some of Saturday taking pics of your son - your Mum will proably be happy to do 'hearding' duty while you take the photos if it means she gets some nice pics to show her friends :)
 
Good idea Faldrax - it'll test my skills at phorographibg moving objects trying to get any of my son!

OK, I thought I had my first lens decision sorted and was going to choose the Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 APO Macro Super DG Lens. However, now I'm thinking that maybe I'd like something with a wider angle feature so I didn't have to swap lenses when out and about.

I did a search on Warehouse Express for Sony/Minolta lenses and ticked 'macro' as I do want that capability as well as a decent amount of zoom. One of the lenses it comes up with which is comparable in price to the aforementioned Sigma is a Tamron AF 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 XR DI II Lens. Is this a good lens and will it do what I want to a decent level of success?

thanks
 
I have the tamron 70-300 and am very new to photography, however I find the lens to be pretty good. Autofocus is annoying so I just use manual focus, but I can get pretty decent macro shots and telephoto shots. At the top end it is a little soft but cheap lenses usually are. For me it does exactly what I want so I am happy.
 
Do you not find you have to change lens when you to take any landscape shots though? I'm really looking for a lens that I can take out to cover all bases as I don't want to have to take 2 lenses with me and keep changing them on everyday trips out.
 
mutamist said:
Do you not find you have to change lens when you to take any landscape shots though? I'm really looking for a lens that I can take out to cover all bases as I don't want to have to take 2 lenses with me and keep changing them on everyday trips out.
Click to expand...

Tamron do a half decent 18-200mm lens Here it is: Tamron 18-200mm although you would be trading some image quality for the convenience. I had one for a while and it was pretty good but I was too used to the lens I had before it and switched back.

Overall, the AF isn't that good, especially in low light, but colours, bokeh and sharpness are all above average. Nice and light too so easy enough to carry around all day.
 
Don't like the sound of losing image quality but then I like not having to swap lenses! As a beginner maybe the loss of quality won't even be noticeable - so many decisions. At least I'm not looking to buy right now so I have plenty of time to decide. Thanks :)
 
mutamist said:
Don't like the sound of losing image quality but then I like not having to swap lenses! As a beginner maybe the loss of quality won't even be noticeable - so many decisions. At least I'm not looking to buy right now so I have plenty of time to decide. Thanks :)
Click to expand...

I don't mean the image quality is bad, it isn't bad at all, but I did notice that the 55-200mm Tamron I was used to using was very slightly better in every area but not by much. I was just too used to the 55-200mm, but looking back I should probably given the 18-200mm a bit more time.

However, I do now have to carry two/three lenses everywhere!!
 
Slimbert said:
I don't mean the image quality is bad, it isn't bad at all, but I did notice that the 55-200mm Tamron I was used to using was very slightly better in every area but not by much. I was just too used to the 55-200mm, but looking back I should probably given the 18-200mm a bit more time.

However, I do now have to carry two/three lenses everywhere!!
Click to expand...

Cool, thanks, again!! Looks like I have a new lens on my want list! What's it like for Macro photography?
 
mutamist said:
Good idea Faldrax - it'll test my skills at phorographibg moving objects trying to get any of my son!

OK, I thought I had my first lens decision sorted and was going to choose the Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 APO Macro Super DG Lens. However, now I'm thinking that maybe I'd like something with a wider angle feature so I didn't have to swap lenses when out and about.

I did a search on Warehouse Express for Sony/Minolta lenses and ticked 'macro' as I do want that capability as well as a decent amount of zoom. One of the lenses it comes up with which is comparable in price to the aforementioned Sigma is a Tamron AF 18-200mm f3.5-6.3 XR DI II Lens. Is this a good lens and will it do what I want to a decent level of success?

thanks
Click to expand...

I know exactly what you mean - I have 2 daughters (aged 2 & 4 1/2) and gettign them both to pose sensibly (at the same time) can be an excersise in futility :lol:

As regards a general lens, the Sony 18-250 is well regarded in that respect, but will cost a bit more - you should be able to find it for £360 - £400, but it is suposed to be a lot better then the Tamron.

Edit : Just spotted one s/h listed on AVForums today.
 
hi all
i`m back after sometime away.
have had my second a200 fail after 8months and amazon were unable to supply another would have had to have a a230 which i really not keen on.
so it had to be an upgrade to an a700......what a shame.
means all my kit will fit apart from my sony grip which will be upfor grabs

so sat here waiting for it to arrive any tips would be great

cheers
mark
 
Had a few Sony fit lenses arrive for my A900:

1) Tamron 24-135 SP - These are superb but rare! I've got one in Nikon fit, and managed to find one in Minolta fit from a store in Germany. Just arrived - spot on lens. Focus is a tad slower than more hesitant than the Nikon version but its optically spot on.
2) Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 - Another of my faves in Nikon fit, focus is a bit slower than the Nikon one I think as well, but optically as good as I expected.

Also have a KM 17-35 which really is a wonder on the A900 as well. Possibly the best out of the three I have.

Think I'm sorted lens wise for the time being :)
 
Happy Snapper said:
Why is the a850 more money then the a900??? :shrug:
Click to expand...

Makes no sense does it?

The A900 is about the best value around right now.

I'm guessing the A900 will be discontinued, and the A850 will replace it - at a higher price point if Sony can get away with it... ;)
 
While I'm pretty new to Sony, when I used Lightroom or ACR - it was pretty clear to me that ACR / Lightroom was broken for Sony files.

Anyhow, LR 2.5 and ACR 5.5 is now out, and apparently fixes some colour rendition issues with Sony in the green channel - the A900 Sony sensor uses "thicker" (for want of a better word) colour filtration.

Might improve things (Capture One and RawTherepee do a far better job than previous Adobe products), should also improve noise performance too I would think.
 
Is the A550 better than the A700? Here's my thoughts having done little to no research:

The model number suggests that the A700 is a better camera, the A700 is cheaper than the A550 suggesting the A550 is a better camera but then the A700 was more than the A550 is when it was first released. I think the answer is that the A700 is a better camera but it seems strange to me that they would then price a lower model above a higher model.
 
puddleduck said:
While I'm pretty new to Sony, when I used Lightroom or ACR - it was pretty clear to me that ACR / Lightroom was broken for Sony files.

Anyhow, LR 2.5 and ACR 5.5 is now out, and apparently fixes some colour rendition issues with Sony in the green channel - the A900 Sony sensor uses "thicker" (for want of a better word) colour filtration.

Might improve things (Capture One and RawTherepee do a far better job than previous Adobe products), should also improve noise performance too I would think.
Click to expand...

Thanks for this - will give it a try.

Also noticed that someone posted elsewhere that v2.5 now supports lens metadata for Sony DSLRs.
 
PDub said:
Anyone tried or heard anything about the sony 50 1.8 yet?
Click to expand...

prob be similar to the older minolta lens.
i have the F1.4 and its great! although it hasnt been used a great deal.
 
Kev M said:
I think the answer is that the A700 is a better camera but it seems strange to me that they would then price a lower model above a higher model.
Click to expand...
this is actually pretty normal e.g. Canon 500D was dearer than the 40D street price on launch etc.
The A700 is an old model right at the end of it's life & the A5xx is a new model right at the start of it's.
The rrp of the A700 is currently £730 body only but typically sell for £550.
The RRP of the A550 is £699 but because it's brand new the street prices are far nearer to RRP tytpically ~£600.

This argument also works for the A900/A850 especially when you factor in the existence of A900 stock bought pre the big price increases that ocurred in the Spring.

The A5xx looks to have some improved technology over the A700 but be minus some features & probably has lesser build quality. I think that the smart money is on an A700 replacement by Spring.
 
Nice reply heidfirst, makes ssense to me. Unfortunately there's no way I'd be able to afford the A700s replacement when it comes out, it would be another 18-24 months down the line when the price has reached a sensible point. Perhaps that's why I should get an A700 before it's phased out completely.
 
Is there a UK based alpha mount lens hire company? I can only find one in the US.
 
There was a facility through the Minolta club (which then became Photoclubalpha).
I believe that the stock from that then went to Photostore UK who was planning to hire but I don't think that he has ever got around to it.
 
Not what I wanted to hear. Never mind, thanks anyway.
 
springtide said:
Sony Alpha A850 Digital SLR Camera Body: £1639.00

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/buy-sony-alpha-a850-digital-slr-camera-body/p1033192?go=kits_bundles


Not that makes more sense - being cheaper than the a900!!! LOL
Click to expand...

I reckon it needs to be £250 cheaper than the A900 - most places will still do the A900 for £1699, so I'm not sure a £70 saving is worth it for a smaller viewfinder, and no remote..?

Still at least it doesn't have video, so that adds £500 value in my book :)
 
puddleduck said:
I reckon it needs to be £250 cheaper than the A900 - most places will still do the A900 for £1699, so I'm not sure a £70 saving is worth it for a smaller viewfinder, and no remote..?
Click to expand...
but once the old A900 stock bought at pre-increase prices is gone average A900 prices will rise.
The A900 price went up 18% earlier this year & at current RRP the A850 is 17% cheaper than the A900 - I think that if you do the arithmetic you'll see how well that ties up with current street pricing.
 
heidfirst said:
but once the old A900 stock bought at pre-increase prices is gone average A900 prices will rise.
The A900 price went up 18% earlier this year & at current RRP the A850 is 17% cheaper than the A900 - I think that if you do the arithmetic you'll see how well that ties up with current street pricing.
Click to expand...

Maybe its a cunning plan to sell all the A900 stock then, as you'd need to be mental to buy a A850 at the mo..!

BTW the old stock price is a myth I reckon - Jessops are going out of stock at £1699 all the time, and re-stocking. They can afford to give 8% Quidco cashback and not take a loss at £1699 ;)

I reckon RRP went up, but dealer prices didn't.
 
puddleduck said:
I reckon RRP went up, but dealer prices didn't.
Click to expand...
according to Digital Depot they did.
Jessops ... well, if they were a well run company would they be in the straits that they are?
I wouldn't put it past them not noticing if something was selling at a loss.
 
Has anyone here got a Tamron 28-75 - do you find that Apps (Lightroom / RawTherepee) seem to think the lens is a Sony 24-105 f/3.5 - f/4.5D?!
 
Just got back from my first job using my A900 for some promotion work for small local market town. Left all my Nikon stuff at home, while I've been bringing it along "just in case" up til now.

Delighted with the quality and detail from the files - 2 or 3 of the images will be used within the town on bus stop size posters, so the extra resolution should show, while the rest will be used to decorate tourist handouts (no need for 24 megapixels for those).

The KM 17-35 is proving itself to be excellent, and with wide near-middle-far compositions, the detail pulled out on distance objects is excellent - the extra accuity over the D700 really shows here. Given the quality of the 17-35 (just a rebadged Tamron 17-35) I really can't see myself going for the CZ 16-35 right now either.

Very pleased I re-bought into Sony :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top