|
DoctaFun posted:Buy my Sony Stuffs! I would snap up your Tamron in a heartbeat if I weren't shopping for a 1911 right now. Bad timing! I am loving the a580 so far, thanks for parting with it Mr Socko. edited for new page context Bud fucked around with this message at 23:25 on Jun 12, 2013 |
#
?
Jun 12, 2013 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 12:19 |
|
|
DoctaFun posted:What better way to explore/experiment with changing from CaNikon to Sony than to buy the lenses I need to sell! Sigma makes their 35/1.4 in sony mount, Rokinon makes a 24/1.4 in sony mount too (the only 24/1.4 besides the canon one, I dunno why people use that as such a sticking point for lens systems).
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
The Zeiss 24/2 is also a perfectly cromulent lens.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
Sigma also makes a 24mm f1.8, just don't expect L level quality wide open. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00005RKSQ
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2013 14:04
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:Sigma makes their 35/1.4 in sony mount, Rokinon makes a 24/1.4 in sony mount too (the only 24/1.4 besides the canon one, I dunno why people use that as such a sticking point for lens systems). I think I'm completely missing your point. What is 'that' sticking point? I'm not arguing, I'm genuinely wondering what you are saying. I think in my post I just meant that there are some classic minolta lenses(50mm f/1.7, beercan) that are very cheap, and there's not a lens like the beercan at the price for the other mounts. But the 35/1.4 and 24/1.4 are not cheap lenses, even if you go third party. I'm pretty sure I am just not following what you are saying though  .
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2013 21:43
|
|
|
I've just been seeing a lot of people here lately going "but that camera doesn't have a 24/1.4" while pointing out flaws with camera mounts, even though its a fairly niche lens, and I don't get why. Well, people brought it up here and the Pentax thread, for sure.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2013 22:27
|
|
|
Lowlight wide angle. There's merit in that. Unless you're focusing up close, once you've set it to infinity, you'll have all the fun. That drat Samyang/Rokinon could use a lock switch to block the focus ring, tho.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2013 22:45
|
|
|
Mr. Despair posted:I've just been seeing a lot of people here lately going "but that camera doesn't have a 24/1.4" while pointing out flaws with camera mounts, even though its a fairly niche lens, and I don't get why. Ohhhh okay, gotcha. I completely misunderstood your post, thanks for clarifying!
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 03:00
|
|
|
Anyone interested in picking up an A77? I have a big package I'd love to sell, but I doubt there's anyone on here looking for all of that. But maybe someone's looking for an A77 body? Could pair it with any of Minolta 50/1.7, Sony 35/1.8, Sony 16-50/2.8, tamron 90/2.8 macro, tamron 70-300.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 02:17
|
|
|
DoctaFun posted:Anyone interested in picking up an A77? I have a big package I'd love to sell, but I doubt there's anyone on here looking for all of that. But maybe someone's looking for an A77 body? Could pair it with any of Minolta 50/1.7, Sony 35/1.8, Sony 16-50/2.8, tamron 90/2.8 macro, tamron 70-300. Bad timing, I just bought a 16-50. The a77 would be perfect to go along with it and replace my trusty (but aging) a700, but current budget allowed one or the other, not both. Though odds are you're in the US (I'm in Europe) so this was doomed from the beginning v  v
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
What would you be looking to get for the a77 with either the 16-50 or the 35 1.8? Just looking to get an idea.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 16:35
|
|
|
ManiacMatt posted:What would you be looking to get for the a77 with either the 16-50 or the 35 1.8? Just looking to get an idea. Is this some trick to get me probated by the mods for posting a price without a picture? Hmmm, risky business. If you are really interested I will grab some pictures tonight to be safe and quote a price. For now, here's a link to what BHphoto is charging for a used a77 with 16-50mm lens: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/800948364-USE/sony_slt_a77vq_slt_a77_dslr_digital_camera.html I would try to price mine accordingly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 21:29
|
|
|
That gives me and idea on price, I'm not sure if I'm ready to jump ship yet. But it gives me an idea, no need to get you probated.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 21:53
|
|
|
Bud posted:I would snap up your Tamron in a heartbeat if I weren't shopping for a 1911 right now. Bad timing! Here is a review from DxO of the best primes and zooms for the a99. While APS-C is a little more forgiving, it gives you a good idea of how some of the full-frame options compare to one another. I'm surprised that there was a difference between the Sony and Konica Minolta 50mm f/1.4 primes, as well as the Tamron and Konica Minolta 28-75mm f/2.8 zooms. Then again, the fine print explaining the DxOMark score says that a difference of 10% doesn't mean much, so I guess that could just be sample variation? I'm also surprised that the Sony 50mm and 35mm f/1.4 lenses scored as well as they did - both are soft wide open. Public service announcement - if you're thinking about buying a Sony/Minolta 35mm f/1.4, don't do it. If you're an APS-C user, the Sony 35mm f/1.8 is much sharper and far, far cheaper. If you're a full-frame user, you can buy 2-3 Minolta 35mm f/2 lenses for the price of a new Sony 35mm f/1.4, and they're both smaller and sharper. Or, just buy the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4; I've yet to hear anything bad about it, and it's still at least a third cheaper than the Sony. Bob Socko fucked around with this message at 06:48 on Jul 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2013 06:45
|
|
|
So I was preparing to sell my Minolta 50/1.7, took some pictures and waaaait a minute... Goddamn it. Seems to be stuck between two elements on the rear group, so that's fun. Anything I can do? Disassembling the lens (to clean the aperture blades) was easy enough, but getting between two elements sounds much more complicated. Last time I skip the flashlight test when buying a used lens, I can tell you that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2013 02:13
|
|
|
Ugh, that sucks. If it's anything like the 35-105's front element, there should be a couple of small, inset notches around one of the elements. I assume that with the right tool, you could screw the lens out to get at the space in between. Here is something Pete Ganzel jury-rigged for just this purpose. Of course, then you have to get it back in the exact same spot, and reassemble everything again, and hope that your focus is still accurate, and so on. It might be easier to find another 50mm f/1.7. It doesn't even have to be a functional copy, just one with an intact rear group you could swap out..
Bob Socko fucked around with this message at 07:59 on Jul 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2013 06:32
|
|
|
Went with plan B: sell the lens anyway. I did mention the fungal invaders, I'm not (that much of) an rear end in a top hat, but the lens still sold for 90 bucks  We'll see how things go when the guy receives the lens, I feel like I'm not out of the woods yet. In other news, I just bought a Sony 50/1.4 on the cheap, supposedly never used. Time to sell the 50/1.8 (also bought on the cheap, in mint condition), which should cover 2/3rds of the f/1.4's price. ...now if only I could get my hands on an decently priced beercan.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2013 18:42
|
|
|
KEH has one for $79, and is offering free shipping on lenses over $100 this weekend.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2013 21:05
|
|
|
Thanks but I'm in Europe, where beercans often go over 150USD.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2013 22:30
|
|
|
Sorry to double-post, but with the traffic this thread is getting I figured editing my previous post wouldn't get me an answer anytime soon. I was "convinced" by some family members to cover their daughter's christening in two weeks. Not that big a deal, I've covered a few events before, but I've never had such a bare-bones kit (sold my Sigma 24-70/2.8, Minolta 100/2.8 and CZ 135/1.8 to fund other hobbies, regretting it right about now). I'm down to a 18-55, 50/1.8 (soon to be replaced by a 50/1.4) and a 3600hsd. Camera's the a700. The 18-55 is not ideal for the very dark church the event will take place in, the 50 will probably be too long for most of the proceedings and the 3600 is quite anemic. Oh, and it doesn't loving rotate sideways. Budget constraints being what they are, I can only replace one piece of equipment. Question is, which one? My flash badly needs an update and there's a used F58 available right now; same price as a new F43 but I figure the 58 is the better deal. Of course with this choice I'll be stuck with f/3.5 to f/5.6 for pretty much the entire ceremony, which leads me to the other obvious replacement: the zoom. A Tamron 17-50 would work very nicely in low-light and/or small spaces, but even f/2.8 won't be enough in that dungeon of a church, so I'll still have to rely on a flash. Opinions welcome! seravid fucked around with this message at 19:09 on Jul 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
Just wanted to point out a misleading aspect of the OP. The "Afghan Girl" photo is by Steve McCurry, not whoever the hell the Flickr attribution in the title is. The Vietnam War execution shot is by Eddie Adams. Maybe someone could edit the OP directly underneath each of those photos to cite the correct photographer. It's unfortunate that Flickr allows users to repost content like that, even if they credit it as an afterthought in the full-text description. I thought Flickr was supposed to be a site for sharing your own work, not a modern day Photobucket of random "these are things other people have created but that I used to express my individualism" content.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
seravid posted:Opinions welcome! Inf posted:Just wanted to point out a misleading aspect of the OP. The "Afghan Girl" photo is by Steve McCurry, not whoever the hell the Flickr attribution in the title is. The Vietnam War execution shot is by Eddie Adams. Maybe someone could edit the OP directly underneath each of those photos to cite the correct photographer. Bob Socko fucked around with this message at 20:51 on Jul 20, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
Bob Socko posted:I'm tempted to recommend the flash. While the kit lens aperture is nothing special, at least you'll be able to get the shot. If you're worried about image quality and need a shallow depth of field, maybe pick up a Sony 35mm f/1.8 and a Minolta 24mm f/2.8? I'm not sure about Euro prices, but here in the US, you should be able to find those for the same price as a Tamron 17-50, if not a bit cheaper. That's actually just what I was thinking. I bought the 50/1.4 because it was a good deal, but I realize 50mm on APS-C is pretty awkward: it's often too short for portrait and too long for general use. There's a couple of used 35's on ebay (around 180USD), I think I'll grab one and sell the 50 when it arrives; good way to save a few bucks considering I'm not going full frame anytime soon. Plus, the 35 is apparently sharp even wide open, that'll be nice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2013 21:30
|
|
|
Surprise - Andrea from SonyAlphaRumors agreed to publish the OP as one of his vacation articles! Here is a link.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2013 07:16
|
|
|
Wake up sleeping thread I got something nice! My first and only crossed x lens, picked up from a dude on CL after a wedding party last weekend in the wilds of Maryland.  Long on a crop sensor but whatever. I'll be bringing it to Brooklyn this weekend for candid portraits. Teacake approves. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2013 03:31
|
|
|
Good old Pocket Rocket. I'd love one for the a99.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2013 03:48
|
|
|
It's a neat lens, I love how tiny it is. I wish Sony would re-release it, though I can understand why they don't - it's not the easiest lens for the layperson to use, so it wouldn't exactly fly off the shelves. Hey, so big news - I'm leaving the alpha mount.  I really hate to do it, but it's hard to keep up with a toddler while carrying 10+ pounds of gear. Plus, I'm just not using most of what I have. You know how often I use my 70-200? Two, maybe three times a year. Same goes for my 70-400 and my Zeiss 85. I have a tremendous amount of gear built up for what-if situations that, after 5+ years, just don't happen very often, if ever. It's time to be a little more realistic with my camera goals, and to cut down on the hoard. I'm jumping ship to Fuji.I'm keeping my Beercan. If anyone is interested in my gear, here is the sale thread over at Dyxum.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 08:55
|
|
|
OP jumps ship? How quaint. Good luck with your new system, hope you find what you're looking for. fake edit: why carry 10+ pounds? Sell the big zooms if you're not using them, sure, but why not keep the a99 and the CZ primes? That's a pretty awesome combo at a very reasonable weight. Not very compact, though, I'll give you that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2013 16:41
|
|
|
Yeah, I get selling off the quasi useless stuff, but I don't see what warrants ditching all of it. At least keep the A99 and one or more primes, because at one point, you'll probably get the regretsies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 01:00
|
|
|
It comes down to redundancy and consistency. I don't do a lot of commercial shoots, but I do a few a year. You've gotta have a backup body for that. I worry about having two different brands of bodies for that. It's hard enough to keep your shots looking consistent between different brands of lenses on the same body - it really bugged me that Minolta/Sony and ZA glass looked different (though both were nice). But to make different brands of bodies and lenses to look the same? Tough, very tough. The simple solution would be to get a Nex as a backup body. I've tried to get into the Nex line, I really have. Three times. Three times, I've bought a Nex and fully intended to use it as my backup body via an LA-EA adapter. And, three times, I just haven't been happy with the body. So, I've gone the Fuji route. The image quality, manual controls, and small lens size makes me happy. The slow focus, wonky focus-by-wire, poor grip options, weak telephoto options, and poor focus raking implementation (compared to Sony) annoys me. But, for me, at this point in my life, it's a better fit for me, because i need something smaller. Maybe I'll come back to Sony when my kid is older. I think the mount has a lot of potential, and I recommend it to others without hesitation. It's just time for me to move on. Bob Socko fucked around with this message at 06:51 on Sep 1, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 1, 2013 05:47
|
|
|
There's a rumor going around that Sony's working on a cross-brand lens compatible camera with a movable focal plane (i.e. sensor), ostensibly to lure users with glass to the Sony system. http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-there-is-a-sony-camera-to-come-also-for-nikon-and-canon-lens-owners/
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 01:35
|
|
|
With the right firmware, that would enable full autofocus (sans moving groups ala Close Focus Correction) on one mount down to close focus to a register 15mm apart at infinity. At normal NEX register distance this would provide body-side autofocus functionality on most rangefinder mounts.
Paul MaudDib fucked around with this message at 05:12 on Sep 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 04:56
|
|
|
If it works, it's earth-shattering, as ground breaking as focus metering or autofocus. If it works.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 06:50
|
|
|
Imagine a world where any lens works on any camera. Would it mean we can finally all be friends? Maybe their 2015 cameras will solve global climate change or something.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 08:32
|
|
|
Bob Socko posted:If it works, it's earth-shattering, as ground breaking as focus metering or autofocus. It's been done before with film cameras, don't see why sony wouldn't be able to make it work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2013 14:23
|
|
|
If it turns out to be true, it'll probably some model proprietary mount, into which you'll screw an adapter mount for your previous lens system. If there'll be an A99 successor with that system, my wallet's going to weep.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2013 00:49
|
|
|
Hey Sony shooters, want to show off what a real red channel is? Sign up for the annual Dorkroom photo exchange today! Thus Saturday, I'm taking a class with Gary Friedman. Any question requests?
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2013 05:43
|
|
|
Bob Socko posted:Surprise - Andrea from SonyAlphaRumors agreed to publish the OP as one of his vacation articles! Here is a link. Very late on this, but I remember seeing it and thinking  Nice job!
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2013 11:16
|
|
|
Thanks! The experience is tempting me to write a book on a Fuji camera, as what've read so far isn't terribly engaging, or even run through spell-check.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2013 06:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 12:19 |
|
|
Bob Socko posted:Surprise - Andrea from SonyAlphaRumors agreed to publish the OP as one of his vacation articles! Here is a link.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2013 11:23
|
|
