Photo sharing: Sony Alpha

[fractal]

 

[zackiedawg]

Well, haven't put any birdie photos in here in a while, so figured it was time again - I don't think there are a lot of bird/wildlife photogs in here, but as long as I don't stick birds in every day, it shouldn't be too overwhelming!

The following were more play and experimentation with the excellent FE70-200mm F4 OSS G lens mounted on my A6000...quite a fun and sharp combo!

Red-bellied woodpecker:

Purple gallinule:

Northern cardinal:

Pine warbler:

Baby anhingas in their nest:

Red-winged blackbird:

Testing AF speed and tracking - a purple martin in flight, around 35MPH and always darting different directions:

Osprey spreading its wings for a dive:

Great blue heron in flight:

Cattle egret soaring through the blue sky:

Ugly baby great blue heron standing upright in the nest, just like mommy above:

 

[havoc315]

Fantastic shots! I wonder why Sony hasn't yet done a teleconverter for the E-mount... A 1.4 teleconverter on a crop body and the 70-200 would really give you a good birding focal length.

Well, haven't put any birdie photos in here in a while, so figured it was time again - I don't think there are a lot of bird/wildlife photogs in here, but as long as I don't stick birds in every day, it shouldn't be too overwhelming!

The following were more play and experimentation with the excellent FE70-200mm F4 OSS G lens mounted on my A6000...quite a fun and sharp combo!

Red-bellied woodpecker:

Purple gallinule:

Northern cardinal:

Pine warbler:

Baby anhingas in their nest:

Red-winged blackbird:

Testing AF speed and tracking - a purple martin in flight, around 35MPH and always darting different directions:

Osprey spreading its wings for a dive:

Great blue heron in flight:

Cattle egret soaring through the blue sky:

Ugly baby great blue heron standing upright in the nest, just like mommy above:

 

[zackiedawg]

I completely agree. I've wanted a 300mm or 400mm lens to debut in E-mount, but honestly a good, matched 1.4x TC would be an excellent addition, keep the size small and reasonable, and on the 70-200mm lens still be an F5.6 at 280mm...plus the APS-C crop factor that would be a solid 420mm equivalent at F5.6...and still be capable of nearly identical IQ. Maybe someday...they have more and more F4 lenses coming, and maybe an F2.8 down the road, so they have plenty of lenses that would work with a good quality TC!

Many thanks, BTW.

 

[havoc315]

I completely agree. I've wanted a 300mm or 400mm lens to debut in E-mount, but honestly a good, matched 1.4x TC would be an excellent addition, keep the size small and reasonable, and on the 70-200mm lens still be an F5.6 at 280mm...plus the APS-C crop factor that would be a solid 420mm equivalent at F5.6...and still be capable of nearly identical IQ. Maybe someday...they have more and more F4 lenses coming, and maybe an F2.8 down the road, so they have plenty of lenses that would work with a good quality TC!

Many thanks, BTW.

My old Minolta 200/2.8, now in the possession of Fractal... would be amazing as a re-engineered native E-mount lens. It's a bit smaller than the 70-200/4 even. Nikon has the new really light 300/4, also even smaller and lighter than the Sony 70-200. A huge Tamron 150-600 may never make sense on E-mount, but you really could go a long way with tele-primes. I really prefer tele-primes over tele-zooms, since I tend to use them at their maximum focal length anyway.

If I was doing the Sony roadmap... A lightweight 200/2.8, 300/4, and a 1.4 teleconverter would be coming up soon.

 

[fractal]

My old Minolta 200/2.8, now in the possession of Fractal... would be amazing as a re-engineered native E-mount lens. It's a bit smaller than the 70-200/4 even. Nikon has the new really light 300/4, also even smaller and lighter than the Sony 70-200. A huge Tamron 150-600 may never make sense on E-mount, but you really could go a long way with tele-primes. I really prefer tele-primes over tele-zooms, since I tend to use them at their maximum focal length anyway.

If I was doing the Sony roadmap... A lightweight 200/2.8, 300/4, and a 1.4 teleconverter would be coming up soon.

That lens will be getting a workout this weekend, Havoc. Driving 4 hours today to watch my daughter play some college lacrosse. Last week I ordered the LA-EA4 adapter (currently using LA-EA1) to give me AF. It was supposed to arrive on Thursday but now won't get here until Monday ( due to severe weather conditions ). Really bummed about that! A emount version of this lens would be a winner.

Here is a video - stabilization test of the A7ii. Doesn't show samples ( yet ) but states how many stops advantage the stabilization gives him under different scenarios.

 

[havoc315]

Just make sure you micro-adjust the la-ea4 adapter for the sharpest shots. You'll be losing some ISO performance, but I think you'll be happy with it as a sports lens.

And as long as you have the adapter, really does open up great value Minolta glass -- especially on the a7ii where you'll get stabilization.

My objection to Sony (a and e mount) is the lack of quality affordable full frame glass -- CaNikon have far more options in the $500-1000 price range. On the other hand, the access to value Minolta glass (on stabilized bodies) is a huge plus.

That lens will be getting a workout this weekend, Havoc. Driving 4 hours today to watch my daughter play some college lacrosse. Last week I ordered the LA-EA4 adapter (currently using LA-EA1) to give me AF. It was supposed to arrive on Thursday but now won't get here until Monday ( due to severe weather conditions ). Really bummed about that! A emount version of this lens would be a winner.

Here is a video - stabilization test of the A7ii. Doesn't show samples ( yet ) but states how many stops advantage the stabilization gives him under different scenarios.

 

[cgattis]

Well, I thought I'd look around and see if there was a Photography board here on the DIS, and lo and behold, there is. But after perusing just a few pages, I see I am WAY out of my league! So please bear with my very amateur question!

I have a Sony A100 that has served me faithfully since it was first released. But it has started to have some issues, so I finally gave in and got an A77. WOW, what a difference. Wish I'd done it sooner! Anyway, I have the 2.8 16-50 SSM and an old Quantaray 4.5 100-300.

I shoot a LOT of sports (indoor and out). What I've got is OKAY outside (not great), but I need something that will give me better speed without the grain in a gym (so I guess larger aperture? Or more a function of speed?). Also, we're going to Alaska this summer, and I'd really like to reach out and capture a moose or bear (not literally! Ha). I'm really looking at $1000 as my max...did I mention I'm going to AK??$$$$. Thanks for any (highly over-simplified!) help you can offer!

 

[fractal]

Well, I thought I'd look around and see if there was a Photography board here on the DIS, and lo and behold, there is. But after perusing just a few pages, I see I am WAY out of my league! So please bear with my very amateur question!

I have a Sony A100 that has served me faithfully since it was first released. But it has started to have some issues, so I finally gave in and got an A77. WOW, what a difference. Wish I'd done it sooner! Anyway, I have the 2.8 16-50 SSM and an old Quantaray 4.5 100-300.

I shoot a LOT of sports (indoor and out). What I've got is OKAY outside (not great), but I need something that will give me better speed without the grain in a gym (so I guess larger aperture? Or more a function of speed?). Also, we're going to Alaska this summer, and I'd really like to reach out and capture a moose or bear (not literally! Ha). I'm really looking at $1000 as my max...did I mention I'm going to AK??$$$$. Thanks for any (highly over-simplified!) help you can offer!

Welcome to the Sony thread! Minolta Maxxum 200mm 2.8 may be what you are looking for. Long, fast, pro quality glass. I bought Havoc's and have no regrets. I've used it indoors for swimming and water polo with good success on my Nex-7.

 

[cgattis]

Welcome to the Sony thread! Minolta Maxxum 200mm 2.8 may be what you are looking for. Long, fast, pro quality glass. I bought Havoc's and have no regrets. I've used it indoors for swimming and water polo with good success on my Nex-7.

So this is an old lens, correct? No longer made, I mean. Any recommendations on where to buy quality used? I've used B&H and Cameta; not sure who else to trust with used gear.

Also, I assume I need "an autofocus lens," right--something that expressly states AF on it? (I feel stupid asking that, but there you go.)

Thanks!!!

 

[havoc315]

Well, I thought I'd look around and see if there was a Photography board here on the DIS, and lo and behold, there is. But after perusing just a few pages, I see I am WAY out of my league! So please bear with my very amateur question!

I have a Sony A100 that has served me faithfully since it was first released. But it has started to have some issues, so I finally gave in and got an A77. WOW, what a difference. Wish I'd done it sooner! Anyway, I have the 2.8 16-50 SSM and an old Quantaray 4.5 100-300.

I shoot a LOT of sports (indoor and out). What I've got is OKAY outside (not great), but I need something that will give me better speed without the grain in a gym (so I guess larger aperture? Or more a function of speed?). Also, we're going to Alaska this summer, and I'd really like to reach out and capture a moose or bear (not literally! Ha). I'm really looking at $1000 as my max...did I mention I'm going to AK??$$$$. Thanks for any (highly over-simplified!) help you can offer!

I'm doing Alaska as well this summer. The Minolta 200/2.8 AF will do well inside a gym. Some good places to buy used would include the forum on dyxum.com. For stores, KEH has a good selection of used.

For Alaska, 200mm really isn't a huge amount of reach. You can get the Tamron 70-300 usd. That's a fair amount of reach for Alaska. Still won't be great inside a gym, but good outdoors. If you really want to go whole hog for Alaska, think of renting the Sony 70-400 or the new Tamron 150-600. Then you'll get your moose and eagles. But those lenses are heavy. They make good rentals.

I will say, the 200/2.8 is the finest lens I ever owned. I only sold it to Fractal because he promised to take good care of my baby.

 

[cgattis]

I'm doing Alaska as well this summer. The Minolta 200/2.8 AF will do well inside a gym. Some good places to buy used would include the forum on dyxum.com. For stores, KEH has a good selection of used.

For Alaska, 200mm really isn't a huge amount of reach. You can get the Tamron 70-300 usd. That's a fair amount of reach for Alaska. Still won't be great inside a gym, but good outdoors. If you really want to go whole hog for Alaska, think of renting the Sony 70-400 or the new Tamron 150-600. Then you'll get your moose and eagles. But those lenses are heavy. They make good rentals.

I will say, the 200/2.8 is the finest lens I ever owned. I only sold it to Fractal because he promised to take good care of my baby.

Well, I guess I'm more interested in having something good for sports pics, since that is all the time vs. one trip. Maybe I should look at buying that one and just renting the biggie. Guess I'll do a little shopping and come back here for some specific opinions . Thanks, all!!

 

[fractal]

You could get the 200mm and a 1.5x teleconverter. Still should be around $1000.

 

[Hockeyman]

It's A Beautifgul Morning by Mike Sperduto, on Flickr

 

[havoc315]

Well, I guess I'm more interested in having something good for sports pics, since that is all the time vs. one trip. Maybe I should look at buying that one and just renting the biggie. Guess I'll do a little shopping and come back here for some specific opinions . Thanks, all!!

In your price range, for a gym lens, you have a few options:

If you want to keep the weight down, the Minolta 200/2.8 is fantastic. Not just a gym lens. It is one of the sharpest lenses you will ever find, with gorgeous bokeh as well. Great for portraits, detail shots, artistic shots.

If weight is not a issue, if you don't mind going heavier:

Newer: Tamron 70-200/2.8 usd. Not as good as the 200/2.8, but will have quiet AF and the convenience of zooming out.

Older, used: Minolta 80-200/2.8 HS. Loud AF. Excellent image quality but a hair below the 200/2.8.

 

[fractal]

Pittsburgh

 

[zackiedawg]

Great shot, Fractal...certainly makes the city look beautiful and so crisp and clean. I guess a cool, clear night for that one!

 

[fractal]

Great shot, Fractal...certainly makes the city look beautiful and so crisp and clean. I guess a cool, clear night for that one!

thanks Justin! It was a cold clear night ( last Saturday ). Long exposure using the railing of an observation platform across the river.

 

[Hockeyman]

Ok poll time.

So if you had a budget of $200-$300 for a lens and wanted something of some length, perhaps even for some family portrait stuff here and there, what would you guys recommend in A Mount. So far the Sony 85mm is on my radar but not sure I want another prime. A replacement for my old Sigma 70-300mm would be nice, an upgraded Tamron would be nice. What do you think?

 

[havoc315]

Ok poll time.

So if you had a budget of $200-$300 for a lens and wanted something of some length, perhaps even for some family portrait stuff here and there, what would you guys recommend in A Mount. So far the Sony 85mm is on my radar but not sure I want another prime. A replacement for my old Sigma 70-300mm would be nice, an upgraded Tamron would be nice. What do you think?

The upgraded Tamron USD, under $300 used.. is a nice lens, but didn't blow me away. Certainly, it's a good value for the money, and a good way to reach 300mm.

I had a bit of love for the beercan, and you can get a good copy for under $150. I wouldn't really use it as telephoto, but I totally would use it for portraits -- With the constant F4, and just the way it is constructed, it produces truly beautiful bokeh. Also doubles as a semi-macro lens:
A Flower by the Minolta Beercan by Havoc315, on Flickr

Beercan portrait:

untitled-6.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

For that matter, if you want a fun lens and willing to do a prime, you will NOT regret the Minolta 100/2.8 macro. I preferred it over the Sony 85/2.8. It is just one of the sharpest lenses I have ever used, with no distortion.. beautiful bokeh, plus true 1:1 macro.

Minolta 100/2.8 portrait:

untitled-22.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

untitled-13-2.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr