Photo sharing: Sony Alpha

[havoc315]

I am actually camera and lens less right now, sort of. Just put up on Ebay my camera with Tamron lens on one listing and then my fisheye on another. Hoping I can get around $500 for camera and lens and then $200 for the fisheye. Sold my 35mm and 70-300 two weeks ago. So technically right now im an HTC One photographer ahaahaha, which the camera sucks

Now im kicking around the idea of getting something wide before I get one of the other two. I will use the heck out of the wide lens for sure but will I use it more than the Tamron 28-70. The 50mm F/1.4 is a given I think. Now its just having to justify what direction to go after.

I think I said it earlier, if you get the 50mm.... that makes the 28-70 far less critical. I can easily walk around all day with 50mm on full frame.

Suppose if you really want the best, go with the Zeiss 16-35. Absolute widest, Sigma 12-24. Or affordable/decent/used -- Minolta/Tamron 17-35.
Or prime.. Minolta 20mm.

If I have time this weekend and if it's warm enough, I'm going to run some tests of my telephoto options.... I own a Minolta 135/2.8 prime, a beercan 70-210 f/4, and the Tamron 70-300 usd. (Surprised you sold your Tamron.. I know it was the older version, but wasn't it full frame?)
My main curiosity is the beercan performance --- You can now find good copies for around $100. And I'm hopeful that aside from CA issues,the performance will be top notch.

 

[Hockeyman]

I think I said it earlier, if you get the 50mm.... that makes the 28-70 far less critical. I can easily walk around all day with 50mm on full frame.

That is what I was thinking also. I would lose the 20mm difference but can make it up eventually down the road.

Suppose if you really want the best, go with the Zeiss 16-35. Absolute widest, Sigma 12-24. Or affordable/decent/used -- Minolta/Tamron 17-35.
Or prime.. Minolta 20mm.

I looked at the Zeiss and its a little rich for my blood lol. Even the Sigma is hovering around the $1,000 mark.

If I have time this weekend and if it's warm enough, I'm going to run some tests of my telephoto options.... I own a Minolta 135/2.8 prime, a beercan 70-210 f/4, and the Tamron 70-300 usd. (Surprised you sold your Tamron.. I know it was the older version, but wasn't it full frame?)
My main curiosity is the beercan performance --- You can now find good copies for around $100. And I'm hopeful that aside from CA issues,the performance will be top notch.

I wasn't pleased at all with the Tamron 70-300m I had. It was the macro one and just didnt perform well so figured I would sell it and start over with something else down the road. Not sure if it was FF or nto to tell you the truth

 

[havoc315]

I wasn't pleased at all with the Tamron 70-300m I had. It was the macro one and just didnt perform well so figured I would sell it and start over with something else down the road. Not sure if it was FF or nto to tell you the truth

This was shot with the beercan.... at ISO 4000, and nearly wide open at 4.5..
So if you want a cost-effective fullframe fairly fast telephoto, it's pretty hard to beat it.


untitled-3.jpg by Havoc315, on Flickr

(This weekend, I need to test some low ISO shots... but not bad for 4000)

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Advice time, lol.

Narrowed down to these two lenses but now considering something wide also. Any recommendations? Considering the Rokinon 14mm fisheye again but would like something non fisheye for now.

Sigma 50mm f/1.4
Tamron 28-70

It's not that wide but have you also considered the Minolta 28-135mm f/4-4.5? A little more reach than the Tamron if you're still thinking of something in this range.

 

[havoc315]

It's not that wide but have you also considered the Minolta 28-135mm f/4-4.5? A little more reach than the Tamron if you're still thinking of something in this range.

The Minolta "Secret handshake" lens. Well regarded. But had the same downside as my 35-105, ridiculously long minimum focus distance for a medium zoom. Makes it less useful indoors when you can't focus closer than about 5 feet.

 

[Hockeyman]

Also I like the fact the Tamron is f/2.8 which helps in low light for me. I would rather have those extra stops over the length. I dont mind if my longer lens is f/4 but my "walk around" the 2.8 is preferable

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

The Minolta "Secret handshake" lens. Well regarded. But had the same downside as my 35-105, ridiculously long minimum focus distance for a medium zoom. Makes it less useful indoors when you can't focus closer than about 5 feet.

I guess you missed the macro mode.

Also I like the fact the Tamron is f/2.8 which helps in low light for me. I would rather have those extra stops over the length. I dont mind if my longer lens is f/4 but my "walk around" the 2.8 is preferable

Sorry - I couldn't quite identify which Tamron (didn't know of a 28-70) to know it was a f/2.8 you were looking for.

I will say my experience is it can be nice to have the extra reach especially if you are moving from a crop sensor to full frame but I'm not familiar with what you liked to use on the crop nor I guess what you are looking for the full frame.

 

[havoc315]

I guess you missed the macro mode.

Didn't miss it... Have the same thing in the 35-105. But it's manual focus, and only in wide angle. The plus is simply how easy manual focus is on dSLTs. (Though I find focus peaking not always super helpful on the a99... Often doesn't find enough contrast to show peaking... Magnified focus becomes more helpful except the viewfinder gets very jittery).

I bought the Minolta 24-85 thinking the wide angle and the better minimum focus distance would serve my needs well. It's so mediocre. Realized I was spoiled by the iq of the 35-105 ( and the 28-135 is supposedly pretty close to the 35-105).

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

Didn't miss it... Have the same thing in the 35-105. But it's manual focus, and only in wide angle. The plus is simply how easy manual focus is on dSLTs. (Though I find focus peaking not always super helpful on the a99... Often doesn't find enough contrast to show peaking... Magnified focus becomes more helpful except the viewfinder gets very jittery).

I bought the Minolta 24-85 thinking the wide angle and the better minimum focus distance would serve my needs well. It's so mediocre. Realized I was spoiled by the iq of the 35-105 ( and the 28-135 is supposedly pretty close to the 35-105).

I think you missed my .

The 35-105 is a nice lens though for the age and price.

 

[Hockeyman]

I guess you missed the macro mode.



Sorry - I couldn't quite identify which Tamron (didn't know of a 28-70) to know it was a f/2.8 you were looking for.

I will say my experience is it can be nice to have the extra reach especially if you are moving from a crop sensor to full frame but I'm not familiar with what you liked to use on the crop nor I guess what you are looking for the full frame.

NO worries, lol. I shoot a lot of wide landscape type scenes, some family pictures and things of that nature. I had a cheap Tamron 70-300 that I just sold (wasn't happy with the IQ at all) and used it pretty seldom, things like Kilimanjaro and trips to the zoo but it was few and far between. I will def end up getting something again with the focal length but my budget doesn't allow for it just yet.

 

[Hockeyman]

Didn't miss it... Have the same thing in the 35-105. But it's manual focus, and only in wide angle. The plus is simply how easy manual focus is on dSLTs. (Though I find focus peaking not always super helpful on the a99... Often doesn't find enough contrast to show peaking... Magnified focus becomes more helpful except the viewfinder gets very jittery).

That is interesting to hear about the focus peaking. That is one of the features im most looking forward to using since I have heard nothing but great things about it.

 

[havoc315]

That is interesting to hear about the focus peaking. That is one of the features im most looking forward to using since I have heard nothing but great things about it.

It's still great, I suspect it just works a bit better on aps-c. That was Harry's experience with NEX vs A7.

I think the larger sensor, perhaps due to shallower DOF, leaves less defined contrast to peak. (Since the aperture is wide open during focusing).

Still helpful but I find the magnified focus a bit more helpful in low contrast situations.

Also, the DMF is very well implemented on all lenses except SAM lenses.

 

[Hockeyman]

It's still great, I suspect it just works a bit better on aps-c. That was Harry's experience with NEX vs A7.

I think the larger sensor, perhaps due to shallower DOF, leaves less defined contrast to peak. (Since the aperture is wide open during focusing).

Still helpful but I find the magnified focus a bit more helpful in low contrast situations.

Also, the DMF is very well implemented on all lenses except SAM lenses.

How well do you think focus peaking will work out on dark rides? Ive been shooting those manual focus and seem to do a failr decent job with the focus but always wondered how or if it even would help

 

[HPS3]

How well do you think focus peaking will work out on dark rides? Ive been shooting those manual focus and seem to do a failr decent job with the focus but always wondered how or if it even would help

Focus Peaking only puts you in the ballpark and magnifying gets it accurate. It's not really useful on moving subjects. I would probably get 1/2 the shots in focus especially when shooting open. 1/2 is on a good day unless it's a stationary subject. On dark rides I would turn it off because I'd find it harder to judge what's in focus with it on.

 

[havoc315]

How well do you think focus peaking will work out on dark rides? Ive been shooting those manual focus and seem to do a failr decent job with the focus but always wondered how or if it even would help

Honestly, I don't know. I'm not great with manual focus, so I wouldn't personally use it on dark rides. I'd get focus much faster and more accurately with auto-focus. But if you find you're getting success with manual focus, focus peaking and magnification can only make it easier.

Though I noticed that focus peaking works much better on the LCD than in the EVF... and I'm assuming that you'd want to stick to the EVF on dark rides. Focus magnification should work great... except that you are sooooo magnified, it could impact your composure.

I think you're going to need to play around a bit with the different MF options and the different AF modes/AF areas + object tracking options, to determine what works best on dark rides.

My best guess may be DMF mode -- Let the AF lock focus and then give you fine tuning adjustment *IF* necessary. If it's having trouble locking focus fast enough for you, then you may need to switch to purely manual focus.

If I was going to try purely auto-focus, I may use spot-focus with object tracking and AF-C. Lock on to Captain Jack on Pirates... track him as the boat moves, snap the shot when ready.

Honestly, I have no idea how the AF will perform on dark rides. I kind of suspect it will work well..... The rides may be dark, but the subjects are lit up. So the focus target should be pretty obvious to the camera.

(I'd also make sure you enable EFC... make sure you turn off focus assist since you don't want an infrared light annoying other people)

 

[Hockeyman]

Focus Peaking only puts you in the ballpark and magnifying gets it accurate. It's not really useful on moving subjects. I would probably get 1/2 the shots in focus especially when shooting open. 1/2 is on a good day unless it's a stationary subject. On dark rides I would turn it off because I'd find it harder to judge what's in focus with it on.

Honestly, I don't know. I'm not great with manual focus, so I wouldn't personally use it on dark rides. I'd get focus much faster and more accurately with auto-focus. But if you find you're getting success with manual focus, focus peaking and magnification can only make it easier.

Though I noticed that focus peaking works much better on the LCD than in the EVF... and I'm assuming that you'd want to stick to the EVF on dark rides. Focus magnification should work great... except that you are sooooo magnified, it could impact your composure.

I think you're going to need to play around a bit with the different MF options and the different AF modes/AF areas + object tracking options, to determine what works best on dark rides.

My best guess may be DMF mode -- Let the AF lock focus and then give you fine tuning adjustment *IF* necessary. If it's having trouble locking focus fast enough for you, then you may need to switch to purely manual focus.

If I was going to try purely auto-focus, I may use spot-focus with object tracking and AF-C. Lock on to Captain Jack on Pirates... track him as the boat moves, snap the shot when ready.

Honestly, I have no idea how the AF will perform on dark rides. I kind of suspect it will work well..... The rides may be dark, but the subjects are lit up. So the focus target should be pretty obvious to the camera.

(I'd also make sure you enable EFC... make sure you turn off focus assist since you don't want an infrared light annoying other people)

Im definitely going to practice with this camera in the dark before I do get up to Disney at the end of Feb. I think ill be ok once I get the hang out the button layout and the settings and see how it handles shooting in low light.

I always had trouble with AF on the A55 using the Sony 35mm f/1.8 so after a few trips I got tired of it and starting shooting manual and would end up with better results and more shots than trying to battle with the AF. No clue how the A99 and Sigma will handle it but if AF works out well id be happy

 

[havoc315]

Im definitely going to practice with this camera in the dark before I do get up to Disney at the end of Feb. I think ill be ok once I get the hang out the button layout and the settings and see how it handles shooting in low light.

I always had trouble with AF on the A55 using the Sony 35mm f/1.8 so after a few trips I got tired of it and starting shooting manual and would end up with better results and more shots than trying to battle with the AF. No clue how the A99 and Sigma will handle it but if AF works out well id be happy

Forget the exact setting, but basically set it so that the shutter will release regardless of whether the camera thinks auto-focus is locked. In other words, make sure you're the ultimate judge of focus (even in AF), and not the camera.

But yes, test it out in a re-created setting. I've found the AF on the A99 to be better than the A55, with one caveat --- the focus points are all bunched in the middle of the sensor. But if you are using center spot AF, I have found the AF to be pretty darn fast and accurate, even in challenging lighting. And the center spot is definitely more sensitive than the other AF points.

Now you're making me want to test it out more vigorously, lol.

 

[Hockeyman]

Forget the exact setting, but basically set it so that the shutter will release regardless of whether the camera thinks auto-focus is locked. In other words, make sure you're the ultimate judge of focus (even in AF), and not the camera.

But yes, test it out in a re-created setting. I've found the AF on the A99 to be better than the A55, with one caveat --- the focus points are all bunched in the middle of the sensor. But if you are using center spot AF, I have found the AF to be pretty darn fast and accurate, even in challenging lighting. And the center spot is definitely more sensitive than the other AF points.

Now you're making me want to test it out more vigorously, lol.

I expect to see a full recreation of the HM attic scene in your living room asap

I generally shoot center spot for the most part

 

[havoc315]

I expect to see a full recreation of the HM attic scene in your living room asap

I generally shoot center spot for the most part

I used to shoot AF-S and center spot 95% of the time. But the A99 -- especially when using an AF-D capable lens -- has changed the way I shoot a lot of my shots.

AF-area-Wide works really well with face detection when shooting the kids.

AF-C/D with center spot + object tracking works very well also of lock and re-compose. After all, traditionally, when you re-compose, you are shifting the focal plane a few inches. So in some situations, your shots may not be totally sharp, due to this slight shift in focus. With the object tracking lock, you lock on to a subject at that center spot (face or object), and then when you re-compose, the focus can adjust as necessary. (though still need to keep your subject mostly in the center 1/9th of the sensor)

Mike, you're going to love the camera. I've had it a couple months and still haven't mastered the best way to use its features. You're not just getting a full-frame camera, you are getting much much richer features.

 

[Hockeyman]

I used to shoot AF-S and center spot 95% of the time. But the A99 -- especially when using an AF-D capable lens -- has changed the way I shoot a lot of my shots.

AF-area-Wide works really well with face detection when shooting the kids.

AF-C/D with center spot + object tracking works very well also of lock and re-compose. After all, traditionally, when you re-compose, you are shifting the focal plane a few inches. So in some situations, your shots may not be totally sharp, due to this slight shift in focus. With the object tracking lock, you lock on to a subject at that center spot (face or object), and then when you re-compose, the focus can adjust as necessary. (though still need to keep your subject mostly in the center 1/9th of the sensor)

Mike, you're going to love the camera. I've had it a couple months and still haven't mastered the best way to use its features. You're not just getting a full-frame camera, you are getting much much richer features.

I love getting new toys and learning the ins and out. I am sitting here counting the seconds until I can actually buy it