FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

The Lineup

Page  <12345 90>
Author
catlady View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 05 March 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 306
Post Options Post Options   Quote catlady Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 April 2006 at 00:08
Can I play?

Sports (Rugby, Soccer and about to be Canoeing): 70-200SSM. Replaced the beercan, which was a great lens but not quite fast enough for the purpose; it went to a friend who does portraits and models. I'm slowly learning how to use the SSM to best efect, think I'm getting there. Attached a monopod last week, takes some of the weight off my neck but still light enough to run up and down the pitch (all day - it was a Sevens event!!!)

Walkaround: 24-105D. Very good for the money, especially stopped down a bit, but then the compromise with DoF bothers me sometimes. I very rarely go out with just one lens, usually I pair this with the Sigma 12-24 (I love crazy wide angle!) I also have the 35-70 f4, better quality I think but hasn't got the range. Can't bear to part with it!

Macro: oldie but goodie Minolta 100/2.8. Flowers, shells, pebbles...stuff that doesn't move! I'd love to get some of those insect close-ups but that's a skill I still have to develop.

Extreme silliness: Sigma 170-500, bought for wildlife and really faraway stuff. Tried it for the Rugby but too slow. Not a bad lens, can hand hold it with AS and reasonable speed but better with a bit of support. And a very old Sigma 600mm Cat...occasionally I get the urge for doughnuts!

Stuff I don't use: 28-105 and 100-300 xi lenses which go with my 7xi. Can't part with them as I might need them if I use film again (not very logical). And a very old Sigma 21-35. Not sure what to do with that last one, but it doesn't owe me anything so it can sit on the shelf in happy retirement after a lot of use in its younger days.


Would love an STF now I've seen some example shots!



focussed on infinity.....pity about the near vision
 



Back to Top
Pontus View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 18 January 2006
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Posts: 223
Post Options Post Options   Quote Pontus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 April 2006 at 21:50
I actually find this thread quite useful and somewhat amusing. Here's my setup:

Minolta AF 20 / 2.8 *keeper*
- would like a wider lense as well
Minolta AF 28-75 / 2.8 (D) *keeper*
- well, you all know this one
Minolta AF 85 / 1.4 *keeper*
- absolutely wonderful
Minolta AF 100 / 2.8 Macro (D) *keeper*
- would like a 200 as well
Minolta AF 70-210 / 4 *????*
- nice but never gets used
Minolta AF 100-200 / 4.5 *keeper*
- great for travelling
Tokina AT-X 340 AF-II 100-300 / 4 *keeper*
- will sell if I find a Sigma 100-300 / 4 or 300+ Minolta prime for only a little more cash. Great lens though!

I would like to have a 35mm 1.4 prime for low light work, but who wouldn't.




Edited by Pontus - 09 April 2006 at 21:52
Back to Top
dCap View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 August 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 5306
Post Options Post Options   Quote dCap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 April 2006 at 23:47
Pontus - 17-35/2.8-4 is well worth a look, the KM or the Tam.

I'll report back in here soon on the Tokina 17mm. Wider than that is silly money 14mm or the 10/11/12-18/20/24 brigade

PS - I prefer the 28/2 to the 35/1.4 ... despite the lovely 35/1.4 bokeh, actually the best bokeh I've seen to date ... the 35/1.4 is a bit big in use (same size as 135/2.8)
Was (alphabetically): Canon, KonicaMinolta, Mamiya, Olympus, Sony
Now: Nikon D300s + Nikkor 16-35/4 VR + Nikkor 50/1.4 + Nikkor 60/2.8 micro + Olympus EPL-2 + M.Zuiko 17/2.8
Back to Top
Pontus View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 18 January 2006
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Posts: 223
Post Options Post Options   Quote Pontus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 April 2006 at 21:19
Dcap, I've thought about the 17-35/2.8-4 and the price is right. On the other hand I don't need a zoom and I would like constant aperture. And does 17mm vs. 20mm actually make that much difference?

You might be right about the 35/1.4, it is big (and expensive), a 28/2 could be a nice compromise.
Back to Top
CTYankee View Drop Down
Emeritus group
Emeritus group
Moderator emeritus

Joined: 02 November 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 3510
Post Options Post Options   Quote CTYankee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 April 2006 at 21:30
17 v 20 ... on film, I loved 24mm, occasionally used 21 (I had an old 21-35 zoom, and it *may* have only been 22mm at the wide end depending on whether you trust the mfr or Pop Photo test). I only ever shot 2 images at 17mm on film !

On APS, it's 25.5 versus 30. Or, almost as wide as a 24 versus almost as wide as a 28 :)

Would I get the 17-35 if I had the 20 ? Well, I wouldn't own both ... probably. I like zooms at the wide end, because a couple mm makes such a huge difference. Ahhh, who am I kidding ... 2X is 2X & 3X is 3X whether wide or tele ... I like zooms from 24 to 300 (equivalent FOV).

The 200/4 is a beautiful lens. If I'd known when I bought it that I'd be using it on APS, I might have saved the money and stuck with a 100 ... at 1:1, the 200 is down to 135 anyway, and that was fine on film, so the 100 on APS is going to give decent working distance. On the other hand, I might have never known the luxury of the rotating tripod collar and tripod mount that allows it to be easily used on a slider. Given the rarity of the 200/4 and the price it's likely to command, my top choice in a macro right now would probably be the Tamron 180/3.5. I read about the Filter Effect Control - a fancy term for a ring location behind the lens shade that allows you to rotate a polarizer with the lens shade mounted - very nice !

- Dennis
April Foolishness
CZ16-80 | 28-75D | 28/2 | 85/1.4 | 70-300G | 400G
Back to Top
Mink View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 08 December 2005
Country: South Africa
Location: Cape Town
Status: Offline
Posts: 1228
Post Options Post Options   Quote Mink Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 April 2006 at 21:49
My penny's worth - there is a huge difference between 17mm and 20mm. At this end of the focal-length spectrum, every millimeter counts! After all, 3mm is a sixth of the total focal length! That's the same proportion as the difference between a 24 and 28mm lens (as CTYankee says) or almost the same as the difference between an 85mm and a 100mm lens! I found the difference at the wide end between my 17-35 and my 18-70 to be quite noticeable, and if you try the 11-18 zoom, you'll be amazed at the difference those 7mm make.

Edited by Mink - 10 April 2006 at 21:58
 



Back to Top
dCap View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 August 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 5306
Post Options Post Options   Quote dCap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 April 2006 at 20:46
I agree also - there is a big gap from 17-20. For me my AF kit for travel is 24 + 90 to this I will add the 17 into the bag for some trips for the 5-6 interiors that I may wnat to shoot.

My 20 is M42, and its for my M42 days. This will be 20/4 + 85/2 only. So I don't consider the 17 & 20 to be 'overlap' or over kill, I have:

AF: 17/24/28/50/90/300 really
M42: 20/85

Sure 24 + 28. But the Sig 24/1.8 EX and Minolta 28/2 are a bit differnt. I have small option 28/2 + 50/1.4 or big option 24/1.8 + 90/2.8m
Was (alphabetically): Canon, KonicaMinolta, Mamiya, Olympus, Sony
Now: Nikon D300s + Nikkor 16-35/4 VR + Nikkor 50/1.4 + Nikkor 60/2.8 micro + Olympus EPL-2 + M.Zuiko 17/2.8
Back to Top
RacingManiac View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie

Joined: 21 October 2005
Status: Offline
Posts: 81
Post Options Post Options   Quote RacingManiac Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 April 2006 at 02:53
Adding mine so far(pretty complete for my need now):
Prime:
CZJ 20/4 M42(bought it to try out M42, need a better adaptor that can do focus to Infinity)
AF 24/2.8(widest prime, I think its a keeper, works great for carshow and stuff)
AF 28/2.0(low light, decent for indoor group photo, haven't got much shot out of it yet)
AF 50/1.7(so far my best portrait lens with 5D, the 75mm crop focal length works well I think)
AF 50/2.8 D(definite keeper, awesome Macro lens)
AF 135/2.8(newest buy, not much use out of it yet)
AF 300/4 APO G(keeper for sure, awesome sharpness/detail/bokeh....all around awesome lens.)
AF 500/8(bought for a while, haven't got much use out of it yet, not very used to the handling of the lens)

Zooms:
AF 18-70 DT(kit lens, may sell it soon, personally can't accept its quality compare to the prime or my other lenses)
AF 28-135 f4-4.5(my current all around zoom, I will definitely keep this one for a while, good sharpness and color, heavy to lug around though)
AF 70-210 f4 "the Beercan"(my first lens outside of the kit, and what got me into buying other stuff, everything is awesome about the lens)
AF 100-300 APO(traveling telephoto zoom for 5D, great reach and good for those days when 300 f4 is not an option)
Back to Top
dukkha View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 05 April 2006
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Posts: 184
Post Options Post Options   Quote dukkha Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 April 2006 at 18:18
my lens line-up is not impressive then the most of you

I own a minolta 35-70/3.5-4.5 but I use it rarely

a sigma 28-80/3.5-5.6 macro, thats my main lens (waiting for the KM 28-75/2.8)

and a 70-210/4.5-5.6

also much MD/MC lensen (2*28MM, 45MM, 50MM, 55MM, 2*135MM and a 300MM) but I don't have an adapter :(

I am saving for a 17-35/2.8-4
and looking for a cheap 50/1.7
Back to Top
dCap View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 11 August 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Posts: 5306
Post Options Post Options   Quote dCap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 April 2006 at 18:31
impressive shelves of lenses do not make good images. you could be the best photographer in here, and have just one lens (prime or zoom). we have some gear-geeks in here (myself and a few others!) ... but the important bit is your eye for a good shot and what I have seen refered to as "the decisive moment" (that natural know how of when to press the shutter)

Put a 35/1.4 G or 85/1.4 G or a 600/4 G in the hands for someone with no talent ... and you will consistantly see rubbish photos. I can testify, I'm not a people shooter, I had the 85G - an impressive lens, if did not make me a better portrait photographer.

welcome to the forum

Edited by DcapVividOptic - 13 April 2006 at 18:32
Was (alphabetically): Canon, KonicaMinolta, Mamiya, Olympus, Sony
Now: Nikon D300s + Nikkor 16-35/4 VR + Nikkor 50/1.4 + Nikkor 60/2.8 micro + Olympus EPL-2 + M.Zuiko 17/2.8
Back to Top
CTYankee View Drop Down
Emeritus group
Emeritus group
Moderator emeritus

Joined: 02 November 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 3510
Post Options Post Options   Quote CTYankee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 April 2006 at 19:21
Originally posted by DcapVividOptic DcapVividOptic wrote:

impressive shelves of lenses do not make good images. you could be the best photographer in here, and have just one lens (prime or zoom). we have some gear-geeks in here (myself and a few others!) ... but the important bit is your eye for a good shot and what I have seen refered to as "the decisive moment" (that natural know how of when to press the shutter)


True enough on all counts ! I had a shelf full of top notch lenses that I wasn't using nearly enough to justify. I sold some of them and bought cheaper versions and don't see much practical difference based on what I'm shooting. Big prints of scenes with fine details will benefit from sharp lenses, but those same scenes benefit more from higher res and/or bigger sensor/film.

Meanwhile, some of my favorite shots of friends/family are technically flawed. People who see them don't seem to mind. It always bugs me to no end that they are flawed, but still better to have the shot than not. By flawed, in some case, OOF enough to be much softer than what you'd get from any "cheap" lens.

Aside from other aspects of getting a good shot, you can be a technically good photographer on a budget by learning the limitations of your equipment and how to work around them (avoid using this lens at these settings, etc).

Have fun !

- Dennis
April Foolishness
CZ16-80 | 28-75D | 28/2 | 85/1.4 | 70-300G | 400G
Back to Top
2manycamera View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 14 November 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 1297
Post Options Post Options   Quote 2manycamera Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 April 2006 at 22:04
Before I bought the 7D, I was shooting 75-80% MF, Hasselblad and Fuji GSW690. My 35mm film use was mostly with zooms: sigma's 70-300, 28-105 and the tokina 24-40. When I bought the 7D, I rethought my entire line-up and started shooting mostly with primes, mostly by minolta.

It was the time with the 'blad that really made me appreciate primes and re-invigorated my commitment to quality images and to pushing myself to discover what I was capable of producing. I was getting good pictures with the zooms, many that sold, but I truly feel that my work is better than ever now that I have changed my "tools". Just as many folks have said the switch to digital from film has made them more aware of "craft", I feel much the same way about my lenses.

Dosen't mean I have any intention of abandoning zooms, my next purchase is likely to be the tamron 17-50/2.8, once some trials have been run. Lenses, like the cameras themselves are tools that do some jobs better than others.
BH

M7D-IR, a77, a850, a3000, NEX6, Maxxum9, 24/2.8, 28/2, 35/2,50/1.4RS, 100/2, 200/2.8HS, 24-70CZ, 80-200/2.8, 24-105, 28-135, 300/4 HS, 16-105,70-300G, 5600HS, 3600HSx2, Tam 90/2.8
Back to Top
omerbey View Drop Down
Emeritus group
Emeritus group
Moderator emeritus

Joined: 11 December 2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Posts: 2516
Post Options Post Options   Quote omerbey Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 April 2006 at 03:14
I'm in.
current MAF:
Tamron 11-18: Easily gets 70% of my leisure shots. Great lens. A little overpriced.

Minolta 35-70 3.5-4.5: One lens I'll never get rid of. It is an old lens that has memories, and has great colors. Doesn't have the best bokeh out there but colors and sharpness and cuteness factors are there all right.

Minolta 75-300 RS: 300 lens. I rarely use that range. It feels weird shooting where I am not. Good colors and contrast. Okay bokeh. At f:8 it is pretty sharp.

Tamron 90 Macro: The magic lens. I use it for portrait reasons mostly. And it delivers. I love it.

Minolta 28-75: I have used a tamron 28-75 recently. On nikon d200 of a friends. I was impressed. And bought it recently. I am thinking of it as a portrait and general use lens. Time will tell. I don't have it yet.

current m42 lenses:
29mm 2.8 pentacon
helios44, helios40
jupiter9, jupiter11
czj 135 3.5, 135 2.8
takumar 50 1.4, 105 2.8
etc. etc. :)

want to buy lenses:
a short tele long tele zoom that is light and lucid.

10mm +-3.5 prime with prime quality. next main lens.

sigma 30 1.4 if I like it. available light lens with decent fov.

one of 16/17/18-50 lenses. need to check first.

possibly a 85 1.4 D to switch with tamron 90

that's all. oh and 200 2.8 czj and 300 4 takumar if I can find them for free ;)
Back to Top
Bob S. View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: 14 March 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Posts: 633
Post Options Post Options   Quote Bob S. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 April 2006 at 14:42
Wow! I didn't know this thread existed! Guess I'll add my .02? to the mix. I've been 'collecting' the 1st Generation (Classic) series of lenses for the last few years.

Minolta AF Primes (all 1st Generation/Classic Series)

20mm f2.8
24mm f2.8
28mm f2.8
35mm f2.0
50mm f1.7
50mm f2.8 Macro
85mm f1.4
100mm f2.8 Macro
135mm f2.8


Minolta AF Zooms (all 1st Generation/Classic Series)

28-135mm f4.0-4.5
35-70mm f/4.0
35-105mm f3.5-4.5
70-210mm f4.0 (I have 2 of these)
75-300mm f4.5-5.6
100-200mm f/4.5


Minolta AF Zooms (RS Series)

28-105mm f3.5-4.5 (I have 3 of these - 1 for each 7D)


Sigma AF Primes ("ZEN" Series)

14mm f3.5
400mm f5.6
500mm f7.2
600mm f8.0


Hmmm. . .now if someone could just explain to me why I never have any money?? ;-)


Bob S.


Edited by Bob S. - 30 December 2006 at 23:19
Back to Top
Dyxum main page >  Forum Home > Equipment forums > Lens Talk > A-mount lenses Page  <12345 90>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.

Monitor calibration strip

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer

Find us on Google+

Feel free to contact us if needed.

Links monetized by viglink VigLink