Hinika: If I know I am only going to use it at a low resolution then I post-process after resizing; makes editing a lot, lot faster.

littleway: If you are in AF-C there is no sound and no AF assist light.

porkchop: You can't see anything from the IR filter-ed light. However an IR-sensitive camera, can.

CCTVs have IR lights and often work in IR only. So it turns on the light when there is none, as humans cannot see IR. Quite like the Sony Handycam NightShot mode.

ieR: Please state your source!

signither: You could try my Kingston 133x 32GB card in your A700... no reason for it not to work. My card doesn't work in an A100 though.

bernama7: Wah do you live in the forest?

neo_lam: Just get the dry box. I have that exact same thing and it is tedious to keep charging it every few days.

Keeping a lens in a bag is bad. Bags will promote fungus. Left my beercan in the old A100 bag and that's how it got fungus, and I knew from then on I had to get a dry box.

davidmak: It is well known that the A550 does 7 FPS with AF and AE off. And yes 5 FPS is with AF and AE.

This post has been edited by albnok: Nov 22 2009, 12:38 AM

littleway: Oops I meant AF assist light.

v1rtual: The right side is underexposed; try 2 exposures and merge them.

RawTherapee 2.4.1 crashing in Windows? Try this.

http://www.rawtherapee.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1593

v1rtual: Yes you will need a longer shutter speed. You can make it a bit shorter with high ISO and brighter apertures.

tanjq87: I don't remember - it's Ein's A100. Then again his A100 has been problematic and has had a tough life (including, not being able to use newer SSM lenses, while other A100s are fine.)

Hinika: Pull the lever on the back of the lens.

ieR: I am at page 6, and there is nothing that says the A550 is faster with the 55-200mm SAM (where you imply that the 55-200mm SAM is not faster on other cameras.)

services189: Wirelessly, no; however if you can find an iISO optical slave trigger which fits our Sony flashes, it might work.

v1rtual: Yes meter on the background. Use slow sync flash.

lwliam: I was answering the question of whether the Sony flashes could be triggered by other brands. The SB-600 does not have a SU-4 mode by the way and thus cannot be triggered by an Alpha in wireless mode. The SB-800 and SB-900 however can be triggered by Alpha wireless signals in SU-4 mode.

I would say I prefer the Minolta-style bokeh to the Carl Zeiss. Anyway, isn't your work far more deliberate and planned out?

For example here's some from a Minolta 135mm F2.8, a superb compact lens which shouldn't be too expensive:
http://www.ewinee.com/

ieR: Yes the A550 is 30% faster than the A350 in AF-C.



Of course, the 55-200mm SAM on the A350 will still be faster than the 55-200mm on the A350. I do not know if they also improved the screw-drive motor or not.

achew: Yes, you can take your sweet time. You plan your shots a lot more than other people. I would say of all of us here you have more potential to use the STF (though, when you make fake bokeh it defeats the purpose of buying a lens for it.) MF is nowhere as hard as you think it is when using the STF, due to the large focus ring and long focus throw (how much you need to turn to go from close focus to infinity - bigger angle is easier for manual focus.)

I would like to see more outdoor shots from you. There the STF is not a problem. It's been a while, surely Singapore isn't just your room and figurines?

ronnie: I would prefer the 85mm F1.4 ZA for APS-C. Yes the 85mm on APS-C would get a focal length similiar to 127.5mm on FF.

There is also the:

Minolta 85mm F1.4G
Minolta 135mm F2.8

If you want budget you can go for:
Vivitar/Samyang 85mm F1.4 (manual focus A-mount)
Jupiter-9 85mm F2.0 (M42)
Carl Zeiss 135mm F3.5 (M42)
Vivitar 135mm F2.8 (M42)


This post has been edited by albnok: Nov 23 2009, 11:35 AM

ronnie:

Minolta 85mm F1.4G - can be any price, but last I remember RM3000 or so.
Minolta 135mm F2.8 - around RM1500 or less if I remember correctly.

135mm on APS-C =~ 200mm on FF = telephoto lens + stage lens + short sports lens
85mm on APS-C =~ 135mm on FF = telephoto lens + stage lens + portrait lens
50mm/55mm/58mm on APS-C =~ 85mm on FF = stage lens + portrait lens

The Wonder: Wah for a while I thought that was Ahmike then I realized it wasn't an A850 and was Ethan. Noticed a tighter crop though! What's different?

millenia3000: 10mm on APS-C = 15mm on FF. Unless you're talking about Canon whose APS-C is 1.6x instead of everybody else's 1.5x.

hazril: I think he was driving a Gen2. Rode with him once. He's the Sony Car Audio Product Manager.

Kul | Mo0: A colleague of mine has it in Nikon mount. Only thing about it is the F2.8 but the range is terribly short - 16mm means you absolutely have to change lens to get tighter, compared to the 11-18mm, 10-20mm, 12-24mm and 10-24mm lenses!

Then again, what is it in full-frame terms? 16-24mm F2.8. Considering a Zeiss 16-35mm F2.8 has much larger range on FF you can why wide shooters like FF - the wide angles on FF have more range and brighter apertures.

I like my Sigma 17-35mm F2.8-4 because I can bring just one lens and use the 35mm for a more normal angle of view. If I was stuck at 16mm APS-C/24mm FF I would have a problem with the perspective. 18mm APS-C/28mm FF is still somewhat manageable.

millenia3000: Very nicely done!

arren86: The 18-55mm has a built-in motor (called SAM) and you need to switch the AF/MF on the lens to use manual focus. It can focus closer (25cm) compared to the 18-70mm (38cm).

achew: Of course we do!



This post has been edited by albnok: Nov 24 2009, 09:08 AM

millenia3000: Congratulations in advance!

The Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG HSM is said to be an excellent performer - it also does not have gear stripping problems as it has HSM.

Other options:

Tokina 28-70mm F2.8 ATX (I believe cjlai is selling)
Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 Zen (rare)
Minolta 28-70mm F2.8G (even rarer, but MFD is a bit long)
Minolta 28-85mm F3.5-4.5
Minolta 28-105mm F3.5-4.5
Minolta 28-135mm F4-4.5 (you might not like the MFD of 1.5 meters!)
Minolta 24-50mm F4 (35cm MFD, amazing!)
Minolta 24-85mm F3.5-4.5
Minolta/Sony 24-105mm F3.5-4.5(D)
Minolta/Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 (33cm MFD; make sure you are satisfied with the image quality as this has a fair bit of variance)

I don't remember if you have a 50mm but your 75-300mm may become a bit more appreciated on FF (some people might find the beercan short on FF.)

millenia3000: The Minolta 28-75mm F2.8, is mostly good but I've seen one bad copy at YL Camera. The Tamron has far more variance. It is the same size as your Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 if you're okay with that size (I find it a big largish.)

My Minolta 24-105mm F3.5-4.5(D) is so-so wide open (weak at the corners) but good at F8 onwards; hence it is a budget studio champion. I don't know how the 24-85mm/28-105mm/28-85mm/24-50mm fare since I haven't used them for group shots on FF.

The (D) stands for Distance Integration meaning it has 8 pins and supports ADI flash. The earlier Minoltas without the (D) do not. All Sony lenses have (D) except the Sony 16mm F2.8 Fisheye, 20mm F2.8, 28mm F2.8, 135mm F2.8/T4.5 STF and 500mm F8 AF Reflex.

Seng_Kiat: The Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 is pretty fast on the A700 onwards. There is one at Leos Trading, Ampang Park.

Personally I say it is pretty darn sharp. It has excellent longitudinal chromatic aberration correction.

http://www.glaringnotebook.com/zimages/bsst3big.jpg
Left to right: 70mm, 135mm, 200mm. Top: Tamron 70-200mm F2.8; bottom: Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG HSM II.

http://www.glaringnotebook.com/zimages/bsst4big.jpg
Same thing; top is Sony 70-200mm F2.8G SSM; bottom is Minolta 80-200mm F2.8G HS APO.

More details here:
http://www.glaringnotebook.com/default.asp?id=1243

5564321: Settings are the same, though the Zeiss was at F1.8 while the others were at F2.8. The Zeiss is indeed very contrasty.

Things I spotted at Sony Style KLCC today!


Banzai_san, this is for you! It looks every bit as good in real life, as it looks in the picture. Which is really, really good.


And then, there is the first ever Sony lens with a 67mm filter thread... (say what?)


The much awaited Sony 28-75mm F2.8 SAM! Note that there is a Lock switch to hold it at 28mm, and the focus ring is reverse from most Sony lenses. It is noticeably smaller than the Zeiss 24-70mm F2.8.

Minimum focus distances:
Sony Vario-Sonnar T* Carl Zeiss 24-70mm F2.8 SSM ZA = 34cm
Tamron/Minolta 28-75mm F2.8 = 33cm
Sony 28-75mm F2.8 SAM = 38cm

We all know that the Sony is a rebadged Tamron - it's obvious from the reverse focus ring and filter size. However, why is the MFD changed from 33cm to 38cm?

The Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 in Canon EF mount comes with a micro-motor since all Canon EOS cameras do not have in-body motors. The Nikon F mount version also has that micro-motor. Both Tamrons can still do 33cm with a micro-motor! So why can't Sony?

Obviously, because a Sony 28-75mm F2.8 that does 33cm MFD compared to a Zeiss 24-70mm F2.8 that does 34cm MFD looks better on paper!

I have to say this, I absolutely hate SAM for lenses that are meant to be matched on higher-end bodies (A850/A900) which have the AF/MF toggle and DMF functionality, because SAM makes any on-body MF control impossible. It's not so bad to have SAM on a kit lens but not on a lens that is targeted to full-frame users.

And yet, it is hard to write off this lens - optically, it is superb, even wide open! I didn't bring my A900 + Minolta 24-105mm F3.5-4.5(D) to compare, but what I shot looks very impressive, with good corners at F2.8. Focusing isn't very fast though, and it feels a bit slow to draw at macro distances sometimes. I guess it's best to have a Zeiss 24-70mm owner to compare as the Zeiss 24-70mm has faster SSM (compared to other lenses in its 24-70mm range.)

Its weight is superb - it's light enough and yet it balances very well on the A850! If the 24-70mm ever felt too heavy, this will feel miraculously matched.

Pixel peeping will come another day!



Pros:
- good balance on the A850/A900
- good optical quality wide open even on the corners
- cameras with a F2.8 sensor (A700/A850/A900) will gain more accuracy
-

Cons:
- SAM motor implementation makes the very useful AF/MF and DMF functions on the A700/A850/A900 useless
- focus ring turns in the reverse direction of all Sony lenses (like the Sony 18-200mm and 18-250mm)
- 38cm MFD is a downgrade from the Konica Minolta/Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 which focused to 33cm close

Personally, if I could find a good copy of the Konica Minolta/Tamron 28-75mm F2.8, I would pick that over this Sony, only for the AF/MF and DMF functionality.

And finally, some leftover lens pr0n:

tanjq87: No price has been announced yet. Hmmm, you have no standard zoom for your A850?

Braynumb: Congratulations!

clivengu: The A700 and A900 have the same number of buttons on the top. I honestly don't use the top LCD of the A900.

jtcs87: The 'body cap' should be in the box.

Kul | Mo0: Tell me about it! That wideness of the beercan on FF is much appreciated because it can focus within a big table.

MechaHerc: It looks like you can.

Left-most compartment: 55-200mm and 18-70mm with back caps facing each other
Middle compartment: A200 + VG-B30AM + 50mm
Right-most compartment: Ultra-wide angle

The flash will fit on your belt (F42 leather pouch has to be modified at a cobbler.)

No need bring blower lah. There is a side pocket outside (not in picture) that can hold the battery and charger.

noprob: Both Sony and Minolta 20mm F2.8 (New) lenses are the same - they forgot ADI.

achew: SGD550 sounds like a really good deal for a Minolta 135mm F2.8! That lens spells lovely bokeh. Completes your portrait prime lineup of:

50mm - 90mm (close enough to 85mm) - 135mm

The street shooters and photojournalists may prefer 24mm (or 28mm), 35mm and 50mm primes. The Minolta 24mm F2.8 is another lovely specimen, but the Minolta 28mm F2.8 is in a lower league.

weixuan: That is sweet!

achew: Scuffs on the rear element can and do show when taking bokeh shots; scuffs on the front element, if big enough, show as a slight haziness (supposing you take a picture of a pattern.)

Probably you won't see it because the lens does not focus near at all (1 meter). However, after trying, and finding the scuff doesn't show in pictures, go ahead (but ask for lower since it isn't as mint as it should be.)

jimlim007: The answer is - you are too n00b.

- increase ambient exposure by using a slower shutter speed and higher ISO. Use Manual Exposure instead.
- don't ever put on a CPL filter unless you want to use it!
- objects are blur because you turned off the flash and it is using a slow shutter speed.
- you are metering for the background so you really do not have to keep adjusting it for every shot

Anyway, you can focus on the body if you want as you may find, it is in the similiar plane of focus. Anyway you can choose the AF point you want, yes?