Seng_Kiat: DOF becomes more shallow at close range - watch out for that. Also make sure you and subject are not moving. Also, are you at 16mm? The CZ 16-80mm sometimes makes a backfocusing body obvious.

jimlim007: Yes, but the price, size and weight of the Sigma are all disadvantages. The bigger body is to reduce cats-eye bokeh, and to fit the HSM motor.

amadeo: Could you add the following to the price list:

Sony 30mm F2.8 DT SAM Macro = RM7xx

Sony 28-75mm F2.8 SAM = RM26xx

gizmo_pony: Use the center AF point for fastest focus acquisition, and zoom out to help the camera catch focus.

Braynumb: The Sony 55-200mm F4-5.6 DT SAM is not compatible with the AF/MF and DMF functions of the A700. Not worth it for me.

marauderz: Interesting, will remember to try this next time I see a tricky purple. Also was it from the JPG or RAW, given that RAW probably would harvest more colors?

The underscore is due to it being in AdobeRGB instead of sRGB.

Braynumb: I think you're going around in circles being silly lah. Just get the beercan. The 100-200mm F4.5 is the closest you've ever had to it, but with a weaker range.

finejava: Yes indeed! An autofocusing 85mm F1.4 is better than a manual focusing 85mm F1.4. Also, I have a friend who feels his Zeiss 85mm F1.4 was slower but when compared side-by-side with my Zeiss 135mm F1.8 it was the same. Perceptual, I guess.

Aiyo, the point of RAW is that you can (and probably are expected to) fix simple errors like underexposure and wrong WB!

As for the difference in color it is entirely up to the RAW converter. Some bring out more colors in fine detail. Some have a different idea of AWB. Whatever it is, you are supposed to change it. If you want to do a direct comparison set them all to the same Kelvin and Color Correction Filter (Tint) value.

8 years is a good long time. Though the local warranty is 1 year plus 6 months once you register it online. If you can bear with shipping it to Hong Kong before it gets sent for warranty, sure! Ironically, I think you'll have better luck and more efficient service sending it to HK... provided it is by a service company of caliber. For example in USA there's Precision Camera which has been getting good feedback on Dyxum.

porkchop: The VG-B30AM and VG-B50AM copies are fine. For the A700/A850/A900 you don't want to get one of those 3-button grips since the VG-C70AM and VG-C90AM have a full set of buttons. That said I think the VG-B50AM feels far more solid than the VG-B30AM, and the copies of the VG-B30AM already feel creakier.

signither: ND for waterfalls, GND for landscapes. I dare say there is more practical use for the GND outside of waterfalls and landscapes, to equalize the exposure on two halves of a frame. However I don't have space for it in my bag all the time.

fansoption: Set the DRO as you like lah! Note that the higher the DRO (say Level 5) you get more noise because it is pulling up the shadows.

CrazyAyik: I have the Minolta 24-105mm F3.5-4.5(D) - it is nice and much smaller than the Tamron 17-50mm F2.8. However are you sure you don't need the 17mm end of it?

marauderz: Just to be sure, were you shooting JPG? If you were, then you can say that the screen couldn't display purple. If you were shooting RAW then we cannot say for sure that the screen cannot display purple as the RAW processor will have a different idea of WB and how to extract color.

SpOOkY: It's the color gamut. Purple is made of red and blue. It is plainly due to the camera's tendency to underexpose because it sees Full Blue (255) but and stops exposing there. If it exposes longer, blue will be clipped but red and green can come out.

Same thing for red - cameras tend to underexpose if it sees blown red, losing the green and blue channels.

You can of course pull out the missing channels.

finejava: No there isn't, the smartest conversion is still up to you.

SHOfrE3zE: Nice geometry!

fansoption: Read my earlier reply to you! I will not post it again.

This post has been edited by albnok: Dec 27 2009, 11:24 PM

One year later, a professional writes about the A900 he bought:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/...-one-year.shtml

craziqbal: Thanks!

mcline_007: You can bring up the midtones in Levels and do a 22% 33 pixel USM.

clivengu: I can relate on the banana bit LOL.

It's not the Samyang 85mm F1.4. Why would you think it is?

sonyx: Send it to the service center, seriously.

SpOOkY: Refer here; you most likely can recover the colors:
http://www.glaringnotebook.com/default.asp?id=1313

sonyx: Er... I would rather get the F42 or F58, really... the F42 is a slight downgrade but I like how it is smaller and has more accurate flash exposure. It also recharges much faster after a full blast (4 seconds).

SpOOkY: As I said - overexpose! You'll see it all coming back.

wha7ever: You can enable Manual Power flash while in Aperture Priority - it's a custom function on your F42. Refer to your manual on how to activate it.

jr.precrime:

Do you need the F1.4 for faster shutter speeds in low light without flash? If so, go ahead.

Do you need the shallow DOF? If so you may be better off with a telephoto lens.

Do you want something you can use and keep the big Tamron at home? Get the Sigma 30mm F1.4 instead, the angle is far more usable.

Seng_Kiat: You mean the flash EV is different each time? Beware the shiny surfaces and compensate accordingly.

Or if you mean that the ambient light is different? That is unavoidable (and so you may need to use the AEL button to activate Slow Sync.)

SpOOkY: There is Slow Sync when you press AEL on A100/A700/A850/A900 or you could set the Flash mode to Slow Sync.

jr.precrime: The Sigma 28mm F1.8 is cheaper, followed by the Sigma 24mm F1.8 and Sigma 20mm F1.8. Not sure how much these are now in Malaysia but last I remember, the prices I see on Amazon are very close to what a dealer quoted me before.

Arranged in order of price:
Sigma 20mm F1.8 EX DG Macro, MFD = 20cm, maximum magnification = 1:4x, USD519
Sigma 24mm F1.8 EX DG Macro, MFD = 18cm, maximum magnification = 1:2.7x, USD449
Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, MFD = 40cm, maximum magnification = 1:10.4x, USD439
Sigma 28mm F1.8 EX DG Macro, MFD = 20cm, maximum magnification = 1:2.9x, USD349

My friend got a local-warranty Sigma 30mm F1.4 recently for RM1750 so we can assume a 1 USD = RM4 conversion rate.

clivengu: Wow, you actually use all 3 MR slots! I used only slot 1 on the A700, and flipped between that and Manual Exposure or Aperture Priority (since they remember their own WB.)

Of course with the A900 and 3 separate slots on the dial it became a lot easier...

hkhk: The Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC in Sony mount, does not come with HSM. This applies for all the older Sigmas (10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC) also. Everything from the 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG II HSM onwards, for Sony mount, had HSM.

And yes, the 28mm F1.8 is fun due to the MFD!

lehtung: Nice! There's something very hypnotic about her and the bokeh. Well done!

finejava: I use multi-segment, but set my AEL button to "Spot Meter AEL Toggle". So when you point at a subject and press the AEL button, it gets a spot meter reading there.

I have always, always fancied the 85mm/90mm focal length on full-frame; whenever I met a Tamron 90mm F2.8 Macro I'd pick it up and take portraits with it because of the very comfortable range.


And so, it is of no surprise that I would end up getting myself a Christmas/birthday present - the Opteka 85mm F1.4!

This is most commonly known as the Samyang 85mm F1.4 - of course, it comes repackaged as a Rokinon, Bower, Polar, Vivitar, etc. However the basic specifications still hold - it is manual focus only, does not come with a focus confirm chip, and has an aperture ring. Interestingly, the aperture jumps from F1.4 to F2.0 then clicks in half-stops until F16, where it jumps to F22.


It also only focuses to 1 meter close, which can be quite far for some people. Fortunately I am not feeling it all that often since I am used to standing further away with the Sony Carl Zeiss 135mm F1.8 (which, despite its closer 72cm minimum focus distance, will need you to stand further away due to intense magnification of the viewfinder!)

The rear end of the lens protrudes a fair bit - I am not sure if a focus confirm chip could fit in there all that easily without it being pushed out each time you focus to infinity.


Here it is, next to all my monofocal prime lenses and teleconverters. Center is the Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 135mm F1.8 ZA. Clockwise from left: Minolta 50mm F1.4 Original, Kenko 1.5x teleconverter, Kenko 2.0x teleconverter, Vivitar 24mm F2.0 DIY Tilt-Shift, Peleng 8mm F3.5 M42 mount circular fisheye, Opteka 85mm F1.4.


Left to right: Peleng 8mm F3.5 M42 mount circular fisheye, Vivitar 24mm F2.0 DIY Tilt-Shift, Minolta 50mm F1.4 Original, Opteka 85mm F1.4, Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 135mm F1.8 ZA.


The Opteka isn't that big, when flanked by the similiarly-sized Minolta 24-105mm F3.5-4.5(D). The Zeiss to the right is the big one.


However, when the Opteka's hood is on, it can try to pretend to be the same size as the Zeiss...


From the top, there is a decent amount of recessing - I really don't understand why. They could've made this lens a lot shorter and its filters would vignette less.

Amazingly, it is an internal focusing design - the Sony Carl Zeiss Planar T* 85mm F1.4 ZA and Minolta 85mm F1.4G are external focusing designs. Of course they have the far more convenient minimum focus distances of 85cm!

The current Nikkor F1.8/F1.4 and Canon 85mm F1.8/F1.2 lenses are all internal focusing. The downside of this is that the view widens as you focus closer.

Also, when looking at the lens from in front while focusing, I'm not sure why they didn't allow the focus group to travel further and thus, focus closer.


Here's the Opteka on the Minolta Dynax 7, and the Zeiss 135mm F1.8 on the Sony Alpha 900.


Somehow, the Minolta Dynax 7 look matches the Opteka more.


Though, the Sony Alpha 900 looks porportionate.

The Alpha 900, like the Alpha 200 onwards, unfortunately does not have the Shutter Release Without Lens option in the menu - so you can't use this lens in Aperture Priority anymore! You have to go to Manual Exposure, unless your lens has a chip. It also does not do focus confirm without the chip.

This post has been edited by albnok: Dec 29 2009, 11:04 AM

And now, for some portraits!


85mm F1.4.


The first picture I took with this portrait lens, was of course, a portrait. You can see sweat! It was a hot day.

Note that initially, Auto WB tended to give a purple cast - I set it to Daylight WB and all was okay.


In office lighting, indoors, it is no slouch - I love how it picks up reflected ambient colors! This is a quality I love in great lenses.


I took it to the streets, where ISO1600 would give me 1/40s. Which would be a decent shutter speed, given the weight of the A900 helping stabilize it.

Yes, SteadyShot does not work here, unless the lens has a chip which tells the body that the lens is at 85mm, and so it can drive the SteadyShot mechanism to compensate accordingly. However in practice, 1/40s was still alright!


Only downside being at F1.4 is the shallow depth of field, making it difficult to pick a subject when street shooting.


On the LRT. I love how contrasty this lens is wide open, compared to my Minolta 50mm F1.4 Original! In hindsight only my Minolta and Sigma 17-35mm F2.8-4 EX are weak in contrast - the other lenses I have like the Minolta 24-105mm F3.5-4.5(D) and Minolta 70-210mm F4 beercan</a> are contrasty wide open.

We now cut to a comparison of contrast. I used the HVL-F56AM flash set at 1/16th power 85mm, and set the A900 at 1/200s ISO200, and turned off all the lights, for this:

The Zeiss was set at F2.0 because the F56AM power cannot be set in 1/3rd steps.


The Opteka was set at F1.4, and the F56AM was dialled down to 1/32th power to equalize. I also cropped a similiar region.


The Minolta was set at F1.4, with the F56AM still at 1/32th power. While it did seem to transmit a bit more, it was quite gauzy. The Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM would handle this situation like the above two lenses, with loads of contrast, but that's a story for another day...


I attempted to make a Minolta Dynax 7-STF mode simulation and this is what I got. The lens bodes well for fake STF attempts!

This post has been edited by albnok: Dec 29 2009, 11:02 AM

Manual focusing is not easy - you need to learn how to do it. However once mastered you can catch focus pretty quick!


100% crop.

Note that I was using the Sony FDA-FM1AM (A900 Type-M manual focusing screen) to help see depth of field accurately at F1.4. This lens is best used with a Sony Alpha 500/550 that has MF Check Live View, or an Alpha 850/900 fitted with the Type-M screen.

But hey, how about some action? I picked up the lens and returned to shoot a rock concert!


Really, it's not that hard! F1.4.


I focused while they were walking! Again, nothing you can't achieve with a bit of practice.

It also helps that I had a few M42 lenses for my A700 before, to practice...


Crazy rain. Yes, the lens got subjected to some inclement weather. 1/640s ISO6400.


The rain killed the generators, leaving the VIP tent in darkness! 1/20s ISO1600.


Woodstock baby! 1/20s ISO6400. I focused to 1 meter, then walked closer until they were in focus.


1/25s ISO1600. I pulled tones out of overexposed red faces to get this.

So the question everybody asks is this - is it worth it? Yes, definitely! It is a stark fraction of the price of an auto-focusing 85mm F1.4! It is great optically, with a decent amount of contrast. (I just have not compared it to the Sony Carl Zeiss Planar T* 85mm F1.4 ZA - something tells me that if I do, I will be haunted by it...)

ianho, great tip! destfull, hope you get your camera back.

ieR: Yes, IQ from the lens is astounding!

ianho: Not that great; anyway my Tamron has gotten gear stripping after I put 2 teleconverters on it one night. No replacement parts unfortunately. The 200-400mm becomes easier to use on the 200mm end especially for concerts (200mm on APS-C was too long sometimes.)

hongyew: Persistently call them.

amadeo: Could you add the following to the street price list:

Sony A500 + 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 DT SAM + 55-200mm F4-5.6 DT SAM = RM3250
Sony A550 + 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DT = RM40xx

ieR: Nice, you need to get the fisheye closer though as there is often too much space.

ronnie: Hmmm didn't get that, but I am happy for Mr. Chin!

And now, for more from the Opteka 85mm F1.4!


I also took the opportunity to compare it to the Sony Carl Zeiss Planar T* 85mm F1.4 ZA - something I may not want to do in fear of finding my lens inferior. Fortunately, it wasn't the case... strongly. Here's the Opteka 85mm F1.4 focused to 1 meter, its minimum focusing distance.


The Zeiss 85mm F1.4, however, magnifies a lot more because:

1) it can focus to 85cm close
2) it has external focus

Internal focus lenses tend to widen the angle of view, thus causing lesser magnification.

For example, the Sony 135mm F2.8/T4.5 Smooth Transition Focus lens focuses to 87cm close, giving a 1:4x maximum magnification. It is an external focus lens.

The Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 135mm F1.8 ZA can focus to 72cm close... so logically, it should be able to get closer and get a better magnification, right? However, as it is internal focus, its angle of view widens at close range, and so it gets the same 1:4x maximum magnification as the STF!

So, there are benefits to external focus lenses.


Size-wise they are quite similiar. Both use 72mm filter threads.


The Zeiss hood can literally eat the Opteka hood!


And how about a portrait comparison? Opteka 85mm F1.4 at F1.4 1/100s ISO800.


Here's the same thing from the Zeiss at the same settings.

Honestly, at a glance, the overall contrast looks very similiar! Also, the Opteka is very capable of picking up ambient colors the way the Zeiss does. Please pardon that the Opteka has a slightly different focus plane.


It is only when you start pixel-peeping that you see why the Zeiss costs 4 times the price... this is a 100% crop from the Opteka. It is pretty sharp wide open!


However, this is a 100% crop from the Zeiss! The keyword here is microcontrast - it has far more contrasty details.

I would say that after this exercise, I understood what the Zeiss microcontrast thing was all about. The Opteka is really 80% of the Zeiss, for 25% the price!