Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
Photography The Sony Alpha Thread V39!, The Orange Legion
|
neo_lam
|
 Apr 22 2010, 01:46 PM
|
|
QUOTE(shootkk @ Apr 22 2010, 01:38 PM) neo_lam : What is the reason for your upgrade to FF? Is there anything that you do not like or cannot get when using the A700? If you are going FF just because you want to upgade for upgrading sake then I would advise you to wait for the A7xx Going FF is changing format already. Apart from the need to get FF lenses, there are these things to consider: 1. The DOF changes. It gets narrower for the same aperture. If f4 can do in APS-C you will need at least a f5.6 or f6.3 when using FF. That means shooting much slower than you normally do. wow...thanks bro for enlighten me....ur point makes me consider into more deeply of my mind.... |
|
|
|
|
|
Gouki
|
Apr 22 2010, 01:49 PM
|
Live Life Cool
|
QUOTE(shootkk @ Apr 22 2010, 01:38 PM) neo_lam : What is the reason for your upgrade to FF? Is there anything that you do not like or cannot get when using the A700? » Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «
If you are going FF just because you want to upgade for upgrading sake then I would advise you to wait for the A7xx
Going FF is changing format already. Apart from the need to get FF lenses, there are these things to consider:
1. The DOF changes. It gets narrower for the same aperture. If f4 can do in APS-C you will need at least a f5.6 or f6.3 when using FF. That means shooting much slower than you normally do.
2. Telephoto no longer gives you that much reach. 200mm will seem short initially for you if you have gotten used to APS-C. So if you are a fan of telephoto range then you need a 300mm to get the same view as a 200mm on an APS-C. If you always use a 70-200mm f2.8 at the 200mm range at f2.8 you are going to feel the pain!
3. The megapixel paradox - Sony only offers 24MP for their FF and that means an increase in all pic sizes. Your current CF cards suddenly becomes low capacity and your PC may feel the load when doing PP. If worse comes to worst, you may need to upgrade your PC too! That's also a cost to upgrade.
4. Fast shooting costs you more - If you're used to the 5fps on A700 or worse the 7fps of the A550 then your only option is the A900 which offers 5fps. The A850 will not satisfy you with its puny 3fps. I don't normally do burst so it's not a problem for me. The A900 is significantly more costly
You are already using a Zeiss lens (16-80). Can you be content with normal lenses when you shift to FF? A 24-70mm will not cover the same range because of the loss of the tele effect on FF. The Zeiss FF lenses costs a bomb. To get an approx of the 16-80 you will need the 24-70mm AND at least an 85mm if not a 135mm. The cheaper option is to get a Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 and maybe the Samyang 85mm but you lose the Zeiss color and crazy contrast and the Samyang is manual focus. Of course you gain bright aperture.
I'm not trying to discourage anyone from moving to FF but it's not a decision to make lightly. Look at me. I have only 2 lenses and they are both old Minolta lenses. Can't afford new lenses. I have another 24-85mm f3.5-f4.5 standard zoom which I borrowed from a friend and that's also an old minolta lens.
The IQ of the A900/A850 is not that much different from the A700 you are using now. Only thing is that it has a higher megapixel count for printing big.
Think about it.
 well said bro~ one of the many reasons why i stay at apsc as a hobbyist~  This post has been edited by Gouki: Apr 22 2010, 01:50 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
kev da man
|
Apr 22 2010, 02:03 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(albnok @ Apr 22 2010, 01:06 PM) Maybe the 16-35mm just causes people to move slightly due to its weight, LOL! He was not using AF-C. That is not what AF Microadjust does - it's to correct for aperture-related focus shift and other cases where due to optical complications the AF unit brings the lens to front/backfocus. If he got it in focus correctly, and locked focus, and moved back, that is user error already! had to reread that to fully comprehend ahahaha. |
|
|
|
|
|
zstan
|
Apr 22 2010, 02:05 PM
|
|
|
hmmm..nice point about full frame.. i guess i should invest in better lenses rather than changing bodies..  speaking of 16-80mm..how much does it cost? |
|
|
|
|
|
neo_lam
|
Apr 22 2010, 02:10 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(zstan @ Apr 22 2010, 02:05 PM) hmmm..nice point about full frame.. i guess i should invest in better lenses rather than changing bodies.. speaking of 16-80mm..how much does it cost? rm2500 can get...really good on apsc body... |
|
|
|
|
|
signither
|
Apr 22 2010, 02:16 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(Kul | Mo0 @ Apr 22 2010, 01:29 PM) neo_lam : signither win la these case. zzzz. Defend you just now, now you bomb me. Sigh. oi oi. why bomb me pulak?   |
|
|
|
|
|
zstan
|
Apr 22 2010, 02:23 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(neo_lam @ Apr 22 2010, 02:10 PM) rm2500 can get...really good on apsc body... ok..i be will posting that on my facebook wall everyday stating i wan dat as my birthday present next year..  This post has been edited by zstan: Apr 22 2010, 02:26 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
jamesies
|
Apr 22 2010, 02:29 PM
|
New Member
|
QUOTE(kev da man @ Apr 22 2010, 10:30 AM) three weeks? i had back mine in one. forgot to pick it up summore from Sony's curve branch LOL X_X~ yeah~ the fellow there say, will give me a call by 2 weeks time, and tell me how much to pay for the repairing.. instead of telling me how much it cost to repair it. they called me in 3 weeks time n tell me my baby is back on track XD
Added on April 22, 2010, 2:35 pmQUOTE(zstan @ Apr 22 2010, 02:23 PM) get lah sony 2875 f2.8 sam =D i think its for both aps-c and FF XD This post has been edited by jamesies: Apr 22 2010, 02:35 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
zstan
|
Apr 22 2010, 02:39 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(jamesies @ Apr 22 2010, 02:29 PM) X_X~ yeah~ the fellow there say, will give me a call by 2 weeks time, and tell me how much to pay for the repairing.. instead of telling me how much it cost to repair it. they called me in 3 weeks time n tell me my baby is back on track XD
Added on April 22, 2010, 2:35 pm get lah sony 2875 f2.8 sam =D i think its for both aps-c and FF XD haha..i prefer a wider angle..28 mm a bit mafan when taking group shots...even so on aps-c.. |
|
|
|
|
|
Zicron
|
Apr 22 2010, 02:42 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(zstan @ Apr 22 2010, 02:39 PM) haha..i prefer a wider angle..28 mm a bit mafan when taking group shots...even so on aps-c.. then u'll need 16mm, which is same as 24mm on FF |
|
|
|
|
|
likito
|
Apr 22 2010, 02:43 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(jamesies @ Apr 22 2010, 02:29 PM)
Added on April 22, 2010, 2:35 pm get lah sony 2875 f2.8 sam =D i think its for both aps-c and FF XD i totally give up SAM lens  , unless sony gonna improve it . |
|
|
|
|
|
shootkk
|
Apr 22 2010, 02:44 PM
|
Loyal Sony A100 User
|
Do NOT get the 28-75mm f2.8 SAM if you think that 18mm on your APS-C is not wide enough.
Although it is a FF lens and can be used on both FF and APS-C body, the 28mm on an APS-C will give you an angle of view that is 42mm.
For those of you who are not sure what I am talking about, turn your kitlens almost to the 50mm mark and look through your viewfinder. If you can live with that being the widest you can go, then you can consider getting the lens.
Just because it is a f2.8 constant aperture lens does not make it a good lens for you. If it does not suit your needs, the f2.8 constant aperture counts for NOTHING. Ditto for 24-70mm f2.8 lenses. Anyone of you guys with APS-C body thinking of getting that focal length, turn your kitlenses to 36mm, tape it there and use that for one week at least without removing the tape. If you can live with that, then you can get the lens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
neo_lam
|
Apr 22 2010, 02:45 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(likito @ Apr 22 2010, 02:43 PM) i totally give up SAM lens , unless sony gonna improve it . 2875 same like the others??
Added on April 22, 2010, 2:47 pmQUOTE(shootkk @ Apr 22 2010, 02:44 PM) Do NOT get the 28-75mm f2.8 SAM if you think that 18mm on your APS-C is not wide enough. Although it is a FF lens and can be used on both FF and APS-C body, the 28mm on an APS-C will give you an angle of view that is 42mm. For those of you who are not sure what I am talking about, turn your kitlens almost to the 50mm mark and look through your viewfinder. If you can live with that being the widest you can go, then you can consider getting the lens. Just because it is a f2.8 constant aperture lens does not make it a good lens for you. If it does not suit your needs, the f2.8 constant aperture counts for NOTHING. Ditto for 24-70mm f2.8 lenses. Anyone of you guys with APS-C body thinking of getting that focal length, turn your kitlenses to 36mm, tape it there and use that for one week at least without removing the tape. If you can live with that, then you can get the lens. bro...turn to 28mm would be the same...not 50mm coz its almost 75mm on apsc... This post has been edited by neo_lam: Apr 22 2010, 02:47 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
zstan
|
Apr 22 2010, 02:53 PM
|
|
|
that's why i want the 16-80mm...not using full frame...widest at 50mm can have to stand 5 metres away only can take group shot wei..@@
|
|
|
|
|
|
albnok
|
Apr 22 2010, 02:56 PM
|
Alpha Male
|
Also, have you maximized your camera?
I say, I have not maximized my A900. Why? Because it has the potential to print LARGE. Huge like walking-past-floor-height in KLCC tunnel LARGE.
I haven't gotten to the level where I have clients with budgets where I can afford to have a make up artist, hairstylist, art director (and me, to press the shutter.) The A900 was designed to be a studio camera for making high-resolution prints. You can even print a billboard with it!
The biggest I've ever printed is 30x20".
Sometimes I look at pictures I took 4 months ago, and think "hmmm, I could've done better." And I keep thinking that whenever I look back. There is still so much to improve or make better, or a different angle to shoot, or a different expression to express.
So, long way for me to go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
neo_lam
|
Apr 22 2010, 03:04 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(albnok @ Apr 22 2010, 02:56 PM) Also, have you maximized your camera? I say, I have not maximized my A900. Why? Because it has the potential to print LARGE. Huge like walking-past-floor-height in KLCC tunnel LARGE. I haven't gotten to the level where I have clients with budgets where I can afford to have a make up artist, hairstylist, art director (and me, to press the shutter.) The A900 was designed to be a studio camera for making high-resolution prints. You can even print a billboard with it! The biggest I've ever printed is 30x20". Sometimes I look at pictures I took 4 months ago, and think "hmmm, I could've done better." And I keep thinking that whenever I look back. There is still so much to improve or make better, or a different angle to shoot, or a different expression to express. So, long way for me to go. bro..nice point...will reconsider everything.... |
|
|
|
|
|
shootkk
|
Apr 22 2010, 03:06 PM
|
Loyal Sony A100 User
|
neo_lam: You're right! Sorry for that mistake.... crap.. being using the A850 for too long ady... hehehehe...
|
|
|
|
|
|
neo_lam
|
Apr 22 2010, 03:11 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(shootkk @ Apr 22 2010, 03:06 PM) neo_lam: You're right! Sorry for that mistake.... crap.. being using the A850 for too long ady... hehehehe... ok..its customary actions....  |
|
|
|
|
|
lugiamcg
|
Apr 22 2010, 03:11 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(albnok @ Apr 21 2010, 06:50 PM) lugiamcg: Yes the D90 has a bad case of rolling shutter (a few of my colleagues have it.) I haven't played with the 550D but the 7D does have the rolling shutter effect. I have a Cybershot WX1 with Exmor R but I haven't really recorded video from it. I'll try to. Sony has recently launched a full-frame 35mm format CCD video camera: http://www.sonyinsider.com/2010/04/12/nab-...r-and-pl-mount/CCDs have global shutters - they capture everything at once instead of scanning, so you don't get that effect. i see wondering why fellow manufacturers uses cmos sensors for movie recording lol  . Btw, is there any cmos video recording devices that could eliminate rolling shutter effect entirely? ie: cmos with global shutter |
|
|
|
|
|
kev da man
|
Apr 22 2010, 03:13 PM
|
|
|
QUOTE(albnok @ Apr 22 2010, 02:56 PM) Also, have you maximized your camera? I say, I have not maximized my A900. Why? Because it has the potential to print LARGE. Huge like walking-past-floor-height in KLCC tunnel LARGE. I haven't gotten to the level where I have clients with budgets where I can afford to have a make up artist, hairstylist, art director (and me, to press the shutter.) The A900 was designed to be a studio camera for making high-resolution prints. You can even print a billboard with it! The biggest I've ever printed is 30x20". Sometimes I look at pictures I took 4 months ago, and think "hmmm, I could've done better." And I keep thinking that whenever I look back. There is still so much to improve or make better, or a different angle to shoot, or a different expression to express. So, long way for me to go. long way for you to go, even longer for us.  anybody knows whether the tamron 1118 is good enough for group portraiture or should i just stick to the sony 1118? itching to get an UWA now, or are there other UWAs available? how bout the sigma 10-20? tak nak samyang 8mm though, really niche lens This post has been edited by kev da man: Apr 22 2010, 03:19 PM |
|
|
|
|
Quote
0.0277sec
0.83
6 queries
GZIP Disabled