**SONY ALPHA (α)**®, Like no others.
|
|
 Sep 29 2007, 11:57 PM
Return to original view | Post
#1
|
 
Senior Member
1,161 posts Joined: Dec 2006 From: http://www.vincentpang.ws 
|
QUOTE([Raven] @ Sep 29 2007, 11:51 PM) then getting the 18-200 would be better you reckon? at least no need to change here and there, i'm getting a 18-200 soon, and a 56 Flash, but then again no one would buy my kitlens get a sigma 70-200mm f2.8... couple with ur kitlens... perfect combo   |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 16 2007, 01:57 AM
Return to original view | Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member
1,161 posts Joined: Dec 2006 From: http://www.vincentpang.ws
|
i got a new a700 (body only) looking for RM 4000. Full warranty from Sony Malaysia. My friend is working in some sony partner shop and got to redeem at this price. PM me if interested.
|
|
|
Dec 29 2007, 11:49 AM
Return to original view | Post
#3
|
|
Senior Member
1,161 posts Joined: Dec 2006 From: http://www.vincentpang.ws
|
we are organizing a LYN photog outing @ Zoo Negara on 5 Jan 2008. Everyone is invited. Pls register in the thread in my signature
|
|
|
Jan 24 2008, 11:03 PM
Return to original view | Post
#4
|
|
Senior Member
1,161 posts Joined: Dec 2006 From: http://www.vincentpang.ws
|
QUOTE(soulfly @ Jan 24 2008, 10:45 PM) Does it really matter? Sony's body focus motor is much faster than Canon's USM... unless silent focusing is your priority. For us, Sony and Minolta users.... lens with built-in focusing mechanism is just a bonus, not a priority. i can't seems to believe that Sony can focus faster than USM, you got some facts to support that ? |
|
|
Jan 25 2008, 12:12 AM
Return to original view | Post
#5
|
|
Senior Member
1,161 posts Joined: Dec 2006 From: http://www.vincentpang.ws
|
QUOTE(soulfly @ Jan 24 2008, 11:56 PM) Agreed. "Feel" is quite subjective for each different individuals. you are referring to this Anyway, here's a good argument-cum-discussion about focusing mechanisms: http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=24369 QUOTE I recently spent several days in Bosque del Apache NWR and had a chance to watch Canon USM lenses being used by professionals. It's no contest. I have two Minolta HS lenses, the 70-200 SSM and the A700 body and could not approach the speed and accuracy of their equipment. Not even the Maxxum 7 or 9 film bodies, which I own, could drive the HS lenses that fast. Sony's got a long way to go whichever system they choose. sorry i lost interest after page 2. I think forum is forum. They will come up with their own conclusion which is sometimes baseless just like what happen here too. |
|
|
Jan 25 2008, 12:32 AM
Return to original view | Post
#6
|
|
Senior Member
1,161 posts Joined: Dec 2006 From: http://www.vincentpang.ws
|
QUOTE(kitman @ Jan 25 2008, 12:24 AM) hmm and how you know it is not a matter of fact yes, my brother owns the sony A100. ? have you tried and time both system side by side? is the difference material? hmm to a sports or nature photographer maybe impt. anyway original poster should have facts to back when stating such claims - feel feel very subjective. and me and my brother stop arguing how crappy both kitlens are and doesn't bother to compare which is better  |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 25 2008, 12:57 AM
Return to original view | Post
#7
|
|
Senior Member
1,161 posts Joined: Dec 2006 From: http://www.vincentpang.ws
|
QUOTE(dx_myrddraal @ Jan 25 2008, 12:24 AM) i'm not a sports photographer, i just pointed out that the EF 50mm f.14 has USM (with FTM), so being RM 100 odd more expensive than the Sony, it can be said "cheaper". poison poisonAm getting a dSLR at the end of Feb, or beginning of March. of course would be great if i can find a used Minolta 50mm f1.8 or Sony 50mm f1.4, then only go buy the A200. Anyone having a 50mm f1.8 wanna upgrade to the Sony f1.4?   nice round bokeh... go for the sony f1.4 |
|
|
Jan 25 2008, 01:15 PM
Return to original view | Post
#8
|
|
Senior Member
1,161 posts Joined: Dec 2006 From: http://www.vincentpang.ws
|
albnok: i'll prefer a round shape than pentagonal one if given the choice
and i'll prefer this kind of bokeh  which blurred out the background. That is also a main reason why some people go for bigger aperture lens. To me, the man sweeping the floor is just doesn't have enough bokeh to isolate the background, unless u want to do composition. Maybe the tree behind is a famous tree or the lake has nice swan. |
|
|
Jan 25 2008, 05:53 PM
Return to original view | Post
#9
|
|
Senior Member
1,161 posts Joined: Dec 2006 From: http://www.vincentpang.ws
|
QUOTE(ganz @ Jan 25 2008, 04:30 PM) something new to learn here.. kekeek. now i'm start to confuse on bokeh ..i thought every blur image in the behind is a bokeh.. you tell me which one you like  http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/bokeh-comparison.htm which one is the correct one?  you are confused because the background used earlier were different, which i have to agree is not a fair comparison. That compasion by kenrockwell is more accurate as they use same object n same background. This post has been edited by vincent_audio: Jan 25 2008, 05:56 PM |
|
|
Feb 16 2008, 08:16 PM
Return to original view | Post
#10
|
|
Senior Member
1,161 posts Joined: Dec 2006 From: http://www.vincentpang.ws
|
QUOTE(soulfly @ Feb 16 2008, 10:58 AM) this is a vague question. sony, minolta or 3rd party? wow crazy, so crazy that the top right corner is darker than the top left corner. I would see this happening with a polariser, but since u said there's no polariser, i would expect this to be a 'feature' of the lens which i'm not impressed at all.Added on February 16, 2008, 11:08 am This is one example of the crazy contrast albnok was talking about....  a100 w/CZ 16-80, no polarizer http://tedadnan.com/blog/index.php?paged=5 http://tedadnan.com/blog/index.php?paged=7 |
|
Topic ClosedOptions
|
| Change to: |  0.0321sec
 0.47
 7 queries
 GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 13th December 2025 - 05:03 AM |
Quote