1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Wot Lens Next ?.

Discussion in 'Sony Chat' started by DaveG40, Dec 23, 2009.

  1. DaveG40

    DaveG40 Well-Known Member

    I currently have an A500 and the following lenses:

    Sal 18-250 (travel/general purpose set up)
    Minolta 28-105 xi F3.5-F4.5 (low light, portrait, kit lens)
    Baby beercan (F4 35-70) with MF macro (used for macro)
    Sigma 70-300 Apo DG Macro (sports, Aircraft and tele use).

    I've noticed that there are several very nice lenses available, and if i had the money I'd probably get all 3, but i have'nt, and as for my useage: I'd like to get into Macro but can't afford the really good stuff, I don't have a prime and I have thought about ditching both Minolta's in order to fill the gap/subsidize a move to a better all-rounder (fast and with Macro ability), the 18-50 f2.8 is sadly out of my price range and would've been the obvious choice.

    <u>The Lenses Are:</u>
    1) SONY 50mm F1.8 (£109 AFTER C/BACK)
    2) SONY 30mm F2.8 Macro (£129 AFTER C/BACK)
    3) Sigma 50mm F2.8 (£180)

    I think No 3 would probably my best bet ?, or is there something better/cheaper that I've missed ?.

    To fund the move to No 3 I'd probably sell the 2 minolta's would that be a fair swap/good move ?.

    At the moment I mainly use my Sal18250 and Sigma 70-300.
     
  2. Steve52

    Steve52 Well-Known Member

    Have you considered this ?

    OK. It is more than what you are prepared to pay, but I think it is an excellent lens for both indoor (which in my case is what it is mainly used for) and outdoor use.

    The company are excellent to deal with as well.
     
  3. fabs

    fabs Well-Known Member

    But be aware. I bought same lens from them last year and, when the sony stripped it's gears I sent it to Sigma for a warranty repair only to be told that it was a grey import. Yes, Microglobe aid for the repair but it's worth noting that you wouldn't be entitled to the Sigma extended 3 year warranty.
     
  4. Roger_Provins

    Roger_Provins Well-Known Member

    It seems you're missing something for real 1:1 macro - so I'd go for number 3 on your list.

    The 2 Minoltas should sell well particularly the 35-70mm (please don't call it a baby-beercan though - there's only one "beercan" and that's the 70-210mm f/4 :) )
     
  5. DaveG40

    DaveG40 Well-Known Member

    Thanks for the thought Steve, but, if the 18-50 F2.8 is out of my price range then spending nearly £390 on a 24-70 F2.8 is most definitely un-affordable.

    Anything about £200 cheaper ;) :D
     
  6. DaveG40

    DaveG40 Well-Known Member

    That's what worries me about the 50mm Sigma, if a 24-70 f2.8 can go like it, what about the 50mm, which apparently does have a limiter ?. Apart from changing the drive from hi to lo on my A500 I can't see anyway of controlling AF speed.
     
  7. fabs

    fabs Well-Known Member

    Sigma have hopefully addressed the gear stripping problem. When they fixed the 24-70 they said they had fitted new stronger gears, can only hope that they went on to do this with any new production. I found Sigma very good to deal with so it may be worth giving them a call.
     
  8. Dorset_Mike

    Dorset_Mike Grumpy Old Fart

    Why not look out for a S/H Tamron 90/2.8 macro, or sell off one or more of the lenses which you have covering similar ranges and get a new one.
     
  9. DaveG40

    DaveG40 Well-Known Member

    Re: Wot Lens Next *UPDATE*

    Merry Christmas everybody, hope you're all sat wedged in your seat watching her madge do her thing :D

    The answer about the A500's gearing would seem to have been answered, I mounted the Sigma 70-300 apo dg macro lens I have and a loud spinning/geary sound errupted and lasted for a few seconds before going quiet, only to come back upon powering off, it basically does it everytime I power on/off the camera with the Sigma Attached, I have tried 2 other lenses and it only does it when the Sigma's attached.

    I may not be that bright but I'd say my A500's stripped the gearing of the Sigma, supposedly a decent lens ?.

    It's only happened today, thanks Santa :( and so have only just posed the question via email to Sigma, how much ?.

    With the sales on is it time to consider a change, is the Sony 75-300 as good (it should'nt break as easy) and if so where's the cheapest it can be found, I can find it at £165 & I believe it's currently getting £50 cashback from Sony?

    Or would i be best served to go for a Tamron 70-300 Di LD (seems to get better reviews on Dyxum), which are available for around £120.
     
  10. Dorset_Mike

    Dorset_Mike Grumpy Old Fart

    Re: Wot Lens Next *UPDATE*

    I find the Tamron 70-300 adequate, I have heard mention of CA under certain lighting conditions but so far not experienced any myself. I do like the fact that it holds f4 as maximum aperture for quite a bit of the range and only gets to a max f5.6 somewhere beyond 250mm. The 1:2 "macro" is useable too.
     
  11. DaveG40

    DaveG40 Well-Known Member

    Re: Wot Lens Next *UPDATE*

    I found the Tamron 55-200 to be a fantastic bit of kit, and tbh unbeatable value for money, as it was my first zoom it lacked the length we all desire and so was sold on (at a profit :D.

    I originally had a Sigma zoom on my ancient Pentax film SLR and to my knowledge it's probably still going strong now, after 20+ years (sold it on ebay), this is my second Sigma 70-300 and going on the comments about it's build qaulity, I must either be very unlucky, heavy handed or not Sigma compliant :(

    Going on the numerous comments I've read, both here and on other forums etc, it would seem the following:

    The Sony 75-300 is the most expensive & generally the worst.
    The Tamron is the cheapest (cost & feel) but the sharpest.
    The Sigma Apo; is well built & good value (but don't like me).

    Although I think Sigma's customer service is fantastic (have had previous experience) I don't hold much faith in them repairing my 70-300 (no proof of purchase etc) and so have just ordered a brand new 70-300 Tamron DI LD for only £99 (& not on ebay).;) Sadly I'm one of those blinkered personalities that feel if a manufacturer makes something it should be fit for it's intended task, and have no intention of throwing good money at something bad, it would cost me nearly as much, if not more to get the Sigma repaired anyway.

    Fortunately it's the same filter size as my 18-250 and Minolta 28-105, finally a bit of luck.

    The Sigma will be sold on ebay as faulty (it still works but the gear grinding noise when powering up/down can be a little off putting :D ).

    Going back to my original post given what's happened recently I've decided to keep my lenses, is there a simple mod that can be carried out on the 35-70 F4 to make it AF in Macro ?.
     
  12. Dorset_Mike

    Dorset_Mike Grumpy Old Fart

    Re: Wot Lens Next *UPDATE*

    You may find the Tamron 70-300 macro does all you want compared to the Min 35-70.

    When I say the 70-300 is adequate, I use it quite a lot of the time, for the money it is an excellent lens.

    There is a mod for the 35-70 for AF in macro, see here, not tried it myself, don't have a 35-70/4, have fun :rolleyes:
     
  13. DaveG40

    DaveG40 Well-Known Member

    Re: Wot Lens Next *UPDATE*

    Thanks for the link Mike, it looks very interesting.

    If I'm honest I'd have to say I use my F4 very little, as i'd either use my Sigma in macro mode or my p&s, mainly becuase not having the steadiest of hands does'nt help when trying to finely tune manual focussing, hopefully this mod will help.
     
  14. Dorset_Mike

    Dorset_Mike Grumpy Old Fart

    Re: Wot Lens Next *UPDATE*

    Another good link for Minolta/Sony "how to's"

    click here
     
  15. DaveG40

    DaveG40 Well-Known Member

    Re: Wot Lens Next *UPDATE*

    Well my new Tamron arrived today, contrary to what I'd heard about it looking cheap, I'd say it looks great when mounted, the 62mm diameter makes it look like a mean and meaty lens especially when the Battery Grip's attached to the camera, the hood's also not as big/cumbersome..

    It does'nt tend to hunt as much/as slow as the u/s Sigma did, which has now gone, for £40.

    If anyone's on the hunt for a BRAND NEW 70-300 lens for only £99, "delivered" I strongly suggest looking at THIS

    Here's a quick question, how good are prime lenses at Macro ?.
     
  16. Dorset_Mike

    Dorset_Mike Grumpy Old Fart

    Re: Wot Lens Next *UPDATE*

    There are a few prime true macros in Sony/Minolta AF fit,

    dyxum database here ranging from 30mm out to 200mm. By true macros I mean capable of 1:1 without relying on attachments.

    I have the Tamron 90/2.8 and I'm quite happy with it. A lot depends on what you want to shoot, the 1:2 macro on your new Tamron 70-300 should be ok for flowers and butterflies, grasshoppers and similar size beasties, but for close ups of flies eyes you'll need something a bit better.

    The longer focal lengths (90mm+) allow you to have a longer lens to subject distance, so less likelihood of scaring off the subject.
     
  17. DaveG40

    DaveG40 Well-Known Member

    Re: Wot Lens Next *UPDATE*

    How effective are close up rings at improving your existing gear's macro ability ?.
     
  18. Roger_Provins

    Roger_Provins Well-Known Member

    Re: Wot Lens Next *UPDATE*

    Using the same database there are 34 :)
     
  19. DaveG40

    DaveG40 Well-Known Member

    Re: Wot Lens Next *UPDATE*

    Sigma "finally" responded to my e-mail (it took tamron less than 48 hours to respond to a query), by the time Sigma had got back to me I'd advertised, sold, sent and had received feedback for the u/s lens :(

    I'm glad I did'nt wait because the response in a nut shell was give us £70-£80 to fix it, now correct me if I'm wrong but if a company makes a item with a clearly "weak" key component they should address the situation, hands up anybody that owns an A500 or higher that would have the confidence to buy a Sigma lens, when you know a 24-70 EX and a Apo dg etc,etc had failed for the same reason ?.

    How much to replace cheap/weak components ?(gears), surely not £70-£80 ?. I'll certainly never buy a Sigma again...I'm not a pro but so far they've lost at least £200 on lost sales (just from me).

    Maybe WDC or AP could do a feature letting all Alpha owners know which Sigma lenses won't break with A500 + Alpha's, the A700's replacement should be interesting, the A700's af speed has to be slowed as it is.
     
  20. MickLL

    MickLL In the Stop Bath

    Re: Wot Lens Next *UPDATE*

    Correct me if I am wrong - but I think that you are wrong.

    My understanding is that older Sigma lenses may get their gears stripped by some modern Sony bodies but that new Sigma lenses don't suffer in the same way.

    If I'm right in that then it's a bit unfair for a manufacturer to be blamed if they make a product which is perfectly OK at the time that it was introduced but was found wanting when Sony changed their specification. If you had a tailor make you a suit and it was fine and you then increased your weight by a few kilos would you blame the tailor if the suit no longer fitted?

    MickLL
     

Share This Page