- This topic is empty.
Lenses
-
Hi
I just bought a Sony a500 DSLR.
I am interested in buying a few different lenses as I really want to throw myself in at the deep end and learn how to use camera properly,I am going to take a few evening classes as well.Just wondered to get me started would it be a good idea to buy a few Minolta lenses instead of the Sony ones,I can get some lenses pretty cheap on ebay compared to the prices of the new Sony lenses.
Im sure these Minolta lenses are old but for the price I think its worth the risk depending and what people here actually think?
If in good condition will these lenses be as good as the new Sony lenses?
If I want to buy a zoom lens would a 70mm – 210mm f/4 be a good one to start with? or would I really want to go for a lower f number?
Same goes with wide angle lenses,what should I be looking for?
I don’t have loads of money for this so thats why I thought starting with a few Minolta lenses which can be got cheap would be a good place to start.
Im sorry if these are basic and silly questions but I have no one else to ask! I know I could seach google for answers which I have done, but there is nothing like a human response albeit a cyber human response.Thanks
First off there is no such thing as a silly question, and in my opinion Minolta lenses are
fine to start off with, I did it myself and have only just got rid of my first Minolta lens,
it was a 28-70 3.5 and it was a great little lens, I have a Sony a700 and actually dont own
a Sony lens, in my opinion they are over-priced and there are many lenses out there that
are equally as good for less money. Sigma, Tamron and Tokina all do Sony mounts I think!It really depends on what you want to get into yourself, which will determine what lenses
you choose, when you are starting out it is so tempting to get anything at all that will fit onto
your camera :) An f4 lens is an ok lens and not to be sniffed at, and most of the modern lenses
will range from 1.8 to 6.3 which will be fine, if you want to concentrate on indoor or low light
photography then look for 2.8 or so, sports or wildlife you will need a bit of reach and a 70-300
is a popular and inexpensive lens, though you might find that you will outgrow this and want
more reach (it happens :) )Basically three lenses will get you out of most problems, a wide angle for landscapes, a mid range
for portraits, macro, etc and a telephoto when you need more reach.Hope you can make sense of all this, I tend to ramble on a bit :)
Hiya shutterbug thanks for the reply.
I have no idea what type of pictures I eventually want to shoot,to be honest I would reckon I would be into everything,its sort of the personality I have,not sure if thats a good or bad thing but every hobby I take up I always want to learn everything about it and be capable of doing it to a decent standard.
Thing with me is though I get addicted very easily,I know I will spend hours now with my first DSLR learning everything about it,I have even been buying DSLR magazines for the past 3 months and I only bought the camera today!
I haven’t the money to buy a range of lenses though so might just get one or two to start with,I am getting married in 6 weeks :sick and will be going to New York/Las Vegas/California on honeymoon so would really like something that will be good for taking shots in these locations,any suggestions?
As I always say; second hand Mercedes is always better than a new VolksWagen. Minolta 70-210 f/4 (aka “Beercan”) has very good reviews, only disadvantage is non-ultrasonic motor so I wouldn´t use it for sports or journalism, however I have no idea what do you want to photograph.
I general I think there´s nothing wrong with old lenses, you just need to be sure what do you need and find out if the chosen lens offers it or not.
BTW “there is nothing like a human response” – and who do you think wrote the answers which you found with Google? Monkeys? :DCasey78 wrote:
I would be into everything
That would be quite expensive… before you buy something, borrow it, try it for a few days and see what will be the best / most interesting for you .
Casey78 wrote:
going to New York/Las Vegas/California on honeymoon so would really like something that will be good for taking shots in these locations,any suggestions?
The same answer; you don´t need to own everything if you use it twice a year. Moreover this is a perfect opportunity to find out what lenses do you need. So borrow as many lenses and other gear (tripod, filters) as you can, try it in the States and when you come back, you will know what to purchase.
For MY honeymoon (!), I’d forget about taking a lot of camera gear….I’d put my piorities somewhere else (get it, get it?).
My suggestion: DSLR with kit-lens and a compact camera/I-phone for incidental stuff. You don’t need a tripod in Vegas esp. if you have a VR lens.The Fine Print wrote:
You don’t need a tripod in Vegas esp. if you have a VR lens.
That was a good one! :lol:
Sony’s have inbuilt stabilization so VR lenses are not necessary, any lens you put on the camera
will benefit from Sony’s sss (super steady shot)oops, mild stroke I guess….must have been thinking Nikon….still, Vegas would have been fine w/o tripod in your case :)
How was the honeymoon…got photos (of Vegas, I mean) ?The Fine Print wrote:
oops, mild stroke I guess….must have been thinking Nikon….still, Vegas would have been fine w/o tripod in your case :)
How was the honeymoon…got photos (of Vegas, I mean) ?Haven’t gone yet! Going on Sept 14th..
Just another question fellas.I have been trying to get tips on taking hand held photos night photos with my DSLR when in Vegas/New York.
Everywhere I read though the first tip they give is USE A TRIPOD! I don’t want to be carrying a tripod with me so how do I take decent night shots of cityscapes in NY and Las Vegas.Thanks
The obvious reply is up your ISO setting on your camera to at least ISO800 (your camera a does even up to ISO12800 I think!. If still not happy you could get a fast lens and use it wide open. 50/1.4 is relatively cheap and great, or the 16 or 20/2.8 are good for wider vistas; an old, fast Minolta Maxxum AF lens would also do the trick. However, check how noisy your image gets at the higher ISO settings before you commit to buy/drag another lens along; your 18-55 kit lens should really be enough. I don’t have a Sony; I have a Nikon and my partner has a Canon; both our systems also have image stabilisation and we shoot regularly handheld in artificial light situations at 1/30s and slower without worries.
The tripod suggestion is still very valid for some situations, but for your kind of “street-photography” it’s largely not necessary. Traditionally, having a tripod vs not having one separated the dedicated folk from the casual shooter…. For long lenses, or certain cameras and getting the very best possible pic quality, tripods give you an edge and indeed make certain shots possible. But day-to-day DSLR stuff: no drama if you haven’t got one. You can also improvise your camera support if needed: Car roof, street post, garden wall, and perhaps a small bean bag, e.g. http://www.cam-pod.com/about_cam-pod.php under you camera…. but these days with image stabilisation built in and high ISO options you can get way with way more than you used to.Thanks Fine Point.
I didn’t mean I don’t want to use a tripod ever! I just meant for this particular trip I didn’t want to be lugging one around the streets of NY or Las Vegas.
I hope to do a course on photography when I get home from honeymoon and become one of those more dedicated folk that you speak of :)The obvious reply is an obvious bulls… :roll:
First: VR/IS/OS/whatever gives you 2-4 stops, which means that with a typical wide angle lens (24 mm) you can use 1/2s exposure, however at night you usually need a few seconds.
Second, high ISO causes noise, especially in shadows and with long exposures – and when you want to shoot at night, you will have both.
Third, when photographing city, you (usually) want the whole photo to be sharp. If you use f/1.4, the DOF will be too narrow and either the background or the foreground will be OOF.
Fourth: When shooting at night, the contrast between lights and shadows is huge, so for a decent looking shot you need to take multiple exposures (HDR). No matter how good, VR won´t help you with this.If you want to improvise, use a thing that you always carry with you – your camera bag – I tried it a few times when I didn´t have a tripod and the results were very good.
This is a HDR photo which I took using my camera bag instead of tripod. 3 exposures, f/8, ISO 100, the longest exposure time was 13 seconds.
We’re talking honeymoon shots here, MMX, with someone who is starting out and who may not need to be overcome by technique.
He’s not shooting “at night” he’ll be shooting in Las Vegas where at least on the main drag there is no night, so, a lot of his stuff will be handheld at 200ISO and 1/60s or less.
Yes, with open apertures depth of field naturally becomes shallower, but that ain’t necessarily a bad thing.I almost always drag a tripod around, unless I’m on holidays; Using a tripod properly needs to be learned as well AND needs time.
How many shots have you missed because you were setting up, or, on the other hand, your partner became inpatient?Also, I appreciate if we can all maintain a polite tone on this forum.
If he came to a photography forum, I guess he wants to take some decent photos, not snapshots. And especially when he´s a beginner, we should encourage him to be as precise as possible, not encourage him to start making mistakes and taking shortcuts from the start.
But it´s a common problem today; people want everything to be quick and simple and they are not willing to take any effort or sacrifice. Everyone would like to buy an one body one lens kit for €200 and shoot everything from architecture through macro to car racing and ideally print it as 40″ posters.
I know that all the manufacturers, distributors and sellers keep trying to persuade you that nobody needs a tripod if you have VR, nobody needs filters if you have Photoshop and nobody needs special lenses if you have ultrazooms, but the reality is different.PS: Night shot at 1/60 with ISO 200? :D Maybe at 1/6… try to find some night photos from Vegas and check EXIF info.
MMX if it’s ok with you I would rather if you stopped offering your advice to me.
I came on here to learn from people who are more advanced than I on this particular hobby,and while you do obviously know more than I do about photography,I don’t like the way you “speak” down to other posters on here,so while you might be more skilled in photography your people skills are lacking big time.So as I said I would prefer if you didn’t reply to any questions I may ask,because I do intend to ask several more over the coming months as I learn how to use my DSLR.
The Fine Point,thanks for your help and I look forward to conversing with you in the future.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
