Photoclubalpha

I was quite tempted by the size and range of the 55-200, but fell into an easy deal for a Maxxum 100-200. Really like this one despite its hard prior use + veiling flare if exposed into sunlight. OK, the minimum focal distance isn't great, but one step back, zoom slightly and done: not a problem in...

When I look at my Sigma 17-70 (the older one), I see the Tamron 17-35 f/2.8-4 that I liked so much, with a 35-70 f/4.0-4.5 added by magic. Owning the 17-35 convinced me I needed more range, and that worked against the 17-50: it was too small of an increase from the 17-35 to justify. As David notes, ...

Any chance someone has both the Beercan and the other Minolta 70-210? I'd like to see side-by-side pics of the 2 so I can tell them apart, if possible I've a near-miss to your comparison, with 2nd-gen 70-210 up against the 100-200. The Beercan is too much weight for me, and I surprised myself in wi...

70-300 f/4, SSM, with helium-filled chambers to keep it below 450g. With all the patents flying, Sony could do this, right?
MAke it watertight too, so if I drop it in a lake it'll float!

I keep watching for some forum member, somewhere, to report on the 17-70 Sigma on FF. If it works decently, it would be a cheap 28-70 f/3.5-4.5 alternative yet still useful below 28mm. Maybe it would fail the 24mpxl test.. but nobody has said anything to my knowledge. Anyone want to loan me a FF for...

Sounds like you got a very good deal! My copy does great work, at its best at or beyond f/2.5 but I prefer the soft look of f/2 to that of camera shake beyond SSS' capability. As I've said more than once, "it's not blurry, it's ethereal!"

Given the rather dramatic changes to Sony's 5-series interface (not to mention other '09 models) I'm to the point where I'd take another '08 model for my next camera body - wish it were an A700, but I can't afford it. If a deal came along for an A300 (in champagne, just for :lol: ) or an A350, I'd ...

A curious review for a curious camera, it seemed to me. The detailed pages were fairly charitable compared to the summary, but one-line criticisms will always sound harsh and blunt. As far as inconsistency between models, brands, years &c.. well, it's their website and they can make up the rule...

I owned the Tamron 17-35; at the time it was my best lens by far, very nice images. The range was just too limiting for me, so after a few swaps I've ended up with an aps-c equivalent with more range (Sigma 17-70). This isn't a great example of the 17-35's sharpness but I've always loved how it turn...

Yet another example of how implementing video is diverting resources from still-photo shooting. It's sad, but "everyone" is doing this so no real way to prevail on this one. Maybe for us lo-tech folks Sony should bring out a DNG-only, MD mount camera - hopefully with TTL metering :lol: Pla...

It isn't really speedy, but my old 35-105 sounds nearly ideal too; mine's the 2nd-gen and you could get one cheaply to try. My primary reason for the Sigma 17-70 is for indoor use in small rooms, but cropping would be in order for an auditorium & it's f/4.5 at telephoto. If you trust Sigma these...

Thanks for the detailed review, David! The compromises and philosophy that Sony shows here puts the A550 comfortably in 4th place if I were shopping now - behind A700, 200 and 850 (two of which would be mighty hard to find :roll:). When my 200 meets its end, I fervently hope this strategy has been ...

It's a secret weapon even on the A200.. too bad it isn't achievable except randomly while shooting AutoISO

edited to a link - big image was too annoying
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_t0ROcoSshLc/SYpC7 ... /astro.jpg

My exact fear, Kevin! I had hoped to sell off a few surplus lenses to partly finance an A700, but a large automobile repair and new sewing machine took care of that plan. Oh well, disaffected DPR-forum owners talk like they will flood the used market as they switch brands, so I'll find a used one w...