Where to start?

[henniebez]

I know this is not the place, but here I go.
I want to buy a camera but are terribly confused. I have been waiting for the new Sony almost now for 6 months. I am so ready! I have the tripod and everything!
In the camera shop the salesman tried to talk me in to a Canon, According to him the Canon setup is much better. But my hart, asking me why I don't know, is with the Sony.
The saleman said to me that if I want to buy a Sony, the that I need to use is the Ziess lens 16-80. Can anybody give me some advice regarding the alpha 700 and the lenses that are availible for the alpha mount.
Cheerz from South Africa

[henniebez]

What lens do I need to start with, if for example I buy the Alpha 700?

[Carlj]

Henniebez,

Welcome to PCA!

What lenses you need for the A700 is pretty much dependent on what you want to shoot. To get the best out of the sensor, you'll pretty much need to budget for the best glass out there - ie, G designated. The Alpha feature on the front of the site shows shots with the 70-200mm f2.8 G - that would be a fine day to day lens, unless you're into landscapes.

Carl

[dewarp]

Hello Hennie

Starting off in photography can be tough. Only you can decide what you want to photograph, and you don't know the answers when you begin! Also, your subject and style will change with time. What you want to photograph, and how you want to present your results, determines what equipment is best for you. Do not take camera salesmen too seriously - they have hidden agendas and generally know more about the technical side of photography than the artistic side.

It is common for someone starting out to begin with a point-and-shoot, graduate to a compact, and then get DSLR. However, please be aware that there are many good photographers out there who have never felt the need to upgrade to a DSLR.

For someone who really wants a DSLR but doesn't know what he wants to do with it, go for the cheapest solution. The chances are that you will buy another DSLR when you know what you want it for.

For further ideas, you could go and talk to the folks at your local camera club, and view the sort of work that others are doing. Look at http://www.PSSA.co.za to find a club in your area.

regards
Peter Dewar

[henniebez]

I prefer landscapes and macro work. I'he been taking photos for 3 years with a point and shoot, but feel that the lens and the settings are standing in my way of expressing myself. My friend is one of the photographers for our University (University stuff like 'serrie' and Rag photos) and has asking me to join him. And hopefully when finnishes I can take over from him.

Thanx again for the replies.

[henniebez]

I got the alhpa 700 yesterday, after seven months of waiting! Its fantastic. The only problem was that I had no lens with the camera. So I just stared at the thing. Today I bought a second hand minolta 70 - 210 f4 lens. The guy told me I can try it out and if I don't like it I can bring it back. I was hoping to buy the Sony zeiss 16 - 80 lens- macro and a little bit of wide angle shots. Do I need to keep the lens or take it back? If I want to buy the Sony 16 -80 lens, I would probably do through BHphotovideo? For me living in South Africa it would be difficult to exchange it - that is if the lens has a problem. Any advice?

[David Kilpatrick]

The 70-210mm f4 is a classic and a great lens to use with the 16-80mm. As long as the price is low - $150 US or less - it is a fine vintage secondhand lens with excellent performance on the Alpha 700.

Buy your 16-80mm from a local dealer if you can. They occasionally have quality control issues, including rattling innards and jumping image when zooming or focusing. You need to be able to return any such example and get a replacement, and doing this by overseas mail order is not a good idea.

David

[henniebez]

Thanks for the help!

The problem of buying the lens locally is that I would pay 1200 US$ for the lens. Now that is totally crazy. The guy at the camera shop told me about a sigma lens 17 - 70 mm ( I think) for just a little bit more than half the price of the 16 - 80 mm zeiss.

Well I don't know what to do. I don't have unlimmited funds, but would prefer to stay with the Sony-Zeiss lens. I must admit I haven't read up on the Sigma lens.

David thanks for your advice.

[henniebez]

I've got it today! Works perfectly. Ready to take photos.

[David Kilpatrick]

The Sigma 17-70mm has a fast f2.8 maximum aperture. It tends to focus not so accurately when used wide open, and that means the 2.8 setting is of limited use. The unique feature of this lens is the close focusing. It will focus right down to the glass (technically, to 2cm) so that you can hardly shoot the subject without the shadow of the camera obscuring it. As this setting, the edges of the picture are very streaky with aberrations. But it means that you can get some exceptional close-ups under the right conditions.

Overall sharpness is not a match for the CZ, and on say the Alpha 700, I think the camera would outresolve the lens. On a 5D I don't think there would be any difference. We tested the 17-70mm on a Sigma SD10, which is pretty demanding resolution-wise even if it seems unlikely.

David

[rogprov]

The 70-210mm f4 is a classic and a great lens <snip>
David

Handheld shot with 70-210mm f4 "beercan" lens on a700. 210mm 200th @ f5.6 - against the light.

I just love this lens!