Discussion of lenses, brand or independent, uses and merits
Forum rules
No more than three images or three external links allowed in any post or reply. Please trim quotations and do not include images in quotes unless essential.
Greg Beetham wrote:I wonder where they got those curved glass pane's from? would have cost an absolute fortune. tinted around the edges too.
That's a style you'll encounter here in Armenia as much as you like. And if you need some just make an order from here. Since it's a routine thing, it doesn't cost much. In one word, they are cheaper here.
The house I gre up in had a coal chute to the basement and we would get coal deliveries through there... if you ever get t a chance to live in a house thats heated with coal ... run away ... this thing (the furnace) used to cough in the middle of the night and you'd wake up in the morning black except where the blankets covered you.
Greg Beetham wrote:Okey dokey, the 24-105 isn't up to snuff,
btw that hatch thingy in the wall sort of looks like the one the one's in a TV program recently about the beginning of the industrial age, (it began in the UK), and the door, I think if I remember correctly had too do with coal deliveries for the winter...back when they used coal for everything, heating, cooking, factory furnaces, steam engines etc....
David Kilpatrick wrote:I have been shooting a lot on the 28-75mm and it's excellent at the 28mm end, but from around 50 to 75mm the corners soften - it would be a bad decision to shoot at 75mm, instead of switching to the 70-300mm SSM.
That sounds like the beginnings of the rationalization that you really need to get a CZ 24-70mm.
The 35-200 Xi is a strange lens to be sure. Once you get past the odd/weird mode of operation and forget about manual focus it is a very pleasant surprise to use. I was fascinated by this lens for years after seeing glowing reports in the "Amateur Photographer" way back when. They gave it their highest recommendation of a "Rosette". After David K gave it a recommendation some time back I bought one.
Although I find it disappointing at full aperture, stopped down a bit it is really good. It seems better in the middle of the range than at the ends. At f11 at 35 mm or 200mm, it is sharper than the 28-75 or the 100-300 APO, and at f8 in the middle of the range it is as good as anything else I have. I have used it on film, 7D and A700.
It is my standard outdoor "good light walkabout lens" along with the 17-35 D.
The surpreme irony of the whole Xi debacle is that perhaps as always Minolta was ahead of its time - "power zoom" is something users of DLSRs with video are going to want!
David Kilpatrick wrote: Funny you mention the 55-200mm because the little Tamron Di II version covers full frame on the A900, at all focal lengths. It is not supposed to, but it looks very sharp and the geometry is not bad wide open. It has a bit of light falloff at 200mm to the corners, but no wonder it is a good lens on APS-C given the reserve of coverage it clearly has.
David,
Can you shot FF with this (Tamron) lens? The A900 supposedly switch to "cropped" when you mount a DT (APS size) lens...
Regards
I think it automatically goes into the "cropped" mode only with Sony Alpha lenses, not with third-party lenses or Tamron clones. A neat little loophole!
I may just go for a 55-200 to complement my 17-50 now...it certainly isn't a big investment!
David Kilpatrick wrote: Funny you mention the 55-200mm because the little Tamron Di II version covers full frame on the A900, at all focal lengths. It is not supposed to, but it looks very sharp and the geometry is not bad wide open. It has a bit of light falloff at 200mm to the corners, but no wonder it is a good lens on APS-C given the reserve of coverage it clearly has.
David,
Can you shot FF with this (Tamron) lens? The A900 supposedly switch to "cropped" when you mount a DT (APS size) lens...
Regards
It does not auto crop, so you can shoot full frame. I am not suggesting you should, but it's interesting to see that unlike the Sigma DC 55-200mm which projects a limited circle, the Tamron covers a full frame without cutoff.
pakodominguez wrote:
David,
Can you shot FF with this (Tamron) lens? The A900 supposedly switch to "cropped" when you mount a DT (APS size) lens...
Regards
It does not auto crop, so you can shoot full frame. I am not suggesting you should, but it's interesting to see that unlike the Sigma DC 55-200mm which projects a limited circle, the Tamron covers a full frame without cutoff.
David
Hum...
One more question: this lens, on the Sony version at least, supposed to be a good performer. Is the Tamron version the same optically, but a different coating? how about the Sigma or the Nikon versions?
In other hand, the 11~18 Tamron won't automatically crop either? that will be a good news...
Regards
I believe the Sony is identical to the Tamron, no upgrade involved. I also believe (I do not have one to check) that the Tamron 11-18mm does not crop on the A900. The Nikon and Sigma 55-200mms are not the same as the Tamron, but having used the Sigma, I know that like the Tamron it's a much better lens than you would expect.
tinted around the edges too.
