Going for a A900

Specifically for the discussion of the A-mount DSLR range
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.
dynacam
Acolyte
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Jun 12, 2009 10:48 am
Contact:

Going for a A900

Unread post by dynacam »

Time has come to retire my 7D, and get the A900 as all my lens are FF and it seems a shame not to make the most of them -

Minolta 28mm f2.8
Sigma 50mm Macro f2.8
Minolta 50mm f1.4
Konica Minolta 17-35 f2.8-4 (D)
Konica Minolta 28-75 f2.8 (D)
Minolta 70-200 f2.8 APO High Speed G
Minolta 70-210 f4
Tamron 200-500mm f5-6.3 (D)
Kiron 2x Tele-Converter

And from what I read and images seen I understand they should work and perform pretty well.
Also there is a lot of good information on this board which helped make up my mind, so thanks to all those who have the A900 and for sharing there ideas.
Graeme Knox (dynacam)
http://www.k-island.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
David Kilpatrick
Site Admin
Posts: 5985
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
Location: Kelso, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Going for a A900

Unread post by David Kilpatrick »

Excellent line-up of lenses. Yes, you should find they all work pretty well on the A900 and transform your output.

Welcome to the forums!

David
User avatar
Birma
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6585
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 3:10 pm

Re: Going for a A900

Unread post by Birma »

Welcome to forum dynacam and good luck with your new A900. I'm sure we look forward to seeing some of the great shots this camera can produce.
Nex 5, Nex 6 (IR), A7M2, A99 and a bunch of lenses.
01af
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 501
Joined: Sun May 20, 2007 2:44 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Going for a A900

Unread post by 01af »

Ever heard the dumb saying, 'the camera doesn't matter; it's the photographer that matters'? As a matter of fact, cameras don't take pictures. But---people don't take pictures, too! It's people with cameras who take pictures.

I bought a Dynax 7D in March 2005 and another in June 2006. With both cameras combined, I fired about 5,500 frames a year.

Since I bought my Sony A900 in January 2009, I am shooting about 800 frames a month on average which translates to more than 9,000 frames a year. I never owned a camera, analog or digital, that makes taking photographs such a joy as the Alpha 900. With regard to photography, buying the A900 was by far the best decision I ever made---and that includes the decision to buy the pre-owned Minolta AF Apo HS 400 mm 1:4.5 G lens which now counts as my 2nd-best buying decision.

-- Olaf
User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3996
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: Going for a A900

Unread post by bfitzgerald »

It might be dumb to some..

I still have what I consider to be my best shot, on my worst camera..beaten up old compact. So I would have to say..whilst I don't have top notch stuff..it's a lot more to do with the eye, than the machine. Obviously nobody shoots sport on a pinhole..so limitations do apply.

9000 frames, but how many are really good? This ain't a numbers game..I would trade 5000 of my most boring shots, for 1 awesome one anyday :mrgreen:
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 50 guests