It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 4:57 am

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.



Post a new topicPost a reply Page 2 of 3   [ 31 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 8:07 pm 
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 7:38 pm
Posts: 5752
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Why is it worse than D600? Because of a lack of a walkaround lens or is it something else I did not understand?
It was shown today that the D600 shares the same sensor with the a99.
I'm confused.
Anyway, waiting for your Saturday report...

_________________
A99 + Sony, Zeiss, Minolta, Rokinon and M42 lenses

Flickr


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Fri Nov 09, 2012 11:50 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
Posts: 6176
Location: Kelso, Scotland
No report, sorry - you have no idea how many things went wrong within 48 hours for us. Everything from the franking machine needing a call-out to restore operation for our mailings, to a tanker crashing into a field and blocking access to the cattery where our cats are staying now, to three or four completely random unexpected panics.

I did complete my Canon G15 review for the BJP and I can only say this - BUY this camera! The G15 is awesome, I could not obtain one before travelling but for me, NEX will be for unusual stuff like legacy lenses in future, and the G15 will soon become the camera I use for travel. Beats the RX100 because the lens is better, not a sensor issue.

Finding the A99 a problem - I can't get close enough. I shoot so many things very close. I need to think about going back to a 24-105mm just because it does close focus a little better.

David

_________________
http://www.photoclubalpha.com
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 10:32 am 
Grand Caliph
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:29 am
Posts: 466
Location: Aberdeen
Hope you've got some white heather with you...

Mike

_________________
Some Sony stuff (and a couple of Sigma bits)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:56 pm 
Oligarch

Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 6:16 pm
Posts: 156
Location: Peterborough, U.K.
David Kilpatrick wrote:

Finding the A99 a problem - I can't get close enough. I shoot so many things very close. I need to think about going back to a 24-105mm just because it does close focus a little better.

David


Is that a problem with the lens or with the camera? If the lens, which one. I seem to remember that was a problem with the Minolta 28-135mm.

_________________
Wes Gibbon
http://www.WesGibbon.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 11:18 pm 
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 1:14 pm
Posts: 6176
Location: Kelso, Scotland
It's a problem with most full format lenses, they need to focus down to 20cm but very few do. APS-C lenses of a similar focal length can afford to back off to 30cm, and in shorter focal lengths, many do actually manage a decent close-up. I'm talking about walkaround kit lenses. The best probably is the Tamron 28-75mm (the SAM version is limited in close focus - in-motor lensed have issues with this apparently).

I had forgotten that the 50mm f/1.4 Min/Sony has always had a very conservative close focus.

David

_________________
http://www.photoclubalpha.com
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:05 am 
Tower of Babel
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Posts: 6136
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
I always thought the MD35-70/3.5 was a decent handy lens that does a low power but effective macro as well, why can’t we have one like that in A-mount FF?
Greg
A700 KM18-200
Attachment:
DSC04129.jpg
DSC04129.jpg [ 233.77 KiB | Viewed 599 times ]


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 7:03 pm 
Grand Caliph
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:29 am
Posts: 466
Location: Aberdeen
Greg,
I had one of those, very handy lens.
What body it is on?

Mike

_________________
Some Sony stuff (and a couple of Sigma bits)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:58 pm 
Tower of Babel
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Posts: 6136
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Hi Mike
You don’t recognize an X-700? Maybe it’s the old tripod head it’s mounted on that I had gotten half way through restoring that’s making it look funny.
Greg

Ps I had a look in my Minolta lens list and they did make a ‘similar’ one in AF way back in 1985 http://kurtmunger.com/minolta_af_35_70mm_f_4_reviewid180.html but it’s an old model now and it really needs updating to 8 pin and (D) standard. There was another re-designed one in 1992 but it didn’t have a macro switch.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 2:38 pm 
Viceroy
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2008 4:23 am
Posts: 892
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
At the moment the A900 uses mostly the Tamron 28-105mm SP F2.8 who is not that bad (but not the best also). In a small bag I bring the Tamron 14mm 2.8 and the Zeiss 135mm 1.8. I found the total of this kit usable with my Nex 7 setup for an event a few week ago.

For the close focus ... I think we can always put a small bag the Minolta 50mm 2.8 or the old good Sigma 24mm 2.8 II Macro lens. The sigma is very small.

Frank

_________________
Frank
A7r + NEX 3N ( and few lenses )


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Mon Nov 12, 2012 7:42 pm 
Grand Caliph
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:29 am
Posts: 466
Location: Aberdeen
Greg Beetham wrote:
Hi Mike
You don’t recognize an X-700? Maybe it’s the old tripod head it’s mounted on that I had gotten half way through restoring that’s making it look funny.
Greg

Ps I had a look in my Minolta lens list and they did make a ‘similar’ one in AF way back in 1985 http://kurtmunger.com/minolta_af_35_70mm_f_4_reviewid180.html but it’s an old model now and it really needs updating to 8 pin and (D) standard. There was another re-designed one in 1992 but it didn’t have a macro switch.


Greg,
I didn't have an X700 but my mate did.
I had XG2, XD7 and X500 bodies. The XD7 was a superb quality camera but I preferred using the X500 plus MD1. My favourite lens was a Minolta MD 70-210 f4.
Mike

_________________
Some Sony stuff (and a couple of Sigma bits)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 6:07 am 
Tower of Babel
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Posts: 6136
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Yes Mike I agree the MD70-210/4 is one of the truly great lenses, I paid just over $1000 for mine back in the mid eighties and I shudder to think what that converts to in today’s dollars.
And the X-500 was I believe a slightly better camera than the X-700 being introduced a couple of years later, it didn’t have the very handy P mode of the X-700 (the first SLR with one I think and biased towards shutter speeds thus no S mode was necessary), but it did bring in the AEL button connection with the flash that the X-700 lacked for balancing the background with the flash. Not that that mattered very much, you could still meter the background with the X-700 first and do your own balancing easily enough IF you happened to have a film speed that could allow it with such a low sync speed of 1/60sec. Both cameras didn’t have HSS, that didn’t come in till later.
The X-500 also had a better viewfinder display than the X-700 in M mode; it showed the selected shutter speed and the recommended shutter speed, they both showed the selected f-stop in the viewfinder but not the current film speed, not that that mattered anyway; you run what you brung, no other option in those days.
You also had to remember to set the ISO dial to whatever film speed you manually loaded into the camera, there was no battery wasting automatic stuff related to either operation, the MD-1 motor drive didn’t add auto load or auto rewind either, only rapid advance.
Greg
Ps I hankered after the XD-7 but by the time I saved enough money the X-700 came out and was the flavour of the month so I got one of those…a couple of years later I got another body for different film speeds.
KM5D KM18-200
Attachment:
PICT2146.jpg
PICT2146.jpg [ 239.05 KiB | Viewed 445 times ]


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 10:22 pm 
Grand Caliph
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:29 am
Posts: 466
Location: Aberdeen
Now I'm drooling. A partnership made in heaven.
I can't remember the costs but none of the MD stuff was exactly cheap.
I was a student when I started collecting and had a good first job to continue the aquisitions.
Minolta lenses - 24-35, 28 f2.8, 35-70, 35-105, 50 f1.7, 70-210 f4, 100-300 plus a Tamron 500 mirror.

The MD1 seemed to last for ever on a set of Duracells and the button batteries in the cameras lasted for years.
I loved my MD stuff.

Mike

_________________
Some Sony stuff (and a couple of Sigma bits)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 10:47 pm 
Imperial Ambassador
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:22 pm
Posts: 559
mikeriach wrote:
Now I'm drooling. A partnership made in heaven.
I can't remember the costs but none of the MD stuff was exactly cheap.
I was a student when I started collecting and had a good first job to continue the aquisitions.
Minolta lenses - 24-35, 28 f2.8, 35-70, 35-105, 50 f1.7, 70-210 f4, 100-300 plus a Tamron 500 mirror.

The MD1 seemed to last for ever on a set of Duracells and the button batteries in the cameras lasted for years.
I loved my MD stuff.

Mike


I still do and they've got a new lease of life on the nex7.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 10:58 pm 
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm
Posts: 3269
Greg seems to look after his stuff very nice condition I'll have to buy something off of you :mrgreen:
Someone is giving me an MD mount Minolta in a few days not sure which one it is though


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: ISO equivalent A900 versus D600
Unread postPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:26 pm 
Tower of Babel
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 3:25 pm
Posts: 6136
Location: Townsville, Qld. Australia
Thanks guys, ha ha Barry I hear you :D but film days are all but over now mores the pity, it was fun while it lasted though, sometimes I want to put a roll of film in the old bods and go on a nostalgic ‘trip’ but lets face it film can’t compete now with the latest digital FF gear, I don’t think even MF film is on equal terms when you look at the PP options digital FF has over film, who ever heard of decent pix at ISO12800 in film for example? There would be grain the size of road-base and reciprocity failure for sure… :lol:
Greg
Ps that’s a great collection Mike, I never got the 24-35, I meant too but I sort of got sidetracked somehow on other things.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post a new topicPost a reply Page 2 of 3   [ 31 posts ]
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
twilightBB Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net