Lens advice

[rharlow]

I have the Sony A200
kit lens and the 70-300 4.5/5.6

I need something to shoot night football games and basketball games.

Budget tight

[Javelin]

where are you sitting when you shoot the games? sidelines or in the stands somewhere? I know Don shoots a lot of football and I think one of the lenses he uses is the 100mm F2.8 macro. I think thats going to fit your budjet better than some of the F2.8 zooms. but it depends on the reach you need

[rharlow]

mostly on the side lines, basketball in the stands.
is that a constant 2.8?


Where i the best place to buy used lens

[Javelin]

Yes it's a prime so it's F2.8 at the widest. you should try your zoom at 100mm and see if that would be long enough for what you shoot. This lens is very very sharp in all versions. on ebay you should be able to get one around 400.00 - 450.00max used. New this lens is 5-600.00

[Dr. Harout]

Yes medium teles would do the job and welcome to the forum.

[rharlow]

Would this be a good lens?

Minolta Auto Focus
80-200 F2.8 TOKINA ATX SD APO PRO (77) WITH HOOD, CAPS, 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS ZOOM TELEPHOTO LENS

[David Kilpatrick]

Read various threads here - it gets a bad press, heavy CA fringes.

David

[rharlow]

Cosina 28-105mm 2.8 AF ZOOM LENS FOR MINOLTA MAXXUM SONY

Any advice on this lens

[Javelin]

oh ya the 135 F2.8.. they had an F2 too.. I thought it was the 100mm you used on your sports stuff sometimes. Have you ever shot a hockey game Don?

[Vidgamer]

Considering that the original post said that the budget was "tight", do you NEED an f2.8? I'd say that 50mm (such as the 1.7) is sometimes not long enough, but at least is good bang-for-the-buck. I have also used my 55-200, and even over 100mm, it is still useable at f4. The main problem is having to use ISO 800, and trying to not get blur from action. The low-light, action need is a severe performance problem, requiring more compromise or more expensive equipment.

[Javelin]

wow ISO 800 and F2.8 .. I thought it would be brighter than that to be honest.

[rharlow]

Which should I buy?


used -- Sigma 135mm LENS for Minolta 1:2.8 135mm

NEW 28-105mm 2.8 AF ZOOM LENS FOR MINOLTA MAXXUM SONY (i think 2.8/3.5)

[jcoffin]

Which should I buy?

used -- Sigma 135mm LENS for Minolta 1:2.8 135mm

NEW 28-105mm 2.8 AF ZOOM LENS FOR MINOLTA MAXXUM SONY (i think 2.8/3.5)

Almost opposite answers. Virtually every 135/2.8 (practically ever) is at least a decent lens, and most are quite good. Even though I've never played with the one you're looking at, it's almost certainly fairly good and quite possibly downright stellar. On the other hand, given a choice I'd try to find a Minolta 135/2.8 in good condition -- I've had one for years and always been quite happy with it. Minolta certainly made some lenses that were/are better (at least in my opinion) but this is definitely a good one anyway.

For the 28-105, you'll need to look at things a lot more carefully. There have been a lot of designs in this range, and the quality varies from great to quite poor. For anybody to comment intelligently, you'll need to post the exact details of the one you're looking at, including the brand and exact speed. Even that may not be quite enough -- in a few cases, there have been two (or more) of the same speed and brand that were still entirely different lenses.

[rharlow]

what does the double cross mean

MINOLTA MAXXUM 50mm f1.7 LENS, Double Cross XX version

[rharlow]

Which should I buy?
used -- Sigma 135mm LENS for Minolta 1:2.8 135mm
NEW 28-105mm 2.8 AF ZOOM LENS FOR MINOLTA MAXXUM SONY (i think 2.8/3.5)

You need to tell us the brand and exact model if you want some definitive answers on this.

-Sonolta

Cosina 28-135