Alpha 200

[Grebo]

I need advice what lenses are better to purchase for Alpha 200: SIGMA APO DG MACRO 70-300 mm F4.5-5.6 or SONY 75-300mm F4.5-5.6

[David Kilpatrick]

Don't consider the Sigma - there is a proven record of the focus mechanism breaking with new Alpha cameras, the new focus motors are too strong for the lens. I would recommend the Tamron 70-300mm f4-5.6 LD Di instead. It is cheaper than the Sony, it focuses right down to 95cm (macro like the Sigma) and it has a much faster true aperture. It is f4 all the way to 135mm, f4.5 to 200mm, then f5 all the way to 290mm and it only drops to f5.6 right at 300mm. This is one third to two thirds of a stop faster than the Minolta 100-300mm APO across the range, and also much better than the 75-300mm Sony (the 55mm filter thread lets you know - the Tamron has a 62mm filter thread, and much bigger glass, because it is a faster lens). It is also very sharp though a touch of soft flare round the image core happens wide open.

David

[Grebo]

Thank you David. I searched Tamron on the web and there will be a problem to get it in Croatia as we do not have Tamron dealers. Will see...

Also, can you be so kind and explain to me few things re. Alpha set-up from your expirience with Alpha:
a) White balance: what set-up I should use as I noted that few other Sony users are posting that best is to keep it under "shade"?
b) Regarding, AF area, do we consider it best to use "spot" or "wide"?
c) Metering mode, with what set-up I can get best performance (it seem's that my pictures are to dark w/o rich colours and contrast...)?
d) How to prevent "red" light when shooting in dark w/o flash as it seems that I am unable to find out correct white balance?
e) any other suggestions when "working" with Alpha ?

Many thanks for your kind answers as I see that lot's of things is already on the web but I would appreciate direct answers. thx.

[David Kilpatrick]

WB - set daylight, not Shade, unless you want extremely warm colours
AF - use spot
Metering - use matrix, it will automatically weight the reading towards the focus spot (centre) and you can hold and recompose
In the dark - just use Tungsten fixed WB, don't use Auto, it doesn't work well

Set -2 contrast on JPEGs when working in bright sunny conditions, and you will get better details to work on from highlight to shadow. If you want excellent shadow detail, use AdobeRGB, do any adjustments to the AdobeRGB file before converting to sRGB if needed.

David

[Grebo]

David,

Under "Matrix Metering" you are reffering to "multi segment" set-up?
AdobeRGB adjustment is option under "collor settings" in PS in wich picture is open and viewed?
Under "Converting to sRGB if needed" I assume it is "save as" option in PS wich optimise pictures for view on the web?

How much you think that PS adjustments can improve the picture and is it really required for the sucess in photography?

Grebo http://www.hrphotocontest.com/index.php ... rID=101016

[David Kilpatrick]

By matrix I do mean multi-segment
AdobeRGB is set in the camera menu for picture styles, and also can be set in ACR/PS. If you set Photoshop/CS3 to use 'Europe Pre Press Defaults' you will automatically get AdobeRGB as your default colour space
You can convert to sRGB by using Save For Web - this is an easy, safe way to do so

Since I shoot raw, I always make fine adjustments. Much of the time they are not needed.

Example: in camera JPEG, A350, sRGB, -2 contrast:

The image processed from raw using ACR 4.4 plugin in AdobeRGB space, but converted to sRGB for web viewing of course:


You may prefer the in-camera version. I wanted more density/detail and colour in the flowers, which have subtle shades to them, and more shadow detail inside the plants - though the camera JPEG actually has better shadow detail than the raw conversion - this is something I need to look at as it indicates there's a need for some default adjustments in ACR (shadows were set to zero for the conversion).

David

[Grebo]

David, now I understand what you are talking about... thank you once again as your kind feedbacks really helped me. Now I just need to get in action.

[Grebo]

Hello,

over the week I shoot cca. 500 pictures with WB - daylight, AF - spot and Metering - matrix.
Also I used Auto settings to compare the results. I noticed that pictures with manual settings above
are always too much "darker" when light is not clear or sun is behind white clauds. I can recompensate with
exposure but then colors are "washed out". I can't get "live" colors...

When I set it on the Auto settings, pictures are better but w/o rich color palette.
I thinked over that and I could only conclude that Alpha 200 is not so good with low light conditions.

Lenses are standard Sony 18-70. As I am planing to upgrade with Tamron 70-300 I am afraid to get even worser pictures with those lenses...

Am I in the wrong impression ?

[David Kilpatrick]

I would say you are shooting under conditions which will not produce good colours. If you want the results to resemble a typical consumer camera, you must use sRGB modes such as Landscape colour or Vivid colour. The combination of spot focus and matrix metering means the exposure will always be biased to the centre point of the image (the focus point determines how the matrix metering is calculated). The Auto modes over-ride this and also set colour profile type - using the portrait mode will set Portrait colour, using the landscape (mountain symbol) mode will set landscape colour etc. If you are using AdobeRGB on an uncalibrated system (including the camera's own screen) the colours will always look washed out, but they are not - this is just a dumb interpretation of the colour by the system.

David

[mic291]

Hey David

Just thought I would say thanks, after my lens sagas I took your advice and one of the new lenses I purchased was the Tamron 75-300mm. I have not spent too much time playing with it, but so far, makes the Sony 18-250mm look second rate....which it certainly is !

Also purchased the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 at the same time. Now thats a very nice camera!!

Mike

[taxeye]

David,
I've just read the "saga" of lens choice re Sony, Sigma and Tamron.
I'm going through the same choice now looking to add a 75-300 to the a200 i purchased in March of this year that has the 18-70 kit lens included.
Over here in Canada, the Tamron is at least $50 less than the Sony. I was considering the Sigma until after reading your sage advice.
I'm a virgin DSLR type and information like this is invaluable to me.
When I finish tax season on April 30 I will be able to become reaquainted with my a200 and put your advice to good use.
Regards,
Taxeye in Canada

[Grebo]

Hello David,

I purchased Tamron 70-300 and I am more than satisfied.
Now my Alpha look's and feel's as it should.
Pictures are clear and sharp just as I expected to be.
AF is slow but good enough for my amateur purposes.
Thank you very much for your kind advices.

Kind regards from Croatia.

[xlycan]

hi... i know this is already a very old thread, but can someone please upload pix using Tamron 75-300mm so we can compare the image quality. thanks.

[David Kilpatrick]

Try:

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2008/06/0 ... cro-ld-di/

David

[Dusty]

Try:

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2008/06/0 ... cro-ld-di/

David

wow! Am I glad I read that article! I had always assumed that my Quantaray AF LD 70-300mm f:4-5.6 TELE-MACRO(1:2) - or so it it is written - was a Sigma, since they're usually the ones that make Quantaray. I saw the macro switch and said "Hey that's my lens!" And so it is! I checked the specs at Ritz Camera against the Tamaron at B&H Photo, and they match!

It's of course possible that mine was built with less quality elements or inferior coatings, but often such rumors are put out my the makers to get people to 'step up' to the name brand. Often, with the limited production runs on house brands, it doesn't pay to set up another production line. Of course, they could be the ones that didn't pass first round QC inspections.

At least now I know it's pedigree. Thanks, David.

Dusty