Overclock.net › Forums › Consumer Electronics › Photography › Upgrade Platform or Reuse? (A33 A390 D3100)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Upgrade Platform or Reuse? (A33 A390 D3100) - Page 2

post #11 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shane1244 View Post
I thought the whole point of the mirror was to have a optical one..? :S
EVFs are generally brighter than optical VFs, esp in low light conditions.

I still prefer optical
post #12 of 18
Yeah, you just don't get the detail though. :/ Although maybe you don't need it. I'm going to give it a try today at work, never used one on a DSLR before.
Shane's Rig.
(15 items)
 
  
Reply
Shane's Rig.
(15 items)
 
  
Reply
post #13 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shane1244 View Post
Yeah, you just don't get the detail though. :/ Although maybe you don't need it. I'm going to give it a try today at work, never used one on a DSLR before.
I don't like it myself much. I don't know why, but something just feels off when I use an EVF.
post #14 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shane1244 View Post
I thought the whole point of the mirror was to have a optical one..? :S
originally the mirror is there to see the image exactly as it will appear on the film. but now it is there mostly for PD AF (phase detect).

Quote:
Originally Posted by r31ncarnat3d View Post
I still prefer optical
ditto, you really appreciate a good optical VF when its 100% on a fullframe.


Quote:
Originally Posted by r31ncarnat3d View Post
I don't like it myself much. I don't know why, but something just feels off when I use an EVF.
yea, i feel completely disconnected from the world when i look through a EVF.
Dell XPS15
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2630QM XPS L502 Geforce GT525M 1GB 6gb 
Hard DriveOS
640GB 7200RPM Windows 7 
  hide details  
Reply
Dell XPS15
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2630QM XPS L502 Geforce GT525M 1GB 6gb 
Hard DriveOS
640GB 7200RPM Windows 7 
  hide details  
Reply
post #15 of 18
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mz-n10 View Post
the sigma 85/1.4 is close to 1000usd which is why i bought the samyang. i cant really justify spending 1k on a lens i use a couple of times a year.

but i am considering buying a 70-400G for track duty....
Is the 70-400G just a rebranded Minolta "G" Lens? I was reading that they were the best lenses Minolta ever made and are highly desirable and hard to find now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mz-n10 View Post
there's no nikon nomenclature equivalent to G/Zeiss/L. they dont market their highend lenses with a special name. but typically anything with ED glass (gold ring) is higher end.
VRII is just their in lens image stabilization system, sony dslr lenses dont have this cause our bodies are stabilized not lenses.
I was wondering about the different types of stabilizing technologies last night. If it's possible to achieve the same level of anti shake using in-camera technology as in-lens tech, why wouldn't all manufacturers do that? It makes their lenses cheaper to manufacture and their systems more desirable. I am guessing, though, that the same level of stabilization cannot be achieved with in-camera tech. Is that correct?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mz-n10 View Post
the sony 18-55 is actually a really really good lens. significantly better then the 17-80 or whatever the kit lens is for the a200.
[/QUOTE]
Wow, didn't know that. I'm guessing that the stiffness after 35mm goes away with use then? How come it's so much less weight? And also, in the accessories booklet, they show a 35mm F1.4G that weighs 510 grams, compared to the 18-55's 210g. Apparently it sells for like $1500 (the 35mm F1.4G) and I'm wondering, since a similarly specced lens from Minolta would probably cost 10% of that, does better glass equal significantly better images? Is a better lens worth 10x as much as a lens with identical specs? Anyway thanks for your reply, it is greatly appreciated.
JJS
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon X5650 Asus P6X58D-e R9 290x 4Gb 24Gb HyperX DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSMonitor
250Gb 840 EVO 3x Seagate 3Tb Windows 7 x64 2x Dell U2711 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Steelseries 7G, Das Professional S Silent, Antec 550W Not at the moment Logitech G9, G500 (x2), G500s 
Audio
Sound Blaster Z 
  hide details  
Reply
JJS
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon X5650 Asus P6X58D-e R9 290x 4Gb 24Gb HyperX DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSMonitor
250Gb 840 EVO 3x Seagate 3Tb Windows 7 x64 2x Dell U2711 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Steelseries 7G, Das Professional S Silent, Antec 550W Not at the moment Logitech G9, G500 (x2), G500s 
Audio
Sound Blaster Z 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by jadawgis732 View Post
I was wondering about the different types of stabilizing technologies last night. If it's possible to achieve the same level of anti shake using in-camera technology as in-lens tech, why wouldn't all manufacturers do that? It makes their lenses cheaper to manufacture and their systems more desirable. I am guessing, though, that the same level of stabilization cannot be achieved with in-camera tech. Is that correct?

A big benefit to lens-based systems is the reduction of camera shake that's visible in the viewfinder.
post #17 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by jadawgis732 View Post
Is the 70-400G just a rebranded Minolta "G" Lens? I was reading that they were the best lenses Minolta ever made and are highly desirable and hard to find now.
no the 70-400G is a brand new design, it just has the G name cause its a high end lens.

Quote:
I was wondering about the different types of stabilizing technologies last night. If it's possible to achieve the same level of anti shake using in-camera technology as in-lens tech, why wouldn't all manufacturers do that? It makes their lenses cheaper to manufacture and their systems more desirable. I am guessing, though, that the same level of stabilization cannot be achieved with in-camera tech. Is that correct?
correct stripping IS out of the lens could make it cheaper but in reality it doesnt....some argue that in lens is better cause its more efficient then in body.

Quote:
Wow, didn't know that. I'm guessing that the stiffness after 35mm goes away with use then? How come it's so much less weight? And also, in the accessories booklet, they show a 35mm F1.4G that weighs 510 grams, compared to the 18-55's 210g. Apparently it sells for like $1500 (the 35mm F1.4G) and I'm wondering, since a similarly specced lens from Minolta would probably cost 10% of that, does better glass equal significantly better images? Is a better lens worth 10x as much as a lens with identical specs? Anyway thanks for your reply, it is greatly appreciated.
the stiffness in the zoom ring might just be the design of the lens, but it might go away after its been used for a while. the lens is lighter cause its a shorter range then the old 17-80 kit lens.

the 35/1.4G is a completely different beast then the kit lens. its just the nature of that lens its expensive (f1.4 aperture) and the sony is nothing more then a lifted copy of the minolta 35/1.4G which is infact still worth well over $1000. used.

if we were to compare the 17-55 vs the 35G and your question is it worth it for the 35G? i would say yes, the 35G would give the photos a "look" that the 17-55 cant. but thats because i already have a lens that would cover whatever the 17-55 kit can do and i dont have a 35G equal.
Dell XPS15
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2630QM XPS L502 Geforce GT525M 1GB 6gb 
Hard DriveOS
640GB 7200RPM Windows 7 
  hide details  
Reply
Dell XPS15
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-2630QM XPS L502 Geforce GT525M 1GB 6gb 
Hard DriveOS
640GB 7200RPM Windows 7 
  hide details  
Reply
post #18 of 18
Thread Starter 
I am leaning towards the 18-55 for two reasons:

1. I won't be able to appreciate great glass without a lot of experience with the mediocre
2. It will fit in with my 55-200 nicely.

It seems like the companies should make lines that cover the ranges. Scott Kelby, in his book "The Digital Photography Book" has a page dedicated to a peek inside his bag. He shows 14-24 F2.8, 24-70 F2.8, and 70-200 F2.8, all Nikon. Those ranges fit together nicely, and there's no overlap. It seems like great marketing on Nikon's behalf. However comparing the Zeiss and G line from Sony I see no tracking like that. But the 11-18, 18-55, 55-200 SAM line does do that.

Anyway I've the A33 for about 5 days now, and can say that any faults I found at first can now be overlooked. Here are a couple pics taken with my 55-200.




JJS
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon X5650 Asus P6X58D-e R9 290x 4Gb 24Gb HyperX DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSMonitor
250Gb 840 EVO 3x Seagate 3Tb Windows 7 x64 2x Dell U2711 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Steelseries 7G, Das Professional S Silent, Antec 550W Not at the moment Logitech G9, G500 (x2), G500s 
Audio
Sound Blaster Z 
  hide details  
Reply
JJS
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon X5650 Asus P6X58D-e R9 290x 4Gb 24Gb HyperX DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSMonitor
250Gb 840 EVO 3x Seagate 3Tb Windows 7 x64 2x Dell U2711 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Steelseries 7G, Das Professional S Silent, Antec 550W Not at the moment Logitech G9, G500 (x2), G500s 
Audio
Sound Blaster Z 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Photography
Overclock.net › Forums › Consumer Electronics › Photography › Upgrade Platform or Reuse? (A33 A390 D3100)