Opticallimits

Full Version: Fast and wide options for the A55
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Guest

[quote name='Yakim' timestamp='1282816969' post='2198']

It certainly gives a lot WRT value-for-money and weight and size are exactly what I'm after but [url="http://www.kurtmunger.com/minolta_af_24mm_f_2_8_reviewid218.html"]IQ isn't that great[/url]. Oh, and the main thing I lust for wider aperture is less DoF. High ISO and AS can't help here.



If one may dream of a slightly larger A77 in the not-so-distant future, the 11-16/2.8 and 24/2 suddenly become very attractive propositions.....

[/quote]



I shoot on Minolta 24 f2.8 on crop camera it is resonable good lens.

There is legendary and very rare and expensive Minolta 28/2.



For wider options if i am not wrong there is 25/2.8 Zeiss Distagon ZS (M42 version) - no AF, but i think it smaller than 24/2.



Or Sony/Minolta 20/2.8.



About Tamron 60/2. I think Sony/Minolta 50/1.4 focusing much quicker than Tamron and reasonable sharp too from F2. Also There is perfect on aps-c sensors Sigma 50 F1.4 HSM with fast and silent focusinh

Yakim

[quote name='seevve' timestamp='1282836112' post='2225']

I shoot on Minolta 24 f2.8 on crop camera it is resonable good lens.

There is legendary and very rare and expensive Minolta 28/2.



For wider options if i am not wrong there is 25/2.8 Zeiss Distagon ZS (M42 version) - no AF, but i think it smaller than 24/2.



Or Sony/Minolta 20/2.8.[/quote]



The Minolta 20/2.8 sounds good on paper (small and light) but the few reviews I've seen online are less than exhilarating. Is the Sony version any better?



And if I'll go with Zeiss, it'll be either 21/2.8 or, more probably, the 18/3.5. But if I give up AF the Zuiko 21/2 or 18/3.5 are my prime candidates. They are so small....



[quote name='seevve' timestamp='1282836112' post='2225']

I shoot on Minolta 24 f2.8 on crop camera it is resonable good lens.

About Tamron 60/2. I think Sony/Minolta 50/1.4 focusing much quicker than Tamron and reasonable sharp too from F2. Also There is perfect on aps-c sensors Sigma 50 F1.4 HSM with fast and silent focusinh[/quote]



AF speed is important to me but so is the macro capability. I have the Canon 60/2.8 which I love and use a lot. One stop faster and AS will be very welcomed.
[quote name='Yakim' timestamp='1282863749' post='2241']

The Minolta 20/2.8 sounds good on paper (small and light) but the few reviews I've seen online are less than exhilarating. Is the Sony version any better?



And if I'll go with Zeiss, it'll be either 21/2.8 or, more probably, the 18/3.5. But if I give up AF the Zuiko 21/2 or 18/3.5 are my prime candidates. They are so small....







AF speed is important to me but so is the macro capability. I have the Canon 60/2.8 which I love and use a lot. One stop faster and AS will be very welcomed.

[/quote]

You can accuse the Zeiss lenses of a lot of things, but not of being small and light <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Wink' />



I think I would prefer a Canon 550D over an A55 (if you were me), because the A55 is not that much smaller, but more difficult lens wise. And you already have a 7D? And it has that mirror which ghosts...

The only 2 things I see it has over the 550D are:


  1. PD AF while using live view. You are always using live view.

  2. Screen that can move. But grrr! what were they thinking about how it is hinged? That is brain dead.




The things I see the 550D having over the A55:


  1. Better movie mode

  2. OVF

  3. No mirror induced ghosting

  4. Small and light lens options (20/24/28/35/50/85mm options)

  5. DPP

  6. mirror lock up (joke)




I do love my small and light EF 35mm f2. And may I point the Tokina 35mm f2.8 DX macro out to you?
[quote name='Yakim' timestamp='1282863749' post='2241']

But if I give up AF the Zuiko 21/2 or 18/3.5 are my prime candidates. [/quote]



So if the 18/3.5 had AF would you buy it? You do realize its DOF is larger than the faster & longer 24/2.8 (which does AF)?



[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1282865545' post='2242']

And it has that mirror which ghosts...[/quote]



Ghosting is a non-issue. Someone at the dpreview.com forum tried to show it at 200% magnification (!), and gave examples from extreme situations that were supposed to demonstrate it. I looked for it really hard, and I'm still not sure I can see it. You don't need to look hard to see the 550D struggling to focus in LV or Movie mode ;-)



Quote:The only 2 things I see it has over the 550D are...



A more complete list of the Sony advantage would include these:



1. In-body IS that works with all lenses, including the short primes the OP is interested in (no equivalent in Canon)

2. Articulated LCD screen

3. 10 fps (vs 3.7)

4. Real AF in movie mode (much faster, no constant hunting, reasonable tracking of moving subjects)

5. 100% Viewfinder

6. Easy and accurate MF in the viewfinder (thanks to the LV magnification)

7. Fast AF in LV

8. Sweep panorama

9. Usable ISO 25,000 thanks to multi-shot NR

10. Microphone port

11. $50 lower MSRP, $150 lower for the A33 (almost identical to the A55, except it's "only" 7 fps and 14 MP)



I probably a missed a few others, but these would be enough for me to prefer the A55 (or go for the A33 and get a 35/1.8 for "free" ;-)).



Quote:Screen that can move. But grrr! what were they thinking about how it is hinged? That is brain dead.



Quite the opposite. Hinging the screen from the bottom is a better, more sensible design, it doesn't suffer from the two major problems of the side-hinge design:



1. The screen is not in-line with the lens. In fact, it's way out to the side - unlike any OVF (including reflex), EVF or regular non-articulated LCD. I find it very annoying to have to peek to the side of the camera instead of straight ahead.



2. The side-hinge screen prevents the left hand from getting a firm grip on the left side of the camera (like [url="http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/3572/cameralcdangledgb9.jpg"]this[/url]). It keeps getting in the way compared to top- or bottom-hinge screens which always remain on the back of the camera, where the left hand doesn't reach.



The only advantage of the side hinge is in shooting self portraits when the camera is on a tripod. I'm not interested in that, but I maybe the OP does.



Quote:The things I see the 550D having over the A55:

- Better movie mode



In what way? I think that PD-AF makes the A55 movie mode better for for most people.



Quote:- OVF



EVF's have many useful advantages over OVF's. 100% accuracy and MF magnification are my favorite advantages, but there are plenty of others.



Quote:- No mirror induced ghosting



Maybe this was an issue in older pellicle SLR's, but it's a non-issue in the A55.



Quote:- Small and light lens options (20/24/28/35/50/85mm options)



There are small A-mount lenses in all of these focal lengths, and unlike in Canon they all offer IS (via the body).



Quote:- DPP



I don't considers DPP to be a major selling point, but maybe it is for the OP who is already using Canon and may be used to this software.



Quote:I do love my small and light EF 35mm f2. And may I point the Tokina 35mm f2.8 DX macro out to you?



I think 35mm is outside the focal length ranges that the OP is looking for.
[quote name='Yakim' timestamp='1282762798' post='2163']

As I see it, [url="http://forum.photozone.de/index.php?/topic/260-sony-a33-a55/page__view__findpost__p__2121"]the A55 looks like the perfect second camera for me[/url]. As such, I won't need many lenses for it. Two will do, a semi-wide (17-25mm) and a short tele (50-80mm). As the A55 is a small and light camera, so should the lenses be. However, the requirement list doesn't end there (I'm spoiled, I know...). I want them to be fast (f/2 or faster), I want AF and I want them to be sharp when used wide open.



The short tele was an easy find - Tamron 60/2 macro - but the other proved to be a difficult nut to crack. Zeiss 24/2? Too big. Sigma 20/1.8? Too big and not sharp enough wide open. Zuiko 21/2 + adapter? No AF. Sony 35/1.8 or Sigma 30/1.4? Too narrow. Leica 25/1.4? No APS coverage, no adapter, no AF. Zeiss 18/3.5 or 21/2.8? No adapter, no AF, too slow.



So, even if I am keeping the cost out of this, it seems I have no options. Please tell me I'm wrong...

[/quote]



Unfortunately, what you want does not exist yet.

We're all waiting for Sony to release more lenses. I think they released more cameras than lenses this year...

They started a series of decent compact primes:



  • DT 30mm f/2.8 Macro

  • DT 35mm f/1.8

  • DT 50mm f/1.8

  • 85mm f/2.8






But the wide-angle part is still missing. Maybe it will come next year.



And maybe the A88 (FF) will also arrive and you'll pair it with a Minolta 28 F/2.0 <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Wink' />
[quote name='boren' timestamp='1282892489' post='2244']

So if the 18/3.5 had AF would you buy it? You do realize its DOF is larger than the faster & longer 24/2.8 (which does AF)?







Ghosting is a non-issue. Someone at the dpreview.com forum tried to show it at 200% magnification (!), and gave examples from extreme situations that were supposed to demonstrate it. I looked for it really hard, and I'm still not sure I can see it. You don't need to look hard to see the 550D struggling to focus in LV or Movie mode ;-)



A huge issue. I have seen the effects at normal print sizes, and especially with low light photography with light sources or bright highlights the ghosting issue is VERY real and problematic.



A more complete list of the Sony advantage would include these:



1. In-body IS that works with all lenses, including the short primes the OP is interested in (no equivalent in Canon)

2. Articulated LCD screen

Not an advantage, as the hinge is at the brain dead bottom position, like the Nikon D5000. Awfully stupid.

3. 10 fps (vs 3.7)

No, 3fps. its 6fps and 10fps modes are nearly unusable due to their implementation. And the AF system is too slow to really track subjects.

4. Real AF in movie mode (much faster, no constant hunting, reasonable tracking of moving subjects)

Real AF in movie mode is silly on DSLRs, for they have shallow DOF. It may work for home video small sensor camcorders. Not in DSLR video. And the aperture needs to be open for this! brr.

5. 100% Viewfinder

yes, but a viewfinder of worse quality. I know which I would prefer (not the EVF from the A55). So, the 100% is nice, the quality is not.

6. Easy and accurate MF in the viewfinder (thanks to the LV magnification)

yes.

7. Fast AF in LV

yes. And the 550D has fast AF in OVF (EVF is always live view <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Wink' /> )

8. Sweep panorama

No. Silly P&S feature. If I want a DSLR for panoramas, I do want control over the process. Nice for P&S vacation shots, yes.

9. Usable ISO 25,000 thanks to multi-shot NR

10. Microphone port

same as the 550D.

11. $50 lower MSRP, $150 lower for the A33 (almost identical to the A55, except it's "only" 7 fps and 14 MP)

Sure.

I probably a missed a few others, but these would be enough for me to prefer the A55 (or go for the A33 and get a 35/1.8 for "free" ;-)).







Quite the opposite. Hinging the screen from the bottom is a better, more sensible design, it doesn't suffer from the two major problems of the side-hinge design:



1. The screen is not in-line with the lens. In fact, it's way out to the side - unlike any OVF (including reflex), EVF or regular non-articulated LCD. I find it very annoying to have to peek to the side of the camera instead of straight ahead.



Can't put the camera down on a surface. Can't put the camera on a tripod. Can't support the lens/camera in a normal way with the LCD out. Stupid position also with self portraits. It is STUPID.



2. The side-hinge screen prevents the left hand from getting a firm grip on the left side of the camera (like [url="http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/3572/cameralcdangledgb9.jpg"]this[/url]). It keeps getting in the way compared to top- or bottom-hinge screens which always remain on the back of the camera, where the left hand doesn't reach.

It is crazy to want to hold the camera on the left! You hold a camera on the right to operate the camera, and UNDER the lens to support the lens and camera and operate the lens.

The only advantage of the side hinge is in shooting self portraits when the camera is on a tripod. I'm not interested in that, but I maybe the OP does.







In what way? I think that PD-AF makes the A55 movie mode better for for most people.



Yes, it makes it better for HOME VIDEO where one does not have any idea about how awful that focus searching is on the screen.

But for that group, DSLR video with its shallow DOF is not a good choice in the first place.




EVF's have many useful advantages over OVF's. 100% accuracy and MF magnification are my favorite advantages, but there are plenty of others.

Like the obliteration of any detail in bright areas? Or the bad quality in low light? Or the problem of tracking at its higher FPS (6 and 10 fps modes)?





Maybe this was an issue in older pellicle SLR's, but it's a non-issue in the A55.

That is not true, it is a BIG problem for the A55/A33. very big. And real.





There are small A-mount lenses in all of these focal lengths, and unlike in Canon they all offer IS (via the body).







I don't considers DPP to be a major selling point, but maybe it is for the OP who is already using Canon and may be used to this software.







I think 35mm is outside the focal length ranges that the OP is looking for.

[/quote]

I put my responses in bold, as the forum makes it difficult to quote and reply otherwise and I didn't feel like cut/pasting a lot. Sorry for that.
I find it funny that people argument about a camera they never hold in their own hands. It is a little bit like the pope is discussing about sex. ;-) I have seen so many people bashing the NEX who never have used it longer. For me is the NEX a much better camera than the A700 because my NEX is every time with me. And now I can shoot from the hip. So maybe we should wait for first user stories. :-)

Yakim

[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1282865545' post='2242']

You can accuse the Zeiss lenses of a lot of things, but not of being small and light <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Wink' />



I think I would prefer a Canon 550D over an A55 (if you were me), because the A55 is not that much smaller, but more difficult lens wise. And you already have a 7D? And it has that mirror which ghosts...

The only 2 things I see it has over the 550D are:


  1. PD AF while using live view. You are always using live view.

  2. Screen that can move. But grrr! what were they thinking about how it is hinged? That is brain dead.




The things I see the 550D having over the A55:


  1. Better movie mode

  2. OVF

  3. No mirror induced ghosting

  4. Small and light lens options (20/24/28/35/50/85mm options)

  5. DPP

  6. mirror lock up (joke)




I do love my small and light EF 35mm f2. And may I point the Tokina 35mm f2.8 DX macro out to you?

[/quote]



Theoretically speaking, A 550D would be the perfect companion for me as I have 7D, several EF-S lenses and several EF lenses. Problem is, I really dislike the Rebel ergonomics. A Canon MILC would – at least potentially - be more interesting.



More things to think about. My most used lens is the 17-55/2.8 IS. Next is the 60/2.8. Least is the 10-22. So, by potentially go with A55, 11-16/2.8, 24/2 and 60/2 I can have all that range + faster aperture + AS. And later I'll just sell the 55-250. I think I'll start with the kit or 35/1.8, just to make sure I get along with its ergonomics and later, if all goes well, I'll get the rest.



Thanks for mentioning another option i.e. Tokina 35/2.8 but somehow it puts me off. While small and light, I really hate lenses that gets long when focusing. AF is not that fast either.

Yakim

[quote name='boren' timestamp='1282892489' post='2244']

So if the 18/3.5 had AF would you buy it? You do realize its DOF is larger than the faster & longer 24/2.8 (which does AF)?[/quote]



1. I just made a search. Zuiko lenses on Sony bodies will need an adapter with glass. Bye bye Zuiko. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Wink' />

2. I don't get it. Why are you comparing lenses which are so different?



[quote name='boren' timestamp='1282892489' post='2244']

I don't considers DPP to be a major selling point, but maybe it is for the OP who is already using Canon and may be used to this software.[/quote]



Actually, I do considers DPP to be a major selling point as that's my favorite SW. But I'm willing to adapt to get other things I want.

Yakim

[quote name='Marco' timestamp='1282939920' post='2254']

I find it funny that people argument about a camera they never hold in their own hands. It is a little bit like the pope is discussing about sex. ;-) I have seen so many people bashing the NEX who never have used it longer. For me is the NEX a much better camera than the A700 because my NEX is every time with me. And now I can shoot from the hip. So maybe we should wait for first user stories. :-)[/quote]



Basically speaking you are right. However, I know myself and I do not like the P&S shape and size. That's one of the main reasons which held me off the PEN.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7