If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Mike wrote:
Alan Browne wrote in I'm biased to the 24-105. Don't blame you for that. While I don't have one (I'd like to, but can't jsutify it, since my 28-105 is more than adequate for my needs), it has the rep of being as sharp as the 24-85, without the 24-85's distortion problems. But it's probably out of the range of the posters' price, which if I'm recalling the thread correctly was a big consideration. Yes, I was ignoring the price restriction ... otoh I didn't invoke the f/2.8 constants either (;-)) -- -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Mike wrote:
Alan Browne wrote in I'm biased to the 24-105. Don't blame you for that. While I don't have one (I'd like to, but can't jsutify it, since my 28-105 is more than adequate for my needs), it has the rep of being as sharp as the 24-85, without the 24-85's distortion problems. But it's probably out of the range of the posters' price, which if I'm recalling the thread correctly was a big consideration. Yes, I was ignoring the price restriction ... otoh I didn't invoke the f/2.8 constants either (;-)) -- -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"John Doe" wrote in message ...
Mike wrote: "John Doe" wrote in news:ci94j1 - Minolta 70-210mm f/4 Awesome lens. Very sharp, very well made. A little slow to focuus on older cameras, but should be OK on your 5. Quite heavy - you will want to support it with one hand while shooting. - Minolta 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 OK - some very good results have come from it, but not as good as the above. - Minolta 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 Surprisingly good for the price, but you cna do a lot better. However, it is very light. - Minolta 24-85mm F3.5-4.5 Extremely sharp, quite contrasty. The weird distortion puts me off the lens though. This distortion is evident at all focal lengths. - Minolta 28-105mm F3.5-4.5 Very good lens. I have 11x17s from it which are very sharp indeed. Under rated, and a good example of why not to believe everything lens tests tell you. I forgot to mention the 28-85mm F3.5-4.5. Apart from the 50mm, I am leaning towards: Minolta 28-??(85/105) + 70-210mm Thanks, Siddhartha I usually recommend the 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 "i" version. It is the second version of the 70-210 that Minolta made for the AF cameras. It is lighter and more compact than the first generation f/4 version. It is as sharp and focuses faster. It also has a focus hold button which can be programmed for different functions depending on your camera. (check the custom fuctions in your camera users manual. The "i" used to be cheaper than the f/4 at keh. I just checked and was surprised that it has gone up in price significantly compared with the f/4 (about $126 to $165 for the f/3.5-4.5 vs $100 for the f/4 in similar condition). I like the light weight and compact size of the newer lens and its faster focus on my older cameras so its worth the price to me. On my 7 both lenses are fast, so I assume that they would also be on your 5. Tom |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"John Doe" wrote in message ...
Mike wrote: "John Doe" wrote in news:ci94j1 - Minolta 70-210mm f/4 Awesome lens. Very sharp, very well made. A little slow to focuus on older cameras, but should be OK on your 5. Quite heavy - you will want to support it with one hand while shooting. - Minolta 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 OK - some very good results have come from it, but not as good as the above. - Minolta 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 Surprisingly good for the price, but you cna do a lot better. However, it is very light. - Minolta 24-85mm F3.5-4.5 Extremely sharp, quite contrasty. The weird distortion puts me off the lens though. This distortion is evident at all focal lengths. - Minolta 28-105mm F3.5-4.5 Very good lens. I have 11x17s from it which are very sharp indeed. Under rated, and a good example of why not to believe everything lens tests tell you. I forgot to mention the 28-85mm F3.5-4.5. Apart from the 50mm, I am leaning towards: Minolta 28-??(85/105) + 70-210mm Thanks, Siddhartha I usually recommend the 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 "i" version. It is the second version of the 70-210 that Minolta made for the AF cameras. It is lighter and more compact than the first generation f/4 version. It is as sharp and focuses faster. It also has a focus hold button which can be programmed for different functions depending on your camera. (check the custom fuctions in your camera users manual. The "i" used to be cheaper than the f/4 at keh. I just checked and was surprised that it has gone up in price significantly compared with the f/4 (about $126 to $165 for the f/3.5-4.5 vs $100 for the f/4 in similar condition). I like the light weight and compact size of the newer lens and its faster focus on my older cameras so its worth the price to me. On my 7 both lenses are fast, so I assume that they would also be on your 5. Tom |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
John Doe wrote:
I have decided to go for a 50mm f/1.7 lens with Maxxum 5. What other lenses should I buy? I am just a beginner with hobbyist intentions only. I prefer shooting landscapes/panorama, the occasional portrait that I find interesting, and indoors (parties/marriages). I rarely zoom but don't mind having a zoom also for some trip to forest reserves where a zoom may prove useful. Thanks for all the responses. I think I will get the 50mm f1.7, 70-210mm f/4 and 28-105mm. I'll probably leave the 28-105 all the time on. I would've gone for the 28-85, but the extra 20mm seems useful. Btw, 28-105 does not seem to available at keh as of now. Any other decent used stores where I can find it? Thanks, Siddhartha |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
John Doe wrote:
I have decided to go for a 50mm f/1.7 lens with Maxxum 5. What other lenses should I buy? I am just a beginner with hobbyist intentions only. I prefer shooting landscapes/panorama, the occasional portrait that I find interesting, and indoors (parties/marriages). I rarely zoom but don't mind having a zoom also for some trip to forest reserves where a zoom may prove useful. Thanks for all the responses. I think I will get the 50mm f1.7, 70-210mm f/4 and 28-105mm. I'll probably leave the 28-105 all the time on. I would've gone for the 28-85, but the extra 20mm seems useful. Btw, 28-105 does not seem to available at keh as of now. Any other decent used stores where I can find it? Thanks, Siddhartha |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
"John Doe" wrote in news:cibbbp$io2
Thanks for all the responses. I think I will get the 50mm f1.7, 70-210mm f/4 and 28-105mm. I'll probably leave the 28-105 all the time on. I would've gone for the 28-85, but the extra 20mm seems useful. All good choices. You should be happy with them. Btw, 28-105 does not seem to available at keh as of now. Any other decent used stores where I can find it? You could try Cameta Camera. They're not as good as KEH, but who is? Mike |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
"John Doe" wrote in news:cibbbp$io2
Thanks for all the responses. I think I will get the 50mm f1.7, 70-210mm f/4 and 28-105mm. I'll probably leave the 28-105 all the time on. I would've gone for the 28-85, but the extra 20mm seems useful. All good choices. You should be happy with them. Btw, 28-105 does not seem to available at keh as of now. Any other decent used stores where I can find it? You could try Cameta Camera. They're not as good as KEH, but who is? Mike |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Tom wrote:
I usually recommend the 70-210 f/3.5-4.5 "i" version. It is the second version of the 70-210 that Minolta made for the AF cameras. It I used to have that lens. Surprisingly sharp, but quite slow at the long end. For the price a good compromise. Still, if it can be found used, the 70-210 f/4 is a better lens in all respects (if heavier). -- -- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Mike wrote:
"John Doe" wrote in news:cibbbp$io2 Thanks for all the responses. I think I will get the 50mm f1.7, 70-210mm f/4 and 28-105mm. I'll probably leave the 28-105 all the time on. I would've gone for the 28-85, but the extra 20mm seems useful. All good choices. You should be happy with them. Btw, 28-105 does not seem to available at keh as of now. Any other decent used stores where I can find it? You could try Cameta Camera. They're not as good as KEH, but who is? Mike I noticed that the Maxxum 5 has low-light assist lamp in the flash so that means the flash has to be popped up in low-light. Then it flashes before taking the photo for focussing. Does that mean I will HAVE to take flash photos in low-light if I am using AF? I hate to take flash photos. I mostly prefer ambient light. Cheers, Siddhartha |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pentax *ist compatible with P3n lenses? | Patrick M. Ryan | Digital Photography | 2 | August 31st 04 04:27 AM |
New Leica digital back info.... | Barney | 35mm Photo Equipment | 19 | June 30th 04 12:45 AM |
Pentax "K" & "M" Lenses ? | Radio Man | 35mm Photo Equipment | 16 | June 23rd 04 10:23 PM |
Review for several Maxxum lenses. | Elie A Shammas | 35mm Photo Equipment | 7 | June 18th 04 02:34 PM |
Asking advice | Bugs Bunny | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 69 | March 9th 04 05:42 AM |