Been out of the game for a bit... Wondering about recent purchase.

eyetrip

eyetrip

eyetrip

Soldato
Joined
8 Nov 2006
Posts
9,237
so, work has been all consuming for the last year+ but am going to be making a concerted effort o get back into things.

Main camera is a65 with a bunch of lenses (of which will se selling a couple) but in November got a a5100 for a good deal - which has seen little use.

Anyway, got to weeks off now and holiday to Mexico end of year, and likely Costa Rica early next year.

Now, I like the a5100, but have quite grown to like evf's. at 400 for the a6000, it seemed like a decent price.

Plan for cameras is to take both a65 and compact alpha on holidays. The compact lenses just don't have much reach, and will make great backup when don't want to take a65 somewhere.


But my hesitation is on my choice of lens. It was between the 18-200mm Tamron and 18-105mm Sony. Went with the Sony for image quality reasons, but just wondering if wouldn't be better off with the reach of the 200mm.

From experience of the places I tend to go, not only am I frequently wanting to photograph small things a bit away from me, but often in shaded conditions.

So the 105 appeals on the basis of being f4 throughout and general sharpness. The 200 appeals because for the reach.

Seeing that this will be backup and lazy day camera, was the 105 the right choice?
 
eyetrip said:
just wondering if wouldn't be better off with the reach of the 200mm.
Click to expand...

That depends on how much worse the optical performance of the Tamron is compared to the Sony. If the Sony is a lot sharper then you have enough megapixels (24?) to even simply crop your photos to get the same sort of framing as the Tamron.

I've heard some of these 3rd party lenses can be pretty soft zoomed in all the way. I don't own either lens so I cant really advise, but you should be able to do some simple experimenting with cropping etc.


Personally I'd stick with the Sony unless the Tamron gives major advantage/sharpness in the range which the Sony doesn't cover including any reasonable cropping, so between 150-200mm ish I reckon.
 
Last edited:
Going by reviews, the Sony is quite a bit sharper.

There are a few other things I like about the Sony, such as power zoom and ability to update firmware (plus general compatibility).

Though this morning I was browsing, and discovered the RX10... yeah, a little out of touch. Looks amazing for a bridge. Wondering if that wouldn't have been a better alternative than alpha csc's....
 
Well, having done at least a little bit of testing with the a6000...

Honestly, the pic quality is better than that of the a65, and it's kind of made the a65 feel a bit redundant.

What the a65 has going for it now is the IBIS, which is handy for the Tamron 70-300 USD lens. That's about the only benefit I can think of for it honestly. Ok, well the size makes it easier to handle larger lenses (got the LEA4 adapter).

For info, my lenses:
a-mount: sigma 150mm macro, Tamron 70-300 USD, Sigma 17-50mm f2.5, Sony 35mm f1.8,
e-mount: sony 30mm macro, sony 18-105mm, sony 16-50mm

Now the situation I have started convincing myself of... ditching the a65 (and the 150mm macro has to go as I never use it as much as I like it due to size/weight), but...

1)
Get the a77 ii, keep my lenses as they are. a77 as main, a6000 as "compact" and backup with lea4.

Appeal: 6/10

2)
Get another a6000 (always want a backup camera on hols), ditch just about all my a-mount stuff including lea4 and going full e-mount, get the sony 70-200mm f4, sony 90mm macro, sony 10-18mm.

This is going to be about the most compact setup.

Appeal: 8/10

3)
Get a7 ii, keep lea4 + tamron 70-300mm USD, and get the sony 24-240mm and tamron 90mm macro. The a7 ii having IBIS means the a-mount tamron lenses make more sense now.

Would still dump a few lenses this way, and suddenly the 18-105mm looks less useful (though still fine on the a6000).

Appeal: 9 (less to sell, less to buy)

Option 2 and 3 will both cost around 1000 after selling all bits.

I tried going CSC before with Samsung, but certain things turned me off - can't remember exactly what any more, but think it was combination features and support, plus found I wanted bit more "reach"

I realise option 1 will give me the most reach when it comes to wildlife on holidays, but the other options still appeal more.

I find the idea of trying FF quite appealing, but sticking with a6000/apsc, all lenses will work in all scenarios, whereas having a6000 as backup to a7, I would lose IBIS if I needed to use the Tamron lenses.

Couple of a6000's with all that G lens goodness... well ,that appeals too. Don't know why, but sticking SLT feels wrong when my other options are full hog apsc e-mount, or FF e-mount.

Having never tried FF.... well, I guess the question is, better glass and all Sony, or FF and still decent glass?
 
Well, made an impulse purchase!

Found a7 ii with 28-70mm for a smidge over £1100. Considering I was prepared to pay £1050 for body only (after cash back), I figured why not!

Won't be a perfect match. The 18-105mm will only work on a7 in crop mode, and the tamron lenses won't have stabilisation if something goes wrong with a7 and need it as a backup.

But the a6000 has the 18-105mm, 16-50mm and 30mm macro, so when pushed for weight/size, this will do nicely.

The a7 will have the tamron 90mm macro, tamron 70-300mm usd and the sony 28-70mm, and happily with the 28-70mm will finally have a weather sealed camera too.

Can't wait to try FF!
 
Does look like a decent camera. Hoping I like using it.

Though it is kind of dawning on me that I am not doing much to cut down overall bulk and weight currently.

Despite deciding to go for a smaller macro with the following lenses it will still take a chunk of space and weight.
Sony 28-70mm (300g)
Tamron 70-300mm (750g)
Tamron 90mm macro (550g)
Sony 18-105mm (425g)
Sony 30mm (150g)
LEA4 adapter (150g)
2.3Kg for lenses

Would love to get down to:
Sony 90mm Macro (600g)
Sony 24-240mm (780g)
Sony 16-35mm (525g)
and something like 55mm prime (275g)
But that still 2.18Kg

And those are pretty expensive lenses...

Might just replace tamron 70-300mm with tamron 28-300mm (which seems like it may actually be sharper than the 70-300mm), which will drop about 250g, and not take 90mm on travels (and live with what the 28-300mm gives me for close-ups), which would bring lens weight down to roughly 1.5Kg on travel. Could even drop that to 1.2Kg roughly if I didnt take the 28-70mm, but would want that for weather sealing.

Still would want at least one decent prime for a7 though.
 
Really struggling to decide on lenses...

If only the Sony cashback was going on longer. Ends this weekend.

The tamron setup with laea4 still appeals for cost, but the lack of stabilisation bugs me (in case wanted to use on a6000)

Very close to just going Sony lenses. As I pretty much paid £80 for the 28-70mm, I could pair that with the 70-200mm f4 and 55mm, and that would be a decent quality setup.

Or I could sell the 28-70mm on for profit, and get the 24-240mm and 55mm.

Ignoring ultra-wide and macro for now. Will be keeping the 18-105mm for the a6000 either way.

Am sorely tempted by the 24-240mm + 55mm route for convenience and cost, but the 28-70mm + 70-200mm + 55mm would be optically better and faster, but not as wide nor with as much reach...

Sigh... Hate deciding these kinds of things.
 
well, made decision.

gone with 24-240mm, and will get the 55mm and some time soon the 90mm macro. got the 24-240mm fom amazon as with the cash back its the cheapest, even compared to import. the 55 and macro will likely be imports.

more to sell, but think will be happier with this setup in long run.

hopefully one day someone will release a 300mm lens. id love to have the current tamron 28-300 in native emount.
 
Brief test with the tamron USD 70-300mm + LA-EA4 against the Sony 24-240mm on the a6000, and feel like made the right choice. Zoomed in on image to same level, and the 24-240mm is noticeably sharper.

That'll do!

Now, for anyone who may actually come in to this thread... Need some advice on flashes. Have the sony hvl-f43am but wanted something smaller.

First I got a neewer MK300, but am sure I purchased something other than what I thought I was getting, as wanted flash with swivel, etc, and this thing is just fixed.

Anyway, would have kept the sony hvl-f43m for off camera stuff, but the neewer doesn't trigger it wirelessly. Difficult getting clear info on these things, so figured maybe it was the sony setup.

Ordered the Nissin i40 which came today, and was hoping the neewer would work as a trigger to that, but nope.

Either way, I will be keeping the Nissin, but can anyone point me in the direction of a not-too-expensive way to trigger it from both a6000 and a7 ii?

Edit: would actually prefer not having another flash as trigger, but not sure what I need...
 
Arrived yesterday, and while I didn't have much time to try it out - wow! What a lovely piece of equipment!

And more customisable than any camera I have ever had to date. Spent ages just trying to figure out the best way to configure all the buttons and bits :D

But damn, the camera with 24-240mm is a tank, and I knew it wouldn't be light, but holding in hand while playing with config, certainly felt it after a little while.

And a battery muncher of note as well.

Still, have not found any shortfall thus far that I was not aware of (though early days), and can't wait to give it some proper use. This has the potential to be the best camera I have ever owned :)

Feel more confident ordering from same supplier again, and possibly other HK based suppliers - though still to be determined what after sales support is like...

Oh, and anyone got any answers on the flash trigger question above?
 
Bloody work and life... just not had a chance to get out with cam yet, and 55mm arrived yesterday but god knows when am going to get time to do more than just snap something in my room :(

Got the 14mm Samyang arriving today (I think) and ordered the Sony 90mm Macro for £650 which will probably only come next week.

So setup will be:
APSC - a6000, 18-105mm, 35mm macro, 16-50mm

FF - A7 ii, 24-240mm, 28-70mm, 55m, 90mm, 14mm

Still considering dumping either:
18-105mm and use 16-50mm + 28-70mm

16-50mm + 28-70mm and keep the 18-105mm
 
Managed to pick up the 28mm FE for a good price from Amazon.it, so think I will stick with that over the 14mm. Very different lenses, but the bulk of the 14mm means it will seldom be taken anywhere.

Finally getting down to figuring out exactly what my setup will look like.

Until Sony release something like a 24-105mm/28-135mm (not horrendously priced, heavy PZ one available), I will be keeping the 18-105mm. My only other APSC lens will be the 30mm macro (still considering the value of keeping it, but it's small and light)

I will pick up the 70-200mm F4, until such time as there is a native 300mm (good quality) for e-mount.

I will hold out and hope for a wider pancake/small lens.

So will have this:
30mm APSC
18-105mm APSC

28mm FE
55mm FE
90mm FE
70-200mm FE
24-240mm FE

That's about 3.3KG total. Manageable to take pretty much all on holiday if wanted. Though wouldn't carry all at same time of course - just when travelling.

Now just to sell the 28-70mm, 16-50mm and the 14mm. Plus the remaining A mount stuff!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom